The main trouble with this film, from my point of view, is that it's simply *the wrong way round*; whether the problem is inherent in the story or not I don't know, but while the film is based on the memoir of a Union soldier and clearly intends the Union raiders to be its protagonists, the way in which it is actually made means that you -- or at least I -- end up willing the other side on to win instead. Outnumbered, indomitable and prepared to chase down his train on foot, on a hand-car or on the footplate of a tiny, elderly shunting engine, Fuller is all but presented as the hero, and the temptation is to cheer for the arrival of the cavalry in the nick of time rather than to feel alarmed for the train-stealing spies. The fact that all the Southerners we meet in the course of the film are depicted as the best of fellows whom the narrator is ashamed to deceive, while the Northern soldiers spend most of it bickering amongst themselves, doesn't help either.
This makes it a rather unusual beast: a film in which, as so often in Hollywood, I find myself cheering on the 'wrong' side, and yet one in which, to all intents and purposes, the 'wrong' side actually wins. The script does its best to present the Union failure as a moral victory, but it's not entirely convincing about it. I found the result to be a rather disconcerting balance.
My other problem with the film was that basically, the train sequences are the main reason for the film's existence and as such occupy a large chunk of the running time; but they're not all of it, and the sections before and after are not exactly enthralling in comparison. If it's a history book, it's a Ladybird history: beautifully illustrated, but basically aimed at children's level, while the railway action is indeed exciting but has the effect of biasing the viewer the 'wrong' way.
This sounds as if I thought it was a bad film, and on the whole I didn't. I don't think it's a particularly great one either, and either it or I (or both) are distinctly confused, but I'd recommend it as entertainment... especially to railway fans!
This makes it a rather unusual beast: a film in which, as so often in Hollywood, I find myself cheering on the 'wrong' side, and yet one in which, to all intents and purposes, the 'wrong' side actually wins. The script does its best to present the Union failure as a moral victory, but it's not entirely convincing about it. I found the result to be a rather disconcerting balance.
My other problem with the film was that basically, the train sequences are the main reason for the film's existence and as such occupy a large chunk of the running time; but they're not all of it, and the sections before and after are not exactly enthralling in comparison. If it's a history book, it's a Ladybird history: beautifully illustrated, but basically aimed at children's level, while the railway action is indeed exciting but has the effect of biasing the viewer the 'wrong' way.
This sounds as if I thought it was a bad film, and on the whole I didn't. I don't think it's a particularly great one either, and either it or I (or both) are distinctly confused, but I'd recommend it as entertainment... especially to railway fans!