gkeith_1 Spoilers. Observations. Opinions.American slave trade ended 1807 by Congress. Why was Gable in Civil War era talking about his work in that field? That was an era ending fifty years before, and even Gable didn't look that old.This looked to be historically incorrect, but will be overlooked for the sake of the story. Louisiana became American (from the French; Napoleon) in 1803, so this makes even less sense.Back to the story. A funeral has people singing Swing Low, Sweet Chariot, meaning heaven coming to take Yvonne de Carlo's father away. I looked over Jordan, and what did I see? A band of angels comin' after me. These are lyrics of this old song. The River Jordan is another euphemism for heaven.Bands of angels didn't rescue Manty, de Carlo's character. She was found belatedly to have had an African American mother, and in antebellum times that was a definite no-no.She's sent to a slave auction. She's such a hot tomata that bidders end in none other than Clark Gable, a swell-dressed local Colonel Sanders.Gable purchases her for a large sum of money. On the way to the auction, though, she is assaulted by a bad guy, but is rescued and is to live in a lovely antebellum mansion with Gable. Gable is filthy rich, and Manty has been raised to be a cultured and elegant young woman. Gable dresses her in fine clothes. They make a nice-looking pair.Gable's house slaves are mainly female, but in walks a striking dark man portrayed by Sidney Poitier. Poitier is opinionated and mouthy. He was rescued in childhood by Gable. Gable educated him as his own son, but Poitier's character always resents the way Africans are treated in general.A maid says Poitier will be king of the mansion, some day, and that Gable has willed the abode to him. Later, Union army occupiers want Gable's castle, and, naturally, Poitier has joined their army. The mansion has been ransacked by those darned Yankee invaders, and Poitier is now king of nothing. Gable is still alive, and Poitier sneakily helps him escape the bloodthirsty bluecoats after accusing Gable of giving him such a terrible upbringing.Denouement: Gable and Manty ride off in a boat to further adventures, with Gable's old sea dog friend rescuing them. Meanwhile, Poitier is on the shore, seeing them off.Poitier. Strong characters. Lilies of the Field, 1963. Don't mess with me. They Call Me Mr. Tibbs, 1970. In the Heat of the Night, 1967. Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?, 1967. Civil rights movement era, in the decade or two after Band of Angels, and African Americans demanding humane treatment. Poitier did a great job in explaining reality. Sidney, you are the greatest.I am a degreed historian, actress, film critic and movie reviewer.

tavm Just watched this DVD of the movie after 30 years of remembering it being promoted on a local station for a late Sunday night showing. Clark Gable plays Hamish Bond, a slave owner who treats his employees with kindness like Carolle Drake as Michelle (we find out she was also his mistress) and Tommie Moore as Dollie. Also, Sidney Poitier as Rau-Ru, who later joins the Union Army. Oh, and Yvonne De Carlo plays a mulatto named Amanda Starr who passes for the lighter race. I'll just now say that while I was fascinated by the fact that one legend was teamed with someone who would become one himself, part of me was bored with the way the plot kept meandering along. I'm sure Robert Penn Warren's novel must have been more exciting than this. In fact, I feel asleep a couple of times so I had to rewind to find out what I missed sometimes. So on that note, I say Band of Angels is at the least worth a look. P.S. I recognized that white Union soldier Poitier was talking to as William Schallert who would later appear with Sidney in In the Heat of the Night. I was a little distracted that the general in this film had the surname of Butler. And I liked the Louisiana locations that were showcased since I happen to live in the state.

clestaffordy2 I seldom register just to review a movie. But this film evoked my heart and cried while watching it twice. The film is a gem but was underrated; good thing I saw this yesterday in TCM and I fell in love all over again with Clark Gable. He has more depth here and more character and passion than Gone with the Wind. I love the tension of love between him and Amantha; I love both of them. I wish there were more kissing, though. All their acting and lines were great; script was great. There were few flows though like too much singing and early complaints of Amantha being bought by Hamish. She should be grateful that he bought her and treated her like a queen; but I guess she was in shock to just find out that she has lost everything. I like Michelle, she's elegant and simple. What I don't like personally, that other woman slave with Michelle that kept on singing, she's obnoxious. Lastly, I did not like Sidney here for the most part because of his ungratefulness to Hamish; but later on realized his mistake. He's always angry; of course, he's a great actor, don't get me wrong.

rcshepherd (William) Clark Gable was a towering figure in American motion pictures from their the birth of sound into the middle of the 20th century. But this film is proof that neither he, nor the studios that employed him, could figure out what to do with his talent(s) after WWII.Most commentators on Band of Angles comment about the film's overall quality, and the work of emerging (Sidney Potier) and established (Yvonne DeCarlo) character actors who turn out professional, above average performances. In doing this they show kindness to the professional history of Mr. Gable and the studio(s); and in fairness to the memory of the beginnings of the careers of actors like Mr. Potier. But standing on its own, the poor quality of this film is striking, and its problems begin and continue with Mr. Gable and the failure of he and the film's produces to have any idea about what to do with him as a motion picture actor - Leading Man Type.The studio faces this problem squarely by the very choice of its production. Of course Band of Angles is a re-play of the cinematic setting of "Gone With the Wind". The heaving bosoms; the passionate cavaliers; the hot-blooded creoles; and the angry Negroes, all lead to the conclusion that the studio was thinking backward not forward. And this film was not produced by MGM. It is inconceivable that a studio would have produced this film in 1957, if it did not already have Clark Gable under contract.But what else could the studio do? Another Love triangle between Gable, Ava Gardner and Grace Kelly? Who are we kidding? Gable was no Cary Grant. Gable's screen sexuality was based upon overwhelming power. His prowess was not to charm his way into a women's heart; but to kick down the door, as he did in GWTW. Its so sad to watch; in GWTW era films, if Gable has a walking stick, its for swagger; to show his hands are idle, unless he's handling a woman. In Band of Angles he can be seen resting himself on his walking stick as a cane. It conveys a totally different impression.When in the film Gable confronts a rival plantation owner, he is, in the scene, holding himself up by his cane; while he's talking to his rival. In his pre-war films Gable doesn't talk to a man who's confronting him; his fists do the talking. Or the threat of their use get's a Gable male plot rival to back down in advance of a physical confrontation.It was combination