mark.waltz It makes sense as to why fictitious names would be used in this adoption of Doctor Mudd story from the days right after President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth. Dr Mudd was imprisoned on Shark Island for giving him medical treatment, and innocently not knowing who he was. Here, a country veterinarian played by Sterling Hayden has the same thing happened to him, except the man he treats is the head of a group of guerrillas, and Hayden is sense to a hell like Prison in the middle of the wilderness in the Middle West. Even though he continues to proclaim his innocence and hopes that with his wife Joan Leslie's help, he will be freed, the prison commander Ward Bond keeps a close watch on him, hoping that he will slip up and reveal things which of course he does not know because of his innocence. What starts off great moves into extremely convoluted plot twists, with Hayden and a group of his cave dwelling prisoners escaping and being led into an attack by Native Americans and others whom Bond has out on the watch for this group. A series a bad choices in moving the plot forward culminates with ridiculous revelations being made, and that results in this being one of the most outlandish re-tellings of American history in Hollywood history.Having already been filmed as the excellent "The Prisoner of Shark Island" in 1936, the story of Dr Mudd had already been presented in a more realistic light. If there was any reason to change what had already been filmed, it was the fact that the producers knew that there was no way that this could compare with the desperate manner in which 20th Century Fox had already done 16 years before. So why do it at all?, is my question. Sterling Hayden does an excellent job as the hero, but he is defeated by a script that doesn't seem to believe in the story it is telling. Ward Bond's character is so one dimensional yet three are indications that this character has multiple personalities because his motivations continue to change at outlandish rates. For that reason I had to give this one a thumbs down, you are better off sticking with your original story or possibly even the television version done more than 20 years later which took great pains to find out details that had not been revealed before.There is also no point in having a major actress like Joan Leslie cast in the insignificant role of the devoted wife, intermittently seeing talking with people she is hoping I can find the evidence to clear him.James Arness has a thankless role as one of the people living inside the cave prison nicknames hell we are all these prisoners are kept. the ending had me raising my eyes with disbelief, and I thought how can I have suffered through 90 minutes of this for a conclusion that made absolutely no sense.it is sad to say, but this one is a piece of American history that is well worth skipping.

Robert J. Maxwell Sterling Hayden is a peaceable ex Confederate and family man in 1867 Kansas, during a kind of Jesse James milieu when some former soldiers had formed bandit gangs and become a nuisance. He's a veterinarian and, in his good-natured way, he treats James Anderson, who shows up at his doorstep with a damaged rib. Anderson who, along with Bill McKinney, practically had a lock on the stereotypical chain gang boss and people of that ilk, is actually the leader of one of the roving bandit gangs.Hayden, of course, being a peaceable and polite horse doctor, knows nothing of this. He makes sure that mares foal properly, if that's the word. He's just trying to get along. But the U. S. Army believes otherwise. Due to a set of unfortunate circumstances, Hayden is convicted of being a bandit and an ex guerrilla, the kind of no-goodnik who would burn down the house of a Yankee with the women and children still inside.That, in any case, is what Ward Bond thinks. Bond is the head of the prison to which Hayden is sent. The prison camp is in a broiling hot canyon surrounded by convincingly arid desert. The Army guards at the camp are aided by Pima Indians who are paid to bring in the bodies of prisoners who try to escape. These particular Pima may be as rough as they say, but generally the Pima, like their Papago neighbors, were among the first to be acculturated and settle down to a horticultural life around the Colorado River.I rather like the production design -- the dozen or so tents of the soldiers, the wooden shack that is Bond's headquarters, and the interior of the caves and the mines where the prisoners work. Corridors are carved out of obviously fake rock, reminding a view of a Boris Karloff movie, but they're atmospheric.The movie has all the requisite moments of penal unpleasantness -- the surly guards, the cruel whipping of the prisoner who misbehaves, the chipping of the escape tunnel, the hot box in the sunshine, the shackles and humiliation. We've seen it all before, in prison movies more carefully structured than this one. I will mention "Cool Hand Luke" and "I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang" in passing, but they had bigger budgets and A-list stars. And "the oven" in "The Bridge On The River Kwai" is in a class by itself.The problem -- the thing that makes this less gripping than it has a right to be -- lies in three elements. First, Charles Marquis Warren was a hack director. He makes errors that you and I wouldn't make. Too many pointless close ups of men looking at one another while nothing is happening, just for example. He's dull. Another is that the film seems hastily written. We never see the men at work. The typhus epidemic is handled perfunctorily. The disease is spread by a microorganism found in the feces of human lice (yuk) and has nothing to do with water. And neither Sterling Hayden nor Ward Bond put much effort into their performances. Hayden -- okay, he never cared for acting anyway. But I can't remember a single movie in which Ward Bond was so slow and inexpressive, not from his earliest work nor from his last period, including "Rio Bravo." The result of all this is a Western that's mediocre at best, an inexpensive rerun of "The Prisoner of Shark Island," and a movie that is entirely without poetry.

MartinHafer "The Prisoner of Shark Island" was a wonderful film starring Warner Baxter. Not only was it very interesting, but it was the real life account of the incarceration and subsequent commutation of Dr. Samuel Mudd's sentence as a result of his exemplary conduct in the prison in saving lives during an epidemic."Hellgate" begins with a quote from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes that makes it appear as if this film is a true story. I could find no information on the internet about the character 'Gil Hanley', but the longer I watched this movie the more I realized that it was a remake of this earlier film with the names and a few details changed. There are just too many similarities between the two tails for them to be anything other than a remake.The film begins just after the US Civil War with some ex-Confederate soldiers stopping by Hanley's ranch. He has no idea who they are nor does he know they are wanted men. He just knows one of them is badly hurt and so he helps them. The next day, Union soldiers arrive and ask Hanley questions about his activities. He willingly admits helping a man the night before but says he had no knowledge of doing anything to aid a criminal--he was just doing a humanitarian act. But, because Hanley was also an ex-Confederate in a region dominated by Yankees, he's quickly charged and convicted of being a member of the gang that is wanted by the authorities. However, there really was no direct evidence--just a lot of hatred towards the South and Hanley was railroaded. Soon, Hanley is sent to a hellhole prison in the middle of the desert. In the case of Mudd, he was sent to a barren island in the Tortugas--desolate islands off the Florida Keys. In both cases, the places are brutal and life is all but impossible. Eventually, though, when an epidemic breaks out, Hanley is instrumental in saving the prison where they are now without water (because it was contaminated).The acting is very tough and gritty. The film just exudes manliness with the super-rugged Sterling Hayden in the lead and supported by James Arness and Ward Bond--three of the very toughest men in their day. Bond was an ex-football player, Hayden's war record is phenomenal and Arness was severely wounded at Anzio. Both Arness and Hayden are 6'5" or taller and bigger than the average ox! Together, this film is just so gosh darn rugged and tough that it's tough to beat on this account!! And, if it had only been an original story, I would have scored it a bit higher, as on occasion I love a film like this...one where John Wayne himself would have been overwhelmed by the cast's testosterone level!! Well worth seeing, but I strongly recommend you also see the Warner Baxter film--it's one of the best seldom seen films of the 1930s.

dinky-4 The early part of this story is the routine innocent-man-sent-to-prison story. Once Sterling Hayden arrives at the prison, however, things improve because of the unusual nature of the prison. It's located in a canyon near the southwestern tip of New Mexico. The canyon walls are more than 200 feet tall and beyond them lies a waterless desert patrolled by Pima Indians anxious to earn a reward for capturing any escapee. Prisoners are kept in underground cells. Punishment consists of being baked in metal coffins half-buried in the sand, or being whipped at a teasingly slow pace which allows the pain of each blow to sink in before the next one is delivered.Seeing how Sterling Hayden reacts to this environment and how he eventually overcomes it makes for a western which rises a bit above its standard materials.