im-fmouie As a huge fan of The Lone Ranger, watching this, I couldn't help saying, "Oh, no, Lone! What made you go wrong?" It was odd to hear Clayton Moore's voice as a baddie. Apparently, this movie was released only months before the Lone Ranger series on TV began in 1949. So, in the end, Lone turned to the good side, and everything was right in the Force. Gene Autry and Hopalong Cassidy were OK, but The Lone Ranger, Tonto and Roy Rogers were my TV cowboy show heroes. Hi yo, Silver! ... c'mon Bullet.

dougdoepke Scenic Autry western with a few surprises. The plot is a little complex for me, and I had trouble keeping some of the look-alike characters straight. But that's probably just me. Anyhow, the story involves aerial spraying of DDT and who stands to gain or lose. In that surprising sense, the movie involves contemporary environmental issues, even in 1949. The 70-minutes is also notable for there being no Autry sidekick (Burnette or Buttram) for comedy relief. So it's pretty much straight melodrama the whole way. Then too, as leading lady, there's the luscious Patricia Barry who later went on to a pretty extensive TV career, along with familiar baddie Douglass Dumbrille, and future Lone Ranger, Clayton Moore, in a supporting role. Also, catch that very last scene, an unusually thoughtful one for a horse opera of any kind. All in all, it adds up to a different kind of Autry programmer with more noisy winged conveyances than Gene's usual 4-footed friends.

dongwangfu Gene Autry's movies are so much more complex than Tex Ritter or Ken Maynard, and it is hard not to admire the way that his movies have more explicit social messages. This movie is particularly intriguing because it is both pro-environment and pro-DDT. Remember, this was 1949, and Rachel Carson's Silent Spring came out in 1962, in part a reaction to the fire ant eradication program of 1957. Not only was DDT seen as a boon to forest management, but the previous year (1948) its inventor won a Nobel Prize for "for his discovery of the high efficiency of DDT." At the core of this movie is an effort to control an infestation by aerial spraying, similar to the fire ant eradication effort a decade later. It is also about a lumber company's effort to first hide the infestation and then sabotage the spraying, so as to make a fortune harvesting the diseased trees. So, DDT is used by protectors of the forest, but the ones intent on letting a natural infestation decimate the forest to profit are trying to convince the farmers that DDT is killing their livestock. One of the townsfolk even says something like "once it gets in the fish, then it gets in everything..." Which all goes to show that what is environmentally sound changes as our understanding of nature changes. Autry keeps insisting that DDT had been tested and couldn't be killing off the animals. Of course, by the time it was banned in 1972 its persistent toxicity and effect on animals were scientifically well-documented.Which, to me, makes this a fascinating movie. Yes, the greed of the timber companies led them to do bad things. But the concern of Gene Autry for the forest also led him to do something that we now know was bad, too -- albeit unknowingly.

keesha45 One of my earliest childhood memories was getting home from school and sitting down in the family kitchen to hear "The Lone Ranger" on our big console radio. Of all my first TV heroes, none were bigger or braver than Davy Crockett, Superman and The Lone Ranger (not to forget his "faithful Indian companion and a fiery horse called Silver.") Until now, I'm sure I'd never seen Fess Parker, George Reeves or Clayton Moore as a bad guy. A few hours before this movie aired on cable, I saw the text of the preview box which read "Pete:Clayton Moore" so I was curious to see what color hat he was wearing. Actually, I later found out from IMDb filmographies that Parker, Reeves and Moore had each played villains more than once. Still, I had to wait until the third reel before I could be sure I was seeing Moore. In the first few scenes, what little dialogue he spoke didn't really identify him. But in the last scene he played with Autry, he spoke long enough that his clear deep voice revealed the familiar one we would grow to recognize from the long-running series which began not many months after the release of this film. There's little else about this oater I'd recommend. There are some good but forgettable songs, by Gene and others, just fair action and cinematography, no real romance, and not even a comical sidekick. It's not a great western by any stretch or even one of Autry's best films. For all that, it's still a passable way to spend an hour and ten minutes, which is about the length of one of my church's Sunday morning worship services. Forgive me, Pastor Mark, but Gene Autry's films haven't yet put me to sleep. Now, Rev, if you're hankerin' to liven up the congregation, I'd reckon you might try to wear a Stetson and fire a six-shooter (blanks-loaded, naturally) now and then. Dale Roloff