The Pathfinder (1996)

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

You might come across this gem after viewing Mann's 1992 Last of the Mohicans or reading Cooper's book, and thirsting for more. Unless you're desperate in the extreme, however, I can't recommend it. The two mains look like they stepped out of an 80's musical, and the costumes are all Walmart specials, fresh out of the laundromat.The one good part, which is why I watched it at all, was the occasional (not frequent) use of genuine scenery and "indians" running through the trees with muskets. As noted in other reviews, however, they are white and flabby, so it's a letdown anyway. As for story, historical reenactment, drama, anything redeemable, it's just plain absent from this show.

Although I found this film to be historically accurate, I found it a bit odd that the British captain (I think he was the captain) was quite friendly with the French Compte. Me being quite the North and South American history buff, I never heard of such "personal alliances" between one British captain and a French Compte. Both nations were at war and they BOTH were only interested in USING the First Nations for their own selfish, evil gains!! It was bad enough that both sides just overlooked the fact that it was Native land they were fighting on! But they both forced the Natives to join either side so that they could defeat the other, and that's ALL that was!! But..... ANYWAYS...... that's why I gave this one a 7 out of 10.

It's hard to begin to describe how bad this movie is. While bringing great literature to the screen might not be the easiest of tasks, you would think the average production company couldn't go wrong with an action story. It's therefore remarkable - stunning, in fact - how completely this film fails on just about every level. It loses the audience from the get go, somehow managing to make a dangerous canoe trip down a roaring Niagara river as dull as ditch water.The acting is woefully poor, with perhaps only Graham Greene approaching passable level. Most of the cast deliver their dialog so stiffly and with such tortured syntax (supposedly the writers felt it would be more authentic that way) that it's often hard to understand half of what is said, and impossible to care much anyway.The whole production has the air of a reenactment, with none of the charm. This might even be an insult to the good folk who take pride in their amateur productions, because filming such a display would likely have resulted in a more engrossing film than this so-called professional effort. One of the very few plus points is that they used some authentic backdrops. It might have been better had they just had someone read a truncated version of the story over shots of the fort, river, lake, etc. On that point, the story is set up as being told as a bedtime story by a grandmother to two small children at a later date - a completely pointless and witless exercise, which does nothing but underline the idea that this film can lull the audience to sleep.Added to the many technical failings are at least a couple of dubious continuity issues. The 18th century pistols sound like modern firearms when fired and the shots echo as if fired indoors while the characters are using the guns outdoors. In one scene, two characters tracking through the woods discover a shoe print that looks a little too much like a modern man's size 12.Ultimately, this is a horrible film that should be avoided at all costs.

The Pathfinder is the third in plot succession of James Fenimore Cooper's Leather-Stocking Tales, a series of five novels depicting life along early America's northeast frontier, each of which features adventures engaging Natty Bumppo, called Leather Stocking due to his long deerskin gaiters, and are full of exciting occurrences, the author's love of the native forests, and scenes ripe for performing artists' insights. We should expect to be grateful for this adaptation, with its more than adequate funding, an outstanding director and technician, Donald Shebib, and proven cast members including Graham Greene, Stephen Russell, Stacy Keach, and Laurie Holden, but the work's very opening scene, depicting the oftseen Flabby Bodied Non-Indians Stripped To The Waist, Daubed In War Paint, And Jiggling Their Soft Bellies Through The Woods, is a harbinger of the sloppy production values to come. The cardinal problem here involves wholesale changes in the plot of the novel, apparently scripted by committee, which includes unrequited love and its effects, altered drastically among the roles, with other sharp alterations bringing about losses of logic, suspense and dramatic continuity, shabby stunt direction and ragged editing also adding to the visual disharmony. Some of the players are quite effective in this beautifully costumed production, actually filmed on and about the Lake Ontario locations of the novel, especially Keach as a French general, Greene as Bumppo's Mohican mentor, Holden with a typically sincere performance, and excellent stage-trained Canadian Russell as the principal villain; however, the remainder of the casting is quaint at best, remarkably so in the case of the film's lead, Kevin Dillon, far too young and lacking in range for the fortyish Pathfinder, who gives one the perception throughout that showing up for this one was the most unpleasant thing he'd to do for a while.