Cast:
Vincent Price (James Reavis), Ellen Drew (Sofia; Karen Kester as child Sofia), Vladimir Sokoloff (Pepito), Beulah Bondi (Loma), Reed Hadley (Griff), Robert Barrat (Judge), Robin Short (Lansing), Tina Pine (Rita), Margia Dean (the Marquesa), Jonathan Hale (the Governor), Edward Keane (Miller), and Barbara Woodell (Mrs. Lansing) Directed by Samuel Fuller (#1790 - Park Row, #2234 - The Steel Helmet)
Review:
"The cameraman is master of his own kingdom. I feel the same about the rest of my crew: sound technicians, makeup people, hairdressers, costume designers. We'd discuss the kind of picture I wanted to make. Then I'd give them ample freedom to get the job done. They always did, no matter the budget or time constraints. I was always lucky with my production crews...The Baron from Arizona wasn't a big success. At least it was fun to make." - Samuel Fuller
Once ago, the West was a weird place. There once was a man named James Reavis that claimed to be a Baron of Arizona. The Missouri native apparently first learned he was good at forging signatures when enlisted in the traitorous Confederate Army as a teenager. He soon decided to surrender to the Union and served briefly there before doing a variety of jobs, one of which was real estate. It was only in 1880 that Reavis visited the then-Arizona Territory. He soon honed his plan that would see him file papers involving grants, deeds, and a claim that would've effectively nullified all existing land titles within the grant. Complications arose in the grant that saw him go to a second plan: an heiress to the grant that he could marry. Finally, in the year of 1889, the ball was rolling for nailing down the lack of validity of the claim, most notably with surveyor general Royal Johnson that noted the irregularities such as using a steel-nibbed pen rather than a quill for 18th century documents. Reavis did sue the United States government that went down the toilet in 1895. He was tried for forgery and found guilty in 1896, where he served prison time until 1898. He died in a pauper's grave in 1914. Incidentally, the tale of Reavis loosely inspired the 1939 film The Night Riders. According to Samuel Fuller's autobiography, he came across the Arizona story in the 1930s when drinking in New Mexico, as one does when on the writing beat. At any rate, years later Robert Lippert, satisfied with I Shot Jesse James (1949), was ready to produce another of Fuller's films and liked the pitch Fuller (who aspired to not leave Lippert after having one good time with him) gave to him. To beef up the curiosity, the movie states a source with a 1949 article in The American Weekly by Homer Croy, which had apparently also had material from Sam White that had been published earlier in True magazine. By Fuller's own admission, he wrote a script that he believed was more interesting than the actual Reavis story, particularly in the planning and with the love story. Fuller even had the benefit of James Wong Howe as cinematographer because Howe, a friend of his, didn't care about the money for shooting a film and just wanted to do it.
Admittedly, even though the movie is fine at best with the overall experience, you can clearly see the development present in a growing talent. The movie does take a bit of time to really get going with its setup (with narration present in setting certain things up, as they say), but the 97-minute runtime is generally watchable to make things worth it. Obviously first choices don't come to most movies, as Fuller had Fredric March in mind first for the lead role, but Lippert couldn't afford him. Instead, Fuller went with a gentleman that he saw on Broadway with a worthwhile voice and movements: Vincent Price. Fuller wrote a lead character that is arrogant and a conniving swindler to nearly everyone he meets and he has the absolute right guy for the film to work when you consider that Price was more than just a guy in horror movies (which happened later in the decade, as we all know), he could even do comedy in films such as Champagne for Caesar (1950). Simply put, Price makes me smile anytime I see him in a film because the mannerisms and voice just fit right from the word go even when playing a swindler. You love to see him in how the cogs turn in his head about where to jump to next in zest that in some way we all wish we had. The rest of the cast by comparison is okay, as if somehow looking at the film behind them (because Howe's cinematography is nice to experience, for one) is more interesting, but nobody detracts from the experience. You can at least believe Drew's character really does have affection for Price even with all that comes with someone who constricts an entire narrative about being descended from great things. The ending is the old fashioned "leave 'em happy going home", but it is definitely the result of a director that wanted to show that even con men can make schemes they didn't see coming work in their favor (besides, the part beforehand involving revealing ink is charming). As a whole, Fuller's second effort as a filmmaker is relatively fine, telling a worthy enough yarn of a conman and the spirit that it takes to carry things as long as it takes to get what they desire most in the game of life. For those who want a curious type of Western that plays fast and loose with history in the most curious of ways with an icon (for me, at least) in his young years, The Baron of Arizona is practically right up your alley.
Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.
