Cimarron1931
Cimarron (1931)
TOMATOMETER
AUDIENCE SCORE
Critic Consensus: Cimarron is supported by a strong performance from Irene Dunne, but uneven in basically every other regard, and riddled with potentially offensive stereotypes.
Cimarron Photos
Movie Info
Watch it now
Cast
as Yancey Cravat
as Sabra Cravat
as Dixie Lee
as Felice Venable
as The Kid
as The Kid
as Jess Rickey
as Sol Levy
as Louie Heffner
as Mr. Bixby
as Mrs. Tracy Wyatt
as Isaiah
as Baby Big Elk `Eldest'
as Baby Big Elk `Youngster'
as Murch Rankin
as Grat Gotch
as Louis Venable
as Donna Cravat `Eldest'
as Donna Cravat `Younger'
as Cim `Eldest'
as Cim `Younger'
as Cim `Youngest'
as Yancey Jr.
as Felice Jr.
as Aunt Cassandra
as Dabney Venable
as Cousin Bella
as Jonett Goforth
as Arminta Greenwood
as Pat Leary
as Killer
as Indian Girl
as Worker
as Lon Yountis
as Extra
Critic Reviews for Cimarron
All Critics (18) | Top Critics (5) | Fresh (9) | Rotten (9) | DVD (1)
"Cimarron" is magnificent in scope, powerful in treatment, admirable in acting. But it is even more than all this. It is one of few talking picture productions which inspires rather than awes.
It is a long, full-bodied picture, paced so deftly that although it covers more than half a century of crowded, changing events, it never drags and is rarely jerky.
This is a spectacular western away from all others. It holds action, sentiment, sympathy, thrills and comedy -- and 100% clean.
A graphic and engrossing screen conception.
Critically lauded at the time of its release, Cimarron was beloved by most who saw it. Eight decades later, it is frequently cited on lists of the most undeserving Academy Award winners.
As a motion picture, this is fairly worthless, crippled by static direction, overblown performances and dull conflicts. But as a study of the American mindset at the time of both the story's setting and the film's production, it's a fascinating look back.
Audience Reviews for Cimarron
A land rusher and his wife attempt to conquer the West. I think one's judgement of this film rests with one's judgement of its main character. Some may see Yancey Cravat as a just, forward-thinking tough paragon of masculinity. However, I see him as a braggart, demeaning, and ludicrous prick. His heavy-handed treatment of his wife, his version of vigilante "justice," his proselytizing sermons, and his posturing nonsense wear on me to the point where I find it impossible to spend one moment in his presence. He's the type of person who so full of himself that there's nothing left for anyone else. The plot of the film serves Yancey. Each turn of the story is meant to render him more fully masculine and more admirably heroic, but what is left when an audience finds themselves unconvinced of his "awesomeness?" Not a damn thing. Overall, this guy is an asshole, and that makes the film an asshole too.
Super Reviewer
Okay, so this film is historically significant since it's the first western to win an Oscar (in general), and also for (somehow) snagging Best Picture. I think this is definitely a case of tastes changing. This was seen as a marvelously lavish and epic film in its time. Now it's a horribly dated, irrelevant and racist mess. I will give it credit for being an interesting look at the values of the society that it was produced in. Aside from that, there's not really much of a reason to see this unless you're an Oscar completist of die hard fan of 30s cinema. The story (based on a historical novel) tells the sotry of a man and wife set against the backdrop of the early history and development of Oklahoma. It should be an adventurous story of progress and adventure but is instead a creaky, scattershot melodrama with racist overtones in its portrayal of ethnic minorities. At the time the film was considered progressive, and no one batted an eye over the content. Yeah...can't say the same for how it fares now. I've seen movies that were far more racist, but thpse also had other aspects that helped me forgive them or at least be more understanding. This film, aside from being lavishly staged, isn't really technically innovative or remarkable. The opening scenes are decent though. At least hte film contains one character who serves as a counterpoint to the dominant views and is sympathetic with or understanding of the minorities. That helps, but it's not enough. It's also boring and unengaging. Well, that pretty much sums this one up. It's not terrible, but there's really isn't a reason to see this beyond what I've previously mentioned.
Super Reviewer
Creaky antique that somewhat inexplicably won the second best picture Oscar ever awarded. Taking into account that films had just started to talk perhaps that is part of the reason for the prize going to this exercise in overacted storytelling. Although today the picture is quite racist in the context of the time it might of even been considered progressive. The print is in pretty rough shape and Dix in particular is over the top, to be far most actors of the time hadn't learned yet how to modulate down their performances from the silents. Read the much better book instead.
Super Reviewer
Cimarron Quotes
There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.