atlasmb In this version of James Fennimore Cooper's "The Last of the Mohicans" the central character, Hawkeye, is played by Randolph Scott. He's a scout for the English, who are at war with the French and their Indian allies, notably the Hurons.Hawkeye works with his two friends, Chingachgook and Uncas, who are the last living Mohicans. They would prefer to avoid the conflict and take care of their own business, but they are dragged into the intrigue by threats to the settlers in the area and, perhaps, by their interest in a couple of young women. The Huron, Magua, is an excellent villain, thanks to actor Bruce Cabot. And the ladies, Binnie Barnes and Heather Angel, are believable as the women who are the objects of much of the action. Randolph Scott plays Hawkeye as an affable fellow and exudes a certain charm.The title might be misleading for anyone not familiar with Cooper's thrilling tale, but it adds a sorrowful air. It also intimates the historic decimation of native Americans.Further adding to the enjoyability is the fact that most of the background story is historically accurate. The story is a classic.Personally, I prefer the 1992 version with Daniel Day-Lewis, primarily due to its greater feeling of urgency, mostly due to Mr. Day-Lewis. But this earlier version is excellent and, no doubt, served to inflame the emotions of many young viewers in its day.

jjnxn-1 For fans of the Daniel Day Lewis version of this story this will seem like a rough draft of that film. It's obvious that the makers of the later version relied on this as a springboard and to be fair to this one it's limited by both budgetary and film making techniques of the time. The addition of color, location filming and advanced techniques lend a kinetic edge to the newer version that this one can't match. On it's own it's got some pleasures but many of the performances are stiff, especially Randolph Scott who seems flat particularly when held up against Day Lewis's work. That may be an unfair comparison since few are as skillful as he and Scott was hardly the most naturalistic actor. It's not a bad blueprint but the Michael Mann remake is superior in every way.

MartinHafer During most of the twentieth century, white actors usually played leading ethnic roles in Hollywood's films. Chinese, American-Indian and many other groups were played by various actors who often looked and sounded nothing like the people they were intended to portray. It was wrong, but that was the way it was. So, when you watch "Last of the Mohicans" (1936), just accept the goofy casting of Robert Barrat as 'Chingochgook' and Bruce Cabot as 'Magua'. Sure, they were supposed to be American-Indians but were popular white supporting actors. And although you may disagree, Cabot and Barrat did reasonably good jobs in these odd roles--particularly Cabot. And, if you think this is goofy, remember in two earlier versions, Bela Lugosi (in a German-made version) and Boris Karloff BOTH played American-Indian roles!! So, it could be worse! As for the story, it's a very good retelling of the James Fenimore Cooper story. Randolph Scott has always been an underrated actor--probably because his acting seemed so natural and unadorned. He played the role simply and effectively. The rest of the cast were also very good. While some might disagree, this might just be the best of the various versions of the story. I've seen about a half dozen others (including the Daniel Day-Lewis version) and liked the 1936 film best. And, while you might think it crazy, the made for TV version with Steve Forrest is awfully good as well.Nice sets, excellent acting and costumes, this one does justice to this timeless American classic.

bikejump Even if it weren't based on a book, this movie would have been horrible, and its worse because it is nothing like the classic book it was based on. I would recommend you read the book, but if all possible, pass by this sad excuse for a movie.1/10