In Pursuit of Honor (1995 TV Movie) User Reviews

A film about courage, compassion, and with a fulfulling delivery.

[Stargal427 · 8/10 · 26 December 2001]

The film opens onto a flashback of one of the darker moments of history -- the destruction of WWI veteran camps outside the White House during the Depression. This sets the stage for how a few veteran calvarymen have a stronger sense of personal morale than their fellow men.

Then the present, with an adept young man whose father left a longlasting impression to many men he comes into contact with in a southwestern military base. It's a calvary stronghold, with around 500 horses and a fraction of that in men.

But the seeming low-action utopia ends when a Colonel retires and is replaced by a more ruthless replacement who carries out orders of Gen. MacArthur -- to disband the calvary's traditions [discontinuing sabers] and destroy the spare mounts in a brutal method that reminded me of the WWII concentration camp scenes of horror where Nazis would shoot Jews and bury them in mass graves on top of one another.

The start of this movie is a fast set-up for the rest of the film and does not leave much room for intermission. It's a long journey they undergo, and isn't without the harsh reality of the peril that the renegades face in their decision to rescue the horses.

I was attracted initially because of its history-base, which I'm interested in, and I've learned while being entertained at the same time of what happened within our own borders that might not have attracted everyone's eye, but was brutally savage all the same.

In conclusion, this made-for-TV movie scored an 8 with me and if any of this movie's main elements fascinate you it should be on your agenda to see.

Not monumental, but worth viewing.

[thousandisland · 7/10 · 4 June 2000]

You don't have to be a horse lover to enjoy this film, but it helps. Sensitive viewers may find some scenes hard to watch, particularly the killing of quite a few horses, but otherwise the action is generally mild. The overall feeling of this film is personal honor. It is about people standing up for what they believe is right and just, even at the cost of their own lives and reputations. This moral standpoint is conveyed, but not overdone. This is not a sweet or sappy film at all, but has restrained, masculine expression that I guess is appropriate for the cavalry. In my opinion it lacks any strong characterization, but this is the fault of the writers, not the actors. There is only one female character in the whole film, and I did not find her to be very believable, but the male leads are all appropriate and seem to fit this film. I enjoyed viewing "In Pursuit of Honor" and got wrapped up in it. It has a triumphant ending and leaves you feeling good, suggesting that even in the carnage and cruelty of war, there can be room for humanity.

My Conclusion? Great story - TOTAL BS

[johnalmquist · 6/10 · 31 July 2016]

CONTAINS SPOILERS....

After watching this movie on HBO Go, I absolutely had to look it up and research the topic. I'm a history buff, and couldn't believe the story to actually be true.

I'm going to make this as logical as possible, but first, I had to give points to the acting in the movie. Aside from the historical inaccuracies, I had to tip a hat to Don Johnson for his work in making this film. This quite possibly was his best acting - EVER - and it was in a made for TV movie?? It was THAT good. Way to go man. I give you props 21 years after the fact.

1. THIS IS NOT BASED ON A TRUE STORY! After reading numerous articles and reviews - one written after the release of the film - the BS meter is off the scale. For as young as the internet was back in 1995, people were really upset about this film, the story, the supposed slaughter of the horses, and inaccurate military portrayals of MacArthur and the common Cavalryman, enough to light up their Netscape 24/7 talking about how terrible the U.S. was back in the day to do this to innocent little bunnies - I mean horses. The fact is, this is a TALL TALE - like Paul Bunyan - passed down and told by drunken cowboys with a dash of history (the Bonus Riots in DC and the turning in of the cavalry sabers) baked in to make it just a little bit more believable. I agree with some of the other reviews that HBO has done a much better job in recent past with their historical research. Today, the claim that it is based on a true story would be supplanted with, "This is a story that some guys told me in a bar in Santa Fe. Here is the best article I could find: "In Defense of Honor: General Douglas MacArthur and the Horse Cavalry of 1934", by Bob Seals

2. MacArthur was NOT a horse killer! Just to reiterate, both military and historical records back up the fact that this NEVER HAPPENED, and General MacArthur did not order the slaughter of these horses. Yes, the esteemed General did get a bit loopy later in life, after the Korean War, and was dismissed by Ike, but this was in the 30's! He is in his military leadership prime, and was given a short stick and a black eye. In fact, at the time of this movie, 1934, the U.S. was in the middle of the Great Depression, and there was a shortage of working horses and mules. I've seen figures that state all 500 horses could have sold for as much as a several million dollars in today's money. Didn't happen.

3. The names of the main characters in this film are made up - with the obvious exceptions.

4. There is no "Milk River" dividing the U.S. from Canada. Anywhere. Look on a map. The border in Montana is the 49th parallel. For 1000 miles.

5. They didn't have to go to Canada, or a Native American Reservation in Montana - they went right THROUGH 3 or 4 of them on the map in the film!! If you look at the map in the film, starting from the Sonoran desert, they head north, right through the Apache and Navajo nations, then have the opportunity to dump the horses in one of several, including going right past the Uintah and Ouray reservation in Utah and through the middle of the Wind River Reservation in Wyoming. Finally, in Montana, there are the Crow, Blackfeet, and other reservations with vast swaths of territory that make these guys look like they couldn't find their "you know what" in the dark.

I give this movie 6 stars for good acting and story line, but understandably, the historical aspects and claim that it is based on a true story detract from the appreciation of the better parts of the movie.

The Perfect Movie

[Rosie-34 · 1 November 2000]

I'm biased: I love horses; I love movies with and about horses. I've seen horse-related movies good, bad, & indifferent. But there was nothing bad or indifferent about In Pursuit of Honor. The first time I watched it, I cried like a baby and swore I'd never watch it again, it devastated me so. But it draws me back again and again, and I've watched the movie probably a dozen times. To my mind, In Pursuit of Honor is one of that rare breed: the perfect movie. The writing, filming, and acting all combine to create the kind of movie that, like a good book, you want to experience over and over again. And if nothing else, it showed me that Don Johnson is not the shallow, pretty face I'd always considered him; he gives a wonderfully restrained performance, as does Craig Sheffer. An entertaining, educational, historically accurate movie that my husband and I will enjoy at least another dozen times.

A dumb story, well done

[mac22101 · 7/10 · 5 December 2021]

This was well done with some great actors, but the premise was implausible to say the least. There had to be a bad guy and who better than General Douglas MacArthur? Don Johnson and Rod Steiger were terrific.

Decent Film

[paulwattriley · 7/10 · 14 February 2021]

Its a Decent Hollywood movie and even though fiction its a great message, in modern times animals are given the same dignified recondition as humans.

The only thing I don't get is chasing the horses across the country using the tanks etc and ammunition is the exact opposite saving the army money which was the main point of killing off the horses.

The Big Pursuit.

[rmax304823 · 7/10 · 21 May 2015]

Gabrielle Anwar is unquestionably a fox. She hasn't much chin to her face but otherwise her girlish features are flawless, as if they'd been sculpted by someone at Walt Disney's Studio. And what a background! From Wikipedia: "Anwar was born in Laleham, Surrey. Her mother, Shirley Hills, is an actress, and her father, Tariq Anwar, is an award-winning film producer and editor. Her father was born in Delhi, India, to an Austrian Jewish mother and an Indian father." As one writer described another nymph, "a salad of racial genes." It's hard to know why her career didn't flourish. There's no pronounced weakness in her performance or her delivery. It may just be that her little-girl voice never conveyed a mood or emotion with any conviction. If a four-year old told you something, would you automatically believe it?

Here, she's the daughter of Rod Steiger, retiring commander officer of an army cavalry camp in Arizona. The easy-going Steiger is replaced by Bob Gunton, one of those officers you know immediately is going to be a problem because he never smiles, he's ruthless, arrogant, and he has a pencil mustache. The camp has several hundred horses belonging to the US Cavalry. By 1932, horse cavalry was obsolete everywhere except Poland. Yet the men, including top sergeant Don Johnson, are fond of their horses. The horses, after all, have fought beside the men and died beside them. The newly arrived first lieutenant, Craig Sheffer, is a cavalry officer and he loves the horses too. Also, Sheffer and Anwar generate some strictly non-equine vibes between them.

The autocratic Gunton calls the men together, informs them brusquely that the cavalry unit will now be merged with the infantry he's brought with him. Furthermore, the men will turn in their sabers and the horses will be replaced by tanks that look like tin toys, the animals to be exterminated by gunfire in a great pit in Mexico. The infantry, ignorant of the bond between cavalry men and their horses, set about machine-gunning the first pitload. It's a shocking scene.

The handsome and impetuous Lieutenant Sheffer will have no more of this. With the help of Johnson and three other sergeants, Buxton commandeers the remaining hundred or so horses and takes off with them for the high ground, his justification being that he has never seen any written orders that the horses be disposed of. The infantry major in charge, another bony faced automaton, threatens him with court martial, but Sheffer, his men, and all the horses light out anyway. A pursuit by Gunton's remaining horses, plus tanks, howitzers, and other motor vehicles follows. The trek takes them a thousand miles to the north -- without food. That's okay for the horses. They eat grass.

It's a sentimental story, of course. How could it not be? It's about saving a hundred helpless horses. But it's not SLOPPILY sentimental. The story could have been milked for every tear it was worth, yet the writers have minimized the pathos either out of a trust for the audience or out of incompetence.

Only one horse has a name, Don Johnson's black horse, Ahab. And Johnson has to shoot him in the forehead when Ahab can no longer walk. It's a monumental opportunity for wallowing in pity -- Johnson making a long, loving speech to his mount, while Ahab nibbles at Johnson's ear and whispers his forgiveness. But -- no such thing. "See you in hell, Ahab," says Johnson, and after a drawn-out pause shoots the animal, which clumps noisily to the ground.

If the film is described as a story about heroic soldiers who refuse to allow their mounts to be destroyed, it sounds terrible. But it's better than that.

This film was well done and touched my heart.

[Peggy-3 · 10/10 · 16 October 1998]

The actors (both human and animal) were well cast. The direction of this TV film was excellent. The movie depicted a humane aspect of the military.

The soldiers started out with some conflict of personalities and became a "team". They had one goal: SAVE THE HORSES. The horses selected for these roles were well trained and were magnificent animals.

Before watching this film, I had a high regard for General Douglas MacArthur. The information given in the film shows another side of the war hero; one not so favorable.

The compassion shown by the Calvery soldier to his partner (the horse) was extremely emotional. He was ready to give his life for his "partner". The soldier looked upon the mount as an equal and treated the animal with dignity. I was unaware that when the soldiers and horses went into battle, they were a team; one depending on the other for their survival. The horse was trained to manoeuvre and respond to protect his rider. This is a part of history that remains a secret to most people.

Good movie- NOT a true story

[callie-33 · 7/10 · 18 August 2010]

This is a good movie. The actors do a great job, and the story is dramatic, and tear jerking.

It is NOT a true story. There is no evidence anywhere that anything like this ever happened, and the Army has very clear regs on de-commissioning horses. Mass killings are not one of the approved methods. Look how long Chief and Comanche were cared for by the Army for proof of how loved and honored the horses were.

So please leave MacArthur alone, he didn't do it because it didn't happen. Enjoy the movie for what it is- a dramatic and moving tale. But don't believe every "based on a true story" tag line you see. "I saw it in a movie based on a true story" is just as reliable as "I read it on the internet." "Titanic" was also based on a true story- there was a boat with that name and it sank, but Jack and Rose were never existed.

Excellently produced and directed.

[drdyer · 9/10 · 5 June 2002]

This is the first film I have seen that accurately depicts the U.S. Army Horse Cavalry during this time period.

My father was a trooper in the cavalry during this time period, as an orderly to General Patton (then colonel), another cavalry man.

My father's stories reflected this closeness of a trooper and his horse.

The film was also accurate in uniforms, saddles, and tack, along with the handling of the horses.

Don Johnson's roll of the Sergeant was remarkable, one of his best performances.

I would recommend this film to anyone interested in a missed part of our history, and to anyone just wanting to see a very good movie.

A great Film-Almost restores your faith in Human Beings!

[Mr Skoooooter · 10/10 · 9 August 2002]

I first saw this film completely by chance as I was shoveling my Dad's driveway the winter of 1996. I had turned on the TV in between breaks and went to HBO and it had just started and it was so well done that I watched the whole movie before I went beck out to keep on shoveling the snow. If the film's portrayal of MacArthur was true, he was a real Turd! And the treatment of the World War I veterans by our government shows that nothing much has changed over the past 80 years! But the film itself is a gem! If you love a movie with a corny old good guys vs. bad guys plot that will leave you feeling great at the end, and if you love animals, especially horses, you'll love this film. I have the video and will get the DVD as soon as they nake that - it's that good!!!

Good, but not a true story

[tellis-642-125759 · 3/10 · 22 January 2010]

As a horseman I was caught up in the emotions of the story, but that is exactly what it was. It claims to be based on true events, but it is completely made up (except a small part of the Bonus Army material in the beginning and the part of the cavalry men turning in their sabers). So as a history buff I was quite upset that anyone would try to pass this off as actual history. It smears the name of Gen. MacArthur and the Army. If anyone takes a little time to research he/she will find the Army never did this and this is a made up story told by some cowboys to a dude in Montana. The acting is not bad. Don Johnson does a pretty good job and is convincing in his role. Rod Steiger is terrific. When the element of killing trusting horses is mixed with the over the top villain, Bob Gunton, and the cold blooded MacArthur (played by James Sikking) the potion is enticing. I was pulled in to the story and cheered for the "horse thieves". However, remember it is not true - shame on the producers for indicating so.

Very Good Movie

[jpeng16990 · 20 January 2005]

I saw this movie and was pleasantly surprised. I didn't expect a "B-rate" movie to capture and keep my attention the way this one did. I happened to be skipping through channels when I saw the uniforms and cavalry and before I knew it, I had seen the whole movie. It's a good story about how a small group of soldiers went against the grain during a rough period in our country's history. I've seen Don Johnson in a lot of different roles throughout the years and I think this was one of his best roles. Its a simple storyline with a happy ending but I would definitely recommend anyone see it-especially if you are an animal lover.

You'll want to know more

[aa4353 · 9/10 · 24 September 2006]

Besides being an enjoyment for anyone who likes horses, this movie also covers shameful incidents from out nation's history. It identifies several issues that warrant further investigation by anyone interested in U.S. history. These include the rise of General McArthur, the treatment of returning W.W. I Veterans,the difficulty of changing the way war is fought.(an issue today)and the influence of the press.. All of this might shed some light on how decisions are made today by men in power. Excellent acting by some actors who are sometimes not praised enough for their craft. Personally, I would accept more movies of this genre.

This is a great movie that touched me!

[walter_chen · 10/10 · 13 March 2004]

I saw this movie accidentally on 2/22/2004 from Cinemax. Then the story of this cavalry movie really touched me. I wondered very much how the cavalry soldiers felt when they were to be replaced with mechanized units. It must be a very difficult time for them. Because I didn't remember the title of this movie after I saw it, I had tried very hard to find out more history behind this movie. For example, I found one thesis titled¡§GREASY AUTOMATONS AND THE HORSEY SET : THE U.S. CAVALRY AND MECHANIZATION, 1928-1940", written by VINCENT J. TEDESCO III for his Master Degree at THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE GRADUATE SCHOOL, COLLEGE OF THE LIBERAL ARTS in May 1995. I tried to study if this movie story was real. Eventually I searched IMDb today and got some information about this movie. I feel very happy that IMDb provides such useful data of all movies. I would appreciate very much if people can tell me any more true history of those characters in this movie.

A fascinating story of conflict between levels of command.

[fkerr · 9/10 · 11 December 2001]

What may be seen by some viewers as just another Western horse chase is really a profound comment on management, military leadership, and courage as well as a very interesting historical antic dote. It dramatically portrays how differently things can look from different points in the chain of command. Gen. MacArthur has seen the threats to the U.S. from Europe and Asia, and he aims to modernize the Army. With an engineering background and the perspective of high command, he simply orders the excess cavalry horses destroyed.

Down on the Mexican border, this order seems absurd by soldiers who have grown to love horses. A courageous bunch led by an honor focused lieutenant and combat wise sergeant seizes the momentary opportunity to save most of the animals. Their superior, who is purely obedience focused, takes after this mutiny, which then becomes an international incident. Retired colonel Hardesty, who is smart enough to have retired to Tucson, and his journalist daughter feed take up the cause with ultimate success.

The story is apparently real, portrayal of the conflict is believable, the characters show their doubts and resolve, and the story is fascinating.

Leaves a lot to be desired.

[levimcnew · 4/10 · 6 June 2016]

As a soldier, there was a lot that I noticed about how much care they had in researching the Army and how people dressed and acted.

For instance, ranks. A 1st Sergeant introducing himself as Master Sergeant (which, despite being the same pay grade, is a lower rank in the command structure) makes me cringe. A Command Sergeant Major being called "Regimental Sergeant" is also quite bad. Come on, this isn't Great Britain! If you are going to be making a movie depicting the US Army, then the least you can do is a little bit of research. Mixing and blending titles and positions with other armies from around the world doesn't work whatsoever.

Uniforms were also pretty bad. Every single man in the film had a uniform, that I can tell was made in a costume shop, just thrown on without any knowledge of how to wear it. There was even people with a full beard. Following the first World War, Every Soldier, Marine, and Airman (excluding only the Navy because they had their own rules) had to maintain a clean shaven face. The only facial hair allowed was a mustache. They introduced this because a clean shaven face would have a proper seal on a gas mask.

Ceremony and simple discipline. Since when does the colors get hoisted on to the flag pole during the middle of the day? And why were they not playing Reveille? Why were they hoisting it while it was still folded!?!? Why were they turning in their sabers in some sort of rag-tag ceremony and not have time for a proper change of command? The man was retiring as well. There would always be a ceremony for that, at the very least. The US Army is a creature of tradition, and there is tons of books, articles, and other things to do some proper research! And now to discipline... ugh... it is one thing to disagree with your commanding officer, it is a complete disgrace when you yell it at the man's face for every man to hear! If it's an unlawful order, then it is your duty to respectfully disobey. Beyond disobeying the aforementioned order, you hold your tongue unless questioned.

This movie is pretty hard to watch. Having been a Soldier, it is excruciatingly hard to overlook the little things. In order to really sell the story, it needs to be authentic. That includes doing some actual research. It's not hard. Even in the 1990s it was easy. Seriously, a trip to Fort Hood, TX would have helped this a lot. There they have a museum dedicated to the history of the 1st Cavalry Division and even a ceremonial mounted Cavalry Troop dressed in period uniforms. The sources for proper information is endless.

A good movie for all ages...

[ferserrano · 23 May 2004]

A fine movie, good plot and solid acting. I enjoyed this TV movie on a Sunday rainy afternoon. I particularly liked Don Johnson's performance.The mere idea of destroying 500 hundred horses for economic reasons is simply disgusting, so viewers will easily take sides. The eternal discussion between blind obedience and common sense is frankly depicted here, and the debate reopens again. The note that states -at the end of the film- that no animal has been hurt while shooting this movie is fitting, because at times you get the feeling that the horses are enduring quite an ordeal and facing death in the hands of those who are trying to save them. I warmly recommend this film, it is good for all ages.

A First Class Feel-Great movie!!!

[elskootero · 10/10 · 8 October 2006]

I first saw this film during a snowstorm at my dad's house in 1998 and got the video when IT came out, and the DVD when IT came out! It's a first-class film in every way. It takes place at the time when the army was just leaving the "old" cavalry and getting ready for the "new", mechanized cavalry, and a group of old-style cavalry troopers have to destroy a group of horses that the army no longer needs. James Sikking does a first class job portraying Douglas McArthur, first clearing out the "bonus" marchers from World War 1, then pursuing these old soldiers as they try to take these now useless cavalry mounts up to Canada, hoping they'll be safe there. If you love horses; great movies with little special effects-just great acting and a really nice end; you must see it; you'll be VERY glad you did!

This movie has stayed with me..

[Chloe1251 · 9/10 · 13 September 2005]

I love horses, but would still enjoy this movie even if I didn't! The story of the resurrection and redemption of a disillusioned, bitter man, and the effort made to save these beautiful animals is deeply moving, without being sappy in the least.

I'm not a Don Johnson fan, but feel he gave a tremendous performance in this film, possibly the best of his career.

Although this is quite a simple story but it's not an easy movie to watch, particularly for someone like me who abhors depictions of any brutality towards animals. I admit I sobbed through most of it, but it's well worth the Kleenex! This is an underrated film that really deserves viewing.

Deserves another showing

[lkovathana · 9/10 · 13 April 2008]

I was reminded of this movie again when reading a brief note about a lawyer who, among other things, investigated and prosecuted persons who committed the killing of horses for profit.

This movie raises several difficult issues. When is it our duty to act to protect those who are in no position to act for themselves? The story sets up a clear conflict of conscience: Who wouldn't want to prevent the slaughter of 500 innocent horses who have performed the involuntary duty of carrying soldiers into war? Yet, how many of us would have had the courage to completely undo their lives in order to stand for such a principle? The soldiers involved in the rescue of the horses in question chose to actively prevent the carrying out of a direct order, at great risk to themselves. The effect of the telling of the story is to serve as inspiration; stories of courage are more thought-provoking when based on an actual event.

I felt this movie was well acted, well told, and at times wrenchingly realistic. I haven't seen its reappearance on cable since it was first shown in the late 90's, but it's worth seeing by a new generation of viewers because its story is timeless.

NOT BASED ON A TRUE STORY

[dudewholikesthepits · 3/10 · 5 August 2021]

Beyond the fact that there was a Bonus March in D. C. in 1932 there is nothing in this film that is based on a true story. There is no evidence or record of the Army destroying horses. In fact the US Cavalry School continued training horses and riders until 1946, when it was deactivated. When the Army's Remount Service ended, its horses and programs were transferred to the Department of Agriculture, which sold the horses at auction the following year.

It's sad, because this was a well written and made film that is marred by the fact that it is a lie.

Not a true story, but it is a great movie anyway.

[daveh-00778 · 10/10 · 4 November 2019]

As I am sure others will point out, this particular event with the horses didn't occur, as the cavalry wasn't officially disbanded until 1946 or so, and the cavalry horses were actually sold.

But that is beside the point. The story is fake, but it's talking about real stuff. Like most everyone else today, the hardest thing I've had to do is work two jobs to pay the bills. This film is about people to whom words like honor, duty, and country aren't something just seen in a dictionary. Much like the Colonel said to Buxton, I hope to God I could do the same if placed in an ethical quandary on that scale.

Excellent movie, all should see.

[bchole · 10/10 · 22 December 2006]

This is a great movie! As an old Cavalry Officer myself (albeit Air Cavalry) this is a great story, presented in an excellent manner. Doing the right thing in the face of official and professional ostracism illustrates personal courage as strong as the courage required to face the enemy on the battlefield. Doing the right thing is not always the easy thing to do, particularly when you stand by yourself in an organization that expects and demands conformity and acceptance to change. The change forced upon these few horse cavalry soldiers, by an organization determined to leave the old way and adopt the requirements for mechanized cavalry, during the early days of World War II, is a story that all should remember. The courage of these soldiers, to do the right thing, and disobey official orders, provides a lesson not only in honor but personal courage that very few would be able to see through to the end.

This is an excellent movie and in my opinion, the finest performance by Don Johnson I have seen.

Based on real events, saving the Cavalry horses, defying Gen McArthur.

[TxMike · 2 December 2008]

This movie is based on real events, however it is dramatized and some characters and events are fictional.

It was 1932, the country was still in a depression, and the US Army Cavalry had just about served its purpose. General Douglas McArthur ordered that all excess horses be driven to the Mexican border and disposed of. Killed. Because, as he later tells a retired officer, "We can't afford to feed them."

But after the first 100 (of 500 total) were executed, 5 of the Cavalry soldiers decided that it just wasn't right, to dispose of these horses this way. They viewed the horses as much part of the Cavalry as they were. So, in a spur of the moment decision, a young officer who had never even seen action led these men away with 400 horses and no plan.

They eventually worked their way up to the Canadian border, and were able to get the horses across, helped by some old infantry friends who fired the cannons at the wrong elevation.

Good story, and Don Johnson once more shows us how good an actor he is, as the seasoned Cavalry Sarg who gave moral support to the young officer.