Custer Histroy according to Hutton
By Lisa Wright
The following is edited and condensed from “‘Correct in Every Detail: General Custer in Hollywood†by Paul Andrew Hutton.
[1] The title [They Died with Their Boots On] was from Thomas Ripley’s 1935 popular history of western gunfighters, a property purchased by Warner Brothers but never developed. It was a major film for Warners, with $1,357,000 eventually budgeted for production. The original script by Wally Kline and Aeneas Mackenzie clearly was influenced by the [Frederic F.] Van de Water biography [Glory Hunter: A Life of General Custer (1934)], but the studio decided to rewrite the script to better fit the Flynn persona. Associate producer Robert Fellows properly characterized it as a “fairy tale, with no attempt at adherence to historical fact.†Still, screenwriter Lenore Coffee, called in to punch up the romantic scenes between George and Elizabeth, was horrified by “really shocking inaccuracies†in the script. She was ignored, and, despite her major contribution to the final script, denied screen credit. Warner Brothers had firmly decided to treat General Custer in the same swashbuckling manner in which they handled Robin Hood in 1938. The tenor of the times influenced the decision. “In preparing this scenario,†screenwriter Mackenzie assured producer Hal Wallis that “all possible consideration was given the construction of a story which would have the best effect upon public morale in these present days of national crisis.†While Life magazine lamented that the film “glorifies a rash general,†the New York Times accused “writers in warbonnets†of scalping history, the only critics that Warner Brothers cared about lined up in droves to see They Died with Their Boots On.
[2] The historical errors in this particular film are legion: Custer was not promoted to general by mistake; he was not a civilian after the Civil War; he was more than willing to engage in shady business deals reflective of the Gilded Age in which he lived; he did not organize the Seventh in Dakota, but rather in Kansas; he did not protect the Black Hills, but rather opened them up; he was not the enemy of the railroad capitalists but their best friend on the northern plains; he was not a defender of Indian rights; he did not knowingly sacrifice his regiment at Little Bighorn to save others; Custer’s hair was cut short at the time of the battle and he did not carry a saber, nor did any of his men; and on and on and on.
[3]However, there is a veneer of truth to the film: Custer was a dashing, romantic soldier; he and Elizabeth did have a storybook marriage; the Sioux were a terribly wronged people; and the Last Stand was indeed the result of events set in motion by venal capitalists and inept, corrupt politicians. Perhaps the film’s greatest triumph is cutting to the essence of the American love affair with Custer.
[4] By chance, the film’s release in late November 1941 coincided with American entry into WWII. As the people reeled from the news of Pearl Harbor, Wake Island, and Bataan, they could clearly identify with the heroic self-sacrifice of Custer and the Seventh Cavalry. The greedy capitalists, crooked politicians, and gallant soldiers of They Died with Their Boots On made perfect sense to a people marching out of economic depression and into war.
