Is Last of the Comanches Worth Watching?
Answer: Yes, Last of the Comanches is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Western movies.
It features a runtime of 85 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:Last of the Comanches is a confirmed FLOP based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 6.2/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Western genre.
Answer: Yes, Last of the Comanches is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Western movies.
It features a runtime of 85 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1953, Last of the Comanches emerges as a significant entry in the Western domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of It's 1876 and all the Indians are at peace except the Comanches lead by Black Cloud. Unlike standard genre fare, Last of the Comanches attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Western is often anchored by its ensemble, and Last of the Comanches features a noteworthy lineup led by Broderick Crawford . Supported by the likes of Barbara Hale and Johnny Stewart , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of Last of the Comanches (1953) is mixed. With an audience rating of 6.2/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: Last of the Comanches is a Western film that presents a compelling narrative that engages viewers from start to finish. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Ending Breakdown: Last of the Comanches concludes its story with a mix of closure and open interpretation. The finale presents its approach to western resolution.
The conclusion addresses the core thematic questions, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of Last of the Comanches reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Worth Watching If You:









Analyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 6.2/10, and global collection metrics, Last of the Comanches stands as a challenging project for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1953 cinematic year.
Last of the Comanches has received mixed reviews with a 6.2/10 rating, making it a moderate success with the audience.
Last of the Comanches is a mixed bag. It might be worth watching if you're a fan of Western movies, but read reviews first.
Last of the Comanches may be available for rent or purchase on digital platforms like Apple TV, Google Play, or Amazon Prime Video. Specific streaming availability can vary by country.
I'll tell you when to drink, when to eat, when to sleep, and when to breathe! I'll tell you when to drink, when to eat, when to sleep, and when to breathe! Last of the Comanches (AKA: The Sabre and the Arrow) is directed by Andre De Toth and adapted to the screen by Kenneth Gamet. It stars Broderick Crawford, Barbara Hale, Lloyd Bridges, Mickey Shaughnessy, Johnny Stewart, George Matthews and Hugh Sanders. A Technicolor production with cinematography by Charles Lawton Junior and Ray Cory and music by George Duning. Safe as a bomb shelter Western. A remake of Zoltan Korda/Humphrey Bogart's war movie "Sahara" from 1943, Last of the Comanches finds Broderick Crawford as the leader of what remains of a massacred cavalry troop. As they make their way across the desert they pick up ragtag group of stagecoach passengers and as water runs low, they must fight for survival against fierce Comanches led by Black Cloud. In essence it's a survivalist story with some Indian War action dotted around the outskirts of plotting. It's nice and airy, pleasingly performed, easy on the eye with its Technicolor photography, and De Toth once again shows himself to be a good marshal of action scenes. Crawford carries the movie of course, imbuing Sergeant Trainor with fearless bluster that holds the dysfunctional group together. The narrative strength comes from the lack of water, both for the whiteys and the Comanche, where the often forgotten weapons of war, that of food or drink, firmly keeps the story engrossing. Not as good as "Sahara" but still a safe recommendation to Western and Brod Crawford fans. 7/10
If you've seen Humphrey Bogart's cracking desert adventure "Sahara" (1943) then you'll know what you are in for... A disparate band of cavalry soldiers, alongside a stagecoach party, are ambushed by a rogue band of Commanches . With the help of the young "Little Knife" (Johnny Stewart) who is also running from "Black Cloud" and his marauders, they take refuge in a remote ruin were they have just enough water to survive - but not for long; and soon there is a siege going on too - with their enemy as short of water as they are... What ensues is a tensely directed Mexican stand off, each trying to convince the other that they have the upper hand, but neither in a remotely strong position. Can they hold out til reinforcements arrive, or will "Black Cloud" prevail? André de Toth has produced one of these rare things - a remake that is as good as the original. Well almost, Broderick Crawford ("Sgt. Traitor") isn't quite Bogey, but the rest of it holds up really well - frequently having you reach for a glass of something to quench your thirst! There is plenty of action to keep it going, a teeny bit of romance from an on form Barbara Hale and it still holds up well - 70-odd years later.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.