Let's be clear, if you have an issue with "painted face(s)", you will have issues with the movie. While it's not exactIy black, the fact that the face is painted is quite obvious nonetheless (if that in and of itself is also offending to you),the main actress here (Donna Reed) is being made to look like a native American.

Another thing that I had more issues with, is how native Americans in general are being portrayed ... especially in conjunction with how the "good white folk" are being shown ... a shame, but something that maybe you can put behind and enjoy the adventure ahead. I do believe that one can watch a movie and be entertained without being too judgemental ... you can feel the right way about history and know way more than the movie reveals ... and just see this as a fairy tale ... it does try to end on a better note than what it preaches before ... so there is that.

It seems not to be as easy to write about these things, because nowadays it is a sensitive matter. I have to adress the issues at hand though so any new viewer is aware of what he or she can expect from this. I personally am more into portraying native Americans (or anyone else for that matter) in more nuanced fashion. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy a movie like this - some just take a movie like this with a grain of salt. And the performances are really good, even if the depictions (especially of the native Americans) is very narrow minded.

Movies from that time are being looked at with different eyes nowadays ... and rightfully so. There are other movies that have stereotypes in them and it is good to have some knowledge of the time or at least be aware that many things can trigger someone today - and again not trying to tell you how to feel - neither about the movie itself if you are able to make certain distinctions or not - that will be up to you - nor about what the filmmakers were thinking.

In 2011, "Time" magazine listed this as one of the 10 historically misleading films! As a retired American history teacher, it's pretty obvious what I think about the film!! Some of the ridiculously wrong portions of the film include a romance between Clark and Sacagawea (she was pregnant and married to Charbonneau in real life) as well as having the Donna Reed play this lady!! It's hilarious hearing her, with her perfect diction and Midwestern accent, playing a native. So how do they make her look like an Indian? LOTS of paint and a wig! I think Divine would have been about as convincing (and a lot more entertaining)!! Despite this romance NEVER occurring, it is the main focus of the film! And, despite the nasty natives in the film, for the most part, the tribes the expedition encountered were very peaceful.

If you can completely ignore the film's MANY inaccuracies, it is a very nice looking but dull film. The color is amazingly nice--and has that nice 1950s color scheme. It also has many lovely location shots and is HUGE in scope. And, if you ignore most of the details, the film did get the gist of the actual story! There were folks named Lewis and Clark and they did explore the western portion of the United States. As for the acting, it was generally good, but Fred MacMurray didn't seem to have a lot to do but scowl. Poor guy. And William Demarest sounded VERY peculiar--with an accent that came and went and seemed like it was part Irish, part Scottish and part....God knows! Heston and Reed were fine.

Note: Although the film is VERY pretty, sometimes the images are blurry. Apparently this is caused by differences in shrinkage rates of the color strips put together to make a full-color film. In other words, the red or blue layer might shrink at differing rates in portions of the film--giving a few scenes an odd look today.

Another Note: Films about this expedition neglect to mention that not too long after it was complete that Captain Lewis committed suicide! This dark event was apparently the result of his lifelong struggle with clinical depression. Pretty sad....

If I would have seen the trailer (preview) of this film in the fifties I would probably not have missed it. It had everything to please , the colorful scenes on the river, the great scenery and potentially a great story about Lewis and Clark that wanted to get to the Pacific and faced all kinds of dangers. It had a lot in common with 'The Big Sky' with the advantage of being in color. But 'The Big Sky' was quite a film and 'The Far Horizons' failed. By casting Donna Reed as an Indian woman and making her character so important they went wrong. Reed is a good actress, but this part was not for her. Just comparing her with the Indian girl in 'The Big Sky' we realize why. It is not really her fault, but her character was too much of a cliché. SPOILER AHEAD. I thought the great moment of the film would be when they start seeing the Pacific Ocean. I kept thinking of 'Lawrence of Arabia', that spectacular moment when Peter O'Toole is walking in what seems like an endless desert and suddenly sees the Suez Canal. But in this film, who knows why, probably because they went over budget, this is not shown. The film cuts abruptly to when they are already in the Pacific, celebrating their achievement. Quite a letdown.