In 1854, at Fort Val Verde, Texas, the U.S. Cavalry is experimenting the novel idea of using camels rather than horses as a means of transportation.In 1854, at Fort Val Verde, Texas, the U.S. Cavalry is experimenting the novel idea of using camels rather than horses as a means of transportation.In 1854, at Fort Val Verde, Texas, the U.S. Cavalry is experimenting the novel idea of using camels rather than horses as a means of transportation.
Gino Conforti
- Hi Jolly
- (as Gene Conforti)
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaLoosely based on historical events. In the late 1850s, the U.S. Army experimented with the use of camels in the southwestern territories, the present states of Arizona and New Mexico. Hi Jolly (Hadji, or Haci Ali, 1828-1902) (portrayed by Gino Conforti) was a Syrian camel expert and driver hired by the Army to help with the experiment. Unfortunately, the project was deterred by the Civil War, and never resumed afterward. Hi Jolly became something of a local legend, eventually becoming a U.S. citizen, and living out his remaining days in Arizona.
- Quotes
Fitzgerald: We should move the barn closer to the house.
Howard Clemmons: Why would you want to move the barn closer to the house?
Fitzgerald: It seems like everyday, I walk a mile for these camels.
- Alternate versionsOriginally released at 126 minutes. Current video versions run 113 minutes.
- SoundtracksI Just Wanna Go Home
Music and Lyrics by Betty Box and Euel Box
Sung by Robert Smith
courtesy Mulberry Square Records
Featured review
Cute movie. I remember it from those days, when I was 11 and growing up in the US. Good family movie, safe for kids, and even has a bit of history in it to justify watching it, as this situation really happened in the US Cavalry (if not the actual people and events portrayed).
Now for the bad news: As others have already noted, the picture and sound are worse than terrible. Looks like they got an old 16mm copy, a school projector, and a portable screen, and used a digital camcorder to record it while it played. Then they slapped it on a DVD and called it digital.
Although the entire image is out of focus, the left side of the screen is even more so than the right. There is also some black banding that stutters down from the top of the frame periodically.
And, judging from the sound quality, it appears that the sound was also recorded directly from the same projector, perhaps using a cheap electret condenser mic. Mounted on a piece of plywood. Or maybe stuck in a drawer.
A company with this lousy of a work ethic should not be supported. Do not buy or rent this movie unless and until it gets a completely new version re-issued from the negatives. If we stop supporting these hacks, they will not be able to stay in business without increasing the quality of their titles. If you must see it, most larger metro US libraries will probably have it. The important thing is DON'T SPEND ANY MONEY ON THIS VERSION! Don't get me wrong; the movie itself is fine, and gets a 7 from me on its own. It's the terrible quality of the transfer that knocks it down to a 2.
Now for the bad news: As others have already noted, the picture and sound are worse than terrible. Looks like they got an old 16mm copy, a school projector, and a portable screen, and used a digital camcorder to record it while it played. Then they slapped it on a DVD and called it digital.
Although the entire image is out of focus, the left side of the screen is even more so than the right. There is also some black banding that stutters down from the top of the frame periodically.
And, judging from the sound quality, it appears that the sound was also recorded directly from the same projector, perhaps using a cheap electret condenser mic. Mounted on a piece of plywood. Or maybe stuck in a drawer.
A company with this lousy of a work ethic should not be supported. Do not buy or rent this movie unless and until it gets a completely new version re-issued from the negatives. If we stop supporting these hacks, they will not be able to stay in business without increasing the quality of their titles. If you must see it, most larger metro US libraries will probably have it. The important thing is DON'T SPEND ANY MONEY ON THIS VERSION! Don't get me wrong; the movie itself is fine, and gets a 7 from me on its own. It's the terrible quality of the transfer that knocks it down to a 2.
- therealcorsican
- Jan 23, 2006
- Permalink
- How long is Hawmps!?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $1,700,000 (estimated)
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
