Cimarron
Performance & Direction: Cimarron Review
Last updated: February 16, 2026
Quick Verdict: Hit or Flop?
Is Cimarron (1960) worth watching? According to our cinematic analysis, the film stands as a ABOVE AVERAGE with a verified audience rating of 6.0/10. Whether you're looking for the box office collection, ending explained, or parents guide, our review covers everything you need to know about this Western.
Cast Performances: A Masterclass
The success of any Western is often anchored by its ensemble, and Cimarron features a noteworthy lineup led by Glenn Ford . Supported by the likes of Maria Schell and Anne Baxter , 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.
Final Verdict: Is it Worth Watching?
Story & Plot Summary: Cimarron
Quick Plot Summary: Released in 1960, Cimarron is a Western film directed by Anthony Mann. The narrative presents a compelling narrative that engages viewers from start to finish. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict involving Glenn Ford.
Ending Explained: Cimarron
Ending Breakdown: Directed by Anthony Mann, Cimarron 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 involving Glenn Ford, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
Ending Analysis:
- Narrative Resolution: The story concludes by addressing its primary narrative threads, providing closure while maintaining some ambiguity.
- Character Arcs: Character journeys reach their narrative endpoints, reflecting the film's thematic priorities.
- Thematic Payoff: The ending reinforces the western themes established throughout the runtime.
The final moments of Cimarron reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Who Should Watch Cimarron?
Worth Watching If You:
- Enjoy Western films and don't mind familiar tropes
- Are a fan of Glenn Ford or the director
- Want solid genre entertainment
Box Office Collection: Cimarron
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $6.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $11.0M |
| Trade Verdict | FINANCIAL DISAPPOINTMENT |
Cimarron Budget
The estimated production budget for Cimarron is $6.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.
Top Cast: Cimarron
All Cast & Crew →
Where to Watch Cimarron Online?
Streaming Hub🎟️ Rent on
Amazon VideoCimarron Parents Guide & Age Rating
1960 AdvisoryWondering about Cimarron age rating or if it's safe for kids? Here is our cinematic advisory:
⏱️ Runtime & Duration
The total runtime of Cimarron is 147 minutes (2h 27m). Ensuring you have enough time for the full cinematic experience.
Verdict Summary
Analyzing the overall audience sentiment, verified rating of 6.0/10, and global performance metrics, Cimarron is classified as a ABOVE AVERAGE. It remains an essential part of the 1960 cinematic calendar.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Cimarron worth watching?
Cimarron is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Western movies. It has a verified rating of 6/10 and stands as a ABOVE AVERAGE in our box office analysis.
Where can I find Cimarron parents guide and age rating?
The official parents guide for Cimarron identifies it as NR. Our detailed advisory section above covers all content warnings for families.
What is the total runtime of Cimarron?
The total duration of Cimarron is 147 minutes, which is approximately 2h 27m long.
Best Movies to Watch if you liked Cimarron
How Cimarron Compares & Where it Ranks
Critic Reviews for Cimarron
Thinking as I have, upon seeing the two versions (on consecutive days) depicting the fourth (from April 22, 1889) of the five Oklahoma land rushes, I have to reconsider my initial impression that the 1931 film was marginally better than this, Mann's 1960 version. I realize I'm not a member of the Glenn Ford Fan Club by any stretch of the imagination, but his co-stars are WAY better, and in Anthony Mann, you find a master of both the Western and the epic format (his later 'The Fall of the Roman Empire' is one of my favourite films from the 60's). A jar of beeswax could have out-acted Richard Dix's performance in the original (it's a dirty rotten shame HE even got nominated for Best Actor, in a year when MANY outstanding actors were overshadowed, not being so honoured), but I have to admit Ford was good, even if IMHO he didn't deserve the honour of being front-and-center of a 2 1/2 hour epic, and you can't beat what Maria Schell, Anne Baxter, Harry Morgan and Vic Morrow--just to name a select few--brought to the picture. Some scenes in the 1931 original still work better, but overall I believe this is one case in which the remake is better than the original. I further would insist that had Mann not been fired and replaced by Charles Walters, it would have been a minor masterpiece.
movieMx Verified
This review has been verified for accuracy and editorial quality by our senior cinematic analysts.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.
