David and Bathsheba

Year:  1951

Filming:  Color

Length:  116 minutes

Genre:  Biblical/Drama/Religious/Romance

Maturity:  PG (for intense thematic elements)

Cast:  Gregory Peck (King David), Susan Hayward (Bathsheba),

Raymond Massey (Nathan), Kieron Moore (Uriah), James Robertson Justice (Abishai), John Sutton (Ira), Jane Meadows (Michal), Gilbert Barnett (Absalom)

 Director:  Henry King

Personal Rating:  4 Stars

***

     Underrated and overlooked, David and Bathsheba is another “sword-and-sandal” flick that takes liberties with the scriptural text but still manages to artfully convey the moral potency of the ultimate story of sin and redemption. It may not have the rollicking action of Ben-Hur or the grand spectable of The Ten Commandments, and yet the excellent acting and poignant “what-ifs” make it another Easter film to remember.  
 

    Gregory Peck stars as King David, a man torn between the flesh and the spirit as he struggles to rule the kingdom of Israel and make his peace with God. But one night while walking on the palace balcony, his restlessness diverts his attentions towards Bathsheba, the beautiful wife of one of his captains, who he spies bathing in her yard (“Peeping Dave”!). Bewitched, he invites her to be his guest for dinner, where it is revealed that she has been spying on him as well (don’t tell he has a royal tub on the veranda, please…) and is quite taken with her observations. They both agree it would mutually pleasurable to shack-up. 
 

    Lest we forget her husband Uriah – well, he’s out fighting for King and Country in the Israelite army. He doesn’t quite know what’s afoot back in his happy home, and King David is determined to keep him in ingnorant bliss. If Bathsheba is caught in adultery, she could be stoned to death according to the law of the land, which outranks even the king himself. Plus, David’s out reputation would be pretty much sunk by courousing with the wife of one of his war heroes. But when Bathsheba becomes pregnant with a royal child, David will stop at nothing to save her. 
 

    First, he tries to get Uriah to go home on leave so that it can claim to be the child’s father. But this brillian plan is foiled by Uriah super-soldier who insists upon sleeping in the field with his men. So reluctantly, the king falls back on Plan B: have Uriah to be thrown into the front lines of battle, and then have everyone else fall back, assuring his removal from the realm of mortal existence. The plan is a smashing success. Or at least, as a temporary fix. But he takes full advantage of it and marries Bathsheba before the world knows she’s pregnant. 

    But when a terrible drout strikes the land, people begin to wonder if it is the punishment of God. Also, Michal, David’s estranged first wife (he has something of a harem going for himself), is dertimined to make him suffer, and turn his favorite son Absolom against him. Needless to say, the Bathsheba incident only makes their relationship less fuzzy, and when the Prophet Nathan comes out to accuse the king of adultery, Michal is determined to seal her husband’s fate. With the net closing in on him, and the death of Bathsheba’s child making him feel even more isolated, David must embark on a personal quest of redemption and spiritual awakening in order to save Bathsheba’s life, the Kingdom of Israel, and his own soul.  
 

    I persoanlly think this is one of the better Biblical movies out there, and certainly the best version of the story of King David (please, avoid Richard Geer like the plague!). Even though it does take liberties with the text, it stays much more on track that some other big-budget blockbusters including The Ten Commandments. In fact, I find it more believable because this film does not try for really outlandish special effects, like fyberoptic burning bushes, and yet maintains a quality in the setting and camer-work. Also, I find it to be more an intimate spiritual journey of one man searching for God, and a man who is much more relatable to every-man than Charlton Heston’s portrayl of Moses. 
 

    I’m also happy to note that the subject of David’s epic affair is treated tastefully…a few passionate kissing sessions, and we get the picture. We don’t have to follow them through the visual blow-by-blow of bedroom sequences. However, as with I Confess, the advertisements indicate all sorts of torrid happenings that are never shown in the movie. Indeed, even Bathsheba bathing is mostly shot from a suitable distance, with close-ups showing her behind a screen (no Kevin Costner in the resovoir here…although we can well imaging that David has a better vantage point to see things from his balcony!).  
 

    What I like best about this portryal of the relationship, though, is the way David is shown as going through something of a mid-life crisis at the same time. It is interesting to watch the comic scene when he is unable to hit his mark with a sling-shot, even though a nearby shepherd boy can do it. “Did you really kill a giant, David?” Bathsheba asks him twittingly. But beyond the irony, it is symbolic of how far he has strayed from his roots. Another symbol of his sense of disolusionment is his lament over Jonathan, his dearest friend who was killed in battle under his father Saul. At the time, Saul was hunting David for fear that he would take his throne, even though that was not David’s intent. Jonathan had helped him escape, and David had been on the run during that battle that resulted in both Saul and Jonathan being killed. Now he continues to feel that he somehow failed his friend, and knows not how to remedy that failing.  
 

    Gregory Peck makes a robust, worldly, yet sympathetic David who seems to have lost his grasp on the spiritual world amidst all the turmoil of military conquests and political negotiations that come with kingship. In his climb to the top, he has lost any sense real love, whether it be romance with women, friendship with men, or even divine consolation from God. In reaching out for Bathsheba, it is almost symbolic of his inner confusion, seeking spiritual intuition and true love in a forbidden embrace. Susan Hayward as the alluring and strong-willed Bathsheba also shows a yearning for true love, even if that means being an accomplice to murder and plunging the whole kingdom into turmoil. At the same time, one has to feel for her a little bit in light of her husband’s portrayed neglect (I’m just talking about physical, but emotional as well), and she seems to be truly repentent for the way things went in the end.  
 

    Whether or not Uriah was a frustratingly law-abiding goody-two-sandals is lost in the mists of time and story-telling, but this portrayal certainly makes it clearer why David finds it expedient to have him hurled out front to save Bathsheba’s life and his own reputation! I can’t say I care much for the portrayal of the prophet Nathan as a religious fanatic, as I don’t believe the Bible portrays his actions in that like at all. He was actually using great wisdom in his approach of making David convict himself of his own crime from his own mouth, and I think that this scene suffered in the film because Nathan was made to look like a wild-eyed holy man, hell-bent on Bathsheba’s death. I think the film was trying to make him a symbol of the more tribal Old Testament understanding of God before the coming of Christ, but Nathan look coo-coo in the process wasn’t worth it. 
 

    But in the end, the plot does highlight the very essence of God: Mercy. As rebellions is seething outside the palace walls, and the mob bays for Bathsheba’s blood, she seems to have resigned herself to whatever fate might be in store, and calmly asks David to play her something that he wrote his boyhood on his harp. He chooses “The Lord is my Shepherd”, but mutters in a tone of cynicism that the God he belived in as a boy, who he had seen in the beauty of Creation and as the strenght of the weak, was only a childhood fancy. Nathan’s God, he decides, is vengeful and merciless. 
 

    But suddenly he is struck with the necessity of finding out which portrayal of God is true, and to find it out for himself.  So he goes into the Holy of Holies where the Ark of the Covenant is housed, and begs God from the bottom of his heart to have mercy on his people and Bathsheba, saying that he will willingly take any punishment for his sins. Then he asks that the innocent boy, David, might live again in him. In a deliciously dramatic moment, he stretches out his hands and touches the tabernacle.
 

    David then experiences a flash-back of his boyhood, when he was called in from tending his flocks to be annointed king of Israel by the prophet Samuel, and the realization that God had judged his heart worthy to be the King of his people. Then he also sees the day when he battled the giant Goliath, with only a sling-shot and five small stones, and his friend Jonathan cheerss him on from the Israelite lines. He remembers the victory, and the overwhelming sense that God was with him and working through him.     When King David comes back to the present, he hears rain falling on the parched land. “God is a mystery”, Nathan remarks, “but today we have seen a glimpse of his face.” 

     So while this movie is all too often passed over in favor of other big-budget Biblical flicks, I really think that this story is too poignant to be forgotten. David himself is such a multi-faceted character, emphasizing all the high and low points of our own lives, and the pain when confronted with an inability to claim the deepest desires of our hearts. That God singled out this flawed man to the king of his chosen people when he is just a shepherd boy tending his flocks is amazing enough. But there was even more to the story of this man who sinned, repented, and found forgiveness: he was being chosen to found a dynasty that would bring forth Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Savior of the World. So this Christmas, I urge you to look up David and Bathsheba, a powerful Biblical film that shows us the mercy of God and gives us a “glimpse of His face.”

King David (Gregoery Peck) plays the harp for Bathsheba (Susan Hayward)

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Year:  2013

Filming:  Color

Length:  146 minutes

Genre:  Action/Drama/Horror/Sci-Fi

Maturity:  PG-13 (for intense themes, strong violence, and some language)

Cast:  Jennifer Lawrence (Katniss Everdeen), Josh Hutcherson (Peeta Mellark), Liam Hemsworth (Gale Hawthorne), Woody Harrelson (Haymitch Abernathy),  Elizabeth Banks (Effie Trinket), Lenny Kravitz (Cinna), Alan Ritchson (Gloss),

Willow Shields (Primrose Everdeen), Paula Malcomson (Katniss’s Mother), Stanley Tuccman (Caesar Flickerman), Jenna Malone (Johanna Mason), Donald Sutherland (Pres. Snow),
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Plutarch Heavensbee), Jeffrey Wright (Beetee)
         

Director:  Francis Lawrence

Personal Rating:  3 Stars

***

    It’s a sad fact, but sequels are usually never quite as good as the originals. That having been said, Catching Fire hasn’t done horribly following up the massive success of The Hunger Games. There still was the haunting music that accompanies the unfolding events. There is still Jennifer Lawrence, with her moving acting and facial expressions. But I’m afraid there were times when I felt like it was just a re-run of the first film, especially in the area of violence, which is one of my biggest qualms in the whole franchise.

    The story opens in the aftermath of the 74^th Hunger Games, when victors Katniss Everdeen and Peek Mellark are finally allowed to return to their home in District 12. But Katniss finds it impossible to simply return to the way things were before; she is emotionally scarred from the Games, and cannot even hunt without fearing her potential to kill. To make matters worse, Katniss and Peeta are forced to embark on a victory tour through the districts of Panem, playing up their make-believe romance for the cameras and acting as propaganda symbols for The Capital.

    But unbeknownst to her, Katniss has actually become a symbol of resistance to the people because of her refusal to kill Peeta in the Games. A revolt is fermenting beneath the surface, and when Katniss visits District 2 and gives a heartfelt speech in memory of her fellow tribute, Rue, who was killed in the Games, the crowd erupts in fury against the Capital authorities, and Katniss can do nothing but watch as an old man is shot before her eyes by the soldiers dispersing the mob. She is warned by her sponsor Effie Trinket and mentor Haymitch Abernathy to “stick to the script” as the darling of the Capital, and she and Peeta struggle to suppress their own emotions and do as they are told. Meanwhile, their own relationship grows closer as they mutually comfort one another.

    At their victory reception at the Capital, in which they insist that they are engaged to be married, Katniss dances with Plutarch Heavensbee, the new official “game-maker” who plans to launch several special for the 75^th Annual Hunger Games the next year. She suspects something unusual in his character, but cannot put her finger on it, but continues to observe him cautiously. Upon her return to District 12, it is announced that a “Quarter Quell” version of the Games will be held, in which all past winners will be forced to fight against each other. Since she is the only female tribute ever to win from her district, Katniss knows she will be chosen.

    Determined that Peeta should be kept out of the Games, Katniss begs Haymitch to take his place should Peeta be picked as the male tribute. Haymitch agrees, but when he is picked instead, Peeta nobly takes his place, and he and Katniss are sent back to the Capital to prepare for another fight to the death in the arena. But this time, there is a note of serious discontent among the chosen tributes, who had been promised a peaceful life after winning their first Hunger Games competitions. Now, as the vicious fighting in the arena begins, Katniss struggles to keep Peeta alive at all costs. But beyond the arena, there are other forces at work conspiring to save her life and make her a symbol of rebellion.

    For HG fans, getting the chance to return to Panem for the sequel was a long-awaited treat, complete with commemorative poster-stuffed magazines at every grocery store counter nation-wide. For me personally, it at least gave me something to sink my teeth into after just getting beginning to appreciate that the story has amazing sticking power. My mind was vibrating: “What’s going to happen to Katniss? Will there finally be a rising? And why the heck hasn’t there been one already, if these Games have been going on for 74 years??” For one who has never read the books, these questions really were pressing.

     Unfortunately, I can’t say I was totally satisfied with the continuation. I’ll admit that after just watching movie one, I really, really did not want to see another Hunger Games competition, and held out hope that this film would be focused on a popular uprising. For half of the movie, I believed it was indeed going this way, and that the Quarter Quell would never actually take place, especially after the wonderful scene in which the tributes all held hands in a show on support on Live TV. Plus, Peeta even went the extra mile by claiming that he and Katniss had been secretly married and that she was with child, causing even the hardened Capital crowd to raise their voices in protest. 

     But the Games went on anyway, even more disturbing than the first round with new forms of torment inflicted on the tributes in a clock-shaped arena. There were genetically altered birds and baboons to attack them, poisonous gas to suffocate them, and the blood rains to drench them. As a result of these horrors, you naturally had people going crazy...eek! Honestly, I couldn’t help but think that these new additives to go above-and-beyond in the realm of gruesomeness were stuck in not so much for plot purposes as for selling purposes. It’s perverse that these things should make people want to indulge, but I think there’s something terribly perverse when people try to tap into the dark side of the human consciousness through books and films, especially when they are meant for young adults. Why, we wonder, do people wind up desensitized, just like in The Capital? It’s because they come to view horror as fun, and death as a game.   

   I also thought some of the acting quality in the sequel lessened (not with regards to Jennifer Lawrence, but some of the others) and there were more "suggestive" scenes that spoiled the clean record (sexually, at least) of the first film. Johanna Mason was a really annoying character, and the part where she strips of her clothing in the elevator was totally unnecessary and vulgar. Evidently, according to the book, she is supposed to be mocking Katniss for being “pure”, but this doesn’t translate well into film. Also, I have to say I found Gloss to be rather…creepy? I mean, he had his good points and all, but he seemed he was making a pass at Katniss in the beginning!

    That having been said, I agree there was more hope that the People were finally rising up to throw off their oppressors, and there were some really moving scenes of heart-felt defiance. Probably two of my favorite scenes are (1. when she gives Rue's eulogy and is saluted by the old man in the crowd and (2. when she is saluted by her sister and mother after being selected for the Games again. Katniss definitely does shine through as a strong female lead, mixing toughness with vulnerability. To her credit, she is obviously suffering from psychological trauma in the aftermath of the first Games, even though she is trying her hardest to hold together for her family’s sake. She starts to turn in on herself, and wants nothing more than to be left alone. 

   One scene that really highlights this is at the beginning of the movie when Katniss is out hunting with Gale, and has a panic attack after envisioning that the turkey she just shot was a tribute from the Games. Another powerful scene demonstrating her shattered nerves is when he is about to be transported to the arena via a tube-elevator, and is forced to watch helplessly from inside the enclosure as her fashion-designer + friend, Cinna, is beaten by Capital soldiers for making Katniss a Mockingjay costume (a symbol of resistance) for her TV interview the night before. Panting with anger and frustration, she emerges in the arena with the realization that Haymitch was right: the real enemy is not the tributes she must fight, but the game-makers themselves.  

    Her destiny is calling her to become a symbol of hope for the people, and her sister Prim encourages her to answer that call, assuring her that her family is behind her. The deciding moment is towards the end of the film, when Katniss refuses to kill a fellow tribute, Gloss, but rather shoots an arrow into the control panel, short-circuiting the arena. Knocked unconscious by the election shock, she winds up being rescued by rebels who had infiltrated the Games, and is urged to officially take up their standard. Now that she has become “Mockingjay”, it will be interesting to see how she handles the intense pressures of her newfound position.  

   Of course, the love triangle is roped around the plot as well, which really bored me to death at times. I mean, come on Katniss, will you make up your mind already? She’s kissing Gale and Peeta alternately, and not just with a sense of passing affection! She even sleeps with Peeta, although I’m happy to report that this is just a matter of Peeta comforting Katniss who is having nightmares, and is not sexual. But at any rate, things are really being dragged out her with regards to her feelings, the one major hand-me-down from teeny-bopper-romances left in this otherwise frightfully adult flick. While we’re on the subject of cheesiness, there is a pretty hokey sequence in which Gale starts to be flogged by Capital soldiers, and Katniss, Peeta, and Haymitch all have to come to his rescue. I just thought the officer guy was a really over-the-top villain (who reminded me strongly of an ork from LotR), and the emotional desperation just looked way too much like acting and a vain attempt to make us really feel the pull of the love triangle!  

   One character who becomes more sympathetic in this film is Effie Trinket, who finally begins to realize just how much suffering the Hunger Games really inflict on the people of Panem. She has obviously come to have more than a passing affection for Katniss, Peeta, and even the scruffy Haymitch, and is furious that the Capital would ever force any of them to return to the arena after they had already won against the odds.  She tries pathetically to make some gesture of solidarity with her doomed tributes, insisting that they all should wear something gold to show their unity of spirit saying "we're still a team, aren't we?" I’m hoping her character will be even more fully explored in the next installment.

    It’s interesting to ponder the affect that Hunger Games Fandom is having on our world. Aside from the tee-shirts and archery classes, people really are taking the story-line to heart. Liberals and Conservatives alike have painted it as an allegory for the ills in American society, and some rebels against regimes they deem to be tyrannical have even adopted the three-finger salute of defiance. It does serve as a demonstration of how well-written literature really can enlighten the mind, inspire the heart, and rouse the blood.

    That having been said, I must include a note of warning here. Not all revolutions and independence movements are justified, and governments should not always be stereotyped as the bad guys. Just because one group or another shouts “we are being tyrannized”, it doesn’t necessitate it’s true. Good judgment is vital in determining what causes are worthy of fighting. Also, not all problems within society can be reasonably compared to the extreme situation in Panem, nor do they require a revolution to solve! Sorry, just the British bit of me advocating moderation unless all else fails (see: William Wilberforce in Amazing Grace)! 

    So I suppose my summary of Catching Fire is that it is meant to make us think, and think hard. I wish that more of the film was focused on exploring more of the issues presented instead of barbarically extended “action” sequences. I am sometimes concerned that the sensationalism surrounding the stories is taking away from that very important exercise, and that it is becoming more of a play-thing for the masses. And yet from a Catholic perspective, there is still much to be taken away about how society can either be a life-sustaining, love-affirming safeguard of our liberties, or can be nothing more than a means of channeling all the avarice and vanity of Man into a structure which can do more harm than imagined. These are the ultimate alternatives that we as society-builders must always keep in mind.    

Ceasar Flickerman (Stanley Tuccman) interviews Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence)

Dances with Wolves

Year:  1990

Filming:  Color

Length:  181 minutes

Genre:  Drama/History/Western

Maturity:  PG-13 (for violence, sexuality, and some language)

Cast:  Kevin Costner (Lieutenant John Dunbar), Mary McDonnell (Stands-with-Fist), Graham Greene (Kicking-Bird), Rodney A. Grant (Wind-in-His-Hair), Floyd Red Crow Westerman (Ten Bears), Tantoo Cardinal (Black Shawl), Robert Pastorelli (Timmons), Maury Chakin (Maj. Fambrough), Charles Rocket (Lt. Elgin), West Studi (Toughest Pawnee)

         

Director:  Kevin Costner

Personal Rating:  2 Stars

***

       Since the passing of the Golden Era of Epic Westerns, there have been countless attempts to create a modernized resurgence of the genre, usually from unusual perspectives and with painful results. Dances with Wolves had its good points, including a detailed portrayal of Native American life and an appreciation of the language barriers that existed between the Indian tribes and white settlers. But I’m afraid they were considerably mitigated by unnecessary “shock factors” that were nothing more than cheap attempts to boost ratings.

    Our story opens with Kevin Costner starring as Lieutenant John Dunbar, a Union soldier fighting in the American Civil War who is feeling really down-and-out by all the fighting and decides to do a suicidal dare-devil escapade to distract the Confederates while the Union commanders launch a surprise attack from the rear. This heroism/imbecility earns him a promotion and a transfer to the Wild, Wild West which is gradually vanishing into oblivion as more settlers move in and camp out.

    The next fifteen minutes of the film could really be skipped altogether. Dunbar’s utterly repulsive side-kick, Timmons, does a variety of disgusting things until he is put out his misery by Sioux arrows (the reason for this we don’t know…but we can’t say we miss his enlightened presence overly much!). Then we get to see Dunbar take a beauty bath – in the full resplendence of his birthday suit! (Somebody get the screen!!!). Have to say now would be an apt time to break for a reservoir pollution commercial, but suffice to say he settles down in his new station out in the great plains and befriends a lone wolf who lives nearby the run-down stockade.

    Meanwhile, he also attracts the curiosity of the Sioux tribe staked out nearby. After initial awkwardness on both sides and difficulty communicating due to the language barrier, they develop a mutual interest in and respect for one another. Oh, yeah, and if bath-time wasn’t enough to get stomachs churning, we also get to watch a certain white captive raised by the Indians stab herself (ill-explained…but don’t worry; she’ll be back!), and the many delights of buffalo hunting…and skinning…and hacking…yeah, you might want to fast-forward that, too!

    But never fear, the bathing beauty returns…with friends! Or shall we say a friend. Or to be even more specific, a lady friend with an Indian costume and ‘90’s hair. Actually, she’s the one who tried to stab herself. But she’s moved on since then. Now she’s translator-in-chieftess for Dunbar and the Sioux Commission, making it easier for the American Cavalry officer to assimilate with the tribe. Eventually they fall madly in the love (a little too madly for public viewing…) and get hitched in a Sioux ceremony.

    But unfortunately, this happy hiatus in the hills is wrecked when Dunbar is taken captive after going back to the fort for his diary (“My Diary!!!”), beat up by some blue-coated thugs (“My Head!!!”), and framed for high treason. But never fear (is that becoming a refrain?), the Sioux super warriors are here, ready to whisk our favorite naturalized native back to his beloved! After a long chat over a peace pipe, Dunbar finally decides he will be noble and leave his home among the Sioux to lead the Cavalry off their trail, and he and his bride ride off into the snow-capped summits of the Hollywood hills.

    Okay, so you’ve deducted from my tone, I’m being sarcastic again. And when I’m being sarcastic, well…you can deduct my general sense of appreciate for the flick I’m reviewing. But I shall make a point of being fair to Lieutenant Dunbar and his tribesmen. First off, Dancing with Wolves is supposed to be an epic about a lost world, and the filming panorama certainly lives up to that. We get to see the “wide open spaces”, golden plains as far as the eye can see, and towering mountains enwrapped in snow. There is a sense of grandeur and nostalgia about a wilderness on the brink of being conquered, and a man searching for the true worth of man in the face of sometimes heartless progress.

   I will start by saying that this film is almost the cinematic twin of The Last Samurai (actually, the other way round since Wolves was made before Samurai). Basically, they’re stories about disillusionment within one’s own progressive culture and a subsequent search for one’s true identity by embracing another, more indigenous culture. There are two main distinctions, however: the positive difference is that Wolves tends to be easier to understand than Samurai in its method of capturing emotions and following the plot; the negative difference is that Wolves also tends to be much bloodier and sexually explicit (which is ironic since Wolves is only PG-13, whereas Samurai is R!).

     Kevin Costner does a much job being a disillusioned Cavalry officer in Dances with Wolves than he does as a hippy outlaw in Prince of Thieves. No really, his character is well-meaning and curious about the world around him, making him an interesting guide through the story as he interacts with the harshness and beauty of the wilderness and native peoples. Also, I am pleased to report that this movie does a really good job focusing on the Native Americans as Characters. They are not cookie-cutter models; they are not savages, nor saints; they are human beings inured in their own specific culture and belief system, trying to understand Dunbar as much as he is trying to understand them.

    The emphasis on the language barrier is an overlooked factor in White-Native relations that is all too often overlooked. Scenes from The Seven Cities of Gold come to mind here, where the Spanish Fr. Serra is able to instantly communicate with the native tribes he encounters in California. I’m not even going to go into all the other Western series that make the same error in script, with all the Indian characters speaking some sort of broken-Italian-dialect with the John Wayne delegation. But anyway, Dances with Wolves really makes up for all this pain, and the feel of the proceedings is admirably authentic, doing justice to both sides.

    There is really is an effort on both sides to get past the language barrier and learn about each other through actions, causing quite a few humorous situations to unfold. Love the part when Dunbar tries to get them to understand the word “buffalo”, and puts his fingers above his head like horns, scuffing about on the ground! His Sioux guests are slightly mystified by the energetic display! Also enjoy the sequence where he grinds coffee for them in an over-enthusiastic way! Overall, he comes off as a sensitive and basically sweet-natured guy whose friendship with the wolf (who he memorably “dances” with, earning him his Sioux name) mirrors the development of his relationship with the natives. Another iconic scene is towards the end of the film when he sees the wolf wounded by a white man’s gun, symbolic of the tribe being scattered by the encroaching pioneers.

 

    Like Nathan Algren in The Last Samurai, Dunbar finds himself slowly but surely assimilating into another nature-based culture. He plays with the village children, accompanies the tribe on a buffalo hunt, joins them in their story-telling sessions around a fire, and learns about their unique customs and language. The main thing that he takes away from his experience is that the Sioux are just as human as the White Men. The triumvirate of memorable characters he encounters in the tribe are the wise and measured Kicking-Bird, the fiery and impulsive Wind-in-His-Hair, and the shy yet formidable Stands-with-Fist.

    For a while there, I really did have hope for the romance in this movie. Stands-with-Fist, the white woman captured by Indians as a child, grows to trust Dunbar gradually. They both come off as being rather shy and wary of connecting, but as her work translating helps bring together Dunbar and the Sioux, she and Dunbar as also brought together. As I mentioned, she does have ‘90’s hair, but Mary McDonnell still does an excellent job acting in this film, realistically portraying the translation process and way someone might remember a first language they had forgotten. There is also a humorous scene in which Stands-with-Fist tells Dunbar how she got her name – after knocking down a Sioux Woman who mistreated her as a child! Dunbar teasingly tells him to demonstrate where she had hit her, and she puts her fist under his chin, after which he playfully pretends to fall over!

    Unfortunately, their hitherto innocent relationship goes over-the-top in a rather shocking manner that I didn’t see coming. Basically, Stands-with-Fist decides she does indeed love Dunbar (now called “Dances-with-Wolves”), and the next thing we know, they are making a mad dash for each other, making physical contact like football players, and groveling around on the ground. It all looked so animalistic (and violent, to be honest), but I had my hopes they might pull back from the brink. They didn’t. In fact, the next scene finds them completely stripped down in a teepee and…need I say more? Bizarrely after all this, they do wind up getting hitched in a Sioux ceremony (like Algren, Dunbar doesn’t seem to be very deep in his Christianity), and my brain was like, “Seriously? You couldn’t have waited until then?”

    As with the violent aspects, the sex scenes just went way beyond the fringe in my opinion. I mean, really…do we, the public need to see this sort of thing? Actually, no, but it seems Hollywood is unconvinced of this. They are constantly employing both these methods to beef-up epics that fall a bit short of the plan. Such, I believe, is the case with Dances with Wolves. It was an interesting little story about the bridging cultural gaps, but like Rob Roy, the plot really fell short of the epic it was cracked up to be. The beginning was confused, the central conflict was minimal, and the ending was rather vague. Also, like The Last Samurai, the plot makes a point of emphasizing the humanity of the indigenous peoples, but at the same time shows no sympathy whatsoever to the whites aside from Dunbar.

    The Cavalry officers are shown to a man as being corrupt, vulgar, and brutal in their lust for land. While some of this is no doubt true, no group should be stereotyped, and it should be remembered that these same “blue-coats” portrayed in Wolves and Samurai so negatively had just gotten through fighting a war that preserved the unity of America and ultimately put an end to slavery within her borders. Also, it should be emphasized that most Native tribes did not even abide by the concept of selling land, so it would have been impossible to even try to strike a fair deal with them with regard to land transactions. Plus, the Native Tribes were not shy about fighting each other for dominance, as is briefly touched upon in the movie but not explored in depth.

     Dances with Wolves is an okay film in a lot of ways, with a few glimmering moments of beauty, and quite a few disturbing scenes of excessive sex and violence. If you want to see an epic, this is not it, but if you want to see a pretty basic cross-culture flick, and are willing to trudge through the muck and mire to see the beneficial parts, then it might be worth something for you. Plus, who knows what cultural tid-bits you might be able to pick up about buffalo hunting, peace pipe smoking, and creating authentic ‘90’s hair-dos!

Lieutenant Dunbar (Kevin Costner) and Sioux Braves prepare for Buffalo-burgers