Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Kevin Costner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kevin Costner. Show all posts

Monday, November 17, 2014

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

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves

A bowman, ready to release a fiery arrow. Below two figures, beside a tree, silhouetted against a lake background.Year:  1991

Filming:  Color

Length:  155 minutes

Genre:  Action/Adventure/Drama/Swashbuckler

Maturity:  PG-13 (for battle sequences, thematic elements, and some sexuality)

Cast:  Kevin Costner (Robin Hood), Morgan Freeman (Azeem), Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio (Marion Dubois), Christian Slater
(Will Scarlett), Nick Brimble (Little John), Michael McShane (Friar Tuck), Alan Rickman (Sheriff of Nottingham), Brian Blessed (Lord Locksley)

Director:  Kevin Reynolds

Personal Rating:  2 Stars

***

    As a Robin Hood fan and an old-fashioned girl, I always raised an eyebrow when I spied this modern film version perched on a library shelf. I had considerable apprehensions on what they would do to remake my beloved Rob, and really didn’t feel I had a strong enough stomach to handle it. But eventually I figured I wouldn’t be able to make a proper comparative analysis without at least giving it a once over, so I steeled myself and prepared to deal with the foreseen mediocrity of modernization, changer in hand for necessary fast-forwarding if the pain became too intense to withstand.  

   The film opens during the Crusades where the wealthy young Robin of Locksley is languishing in a Saracen prison. After offering to take the place of another prisoner who is about to have his hand chopped off, he uses his super-galactic-super-unrealistic fighting skills to launch a massive prisoner revolt. In addition to freeing as many Christian prisoners as possible, he also rescues a Moorish political prisoner named Azeem who agrees to return the favor by saving his life someday.

    Returning to England with Azeem, Robin discovers to his horror that his father has been framed by the evil Sheriff of Nottingham and murdered by a corrupt inquisition that claims he practiced dark magic. In truth, it is the Sheriff who has been dabbling in the occult with a run-of-the-mill-creepy-hag who claims to be able to make him a success by reading the future in egg yolks. Robin, meantime, tries to secure the aid of the rather prickly Maid Marian who he has not seen since she was a child. Eventually, being hunted down as heir to the Locksley estate, he is forced to take shelter in Sherwood Forest.

    There he meets a band of outlaws who are none-too-keen to take the riches-to-rags outcast into their inner circle. But through his courage, innovation, and fighting skills, he eventually assumes command of the disorganized bunch and turns them into a hit-and-run fighting force capable of protecting the common people from the tyranny of Prince John in hopes that King Richard will return and validate their stand. After an epic battle for possession of the outlaw camp, the outlaws hold their ground, but Robin is believed to be dead. Meanwhile, the sheriff men capture a handful of peasant children and use them as hostages to force the well-to-do Marian to wed him.

    More trouble unfolds when Will Scarlett, a young outlaw who chafes under Robin’s command, offers to be a spy for the sheriff to find out if “the Hood” is still alive. But in the process of doing so, an even more unexpected twist is in store as the two men discover they are really long-lost half-brothers due to their father’s liaison with a commoner that Robin broke up! (Dysfunctional family plot…joy…) Anyway, their common bond is the link that reunites Robin’s band, and the battle to free the hostages, rescue Maid Marian, and overthrow the tyranny of the Sheriff is underway.

    Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is another big-budget would-be epic that puts glamour before substance and tries to pair historical fiction with fantasy/sci-fi in a way that is nothing short of ridiculous. Artistically, it has some entertainment value here and there, but if you are like me, and prefer to actually “get the feel” of a past time period as opposed to having it exchanged for miss-match portrayal, this really isn’t for you. Modernizations are rife from beginning to end, trying to make it all more trendy, multi-cultural, and feminist. Superman action sequences are off-putting, as are the crude, rude, and lewd actions and linguistics that are liberally sprinkled throughout.

    Whoever decided to bestow the honorable title of “Prince of Thieves” on Kevin Costner should have been run out of Hollywood on a rail. I mean the guy reeks of 1990’s California, has trouble mustering up even the vaguest hint of an English accent, and simply cannot mesh with even an obviously shoddy depiction of 12th century England.       Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio’s depiction of Maid Marion is something of a generic girl-power model that conveys too little of the discreet sparkle and charm that I have always found delightful about her character. Plus, she seems to take pleasure viewing a naked Rob swimming in a lake! Her plump lady in waiting also proves to be a lame comic relief figure.

    The Sheriff of Nottingham is disgustingly overdone, with his topless harlots and hoaky witch sidekick who claims to be able to discern the future in breakfast food. The most disturbing sequence has to be his attempt to rape Marian, which was totally over the top and unnecessarily graphic. Little John is shown as being a foul-mouthed ruffian who’s pushed around by his formidable wife, Fanny. Friar Tuck is a drunken wreck who sings filthy ditties, only to be slightly rehabilitated when he is appointed chaplain at Sherwood. Still he stands out as a bloated bigot when dealing with the Muslim Azeem. Again, he does redeem himself to some extent by inviting the Moor to share a drink with him after Azeem saves Little John’s wife. But overall, he is fairly unlovable and a generally a disgrace to the priesthood.

    That having been said, there are some interesting twists in the plot. Getting to see Robin Hood in the Holy Land was a rare treat, and having him offer to have his hand cut off in the place of Marian’s was a gesture in keeping with his character. Having said brother charge Robin with caring for Marian after being mortally wounded is interesting as well. I thought Azeem was okay as an additional sidekick, and I had no problem with having the Islamic perspective introduced to the plot. One of the best lines from was when a little girl asks him why his skin is so much darker than her own. “Because Allah loves diversity,” he responds.

    Of course, the Crusades are generally cast in a bad light. Lord Locksley, portrayed as a man of principle, is against his son going to fight in Palestine, saying that it is vanity to force one’s religion on others (which completely misses many of the reasons why the Crusades were actually fought, but anyway…). Frankly, Islam has been extremely intolerant towards other religions during the course of its history, and making Eastern culture seem more spiritually and intellectually enlightened than the West is hogwash. It is true that technological advances were definitely made in Europe as a result of contact with the East, as it is true that later the East would make similar advances through contact with the West, as is portrayed (negatively, may I add) in The Last Samurai

    Some of Azeem’s lines and actions are admittedly humorous, like his declaration that he would never let a man sneak up on him “who smells of garlic, while a wind is blowing to the back of me.” He also seems to takes his sweet time to repay Robin Hood for saving his life, always putting his rather drawn-out prayer ritual first, but in the end proving that he really knew what he was doing the whole time. There is some genuinely good banter between them, especially when R.H. is stunned by the projection of Azeem’s telescope. “I don’t know how you English are winning the war,” the Moor sighs, referring to The Crusades. “God only knows,” Rob returns brightly.

     The portrayal of the Church overall may not be glowing, but it could have been a lot worse. The bishop is corrupt, Friar Tuck is a lout, and the Crusades and the Inquisition are portrayed darkly. However, it is also shown that Robin and Marion are both practicing Catholics, and that the bad guys plunder churches and misuse humble country clergymen. R.H. returns the stolen articles to the Church. One major motif that stands out in the film is the cross pendant hung on Lord Locksley’s grave which Robin assumes as a symbol to mete out justice to his father’s murderers.

    With regards to battle sequences, the long-staff duel in the river was exciting enough, if rather drawn out, with Little John using less than gentlemanly language. Later on, it was interesting to see Sherwood Forest laid out as an actual defensible compound with tree-houses, bridges, and an ingenious rope-swinging system (which Rob and Marian make romantic use of!). The battle is not your average woodland skirmish, but a full-scale assault and counter-attack. It’s cool, if a bit over-extended. The hokiest part is when Costner-Hood is thought to be dead, but then reappears, unexplained, out of the forest mist! The last battle is way overblown, and the hanging sequence last a forever before the suspended personages are finally rescued. But really I think the duded would naturally have been deceased by then!

    To its credit, this version, as innovative as it aspires to be, it does not abandon the bare essentials of the Robin Hood narrative we all know and love. R.H. is a full-fledged hero, not a Russell Crowe anti-hero, and his dedication to the English people is pure. One scene I find particularly stirring is when he when he returns to England from Palestine, and kisses the ground. Another scene I appreciated was when Robin explains to Marian how he went from being a play-boy to the man of the people: How on the Crusades, he had seen high-born men turn and flee, while a low-born man had pulled a spear from his own body to defend a wounded horse. Hence, he discovered that nobility is made manifest through acts more than birthright.
       
     So my overall synopsis of Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is that it is a newbie hip-flick, trying to remake beloved classic and somehow give it more spring in its step. As I’ve outlined, it does have its positive points, but perhaps the main problem with the whole production is belief that it is even necessary to modernize all things old in order to keep up with the times, instead of letting modern audiences learn to appreciate an older setting and comportment that does not necessarily perfectly coincide with their own.

    This is all the more distressing since our present tee-shirt and flip-flop era has almost completely lost its sense of modesty and decorum, both in daily life and on the Silver Screen. The lessons and charm of the past seem to be lost to the masses, which is nothing less than tragic. If you want to watch superior Robin Hood adaptations, check out the film versions with Errol Flynn and Richard Todd, the TV series with Richard Greene, and the Walt Disney animal cartoon. They beat California Costner-Hood of Smoggy Sherwood by a running mile.




Robin Hood (Kevin Costner) meditates at his father's grave