1990: "Dances with Wolves" dir. Kevin Costner

"Revisionist" history that could use some further revision from a modern frame.

Metacritic Score: 72/100

IMDB User Rating: 8/10

My Rating: 4/5 Stars

As these reviews develop, I am discovering that my feelings are sometimes more convoluted and confusing than I expected they would be. In Kevin Costner’s Dances With Wolves, I have noted that my rating of the movie will not always agree with my opinion of its legacy—this film was excellently enjoyable, however I do not feel as though it is a must-watch highlight of American film.

The film follows 1st Lieutenant of the Union Army John Dunbar (Kevin Costner) on his assignment to Fort Sedgwick, which neighbors a Sioux tribe in 1863. Enthralled by the lifestyle that the Sioux live, he chooses to abandon his soldier lifestyle and adapt to the tribe, being given the name “Dances With Wolves”. The man who gave him the assignment (Maury Chaykin) and the man he is sent to travel with (John Pastorelli) both die during his travels, so nobody is aware of his assignment there. Dunbar fully assimilates, joining the hunt and marrying a woman of the tribe. The U.S. Army eventually occupies the fort as tragedy ensues and Dunbar is charged with desertion and taken prisoner for abandoning his assignment, and the epilogue announces that the remaining Sioux eventually were forced to surrender.

As a cinematic experience, it cannot feasibly be denied that Dances with Wolves is a rare all-around treat. I mean, it won seven awards at the Oscars, like Best Score, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography, and more. By every visible and audible nature, this film got it absolutely right, lending to my high rating despite those glaringly obvious problems with its morality. The acting and accent choices for Dunbar (Costner), Kicking Bird (RIP as I’m writing this, Graham Greene, if I may date this so), Stands With a Fist (Mary McDonnell), and Wind in his Hair (Rodney A. Grant) were all unbelievably impeccable. I thoroughly enjoyed the costume choices as well—I’m usually the research police on all of these period pieces, but I truly have nothing to say here. Certain shots, like the POV shot of Dunbar as he rides his horse in his impromptu suicide mission on the field, are so jarringly unique within the rest of the frames that you are constantly kept on the edge of your seat. All of this said, I really, really wish that Dances With Wolves were a movie that I could recommend as a significant watch, because it is so masterfully done, but the plot simply does not sit right with me within the context of legacy.

To my greatest dismay, Dances With Wolves is made by white saviors, for white saviors. The story makes an attempt at reconciling the historical travesties placed up Native American tribes by white intruders, and yet manages to erroneously do so through a white lens. It is not a Native celebration, but a white attempt to save face. It is not about the Sioux achieving liberation, but Dunbar overstepping his way into “protecting” them from his real people. When I found out that the love interest was a WHITE WOMAN ADOPTED BY THE TRIBE, I actually couldn’t believe it (I have nothing even a little well-written or professional to say about that. Still gob smacked. Like, really?????).

I think that Dances With Wolves tries so hard to be politically correct that it explodes in a performance of exactly what it was trying to avoid. Our main character is white. When he is en route, we are shown nothing other than the “noble savage” Pawnee tribe (who, historically, were weaker than the Sioux, which is my one gripe with accuracy in the plot). We are also shown that the Sioux were gretaly ebnefitted by the help of a white man. We are made to believe that if Dunbar were not there to give the Sioux an artillery of Western weaponry, they would have stood no chance in their fight against the American convoy. The film, in its epic sort of grandeur and masterful composition, tricks you into believing that this is an adequate apology for the American past, masking the inappropriate bravado of American strength and Native incompetency. It did ultimately “popularize” the Lakota Sioux in American culture, even prompting members of the real tribe to hold a ceremony honoring Costner and co. for their contributions to the renewed positive Lakota image. I can accept that this came at a time where any adequately positive representation at all was an honorable move. However, at what point is the “what-if” game dangerous? We are in an age where “what if the white man befriended the Natives” is not good enough—it is inauthentic, and I would prefer to see a retelling from Kicking Bird’s point of view, so that it can be a Native story including a white man instead of a white man’s story of saving a tribe from displacement. I enjoy this film if I can detach it, as a parent does when they show their kid Disney’s Pocahontas, and I can honor that perhaps it was a step in the right direction for its time, but I regrettably cannot say that it holds up in 21st century canon, for its justice is only weakly served.

P.S.: if you’d like, I do short-form reviews on all films I watch on my Letterboxd profile. Sometimes they’re silly, but other times I am so captivated by films that are not on this list that I have to review them on the spot! Please feel free to message me with any films you’d like me to give my insight on.

Also, I will never ask for paid subscribers, as you reading this helps me out as much as I have entertained you :). That being said, if you would like to be so kind as to donate should you like to help me complete my last year of college, then I do have a Kofi set up here. Thank you so much for reading regardless of how you support!