Customer Reviews

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

5 star:		(42)
4 star:		(16)
3 star:		(10)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

HBO's "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" is not a mini-series; in fact, it only covers the last two chapters of Brown's book and runs a little over two hours. The film would have been better titled, The Last Days of the Sioux Nation: Second Edition

There are many historical inaccuracies in this film; some are big, and some are small. Director Yves Simoneau recounts the story of reservation life, the taking of Indian lands and the debate that ensued. Choosing drama, as opposed to a documentary style, to recount these subjects is most challenging. When one looks past the inaccuracies in "Wounded Knee", one will discover many moments of brilliance.

So, let us undo some of the most important snafus first:

* The film opens with a young Ohiyesa -- Charles Eastman living in the village at the Battle of the Little Bighorn. Eastman was never there.
* Sitting Bull physically lashes his men for attempting to flee Canada for their old homeland. This was never the case. Sitting Bull did use the akicita (similar to law enforcement officers) to keep people from leaving Canada. The film accurately portrays why Sitting Bull took the actions he did.
* Sitting Bull surrenders at Standing Rock instead of Ft. Buford.
* Charles Eastman was not the right-hand man to Dawes in developing what would later become the Dawes Act.

"Wounded Knee" indeed seems to be two films. The first covers the latter years of Sitting Bull's (August Schellenberg) life which are filled with triumph and defeat, greatness and loneliness. The second involves the rescue of a culture gasping its last breath. Trying to resuscitate it are Senator Henry Dawes (Aidan Quinn) and Charles Eastman (Adam Beach) through the building of the Dawes Act that ensures every Indian family would own 160 acres of land.

The first film centers on Sitting Bull, a defeated chief of the Lakota, and one of the most convincing American Indian characters ever shaped for a film. He is a complete enigma. He fights to protect his people, yet he lashes warriors for fleeing Canada to their homeland in the Dakotas. He criticizes other Indian leaders for accepting the white man's way of life, yet he sells his autograph and photo. Sitting Bull's redemption is intended to be shown in one dramatic scene where he confronts the Dawe Commission. "You may say they wish to give us land. But, here is the truth. Each patch is for a man and all generations that follow. They know that this land cannot feed but one generation, not even so much as that..." He continues his speech which will shock and surprise many viewers. In the end, Sitting Bull's oration becomes his death warrant.

Film two follows the life of Eastman. When he is 15 years old, his father Jacob (Wayne Charles Baker) takes Eastman back from the roaming Santee bands. Eastman is confused from his father's acceptance of Christianity and his singing of hymns. For me, one of the most notable scenes occurs when Eastman must leave his father to begin yet another new life. As Eastman looks out the window of his slowly moving train, his father waves goodbye and begins to sing a hymn. The emotions are exceedingly powerful; the hymn develops into an Indian strong-heart song as he waves goodbye to his son for the last time. Eastman eventually becomes the agency physician at Pine Ridge where he meets Elaine Goodale (Anna Paquin) and they become fast friends. However, the Beach character is filled with conflict in one of his best performances. Living again among his people, Eastman questions what he has become.

From these doubts, the film chronicles perfectly Eastman and Dawe's collapsing relationship. Through the first two acts, they share the enthusiasm of great dreams and aspirations on how they intend to save the American Indian. They become like father and son. But, they finally reach an impasse in a scene that exudes much sadness.

In the middle of this complex storyline comes a moment of elegance in the only scene involving Wovoka (Studi). With ballet like movements, the Studi character brings his message of the Ghost Dance to the Lakota people. As he articulates his vision in words, he accompanies them with Plains Indian sign language while his body gracefully moves before the crowd. Wovoka's message is simple: If the Lakota people believe his vision and learn the Ghost Dance, the Great Spirit will rid the earth of the white man, return the buffalo to their full glory, and give back to the Lakota their old way of life. It is the strangest irony of this film: from such promise the Lakota people feel happiness again, but all they receive is death.

"Wounded Knee" gives us two great scenes that connect the two films together. The first is the death of Sitting Bull never told before with such accuracy in any other film. This scene over any other still haunts me. The film then transports us to the second climatic scene, which is the Battle of Wounded Knee. Yes, it was a battle; there was fierce hand-to-hand combat, and it ended in a slaughter. The movie vividly portrays the tension leading up to the battle, its fight, and its massacre, but fails in its explanation why. The movie attempts to explain as when Col. James Forsyth (Marty Antonini) says to Eastman, "We didn't fire first. I swear to all-mighty God, we did not fire first." I still wish the film explained further.

That lack of explanation does not diminish from the greatness of this movie. It is truly courageous in the tale movie producers have, until now, been afraid to touch. For the first time we have a Western movie that is concerned with both sides. With its intelligent script, strong direction, and powerful acting, "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" grasps the concept of the last days of the Lakota nation wholly; at times brutal, but the movie still exhibits warmth and passion.

Bury My Heart....is a decent film. I always welcome any film that, respectfully and honestly, tries to deal with native american subject matters.
However; this film was simply too riddled with historical inaccuracies to be what it should have been.
The first problem arises in that Dee Brown's book in itself romantizises the massacre at wounded knee. To base a film on a book that is already flawed, from a native point of view, is tatamount to building a house on quicksand.

Ok let's look at the character of Ohiysa, or Dr. Charles Eastman, portrayed by Adam Beach.
Ohiyesa was Whappeton-Sisseton DAKOTA....in the film he is portrayed as LAKOTA. To most people that won't matter much, but for both the Lakota and Dakota people it does.
He sometimes speaks in Lakota....which, as a Dakota, he most certainly would not have. True, both dialects are mutually understandable and are of siouan origin, but Ohiyesa would certainly have spoken his Whappeton Dakota dialect....not the Oglalla Lakota dialect.
Then he is placed in the wrong place and time. Ohiyesa was nowhere near the greasy grass (little big-horn) when the lakota camp was attacked by Reno and his men. In fact, he was a state away up in North Dakota or further over in Minnesota....not in Montana where the battle took place.
Neither was he ever close to the wounded knee massacre. He WAS the agency physician at Pine Ridge, Oglalla Lakota Reservation, but not at the time of the battle at wounded knee.

Chief Tatanka Iyotake...Sitting Bull. August Schellenberg did a good job with the script he was given. What bothers me however, is that in almost all native type movies the actors are forced to speak in a very awckward manner which comes across as phoney and contrieved. As though natives would have spoken that way in their own language.

Anyhow. Tatanka Iyotake comes across as somewhat of a jerk and I feel that the way he was pertrayed took much away from the real Sitting Bull...not that I knew the man of course. However; Sitting Bull was a wicasa wakan...a holy man amongst his Hunkpapa people and I doubt he would have conducted himself as arrogantly and foolishly as he was made to look in this film. Also, he never came to Pine Ridge...much less did he surrender there. He surrendered at Ft. Robinson Nebraska.....the same place where Tashunke Witko...Chief Crazy Horse surrendered and where he was murdered by the U.S. Govt. They did get it right that Sitting Bull was murdered on his Standing Rock Reservation in North Dakota.

Again, these inaccuracies may not seem like a big deal to most, but I doubt ANY american would take kindly to a foreigen nation making a film about, say Pearl Harbor, but confuse names, events and places of major american figures along the way. Imagine, a foreigen produced film about Pearl Harbor, with Gen. Mc Arthur invading China instead of Japan, and Pearl Harbor being set on the coast of Maine. Wouldn't go over well would it? Now imagine how the decendants of the native side of wounded knee feel when the story of their ancestors is constantly told in a haphazzard manner.Point made.

There are a few other things wrong with this film. In the last frames of the film Chief Makhpia Luta...Red Cloud, is shown riding on a wagon, as Ohiyesa and his wife bare witness to the aftermath of the massacre. Red Cloud was not at wounded knee. He was at Pine Ridge at the time yes, but he did not visit the killing field because he was afraid that more violence would errupt. Beyond that, he had gone blind and was in frail health at the time of the massacre....he couldn't have gone even if he had wanted to.

All in all the acting was anywhere from great to ok, but given the lame script and dialogue there was not much any of the actors could have done. The cinematography was very good, as were the costumes....at least here they paid attention to detail in ditinguishing the Arikira from the Crow and the Crow from the Lakota...as each tribe had it's own very distinctive dress and appearance forms.

One last note on Dr. Eastman. In the film he is shown as being desolate toward the end and out of work when he, in fact, went on to publish many books and was, even in his day, recognized as a writer and orator of great renown.

From my perspective it is hard to get around the inaccuracies and the torrid dialogue, but given the scarsity of cerdible native themed films...still and ever, I take it for what it is and give it 3 stars.

BURY MY HEART AT WOUNDED KNEE is a somber retelling of the events leading up to the massacre at (what is now) the Wounded Knee Memorial. But this isn't a documentary. This is a made-for-TV fictional retelling, and it is the "made-for-TV" bit that makes this important American event lose some of its composure.

The entire production flags because of the TV aspect, many of the film shots losing their impact either because of lack of attention to detail or funds (or probably both). Either way this could've been an extreme visual recollection for most viewers but instead it lacks the depth I would've liked to have seen.

Regardless, there are some stellar appearances and acting within it. August Schellenberg as Sitting Bull undeniably has the most impact. Recent movie viewers will probably remember him from his portrayal as Powhatan in The New World. The contrast between the character in The New World and here in Wounded Knee shouldn't be lost, either. Without Powhatan and Pocahontas, the white settlers at Jamestown would've perished within the first few winters. And now, in Wounded Knee, it is the white man who destroys what is left of Native American life; a terribly stark (and bloody) reality.

The other notables are Adam Beach (Flags of Our Fathers) as Charles Eastman, and Aidan Quinn (Legends of the Fall) as Senator Henry Dawes. They spend a lot of time together on film and they played against/off each other exceptionally well. Charles being the "new wave" Indian who melds into the white man's way of life until exposed to reservation life at Pine Ridge. Henry Dawes seeing himself as "The Great White Savior Of The Indians" by passing legislation that loops a few nooses around the necks of the Plains Indians' way of life without even realizing it.

But other actors have little to offer. Anna Paquin (X-Men) as Charles' white love interest (and eventual wife) is seen too infrequently so the relationship between the two has little impact. She does a good job of acting but the script stymied any possibility of real success. From here the acting dips into the drab and boring. I have to give mention to Senator Fred Thompson (currently a Republican runner for the U.S. Presidency) who plays President Ulysses S. Grant. We see maybe four frames of film with him in it and then he's gone. This surprised me greatly since it was Grant's administration that doomed Native Americans by rounding them up and placing them on reservations.

Despite my misgivings about the script, cinematography and acting, this is a vital story that needs to be told, and it isn't something that is normally taught in grade school or higher. Europeans (us) conquered this land and its people, and pushed them into holding pens where they, to this day, await justice for our multiple treaty violations and massacres of their men, women and children (I will say that the scenes depicting large-caliber rifle bullets ripping through young kids was filmed well and was equally hard to watch).

So the story gives this film a higher rating than anything within it, which is unfortunate, as this terrible moment in American history needs to be remembered just as much as Germany needs to remember its holocaust.

My friend from Standing Rock (Hunkpapa) and I watched this one Wednesday after I got this show. He was not impressed; August Schellenberg just did not bring Sitting Bull to life. He was somewhat insulted by the portrayal.

This show does depict early reservation life well, with the rations and the corral "hunting", and of course, the Massacre at Wounded Knee. However, wounded Knee was only shown in a brief flashback, and was not really explored firsthand. I was suprised, and my friend quit watching the show after about forty minutes. I think the director would have been better off to use someone like Russel Means, Floyd Westerman, or even Wes Studi as Sitting Bull; Schellenberg just didn't fit the part.

This is an excellent film. However I feel that it did not succeed in showing the true horror that the native American people suffered. I felt the movie was designed to appeal to a broad audience without stepping on anyone's feelings. I am still waiting for a film that shows the true plight of all native american people. The only film that has come close to that is the documentary 500 nations. I did however enjoy this movie very much. It was a great move forward for telling the truth.

The movie itself was very slow to get going and did not make use of the talented actors in the movie. The politics that occurred behind the scenes sicken me even more. Initially Native American Writer, Sherman Alexie, was supposed to direct this film. Ten minutes after he was given the job he was called back and told they had decided to go with another director, Yves Simoneau. Please don't misunderstand me, Yves Simoneau is a fine director, but it is my belief that the job should have gone to Sherman Alexie who is more than qualified and brings the fact that he is Native American to the job. That provides a different perspective than that of a French director. In my opinion the movie was a watered down version of the book and I think it would have been much better had it been directed by Sherman Alexie.

An arrow launched bravely, but falls short

I read Dee Brown's classic story about the brutal, tragic history of White-Indian relations back in the early 1970s when I was in high school. Ranging as it does over 400 years of American history, from Columbus to the early 20th century, the book seemed impervious to adaptation to television. But HBO has done a creditable job of bringing a slice of Brown's blood-soaked tale to the small screen. To do so, HBO had to cut away much of Brown's wide-ranging narrative, and might have cut even more to keep from confusing the audience with too many characters. HBO spliced onto the story the tale of Charles Eastman, a Dartmouth-trained doctor who grew up as a Sioux. Eastman's story functions as a splint that holds together the disparate shards of Indian history that culminate at Wounded Knee. It also serves as a bridge between the worlds of Washington DC, where decisions about Indian affairs were made, and the distant battlefields and reservations where those decisions were implemented.

"Bury My Heart" focuses mostly on the stories of chiefs Red Cloud and Sitting Bull, who lead some of the last bands of Indian holdouts against assimilation into white society. The film depicts Sioux life as harsh, yet happy and robust. Tepees sprout in harmony along rivers and streams. Children play happily, hunters bring home the abundant game and families sit cozily around campfires. But all goes awry when whites encroach on Indian lands, and especially when gold is discovered in the Black Hills, sacred to the Sioux. Suddenly, the iron-clad treaties that whites had negotiated with the Sioux are treated as fungible, and deal after deal is shoved down the throats of these bands whose firepower is vastly outbalanced by white guns and rapaciousness. The final "battle" -- if gunning down hundreds of unarmed and sick Indian men, women and children can be ennobled by that word -- occurs with horrifying finality at Wounded Knee Creek.

The film is strongest where it shows important events that rarely make it into the history books. The "education" (really, indoctrination) of young Indians by white teachers, Little Bighorn, Sitting Bull's death (assassination is not a stretch), the Sioux emigration into Canada, and the final battle are well-depicted. The ongoing debates between government "progressives" (who wanted to save Indians from extermination by forced assimilation into white ways) and the militants (who wanted to kill them off outright) shows the lack of understanding and respect that hampered white's ability to deal with the Indians fairly. Where the film falls short is in depicting the emotions and subtleties of the interaction. There are no scenes showing gold-crazed whites pushing into Indian lands. Treaties with Indians are shown, accompanied by maps, but it's hard for the uneducated viewer to quite understand the issues. An interaction between Sitting Bull and Phil Sheridan gives the American general the opportunity to trash the Sioux version of its history, but gives next to no space to the Sioux view, suggesting that Sheridan was correct. Most importantly, the film skirts the issue of race. This was especially evident in the love story between Sioux Charles Eastman and his white wife-to-be, Elaine Goodale. Everyone seems thrilled that these two young people were getting together. But given the tenor of times, it's hard to believed that a red man marrying a white woman would have been acceptable to most people.

Still, the film provides indelible images of the campaign of white atrocities and duplicities that drove the outgunned Indians from their lands. An Indian chief's frozen body is flipped on its back to facilitate a photographer; an endless series of tepees stretches along the Little Big Horn as the battle rages; Indians literally "touch pen" to the implements that signify their assent to a document; Hotchkiss guns hurl deadly shells at fleeing Indians; an old man drags young boy after he has been cut down.

In spite of its many deficiencies, "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" is worthy of watching -- especially for an amazing performance by part-Mohawk August Schellenberg, who gave his role of Sitting Bull the ferocity, gravitas and dignity that made him completely believable as the fearsome Sioux war chief.

"Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" DVD should be required viewing for all high school students in both English and Social Studies/American history classes. Of course most adult Americans may never see it but still they OUGHT TO. I'm working on getting all my family members to view it. One important virtue is that it doesn't simplify the different perspectives in the usually dumbing-down style of Hollywood. Yes, much of the history included is selected as is necessary, but at least this film tries to present the complexity and background of the massacre and the principal people involved. With a deep background in 19th century American literature and history & Native American studies, (PhD.) I would highly recommend this film. Kudoes to the director, producer and actors for doing it. It's based on Dee Brown's classic book by the same name. I particularly appreciated the film's attention focused on peoples' difficulties with language and culture barriers, the consequences of many misunderstandings, and the powerful clarity of the Sioux leaders as they continually resist the genocidal, murderous, and racist forces arrayed against them.

I have read a great deal about the shabby treatment of American Indians by the US government and found this movie to be consistent with most of the well researched books on the shelves. Inaccurate presentation of facts is never good, but whatever they might be here, they did not detract from the overall power of the film to tell the truth. Aidan Quinn did a good job of expressing the tremendous conflict Dr. Eastman experienced as well as his inability to completely work through the anger he felt at having to give up the foundation of who he was. A worthwhile movie that demands a thoughtful response.

Unique storytelling angle and complex performances by Gordon Tootoosis, August Schellenberg, & Adam Beach. I'm not completely sure, but I think I'd have to say for now that Schellenberg is probably the best Sitting Bull on film yet--even though he's been played well a number of times in recent years. Some other Native people have told me they had mixed feelings about the portrayal of Sitting Bull [it's painful], but I felt that it actually captured a deeper and more subtle tragedy behind the events that other films on this subject don't bring out as much: the way the government manipulated tribes and tribal members to attempt to set them against each other, all while steadily attacking the dignity of each individual (and their ancestors). I'd have to say that this film brought out the shame factor big-time, and that is very, very hard to watch coming from my culture. Yet as much as it might seem disrespectful, I think in this case it's important for Americans to acknowledge this aspect of the injustice and understand the magnitude of it.

On a side note, I have to admit that I resent the inappropriate and melodramatic subtitle "The Epic Fall of the American Indian" as it implies some kind of extinction is in effect. Maybe your town/city is Native-free, but Ishi the last Yahi is not the reality of every tribe! I get tired of hearing people feeling bad about what white people did in the past without realizing that they can do something positive in the present. Maybe if people stopped talking past tense about the "plight" of the Native American" and started recognizing tribes as LIVING and supporting tribal sovereignty and such it would help. Thanks for listening.