Skip to main content

As I heard my Sioux name being called over and over, I knew for the first time who I really was.

Dances with Wolves
(1990)

(SPOILERS) Kevin Costner’s Oscar glory has become something of a punching bag for a certain brand of “white saviour” storytelling, so much so that it’s even crossed over seamlessly into the SF genre (Avatar). It’s also destined to be forever scorned for having the temerity to beat out Goodfellas for Best Picture at the 63rdAcademy Awards. I’m not going to buck the trend and suggest it was actually the right choice – I’d also have voted Ghost above Dances, maybe even The Godfather Part III – but it’s certainly the most “Oscar-friendly” one. The funny thing, on revisit, is that what stands out most isn’t its studiously earnest tone or frequent but well-intentioned clumsiness. No, it’s that its moments of greatest emotional weight – in what is, after all, intended to shine a light on the theft and destruction of Native American heritage – relate to its non-human characters.

Which isn’t to say these points were ignored at the time; one of the first things anyone seeing the film would comment on was how sad it was when White Socks is shot (punctuated heartbreakingly by John Barry’s score). And that coming after John Dunbar’s horse has been shot from under him. But it’s only at this point, as John is divested of his animal – as opposed to human – companions, that the picture feels as if it is really taking on emotional heft and stakes. Before that, as an audience member, it’s easy to be carried along rather ambivalently by this, as Pauline Kael put it in one of her last reviews, “middle-of-the-road epic”.

Did I like it more at the time? I’m sure I did. It’s a film that very much benefits from being appreciated on the big screen, where its open-plains vistas make up for what is otherwise a fairly rudimentary directorial style of the Eastwood mould (which isn’t to say Costner’s a bad director – Open Range is expertly put together – simply that he’s no auteur). Indeed, it’s those vistas combined with Barry’s magnificent score that explain much of how this pill of a white hero pointing the finger at his fellow genocidal countrymen went down so agreeably (behind the majority of middling Best Picture winners there’s a highly affecting score).

In an era where well-meaning patronisation from white (male) filmmakers is tantamount to being guilty of the very acts they’re seeking to atone for (Green Book), it’s easy to dismiss Dances with Wolves in the same manner that many at the time dismissed Driving Miss Daisy. Dances is no masterpiece, just an old-style western that happened to be elevated beyond its place by a rapturous Academy. Not really its fault. Costner, who seemed to be born middle-aged, was unsurprisingly Republican in leaning during the ‘80s, and his Dunbar is very much a right-of-centre protagonist, liberal where it counts yet keen on huntin’, shootin’ and fishin’, but almost painfully uncynical with it. What’s most noteworthy about Costner’s approach is the way that, in certain key areas, Dunbar is very much not the honed, can-do hero. He makes an arse of himself when introducing himself to his new neighbours, he isn’t a particularly effective fighter, and Costner’s narration of Dunbar’s journal entries is commendably unpolished, almost boyish in its sincerity as he blithely elevates the Sioux to the level of sainthood.

Of course, that’s not to let the director off his conceits. Dunbar’s suicide ride rewarded as bravery may be intentionally ironic, but it still involves a very silly Jesus Christ pose, one one suspects Costner cobbled together after seeing the death of Elias in Platoon. And if Dunbar’s low-key and reticent about revealing the dangers of his co-invaders to the Sioux, it is he who carries the burden – in terms of the denouement – of losing even more than they! He gets to pair with Mary McDonnell’s conveniently Sioux-raised squaw, but nobly chooses to exile himself from his adopted tribe, knowing his ex-army colleagues will be after him. He thus gives himself the ultimate hero’s ending, suffering in worthy silence and isolation. The character’s also furnished with an entirely non-regulation mullet, one that would follow Costner around through a couple of time periods, notably fifteenth century Nottingham, before he dispensed with it to save Whitney Houston’s life.

While Dances’ sentiments (and sentiment) may seem at best naïve now, Costner was notably made an honorary member of the Sioux Nation for his efforts. Although, that might have been partly due to his airbrushing Sioux history as peace-loving, when accounts of the period had the Pawnee as more frequently their victims. With Wes Studi as their leader, soon to be irrevocably associated with ruthless Native American villainy as Magua in Last of the Mohicans, it couldn’t be otherwise. The portrayal of the tribe is very much of the veneration-first disposition, replete with clichés of strong silent types, wise elders and bonding through common humorous touchstones. Graham Greene’s Kicking Bird – besides his deep and abiding kinship with Dunbar – is most singled out by mystification at his missus – unfathomable women, eh, the great cultural leveller! – while initially antagonistic Wind in His Hair (Rodney A Grant) becomes Dunbar’s staunchest defender. The Union Army are mostly cruel idiots or crazy (Maury Chaykin makes a strong impression early in the proceedings), such that it comes as a surprise when a sympathetic figure appears (Charles Rocker’s Lieutenant Elgin) and soon after meets a brutal end.

It can seem hard now to place just how and why Costner became the biggest movie star on the planet for a couple of years, but I think the key was probably the flavour of honour and dependability he brought to his most famous roles, a quality from a bygone era; he never fared quite as well when he tried to rough things up in contemporary or futuristic fare like Revenge or Waterworld. It’s why, whatever else you may want to say about Man of Steel, he was perfect casting as Pa Kent. If you look at the pictures he made when was riding high – The Untouchables, Field of Dreams, Dances with Wolves, Prince of Thieves, even The Bodyguard and JFK – and they suggest irreducible, straightforward values (there are a few wrinkles too, No Way Out and Bull Durham being two of his most interesting pictures of this period). That also means there isn’t a whole lot of depth to his iconography. It doesn’t matter too much when you’re dealing with the mythic or quasi-spiritual (De Palma/Mamet and Alden Robinson’s entries) but the seams begin to show when all you have between you and pure corn is Alan Rickman hamming or a diva hammering out an old favourite.

So the Oscar. Awakenings now stands out only as a “What were they thinking?” in its status as a strictly middling disability movie in the mode of Rain Man and My Left Foot, but lacking their slickness and punch respectively (but with De Niro doing some attention-grabbing gurning/drooling to secure it the necessary cachet, and Robin Williams in mawkish sincerity mode). The Godfather Part III is a case of everyone putting it forward really hoping they were wrong and that it was worthy of its predecessors (seven nominations, no wins); this was, after all, an awards season where everyone had been tipping Bonfire of the Vanities for honours before they got a whiff of the goods. And no, I don’t think it’s nearly as bad as its rep; it’s just far from great. And Ghost, the kind of unfettered, cheesily sincere romance that just plain works, but was never in serious contention of taking the top prize. None of them can hold a candle to Goodfellas, but it’s often easier to go for a quick fix of emotional uplift with a twinge of melancholy after a hard year making movies, combined with patting yourself on the back for your sensitivity towards injustices, rather than immersing yourself in a fetid bath sordid violence, avarice and criminality. That, and a western hadn’t won in a long while. Of course, a much, much better one would only then go and win again only two years later.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

I’m smarter than a beaver.

Prey (2022) (SPOILERS) If nothing else, I have to respect Dan Trachtenberg’s cynical pragmatism. How do I not only get a project off the ground, but fast-tracked as well? I know, a woke Predator movie! Woke Disney won’t be able to resist! And so, it comes to pass. Luckily for Prey , it gets to bypass cinemas and so the same sorry fate of Lightyear . Less fortunately, it’s a patience-testing snook cocking at historicity (or at least, assumed historicity), in which a young, pint-sized Comanche girl who wishes to hunt and fish – and doubtless shoot to boot – with the big boys gets to take on a Predator and make mincemeat of him. Well, of course , she does. She’s a girl, innit?

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) (SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron ’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison. Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War , Infinity Wars I & II , Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok . It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions ( Iron Man II ), but there are points in Age of Ultron whe

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) (SPOILERS) There’s something daringly perverse about the attempt to weave a serious-minded, generation-spanning saga from the hare-brained premise of The Place Beyond the Pines . When he learns he is a daddy, a fairground stunt biker turns bank robber in order to provide for his family. It’s the kind of “only-in-Hollywood” fantasy premise you might expect from a system that unleashed Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man and Point Break on the world. But this is an indie-minded movie from the director of the acclaimed Blue Valentine ; it demands respect and earnest appraisal. Unfortunately it never recovers from the abject silliness of the set-up. The picture is littered with piecemeal characters and scenarios. There’s a hope that maybe the big themes will even out the rocky terrain but in the end it’s because of this overreaching ambition that the film ends up so undernourished. The inspiration for the movie

This entire edifice you see around you, built on jute.

Jeeves and Wooster 3.3: Cyril and the Broadway Musical  (aka Introduction on Broadway) Well, that’s a relief. After a couple of middling episodes, the third season bounces right back, and that's despite Bertie continuing his transatlantic trip. Clive Exton once again plunders  Carry On, Jeeves  but this time blends it with a tale from  The Inimitable Jeeves  for the brightest spots, as Cyril Basington-Basington (a sublimely drippy Nicholas Hewetson) pursues his stage career against Aunt Agatha's wishes.

I’m the famous comedian, Arnold Braunschweiger.

Last Action Hero (1993) (SPOILERS) Make no mistake, Last Action Hero is a mess. But even as a mess, it might be more interesting than any other movie Arnie made during that decade, perhaps even in his entire career. Hellzapoppin’ (after the 1941 picture, itself based on a Broadway revue) has virtually become an adjective to describe films that comment upon their own artifice, break the fourth wall, and generally disrespect the convention of suspending disbelief in the fictions we see parading across the screen. It was fairly audacious, some would say foolish, of Arnie to attempt something of that nature at this point in his career, which was at its peak, rather than playing it safe. That he stumbled profoundly, emphatically so since he went up against the behemoth that is Jurassic Park (slotted in after the fact to open first), should not blind one to the considerable merits of his ultimate, and final, really, attempt to experiment with the limits of his screen persona.

I think it’s pretty clear whose side the Lord’s on, Barrington.

Monte Carlo or Bust aka  Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies (1969) (SPOILERS) Ken Annakin’s semi-sequel to Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines tends to be rather maligned, usually compared negatively to its more famous predecessor. Which makes me rather wonder if those expressing said opinion have ever taken the time to scrutinise them side by side. Or watch them back to back (which would be more sensible). Because Monte Carlo or Bust is by far the superior movie. Indeed, for all its imperfections and foibles (not least a performance from Tony Curtis requiring a taste for comic ham), I adore it. It’s probably the best wacky race movie there is, simply because each set of competitors, shamelessly exemplifying a different national stereotype (albeit there are two pairs of Brits, and a damsel in distress), are vibrant and cartoonish in the best sense. Albeit, it has to be admitted that, as far as said stereotypes go, Annakin’s home side win

Death to Bill and Ted!

Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) (SPOILERS) The game of how few sequels are actually better than the original is so well worn, it was old when Scream 2 made a major meta thing out of it (and it wasn’t). Bill & Ted Go to Hell , as Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey was originally called, is one such, not that Excellent Adventure is anything to be sneezed at, but this one’s more confident, even more playful, more assured and more smartly stupid. And in Peter Hewitt it has a director with a much more overt and fittingly cartoonish style than the amiably pedestrian Stephen Herrick. Evil Bill : First, we totally kill Bill and Ted. Evil Ted : Then we take over their lives. My recollection of the picture’s general consensus was that it surpassed the sleeper hit original, but Rotten Tomatoes’ review aggregator suggests a less universal response. And, while it didn’t rock any oceans at the box office, Bogus Journey and Point Break did quite nicely for Keanu Reev

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994) (SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction ’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump . And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

Poetry in translation is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

Paterson (2016) (SPOILERS) Spoiling a movie where nothing much happens is difficult, but I tend to put the tag on in a cautionary sense much of the time. Paterson is Jim Jarmusch at his most inert and ambient but also his most rewardingly meditative. Paterson (Adam Driver), a bus driver and modest poet living in Paterson, New Jersey, is a stoic in a fundamental sense, and if he has a character arc of any description, which he doesn’t really, it’s the realisation that is what he is. Jarmusch’s picture is absent major conflict or drama; the most significant episodes feature Paterson’s bus breaking down, the English bull terrier Marvin – whom Paterson doesn’t care for but girlfriend Laura (Golshifteh Farahani) dotes on – destroying his book of poetry, and an altercation at the local bar involving a gun that turns out to be a water pistol. And Paterson takes it all in his stride, genial to the last, even the ruination of his most earnest, devoted work (the only disappoint

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.