Ok in 1990 Costner was still a decent actor, but he's not the greatest artist and this is his first (and best) attempt at directing.
Yet it is a masterpiece of filmmaking for the ages.
I cannot imagine many ways to improve it, it's engaging and enjoyable from start to finish and excellent in all its parts.
I think it's incredibly good, maybe it was beginner's luck but it's one of those rare examples where everything magically falls in the right place.
It's never left my all time top 20. This film is all good ideas and gusto. You can feel the passion in every scene, from everybody involved, both behind and in front of the camera. I think it's just a clear cut case of the stars aligning. I'm not sure what the story is behind this film but I feel it almost has to have run over budget. Some studio head had to be watching the dailies and said just keep doing what you're doing.
shareIt's sad that Costner was not able to tune in on this magic and replicate it.
I understand it's not easy to do.
I think that the success and fame got the worse of him rather than the best, or maybe he was scared of it and never even tried.
I have always enjoyed it -- although I haven't seen it for many years now. An elegiac, engaging film with a gorgeous John Barry score. I did always find Costner's performance rather bland, particularly his wooden narration, and wish he had cast a livelier and more charismatic actor in the lead. But there's certainly enough good stuff to compensate. Graham Greene is very charming.
shareEh. Man. I've grown to love Costner. But it was absolutely an acquired taste. He's such a hambone. But he's so passionate about the art, you can tell he really cares, that I just give him a pass.
shareHe has a leisurely, laid-back acting style that works for certain roles - he's pretty good in Field of Dreams and The Upside of Anger. But one thing he does not have is gravitas, and another is wide emotional range. I honestly feel that the role of Dunbar was a stretch too far. For me, it's a testament to the strengths of the film, and the rest of the cast, that it works so well despite him.
shareIt worked for me in this film. He felt like an old west stick in the mud rube. Sort of a dim guy having his mind blown. I don't know if that was the intention but that's how it plays for me.
shareMy wife & I gauge the quality of all Westerns by asking: "Is it as good as Dances With Wolves?"
Most aren't, of course, but there are a smattering that are just as worthy in their own unique way: Django Unchained, One-Eyed Jacks, Shane, The Outlaw Josey Wales, North to Alaska, Bandolero!, The Big Country, The Missouri Breaks, The Sundowners (1950), Ride with the Devil, Rooster Cogburn, September Dawn, Ride the High Country, Jubal, Duel in the Sun, Chino, Destry, The Last Frontier, 3:10 to Yuma (2007), The Ride Back, Wyatt Earp, The Last Wagon, Nevada Smith, etc.
I think the whole story of how this film came about is quite fascinating - check out the story of how the script was written.
https://theactorspad.com/kevin-costners-incredible-story-on-the-making-of-dances-with-wolves/
Hey Maximmm, thanks for the link, that was an interesting story I didn't know.
I'm baffled by Costner's luck on that one!
And possibly, his constant refusal to read it and his friend's continuous dire situation only helped the refining and polishing process.
The best way to ruin an artist's vein is give him freedom and hope.
Speaking of which, there is a direct sequel to this story in the book format called 'holy road' - written by the same author, featuring the same characters 11 years later. Costner turned down the idea of making into a film.
Frankly, I never understood what the fuss was all about. I found it a bland, forgettable film which tried to be "important" by having long, ponderous scenes in Wide Screen, and John Barry's usual C-chord-based ho-hum score.
Not that I have anything to say against John Barry's music, as a rule. But for a western "epic", it was a bit too generic, I thought.
And Kevin Costner is a mystery to me. I find him one-dimensional and insipid to the point of being a non-entity. He's like the spear-carrier who has one line in the play, and he muffs it. For a truer portrayal of Indian life, I'd prefer to re-watch "Little Big Man", any day of the week.