Horrible Movie


I'm writing a paper on this for a class of mine so I came here to get a few quotes and spelling of character names. However, I just have to say, that this movie was attrocious. I think the depicted the Native Americans horribly and the acting was extreamly poor. And on top of that they made the poor Native Americans look like idiots becuause they turned their shaman into a joke. It was a mmidget that looked like it belonged in a circus... and the way it was yelling at the priest was rediculous. They definately should have been more respectful to the Native American culture when making this movie, after all... isn't that what this movie is all about?

reply

Or maybe you're being disrespectful for calling the Shaman a midget who should be in a circus?

The movie, like all history movies, depicts certain groups different depending on which side of the story it wants to tell, it doesn't show the natives "horribly" it shows them misunderstanding and mostly unwilling to cooperate with the black robes, it shows it from the perspective of the black robes which makes the natives look even more uneducated.

The movie actually goes out and defends the native culture when Daniel comments on how the afterlife of the natives is no more hard to believe than that of the Christians.

Too bad you missed out on all that. You misinterpreted the film I think.

reply

Excellent reply Pete101. The OP seemed pretty clueless.

reply

very good answer pete101. it's a shame that the poor flower child has not done a lot of reading in its life.

the iriquois were fierce warriors and their treatment of other native groups is recorded.

reply

Yeah, you also have to keep in mind that the native americans generally were idiots. There's a reason groups as lame as the british and french were able to defeat them.

reply

ummmm....no,that's not what I was getting at at all.
I was stating that the Native Americans were an actual culture that deserved more respect than the movie portrayed.

reply

[deleted]

another good answer muck.

thank you.


reply

Um... for your information everyone
I dated a guy of Cherokee descent for close to two years and he would have been appalled by this movie
and I'm an English major and have read MANY books in my lifetime. Just because I feel that they showed them disrespectfully doesn't mean I have to be bombarded with people calling me uneducated.
and for your information, the MAJORITY of the class was annoyed with the portrayal of the Native Americans in this movie... So it's not just me.
Some of the stuff was VERY over the top and almost seemed like a joke...so please respect other people's opinions...

reply

Somehow in this heavily politically-correct social climate I'm not surprised that a majority of current college students would be as you said annoyed with the portrayal of Native Americans in the movie. I still don't understand at all what you or anyone, especially those with some background knowledge of the history of the people, places and things in the story to help give some context, would be so appalled by it. Your one example, the shaman- how is it so unreasonable to imagine back in those times a little person being born and because of their marked difference from the norm being seen by the tribe as being special, maybe having magical powers or what have you? I believe the man had characteristics of dwarfism rather than being a midget( midgets being proportional to normal-sized people just much smaller). With either condition there is nothing wrong with their intellect. Who's to say that the shaman's behavior and casting of spells etc towards the priest would have been any different from a "normal" shaman's if he had been along on the trip?
As for how the different tribes were portrayed where's the beef? There's good people and bad people, Indian and White. The over-riding feeling I got after the film was even more sympathy for the natives, not less. Did the "bad" natives behave really any worse than Europeans or other cultures around the world were doing against their fellow man- I don't think so. I think the film was much more honest about Native Americans/First Peoples than most other film depictions of them as the Noble People - which seemed to reach its zenith in the over the top PC-ness of Dances with Wolves.

reply

I don't think the trouble is political correctness but a lack of introspection. I have a BA and am working on an MA in English. I have noted that even at the highest level of study my colleagues continue to make assumptions about time periods and cultures, for example. This led to bizarre readings, I can tell you! One classmate stated that she was very surprised to find Dante so different from the Icelandic sagas we had been reading... Another gave a detailed presentation about the Victorian values of the medieval Icelandic peoples complete with sexual repression for women... this was despite the fact that sexuality was discussed in the Icelandic texts in such an open way that our modern and "enlightened" students thought these people were sick. These sorts of leaps in logic say more about the reader's assumptions than they do about the text- or in this case, the film.

Bronteana Bronte Studies Blog:

http://bronteana.blogspot.com

reply

Yes it's more than just PC. I'm left with thinking that the OP mustn't believe that the Amer-Indians could possibly be anything more than noble, honest, stable, stoic etc etc. Talk about not respecting a people(s). But since she's dated a Cherokee guy and has had a lifetime (at 21, 22 or?) of book reading who am I to say anything? (<:

I'd argue that there is not a lack of introspection- it's outtrospection (extrospection)! Maybe too much (and especially at the relatively early college age) dependence on a sketchy world-view and as you said too many assumptions made and lack of seeing history or what have you from the POV of that time, era, epoch. Walking in their moccasins so to speak. It's obvious many have a hard time relating to other time periods. How could they live without electricity and indoor plumbing? No video games?!

reply

So you're an English major who doesn't know how to spell "ridiculous"? Also I believe that a shaman, even if he is a midget, still qualifies as a human being, and therefore should be referred to as "he", not "it".

reply

So you're an English major who doesn't know how to spell "ridiculous"? Also I believe that a shaman, even if he is a midget, still qualifies as a human being, and therefore should be referred to as "he", not "it".
With literary skills such as these on show, I don't feel over confident that OP Ms Flower Child turned the academic world upside down, with her final results.🐭

reply

I haven't seen this movie in years, so I cannot comment on accuracy but I wanted to point out two things: one, there is no such thing as "the Native American culture." This continent was inhabited by numerous distinct ethnocultural groups- cultures, not a single culture. And it is reductive to refer to them as a single unit as you do here. Secondly, and related to the first point, this film is about native groups in Canada, not America. What the Cherokee have to do with their cultures is interesting, perhaps, but does not bear on a film which is not about the Cherokee. I suggest that you research the cultures in the film before proceeding with your paper or you may be jumping to some very big conclusions and generalisations- perhaps even racialisations. Research the Algonquin, Huron, Iroquois, and the French as a start. You might also want to research the Cree, English, and the other tribes of the region which were in contact with the colonising nations.

Good luck with your paper!

***
Bronteana Bronte Studies Blog:

http://bronteana.blogspot.com

reply

OMG, I so totally hated this movie too! But I thought the Jesuits were, like, the ones they portrayed wrongly and dissrespectfully! I mean, like, I dated a Catholic for 11 days, and their nothing like that! Like, they look so stinky and dirty thru-out the whole movie, and that just isn't how they are and its disrespectful to they're culture and stuff. And when that guy gets his finger cut off by the sea shell, he so totally wusses out, and like if they want to protray Catholics like that in the movies whatever but my boyfriend would have totally, like, kicked that Indian's ass. Also, whatss with the black robes all the time? Its not like their goths or something, Catholics are like pro-life and stuff. The whole thing was just rediculous and I know a lot about Indian culture from watching films like Gandhi and, like, they didn't have that right either, but they're appraisal of the Catholic caricatures was even worse. I am righting a letter write now on behalf of my Freshman English class protesting this awful film!

reply

Themill, your post is excellent. I think you would have achieved your point better had you CAPLOCKED certain portions of it. Seems to be what they teach to us English majors.

Truth is, we've all read the books, but it's impossible for us to really know what it was like 350 years ago.

-peter

ps. one other thing... as a person of both catholic and native heritage, I didn't find this movie offensive to my people at all.

reply

Hoo, for shame! Caps Lock is TOO evil, even in fun. No disrespect to English majors intended, by the way. Spent four years as one myself, and the next four trying to get a job. :)

reply

I had to watch this for my history class, and after doing some research I found that the author of the book actually tried to show the Indians in a better light than what his research suggested...so I guess, is it offensive if its historically accurate? Just because these indians acted this way, it doesn't, to me, convey a message that all native americans were bad or evil or stupid...Plus you say that your ex was a Cherokee, but, correct if I'm wrong, the Indians in this movie were not Cherokee...

reply

I've seen this film quite a few times and I am surprised at some of the reactions from readers on this board. It seems pretty fair from an historical perspective considering the times and cultures it concerns itself with.
The native americans (and canadians) depicted were cultures alien to all those who assumed the status of conqueror/colonizer, and as much as they may have had societal positives amongst themselves, toward enemies or competitors they also had some rather brutal habits. Which is not to say that usurping cultures, such as the French, Spanish or English, did not. Historical accounts will support this with no question.
I don't think you can compare the view of the parties involved in this drama with insulting portrayals of same in so many other films.

LjM

Step on it! And don't spare the atoms!

reply

That's perfect :) Thank you for that!

reply

Am I the only on who actually sees a problem with the post o.o''
First of all your using your boyfriend/girlfriend to compare with a Jesuit Priest that is portrayed centuries ago.
2ndly your saying that the guy wusses out when he gets his finger cuts off> in what way did he wuss out. If my memory serves me correctly he simply held in the pain and back away. And lets see you get your finger cut off.
3rd of all your using the term Catholic in the wrong manner. about 1 in 5 people are Catholics, that doesnt mean their all going to kick that "Indian's Ass"
4th Black Robes don't mean Goth. Not even close. Does your black Tees mean Goth?
Even today in modern times Father's wear black robes, besides the color can you find a argument that actually shows them as Goths. And if your going to refer to the whipping he does on his back, thats just a ritual they do when they have sinned/
5th your grammar is not to be offensive but terrible

reply

if you're referring to themill's post, it was obviously sarcasm... a send-up of the OP.

reply

HA!!

WOW

I suspect many many things just seem odd and out of place to you in this world. That is a shame. I suggest you turn FOX news back on. They are looking out for you. They will take care of all the thinking so you can just sit back and take direction and know who is to blame. People like themill are obviously products of the liberal school systems and have no business in the thinking world. They clearly are also serving an anti-Christian agenda, just like this movie!

reply

You're kidding right?? or are you seriously that ignorant of native and French Catholic culture in the 17 century? The acting was superb, soundtrack excellent and it was historically accurate without PC bias or revisionist history. It told it like it was. What did you want instead? a happy ending??

reply

What really gets me is how most of the PC people are not even Indians. I am both part Cherokee and part Iroquois, yet I do not deny that the ancestors of Grandpa Frank occasionally roasted or mutilated PoWs. I mean, who hasn't? I'm also part Norwegian but I do not deny we sacrificed people and did things far worse than the natives of this land have done.

You'll all call me crazy, but I'm not crazy, I'm the only one who's not crazy!

reply

Flowerchild...you are a buffoon!

reply

This idiot thread by the idiot "flower child" shouldn't have been responded to so much. "Black Robe" is the most realistic and meticulously researched and starkly beautiful film that has ever been made about the Amerindians of the northeast.

reply

[deleted]

It's called historical accuracy. Which means that whether you like it or not, this is how things actually were. You have been spoon-fed glorifed movies that twist the real story for profit your whole life, and when presented with a literal depiction you can't handle it. It's not your fault, really. There were two sides to the whole "we crapped on native americans" story. This tells the side you don't often hear about--Natives acting like "savages"--and this is PG rated compared to some of the stuff that actually happened back then.

About the "midget" you speak of--He is a man of great power in his tribe and any person born that way would have been given a special title because others in the tribe would consider them sent from the "gods".

I thought this was a great movie and that it did a great job portraying the tension-filled relationship between the Natives and the Jesuits.

reply

I'm Native American and I think the Native's were depicted beautifully. Certainly not a Hollywood production like Dances With Wolves, but that's what made it wonderful. The Natives weren't 'Hollywood-ized' (if there is such a word).

I love this movie!!

reply

I agree, Oji, 100%. it was totally awesome. one of my favs! : >)
I hated DWW. so dumb

reply

The movie was solid. Historical accuracy isn't politically correct, it is what happened. Native Americans weren't perfect harmonious people. They had their flaws, and some of them were quite barberic. With that said, obviously what Europeans did to them was awful by disease and by violent force. There are 2 sides to every story and you can't have tunnel vision looking at life just through one perspective no matter what the perspective is.

reply

"It was a mmidget that looked like it belonged in a circus... and the way it was yelling at the priest was rediculous."

Sorry, but I cannot NOT say anything about the fact that the OP refers to the "midget" as "it". That is the most offensive thing I've seen in a long time.

reply