"Uneven, incomplete, and boring depiction of the story"
What the hell is this? Every time I get on IMDB's page for this, there's usually a negative comment, why? I watched it and thought it was a very gripping chronicle. Is it different from the book too much? I've never read it but I want to. Can somebody answer this for me?
I guess acting just a few times was a little cheesy, but not too much.
It WAS uneven and very one sided. Though I'm a White person, I was disappointed in the very White look at a culture that is quite different from mine.
Wes Studi is one of my favorite actors; I'd see him in anything. But I feel that the focus was very non-Lakota. That's wrong.
As for the book, by all means read it. You won't find a better chronicle.
I didn't find it one sided. I thought it showed what the 'Friends of the Indians' intentions where and how, despite their good intentions, they were essentially wiping out a culture. I didn't think it was quite subjective in that respect. However, I would have liked a bit more about the culture and the Lakota off of the reservations
shareHere is an audio interview you might find interesting.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10486261
I decided to be a kinder-gentler Rimeshot.....
It's hard not to like the white man after watching this film.
Yes, it's true that the white man was taking the land just as the natives where, for many years, taking lands from other tribes. But it didn't seem fair that the white man threaten the natives with far more advanced technological weapons and war tactics.
It's a shame, really. Look what the white man and his industrial movement has made to this world. We're killing everything. That's all we bring: death and destruction.
Well, ocular, we weren't the first society to do this; it's a cycle that's been repeated by countless civilizations over the years.
Sadly, though, we may be the last, given our blatant disregard for the atmosphere.