Geez! The overwhelming majority of those are nowhere near historically accurate.
Which is why I prefaced my list with the statement: "Here are several worthy Westerns that are relatively historically accurate
(some being historically-rooted and some fictional):"
It doesn't matter that "Young Guns" featured the '80's Brat Pack, it was based on real-life events and relatively accurate. By all means, compare the events of the movie with actual history. The gist of the story is true.
Same thing with "The Alamo," "Butch Cassidy" and "Wyatt Earp." They're all based on historical events and the gist of the stories are true. Filmmakers always change details for dramatic purposes.
"Dances With Wolves" wasn't a joke; it was relatively realistic (although not based on a true story).
I've heard the grumblings about the film's PC-influenced negative portrayal of whites in general and also its supposed romanticized portrayal of Natives as super-virtuous, yet most of these criticisms are hogwash. No kidding. The film rings of authenticity and the characters are anything but one-dimensional. Want proof?
The Pawnee are the first Indians the viewer encounters in the film and they are portrayed as completely hostile to whites and other NA tribes, so hostile that they'll kill a white person on sight without mercy. I'd say this is a negative, stereotypical portrayal of Indians, wouldn't you agree?
Also, Wind In His Hair (Rodney A. Grant) clearly states that the Sioux should kill Dunbar at the council meeting; I'm sure there were others who agreed with him but it was ultimately decided that killing Dunbar would likely cause more problems than solve.
Not all white people are shown in a negative light; in fact, Dunbar himself -- the film's protagonist -- is white.
"Based on historical events" means nothing. Michael Bay's "Pearl Harbor" was based on an historical event and it sucked dog's balls in terms of accuracy. And taking two fighter pilots and putting them on the Doolittle raid - another historical event - was bull. The event happened; the accuracy was terrible. The flight crews were members of the 17th Bomber Group, and all the training was at Eglin Field, Florida. Wasn't a single fighter pilot around.
Can't use "based on historical events" as a barometer for accuracy.
"Pearl Harbor" did precisely what "Titanic" (1997), "Braveheart," "September Dawn" and most other historically-rooted films do -- added a dramatic story in order to hook the viewer to the real-life events and provide them characters with whom they can relate.
You're confusing these kinds of films with documentaries.
And, by the way, "Valdez is Coming" is much more than a lame ass "Liberal vehicle."