DANCES WITH WOLVES 

: film study and analysis

Full name: Wissem Kerboub /M2

Dances with Wolves is an American film directed by Kevin Costner in 1990.It is an adaptation

of the eponymous novel written in 1988 by Michael Blake. It is one of the most awarded films in

the history of cinema for a director who is also a lead actor and producer. Indeed, he received seven

Oscars, three Golden Globes and the Silver Bear at the Berlin International Film Festival.

Right away the hero is there, full frame. We know he’s the hero because he's committing a

heroic act, and the close up shot on his face conveys his status. You recognize the blue uniforms,

the Civil War...and we see this wounded soldier, Lieutenant Dunbar (Kevin Costner), a big boy with

a dirty beard on his face, stiff mustaches. His foot is almost torn off, they want to amputate. No, he

gets back on his horse after puting back his boots through the pain (00.01.35), teeth clenched, arms

crossed, he gallops on us, bullets whistle, he crosses the southern line with a suicidal leap and,

flushing out the enemy, saves his regiment from a deadly ambush which later allowed him to

benefit from the care of the general’s personal surgeon, who admired his exploit.

However, this movie does not depict only one theme but a set of themes gathering human and

nature and the symbiosis of both. In other words, we might say that Dancing with Wolves is a

superb epic about the origin of one civilization and the decline of another, about understanding the

other and living together across different cultures, about questions of identity and our relationship to

nature. Kevin Costner demystifies the creation of the United States in a film that is grandiose,

moving and rich in powerful messages. Superbly mastered, with magnificent shots in abundance, it

shows all of Kevin Costner's talent, both in front of and behind the camera. A tribute to the Native

American tribes whose cultures are discovered here in the most authentic way possible, it reminds
us of the importance to remember these peoples who are stateless today and who were and are

misunderstood.

The settings and the historical background required “western” places but also authentic Indian

lands, the film was shot mainly in South Dakota, but also in Wyoming... the mise en scene gathered

spectacular images of lanscape shots, vivid western and Indian music which created a balance

between two diffrent but tirelessly linked worlds, the tone of discovery and adventure were depicted

thanks to realisation of each scene with passion and precision, thus the movie is long but very

detailed and rich.

The movie has not been enough to retrace the history of America through the 19th century, on

the contrary, it allows itself to go further, and to draw up a rather daring self-critique of America's

long distorted history. He begins his story with that of the civil war between the union and the

confederates, a brief passage that sets the tone and prepares us for the real subject at hand. Then we

gradually discover another world, another civilization: the Indians. We discover their history, their

humanism. And the fact that the Indians were played by native actors who relearned their language

( Lakota) gives this touch of authenticity and reliability and I think that the audience was attracted

and curious about the tribes lifestyle and the Indians humanism which was pretty well reprsented

for that time despite the little pitchy tone of savagery and dangerousness of the Pawnees, the life

aspects of the tribes were correct espicially the language, the costumes and the music. As Dunbar

discovers the culture of the Sioux, so do we. As the viewpoint of the hero gradually shifts

throughout the film, it is also paralleled by the similarly shifting perception of the audience- from

one of initial, stereotypical fear to a much more positive one, of respect and sympathy. This overall

effect on the viewer is accomplished through the skillful use of several techniques in the film, as

well as through the use of some memorable scenes, as portrayed through Dunbar's eyes.
 In fact, Dunbar's journey in the land of the Indians is not only in space but also in time. John

crosses a doorway in space to find himself at the origins of humanity. Little by little he discovers

this mythical world, and the relationships of friendship ,love, attachment, loyalty, sacrifice, truth

were born along the way. In the first section of the film, when Dunbar discovers the area in which

he settles reveals Dunbar's first impressions of this virgin paradise, makes daringly spare use of

dialogue. The images, though, are splendorous, expressive and constantly surprising, we can clearly

depict the atmosphere thanks to the shots at his Eye level which make us feel like we were in that

place. Working with the Australian cinematographer Dean Semler, Costner makes us feel as if we're

seeing these western landscapes with fresh eyes, as Dunbar is seeing them. Our reactions

throughout the film, in fact, are keyed to Dunbar's. We discover his world as he discovers it, and

feel along with him the pleasures of new revelations added to that the vivid music sound and the

back lighting which throws a dramatic spotlight effect.

But before that in (00.25.48) we see Dunbar in a scene with his horse Cisco in the vast plains,

and it is intersting to analyse this shot beacause it shows the beauty and the artistery and heart put in

every scene. One of the elements we recover in the movie is the landscape shot which is natural due

the context and the magnificent location and setting. In fact, in this particular scene we see Dunbar

on his horse in a distant catch with the warm tones of the sun's rays and the seriousness of the

silence imposed by these vast lands. It is the beginning of something, an adventure and a mission

that this man and his faithful friend are ready to accomplish. This panoramic plan also evokes the

greatness of nature with man as a point, a shadow...

In another scene (01.21.00) when Dunbar has his first encounters with the members of the

Sioux tribe, Costner gives each one a distinct personality; these are anything but faceless heathens.

The lieutenant's relationship with the tribe in particular with the medicine man Kicking Bird

(Graham Greene), the warrior Wind in His Hair (Rodney A. Grant), this scene has not much

dialogue, it obviously puts light on the communicative side,the first attempt, the language barrier,
however, it did go well because all men have somthing in common, the effort is done by the Sioux

tribe and by Dunbar, thus, their willing to know each other made it easier for them to express

themselves in an atmosphere of curiosity and tolerance. The shots here are clear, the camera caught

the tribe’s guru and the warrior in a way to show their prestance and valourousness in a medium

shot on their horses. Unlike Dunbar who was hesitant and caught from a upper side to show his

vulnabrabilty but also his sympathic sight when he looks up way to welcome his guests.

What more, one of Costner's greatest achievements here is the balance he strikes between the

film's larger strokes and its smaller ones, between the seriousness of its themes and the lightness of

its approach. Costner's feel for the visceral pleasures of big screen imagery and there's virtuosity in

his staging of scenes, like the one in which Dunbar first makes contact with a buffalo herd, which

moves over the half-dark of the prairie like a battalion of ghosts. And his ability to make the

landscape a character in the drama proves his hardwork.

Not surprisingly, Costner is able to obtain dazzling performances out of all his actors. Greene's

Kicking Bird is the movie's still center, its soul, and the actor gives resonance to his character's

anxiety over the coming of the whites he repsents tolerance and patience. By contrast, Grant's Wind

in His Hair is the picture's volatile, impulsive heart; when he rides into Dunbar's camp, brandishing

his spear in a display of brazen fearlessness, you sense the confusion at the sight of this creature that

mixes in with his courageousness. However, the three men have in common a sens of loyalty,

friendship and a set respectful principles that defies culture, time and place. Another character who

is worth the attention is Major Fambrough way I personally saw it, was a sad little king of a sad

little kingdom. He probably envisioned his work to be to bring civilization to the frontier, but the

frontier kept moving west and he got left behind. When he encounters Dunbar, he is confronted

with unbearable truths. His frontier kingdom is an illusion, his power is meaningless, and before

him stands a man on a true path to become a human being. Before him stands a king. Faced with

this, Fambrough's life no longer has meaning. His relationship with the others pschye is his status
of major, chief in other words, he is the parallel of Dunbar the hero who unlike Fambrough was

curious about the frontier despite his large choice of location. The suicide of the major represents

the let go and the role passing for Fambourgh. It was a miracle and an echappatoir for a sad man.

Going back to the Native Americans, when they are, therefore, initially portrayed in the film in

harsh contrast with Dunbar, the audience is, not at all surprisingly, immediately biased against

them. While Dunbar is noble and upright, the Indians are wild and brutal; for example, they murder

Dunbar's wagon driver Timmons in a most violent and cruel way, by hacking him with knives and

arrows. Their actions confirm traditional views of Indians as “bloodthirsty” savages who kill for no

better reason than the fact that Timmons was ignorantly tending an open fire on their territory.

Another case in point is when Dunbar finds Stands With a Fist by the river, cutting herself with a

knife. He immediately tries to help her and gently returns her to the Sioux Indians. The Sioux,

however, respond in a quite different manner; instead of being grateful towards Dunbar, Wind in

His Hair screams at him and fiercely snatches the woman away from him by her hair. As a result,

the audience feels indignation and anger at the Indians, especially for treating its esteemed hero in

such an apparently unjust and unwarranted manner at first.

As the movie progresses, however, the perception of Dunbar and, in turn, the perception of the

audience, towards the Sioux, begins to change. Several episodes reveal how Dunbar and the Indians

gradually begin to grow closer to each other. Firstly, each party ventures to visit the other as we

described above the first encounter, thus, tentatively begins to build a better understanding of his

neighboors. Then, when they are more comfortable together, the two sides begin to extend the hand

of friendship; the Indians give Dunbar a buffalo blanket, while, in return, Dunbar gives the Indians

some of his food supply and their first taste of coffee. As the relationship between Dunbar and the

Sioux becomes much more relaxed, the audience, too, becomes more open-minded and accepting of

the Indians. Granted, Dunbar and the Sioux experience several misunderstandings, such as the scene

where they are trying to communicate the word "buffalo," or when Dunbar is grinding coffee for his
baffled Indian guests. The differences between the two groups no longer cause feelings of animosity

or fear, however, but instead add a pleasant element of comic relief to the film.

Some technical elements of the film contribute to this transition, as well. For example, tense,

ominous music is replaced by more joyful and melodious sounds, causing the audience to feel a

much more relaxed and playful mood. Another major component of the film is its use of symbolism

and parallelism. As the relationship between the Indians and Dunbar develops, the relationship

between Dunbar and the wolf begins to grow as well. Like the Sioux, the wolf is at first perceived

as dangerous and hostile, a beast that Dunbar thinks may attack or harm him at first. As time passes,

however, both parties learn to trust the other, little by little, and they soon develop a strong bond of

loyalty and friendship. Through the symbolism of the wolf, the film teaches the audience that

appearances or stereotypes should not be the sole basis for judgment; for outwardly, although the

wolf appears to be very ferocious and bloodthirsty, in reality, it is actually very gentle and kind-

hearted, just as the Sioux Indians. In fact, further background research into the injustice suffered by

the Sioux, under the hands of the white American armies, would only cause the audience to support

the white massacre all the more. For example, according to the website of the Standing Rock Sioux

Nation, in actual history, the Sioux were forced to relocate several times throughout the Dakota

plains, and when they resisted to a direct violation of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, the US Army

responded by engaging in a long and bloody war with the Native American nation. The scene in

Dances With Wolves, in which the Sioux are impelled to attack a few white soldiers, pales in

comparison to the actual massacre of Wounded Knee in 1890, where 300 Indians were killed and

left to freeze in the snow by the whites.

Nevertheless, perhaps the intent of the film is not so much to vilify the whites in favor of the

Sioux, as it is to simply point out that judgment and stereotypes should not be based upon exterior

appearances alone. In fact, not all the white characters in the movie are bad; Dunbar, of course, is

the obvious example of one who desires to help the Sioux.

 Overall, the film causes the audience to change a traditional, stereotypical view of the Sioux

Indians, but on a broader level, it also challenges the audience to view all people from a more

humanistic point of view.

WORKS CITED

Standing Rock Sioux Nation. Home Page, 31 Mar. 2000. Standing Rock Sioux Nation. 12

Oct.2001. http://www.standingrock.org.