Bury My Heart bungled it
Tim Giago: Hollywood dashes hopes of 'Wounded Knee'The nominations the television special received that are usually considered strategic are for Directing, Yves Simoneau, Supporting Actor, August Schellenburg for his portrayal of Sitting Bull, and Supporting Actress, Anna Paquin, the non-Indian woman who played the role of Elaine Goodale Eastman, the wife of Dr. Charles Eastman. Neither Dr. Eastman nor Ms. Goodale was in the Dee Brown book, but they were added later to bring a love affair to the movie.
And therein lies the tragedy that is known as Hollywood. It is pre-determined that in order for a movie to be successful it must have a love affair no matter how contrived. In the case of “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” the love affair was a waste of valuable time and a distraction from the tragedy that prompted Dee Brown to write the book in the first place. By creating the affair out of whole cloth for this movie, the producers severely damaged its relevance in the eyes of so many Native Americans.
10 comments:
Writerfella here --
What always will be forgotten, or perhaps even conveniently overlooked, is that a book as a narrative and a film as a narrative are two entirely separate creative matters. writerfella, long a writer of teleplays and screenplays, know this all too well. Scripted narratives, and thus the films made from them, obey fairly stringent rules as to the lengths of scenes and acts, dramatic license, character development, progression, and many other structural forms. Dee Brown's book was NOT a documentary, and neither was the film BASED ON that book. Certainly Dee Brown neither was alive nor present to hear what the historical figures said during their historical events. But no one seems to call Dee Brown on the carpet for giving his characters conceptual dialog and speeches other than those that historically were preserved. Thus it is with the filmic narrative, that if human content is missing from the original narrative, it must be created to allow the script and the film story to follow the creative rules of structure, most especially if the film is character-driven rather than plot-driven. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST, per exemplum, was a character-driven film, whereas STAR WARS or even TRANSFORMERS are plot-driven films. Tim Giago writes fairly well, but writerfella sincerely would like to see Tim try to write HIS OWN SCREENPLAY of "Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee." Dollars to doughnuts, Tim would be sitting at his word processor, looking at a blank screen for a long, long time on a reservation far, far away...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
I don't think Dee Brown's book had a lot of dialog, invented or otherwise. It was pretty much a straight nonfiction narrative.
I wouldn't want to try to write a screenplay for Bury My Heart. Why not? Because it wasn't meant to be turned into fiction.
Similarly, I wouldn't try to turn a user manual or an encyclopedia into a screenplay, either. If I did, I'd expect to get criticized for it. Why? Because it's unlikely I (or anyone) could make a dry piece of nonfiction into a compelling drama.
Writerfella here --
That to which you and even Tim Giago never will become accustomed is that others who know more than the either of you will dare to disagree with or even to ignore your personal, precious points of view. One can become an 'expert' through study and research, but nothing equals the knowledge and/or experience of actually doing the things that other people only can study and research. It is not logical, but it most often is true...
writerfella is waiting for the yelps that will come from both camps when BURY MY HEART AT WOUNDED KNEE wins HBO and Wolf Films more than just a couple of Emmy Awards.
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Only you would take my admission that I can't do something and turn it into an attack on me.
If people disagree with me and think they can turn a user manual or an encyclopedia into a screenplay, by all means let them try. I'll be happy to critique the results.
As you may have noticed, I support my opinions with facts and evidence. If you and others did the same, you wouldn't lose so many debates to me.
Giago's main point was that Bury My Heart didn't need a romance to succeed. Do you disagree?
If you think movies do need romances to succeed, go watch Citizen Kane, Schindler's List, To Kill a Mockingbird, or The Bridge on the River Kwai. Then revise your ignorant opinion.
Writerfellahere --
If you truly believe that CITIZEN KANE did not contain a romance, then you have not watched the version that writerfella has watched on Turner Classic Movies several times. Kane and his wife romanced in their own various fashions right in front of our eyes. And when Kane dies, "Rosebud" is revealed as the real and original romance that the character ever knew.
What you do not understand is that EVERY movie you ever have seen obeys the rules that writerfella expressed in the above. Else, they never would have been made as films. How can one critique a subject that one fully does not understand? What has happened here is that you have judged your own life's experience without ever once having looked into a mirror...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Writerfella here --
As for the rest of the films you listed, again you have missed their point of existence. In SCHINDLER'S LIST, the man romanced business and survival as a businessman, then he romanced the people who made his business function, then he romanced that his business must survive, and finally he romanced his employees as people. The scene where Liam Neeson deserves his Academy nomination is when he realizes that the diamond stickpin he wears could have been traded to save even more people than he has.
In TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD, that man's romance is with his career and with the proof of his first romance, his children. No person who is a hero ever has recoiled from putting the things he holds most dear in danger just because of his life principles.
And I love the mention of THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, simply because there are so many social aspects under examination, both in the original novel and in the film. It depicts two of the most civilized and polite nations on earth at war. The conflict between the prison commandant and the prisoner commandant is brilliant, both in novel and in film. The roamnce lies in that both characters find themselves seeking the same end result based on their cultures, and finally they are in agreement. The film ends with an ambiguous moment that destroys the bridge they had established with one another.
My opinion is ignorant? Sorry, but you missed it BY THAT MUCH!
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Giago and I were both talking about romance with a woman, not your various caricatures of the word "romance." Sorry if you misunderstood what would've been obvious to a kindergartner.
So you think Giago and I don't understand that a movie's protagonist has to desire something to drive the story? If nothing else, you're ignorant about what I know.
In Bury My Heart, the Eastman character was motivated by wanting to help his people. That was all the "romance" he needed. He didn't need a secondary motivation--finding a helpmate--to spur his action.
So you're still wrong. Like the films I listed, Bury My Heart didn't require an embroidered love interest to work. It would've worked fine without one.
Writerfella here --
So you say. But you are in the business of judging the temple AFTER the temple was built. You did not do any of the planning, you did not do any of the labor, and yoo will get none of the accolades when the work is judged by the peers of the creators. Yet, somehow you are in the mix as though what you have to say has significance to a matter in which you had no meaningful participation, except as a consumer. True, a dish in a restaurant may have more salt than you like, but the dish doesn't change just because you complained. What you miss is that it all is a matter of taste, period, and thus anything you have to say is ephemeral, completely, and as important.
Where's writerfella's T-shirt that says, "I Boldly Went Where You Can't..."?
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Re "But you are in the business of judging the temple AFTER the temple was built": No, I'm in the business of creating fiction as well as consuming and enjoying it (or not). Just like you.
As I explained before, it's not necessary for a critic to be a great painter or chef before judging a painting or a meal. But I have written fiction, so I know what makes good fiction from a writer's as well as a reader's standpoint.
There wasn't any love interest in your "Rite of Encounter" or "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth." So even you realize that romance (with a woman) isn't necessary, although you ignorantly criticized me on the point. Next time, think before you speak so I won't have to chastise you for your foolishness.
Post a Comment