IMDb user comments for
Dances with Wolves (1990)

Werbung

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Spoiler verstecken:

Seite 1 von 27:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Übersicht

268 Nutzerkommentare insgesamt

---

172 out of 239 people found the following comment useful :-
Hard to believe, 27. November 2003

Author: pedrocy2000

It's hard for me to believe this movie is not in the top 250 on IMBD all time list. Without question my favorite movie. We live in a strange world when Pulp Fiction ranks #18, and Dances with Wolves just misses the top 250. Maybe people thought the movie was too long. I thought it was too short if anything. I wish they would have gone on forever. What an incredible story. The way Costner continued to get closer and closer to the Indians way masterfuly done.

---

115 out of 130 people found the following comment useful :-
I love this movie!, 9. November 2004

Author: PhilipJames1980 von Annapolis, Maryland.

It's hard for me to believe that fourteen years have passed since I first saw this movie. I was only ten at the time, and this was the first movie I ever saw that was both an eye-filling and a mind-filling spectacle.

It was also one of only two theater-going experiences that I ever had with my late grandmother, and I always think of her when I watch this movie. It always takes me back to an earlier time in my life no matter how many times I see it.

This is one movie that could only have been made in the post-Vietnam era, when Americans began to question the moral integrity of their country. How else to explain, in the opening sequence depicting the Civil War, the utter cynicism of the soldier who speaks with Costner's Dunbar character? Or Dunbar's later observation that "there was no dark political objective" to the Sioux battling the Pawnee?

The scene in which Dunbar receives his orders from the mentally ill major also seems to speak of Vietnam, the point being I think that while an entire generation of young men was being cut down in the Civil War the West was being managed by those who were not fit for duty in the larger conflict. Maury Chaykin, in that one scene, gives one of the most memorable and haunting performances I've seen in any film.

This movie's depiction of Native Americans is not nearly as politically correct as it may seem to those who watch it only once or only at a superficial level. In the very first scene depicting Indians, in fact, a Pawnee brave shoots one of the white characters full of arrows and then scalps him. The unrepentant villainy of Wes Studi's character, in particular, recalls the moral simplicity of countless earlier Westerns.

Even the most sympathetic Indian character in the movie, Kicking Bird, is not kind to Dunbar merely to be friendly but because he believes he can get useful information out of the white soldier about the other whites who are encroaching on Sioux territory. The interaction between Dunbar and the Sioux is powerfully effective precisely because the Sioux remain true to themselves. They are not cartoonishly hostile like the Indians depicted in old Westerns, but they are not soft or naïve either.

While this movie draws its inspiration from American epics as diverse as The Birth of a Nation (1915) and The Searchers (1956), its originality lies not only in its respect for Native Americans but also in its intensely personal treatment of the main character. Few other three-hour epics (Lawrence of Arabia and Braveheart come to mind ) have developed their protagonists as fully and dynamically as this movie develops Costner's Dunbar character.

Even after fourteen years, the Dunbar character's arc, going from a suicidal soldier in the opening sequence to an adopted Sioux who in the final scenes puts the needs of his people ahead of his own, is still one of the most remarkable I've seen in any movie. Costner's performance won no awards that I know of, but it provides the movie's indispensably tight focus. He's completely convincing every step of the way, if a bit too clumsy and self-effacing at times, hitting his head in the dark and fainting after a confrontation in a heavy-handed attempt to demystify the West.

Another quality this movie shares with The Searchers is that it associates the physical challenges of the frontier with the testing of the soul. The Dunbar character cleans out the watering hole at the fort because he refuses to lose his humanity like the men before him who abandoned the fort. Later he cannot decide whether he feel more or less at home in the presence of the Sioux, because he is struggling to remain true to himself even as he remains unsure of who he is.

This movie probably disappoints viewers who are looking for sheer entertainment. It's a quiet, thoughtful story, and although there is action in it the focus is on how the action transforms the characters (particularly Dunbar) rather than on the action itself. You won't see any computer-generated comic-book characters in this movie, but you will see real people having real conversations, and you'll see Costner and costar Mary McDonnell engaging in such intimate and convincing love scenes that you'll forget they're acting!

If I could rate the musical score for this movie by itself I'd give it a perfect 10, because it's one of the best I've ever heard, able to stand on its own but fitting the movie like a glove. It is sentimental without being schmaltzy, noble without being pretentious. Best of all, it captures the hesitant emotions of the story, the sense of curiosity overcoming fear and becoming trust.

Only this movie's extreme length works against its total success, particularly in the special edition that runs nearly four hours. The three-hour theatrical version is still long, but it's difficult to say what should have been left out of it.

Some people still resent the fact that Costner won the Best Director Oscar over Scorcese's Goodfellas. There's no question that Scorcese is the better director, but I believe the direction of Dances With Wolves is better than that of Goodfellas. If you disagree with me try this test: imagine that Scorcese did this movie, and Costner directed Goodfellas. It's a question of which directing job is better, not which director is better.

Unlike most epics, this movie ends exactly as it should. The final images, such as the journal floating down the river, the white man and the Native American speaking English to each other, and the brave shouting his farewell from the top of a cliff, are so beautiful and dreamlike that they manage to be both joyful and sad. This is a movie that looks into the very fabric of this country's past, and asks us to do the same.

Rating: 10 (Good job, everybody.)

---

121 out of 142 people found the following comment useful :-
One of the great ones, 27. August 2003

Author: (reporterman2000@yahoo.com) von Texas

People who say this movie is long and boring have obviously never sat through, oh, "Lawrence of Arabia," "Patton," "Doctor Zhivago," "The Godfather," "Ran," "Seven Samurai," or probably even "Braveheart." Thank God that not every filmmaker believes that a car must explode every 10 seconds in order for his movie to be a success. Kevin Costner is one of those directors who prefers the long format. David Lean, Francis Coppola and Mel Gibson, to name a very few, also worked in that format, and produced lasting works of art that also packed theaters. There are plenty of options for people who don't like movies that take the time to build character, drama and suspense, movies like "Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle," "Freddy Vs. Jason," and "Weekend at Bernie's." I don't think any of those movies has ever been called "boring," but they sure are crap cinema.

Onward. "Dances With Wolves" thrilled audiences way back in 1990 and made so darn much money precisely because people had forgotten the pleasures of the long narrative, the Western genre, and movies that weren't special effects schlock-fests. It remains an inspiring and moving experience, especially on DVD, which preserves the movie's theatrical sound and picture quality.

Costner's direction is first-rate. He's able to blend intimate drama with big, sprawling action that covers a huge canvas. I'm amazed at how smoothly the film segues from movement to movement -- action, alienation, suspense, social commentary, romance. Heck, Spielberg could take a lesson or two from this movie.

He also gets great performances out of his cast. I don't think of these people as actors, but as the characters they play. That's a compliment not just to the actors themselves, but their director. And, yes, Costner is terrific as John Dunbar.

Sure, it's easy to call "Dances" politically correct w/ reference to the Indians. But it also treats them as people and, better yet, as fictional characters whose lives are made part of a fascinating narrative. I just consider all the complaints about the politics of this movie as total hogwash.

Finally, the movie is beautifully shot, has an unforgettable score, and is very well-written. I've never thought of "Dances" as a Western, but a modern action picture/character study that avoids all the boring cliches of the Western genre. Here is a movie that stands for something, means something, and deserves at least as much respect as some of the overrated dreck we've gotten saddled with lately.

---

151 out of 209 people found the following comment useful :-
Not in top 250?, 16. Januar 2004

Author: weilbody von United States

What the heck are people thinking! There are way too many Costner bashers on the internet. This was a revolutionary motion picture at its time, never has a story about the American indians ever been told with such emotion and grace. What a sham. For the record Costner is not that bad of an actor.

9/10

---

52 out of 67 people found the following comment useful :-
Spectacular epic and one of the greatest 90's movie classics, 19. November 2003

Author: Mika Pykäläaho (bygis80@hotmail.com) von Järvenpää, Finland

This is the type of a film that's never boring no matter how often you watch it. It deserved every single award it got. It's touching, it's timeless and it's downright beautiful. I'm not a huge friend of extended versions because there's usually a perfectly good reason to take something out of the film and none whatsoever to put it back again, if pleasing hardcore fans isn't a good reason - that's totally a matter of opinion. However, "Dances with wolves" is certainly an exception.

The nearly four hour version is the only one to be. Sure it sounds like it's too much but when you watch the movie it doesn't look a minute overlong and cutting even a second out of it would seem like a horrible crime. The original theater version was 52 minutes shorter which sound too cruel to be true. I mean really, what's there to cut? If you haven't seen "Dances with wolves" yet you have missed one of the greatest motion picture experiences of the 90's and you should do something about it instantly.

---

60 out of 91 people found the following comment useful :-
One of the 15 best Movies of all Time, 2. Juli 2003

Author: mrbluto (studio4940@verizon.net) von United States

Dances with Wolves is a great movie, make no mistake about that, Kevin Costner had lighting in a bottle. Costner has not come close to movie success since wolves. The cast is excellent, Kicking Bird, Stands with Fist, Wind in his Hair and my quiet favorite smiles a lot, smiles a Lot had trouble with growing up and becoming a brave, until it is forced on him, his mood after he has killed the first time is priceless. Some people say Dances with Wolves was an anti white movie, that is total bull, it tells the true story the way few movies have of the cruelty of the white people. People don't want to admit this movie is a true telling of the way white people treat other races and nature. It is a hard movie to digest.It is a hard movie to admit the truth. The other thought is a lot of movie fans want car chases and explosions. If a movie is thoughtful, it is labeled boring. Dances is one of the top 15 movies of all time. 9 out of 10 stars. Dances with wolves I am wind in his hair Do you see that I am your friend? Can you see that you will always be my friend?

---

41 out of 57 people found the following comment useful :-
magnificent, 26. August 2003

Author: Chewbaccy (dominicholder@hotmail.com) von Nottingham, England

I like to watch lots of films, pretty much any film in fact, therefore I can tell you i have seen a fair few duds. I have also seen some spectacularly brilliant films. Dances With Wolves is one of them. For me to have the patience to watch a film more than a couple of times then the film needs to make me want to watch it over and over. Let me tell you I have seen this film more than a few times. I think you know when a film is special to you when you watch it and you keep thinking to yourself "oh this scene coming up is great", if you can say that continually whilst watching a film then you know you are watching a great film.

As for the film itself, cinematography has never been bettered, Costners acting is OK but it his presence rather than his acting that has brought gravitas to his movies, you certainly cant argue with his directing, which along with Orson Wells, Tarantino and a few select others must rank alongside as one of the best directorial debuts. The supporting cast is excellent especially Graeme Greene who is the wonderful Kicking Bird and of course Rodney A Grant.

I shamefully dont know too much about the history of the Indian population in America, so I dont know whether the events or portrayals in the film are accurate, however artistic license is surely allowed when making what is first and foremost a piece of entertainment. Being British I have seen many an American film with British stereotypes, not once have I been offended or appalled, as I see them as interpretations, God knows British filmmakers are just as guilty of such generalisations when it comes to "foreign" characters.

Marvel at the wonderful film-making in this film not political inaccuracies after all this is a story, and a damn fine one at that, remember King Kong didnt really climb up the Empire State Building and you dont here gorillas complaining about being misrepresented. This is a point of view expressed in a great film.

Personally films dont get much better than this.

---

47 out of 72 people found the following comment useful :-
Best Native American Film Ever Made, 5. Dezember 2003

Author: dana_jensen533 von Shoreline, WA

This film is certainly one of the finest films out of Hollywood in recent years. It accuratly shows how "The White People" ran roughshod over the native americans and eventually took everything they had (their land, buffalo, etc.). The end of the film is heartbreaking where it says on screen that the Indians and the Horse culture were "passed into history." I suggest every history teacher show this film in their classes so future generations can see what a proud race of people the native americans are, and what we did to them.

---

38 out of 56 people found the following comment useful :-
Lt. Dunbar's worst fears have come true., 8. Juli 2003

Author: TOMASBBloodhound von Lincoln, NE USA

This film is a sweeping epic that you'll never forget whether you liked it or not. It tells the tale of love, loyalty, friendship, and self-realization in a magnificent setting among a great people, and during a time of strife. This film put Kevin Costner on the map as a Hollywood star. He could use a hit like this one right about now.

The first thing a viewer is struck by is the amazing landscape of western South Dakota. If any of you have never been out that way, do your self a favor and check it out. It will blow you away. The musical score is also very beautiful. The Indians look so authentic that they almost blend into the scenery even as we get to know them as individuals. It's hard to imagine that Plains Indian culture could have been depicted more realistically.

The story deals with Lt. John Dunbar (Costner), a disillusioned Civil War vet who asks to be transferred to a western post so he can see the west "before it's gone". He is then sent to a deserted fort where he finds himself in the precarious position of being the only white man in a land of Indians who seem intent on stealing his horse. He decides to try to get to know the local Sioux tribe and eventually becomes one of them. In finding a place in their society, he finds himself, so to speak.

Dances With Wolves is a very good film. I think it belongs in the top 250 to be sure. It is a little slow at times, but so what? A lot of great films are. Other than Dunbar, there are really no positive white characters. This is understandable considering the subject matter, but the barbarism of some of the soldiers seemed a little over the top. Other than that, no real gripes.

For me, the most memorable scene was when Dunbar and Kicking Bird were discussing the number of whites who would be coming into the territory.

Dunbar: You've often wondered about how many white people will be coming. There will be a

lot, my friend.

Kicking Bird: (in English) How many?

Dunbar: Like the stars. It makes me afraid for all of the Sioux.

Unfortunately, this fear has come true. All one has to do is drive out to White Clay, Neb. and see them sitting there. Along the street. Drunk by mid morning. The descendants of people like Kicking Bird and Wind in His Hair. These men would have been out hunting buffalo or battling with their enemies 150 years ago. Now, there is nothing for them to do. They have two choices: Stay on the reservation and live out a life in poverty while keeping their traditions alive, or try to make it in the cities and cast off their traditional ways. A tough choice to be sure. Watch the movie Thunderheart to get an idea of what these reservations are like. It's not a pretty picture.

The destruction of Indian Culture was not the goal of the United States. It is merely a CONSEQUENCE of the idea of Manifest Destiny. The Sioux are a magnificent people. What has happened to them could be summed up in one word: tragic.

10 of 10 stars

So sayeth the Hound.

---

15 out of 19 people found the following comment useful :-
A not-so-average Western that still does the trick after so many years, 2. Februar 2005

Author: Philip Van der Veken von Tessenderlo, Belgium

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

"Dances with Wolves" is hated by quite a lot of people. Is it perhaps because the Indians aren't depicted as the bad guys for once or is it because this isn't the usual Western in which you'll not find a justification for the slaughtering of the Indians? Is it because it is very long or is it because Kevin Costner is in it? I don't know, but I do know it is very cool to dislike everything he has done, but I'm not following the masses. I can still think for myself and I must say that, even though the man has done some bad projects (for instance "Waterworld"), this movie is absolutely one of his best.

The movie starts with showing us a wounded Lieutenant John Dunbarr (Kevin Costner) who is about to have his leg amputated. Because he wants to keep it, he decides to flee and go back to his troops. Than he does something stupid. He takes a horse and starts running in front of the rebel front line, but doesn't get hit once. His troops, overwhelmed by so much 'bravery' all jump up and start fighting again and eventually win the battle. Because a general has seen what happened, Dunbarr gets the honor of having his wounds being treated by the general's surgeon, who saves his leg. Now that he feels better again, he asks to be send to a remote outpost in the West. Arriving there, he finds himself in the middle of the wilderness, all alone and surrounded by hostile Sioux. His only companion is his horse and an old wolf that he calls Two-socks. Gradually he gets accepted by the tribe, where he is known as "Dances with Wolves" and falls in love with "Stands With a Fist", a white woman who had been adopted as a young girl and was raised by the tribe. But while he is living with the Indians, the West is very fast being conquered and one day he finds new troops in his camp and even though he is an American soldier, he is seen as a traitor.

I've always had a weak spot for the not-so-average Western, so when this movie first came out I was already a fan. Now, so many years after it was first shown, this is still one of the best Westerns ever. I like the fact that it shows the Indians not as savages, but as normal, loving people who only defended what was rightfully theirs. I like the fact that the movie isn't sugar sweet, but shows every detail very realistically. I even like the fact that the soldiers are seen as the bad guys for once. Add to this some very good acting and directing and an interesting story and you know you've got something special. This is a very good movie that should be seen by everybody. I give it an 8/10.

---

---

Seite 1 von 27:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Weitere Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com Video	Nutzerbewertungen
Filmpreise	Newsgroup reviews	Externe Kritiken
Parents Guide	Offizielle Website	Plot keywords
Hauptübersicht	Your user comments	Your vote history