7/10
Watch first, read comments next is a good policy.
4 February 2005
"An unfortunate lousy attempt at portraying Geronimo" was the featured review. YET, the reviewer, admittedly was NOT Apache, NOT Cheracowa, NOT even an American and obviously was NOT there in person and has NO MORE STANDING to make this sort of comment AND be believed than, say, a Sudanese dentist in Des Moines would, per se.

Folks, history is tricky. We weren't there. We CAN study REAL accounts, judge etc. BUT simply stating a movie is an unfortunate lousy attempt, etc. seems silly to me.

Yes, the subject matter still hurts many Americans. Yes, some American indigenous OF the the Cheracowa group, should any direct descendants be alive, might know things no one else KNOWS, but who else actually does? Entertainment's first duty IS to entertain. IF this can be done accurately, do any of you think the studios don't have the resources to do a LOT more research than most of us? Even the actors often do their homework.

Anyway, I liked the film, photography, star's, viewpoints etc. I never comment on spoilers or even the point of a film since this itself is pointless and potentially spoiling. IT was a grand scale Western, updated, likely researched well and well worth watching.

My personal preference IN watching a film is to follow actors. My joy in watching them is finding new actors OR new depths in one's I have seen before. Wes Studi, Geronimo, was one of the latter.

Robin,
14 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed