Geronimo: An American Legend (1993) Hill - Film 334

"We're telling the story of Geronimo the fighting man, we're not putting him on a pedestal and saying he never did anything wrong. He was brutal, he did kill women and children. But he was reacting to the way his people were being treated by the U.S. government. He was a stubborn man trying to preserve a way of life." - Wes Studi

Co-stars: Wes Studi as Geronimo, Jason Patric, Gene Hackman, Robert Duvall, and Matt Damon.

Plot: The movie covers Geronimo's last uprising, 1881-1886. At the beginning of the film Geronimo (Wes Studi) is already a living legend, having turned himself in and settled on a reservation. However, when the army kills several Apaches, Geronimo decides to go on the warpath and heads for Mexico. The film covers two expeditions to apprehend Geronimo and his final surrender.

Pros: Geronimo has several things going for it. First, the acting is quite good, especially Studi and Dvuall and of course Hackman is always solid. Second, its beautifully photographed. Its full of beautiful near-desert vistas that dwarf the small groups of men fighting each other. Third, everything looks authentic. Fourth, not only is Geronimo played by a Native American, but all the Apaches are. The Apache language is used with subtitles. Finally, Hill tries to be even-handed, showing everyone as complex characters with different motivations, including Geronimo himself. There are no saints or sinners and the facts are more or less hewed to.

Cons: While evenhandedness is admirable, it makes the film less involving and dramatic. Geronimo may be a legend but he's not a hero either, and its hard to root for him. Nor are the white characters (except for Patric) particularly sympathetic. The film views all the characters from a distance, so the film often seems like a historical docudrama. And since the viewpoint is rather neutral, it was hard to get excited about the battles and the killings. Dramatically, the film probably should have focused more on the Duvall - Patric conflict and given us more sympathetic background on Geronimo.

Of course, that's the problem with filming historical figures like Western outlaws, Indian war chiefs, Vikings, etc. - if you tell the whole truth about them, nobody would root for them, so you get a fanciful retelling of their story or you just have to leave out a lot of things.

Also a minus, the battle scenes themselves were rather repetitive, bland, and surprisingly unrealistic. Far too many scenes of Apaches jumping on the backs of Cavlarymen and pulling them to the ground (try that it in real life!) or Apaches mindlessly charging the enemy firing their six-guns. Hill is no Anthony Mann. Note: I did like the pulling down of the horse and firing a rifle at a charging enemy - that's straight from history.

Finally, the pace lags at times , and Matt Damon's character really adds nothing.

Summary: An above average Western notable for its even handed portrayal of the Apache and the US Calvary. Despite the large number of battles its not a "shoot 'em up" nor is it a good vs. the bad guys. Those interested in history will probably enjoy it more than the average film fan. Rating **1/2

Added Notes:

1) Mexican Bounty on Apache Scalps: The film brings up the historical point that the Mexican Government paid money for Apache scalps. From reading some history, it seems the Mexicans didn't wish to "steal" Apache land, so their solution was to put up with Apache raids and rely on bounty hunters. The Mexican Government eventually gave the US Cavalry permission to pursue Geronimo in Mexican territory.

2) The Incredible Weirdness of the MSM Film Reviews.

After seeing the movie, I read some of the online MSM reviews. For some reason this movie brought out their liberal weirdness. Actual discussion of the MOVIE took a backseat. Instead, reviewers preferred to Gnash their teeth over the Native American "Genocide", preen about their moral superiority, and tell how they cry deep tears (Lo, the poor Indian). at the evil "the white man" (themselves excluded) who exterminated the Indians and "stole" the Indians land. They seemed upset that Geronimo tries to be even handed, when of course, all 'enlightened' (aka Liberals) people know that isn't so. One even calls Indian Reservations "Concentration Camps"! They were confused that Hill doesn't show the US Calvary as pure evil. As expected, Ebert leads the pack in this mindless un-historical nonsense. Per his review:

"Within a few days of each other, I saw "Schindler's List" and "Geronimo," and it occurred to me that both films are about Holocausts, about entire populations murdered because of their race"

Later -oblivious to the contradiction -he writes:

"Geronimo was never defeated, although he surrendered twice and finally died a natural death at 80, a prosperous Oklahoma farmer."