Saturday, February 6, 2010
Wounded Knee
I really enjoyed the film. I loved how it looked, the found footage was amazing. I wonder how they got such good footage, the Natives probably realized that this was history they were making and that recording it was a very valuable thing to do. The only thing that bothered me was how the end became a triumph. The Natives did not get what they wanted, and ended up paying the price. Perhaps it was worth it though. Sometimes it's better to fight and lose than not to fight at all. An act of defiance reveals that the status quo is not alright and that pushing envolope will only cause problems. Is this one of those situations? I'm not so sure. The natives did gain publicity, but it was much less than it could have been because of watergate. It was violent, and people did die. It did however, establish enough publicity to create classes like this one. There is a lot more questions I would need to ask before I can properly decide if this was successful. Need to find out how the status quo changed because of this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I actually felt the same way at the end of the film. It was like they just skimmed over the fact that they did not achieve what they set out to achieve. I think the filmmakers could have easily portrayed the governments actions at the end of the film as just another unjust treatment towards the American Indian and in that way gained support.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up an excellent point about how we know if a movement is a success. I wonder if there is even a politics to how we think about a movement. If we continue to think of Native people as victims then does that actually create a continued narrative of oppression? Does framing an ending as positive actually make a statement about survival?
ReplyDelete