Taza, Son of Cochise 3D Blu-ray (1954) [Region A Locked]

[Joe D.]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

It's more complicated than that Joe. The arrival of native tribes on the American continent
was an earlier manifest destiny, and the supremacy of the Apaches in the southwest was
yet another manifest destiny. The history is infinitely more complicated than any single
film can address in two hours. For example the Apaches made war against other tribes
long before Spanish missionaries arrived and Anglos followed. By the time the Spanish
missionaries got here the Apaches were a warrior race, savage, barbarous and cruel, as
well as other things. Most historians believe the Apaches wiped out the Hopi civilization,
for example, although it's so long ago no one knows for certain. So there was a lot of
blood on the saddle before Cochise tried to make peace, and there would continue to be
until Geronimo was removed. Today the Apaches operate gambling casinos on their land
shaking millions out of addictive white people.

Taza Son of Cochise treats the tribe's conflict with a fair hand, but don't expect too much,
Joe. I caution you not to set your expectations too high. Universal set out to make an
entertainment not fight the Apache wars all over again. Taza Son of Cochise is a superior
western on every level. One can enjoy it on that basis alone. Pictorially and in terms of
content, Douglas Sirk fashioned a Rolls Royce as opposed to, say, a flatbed Ford.

Sirk is one of my favorite directors. I love his work. Every Sirk film that arrives on
blu-ray is an occasion, and they're not coming fast enough (damn Universal). I wish he
had made more westerns, because he's better at it than almost everybody else. At the
very least his only western is competitive with Ford, Mann, Daves, and Sturges. I never
understood his preoccupation with Rock Hudson in every film. The sight of Hudson
wearing feathers might be too much for some people, but the story is so well-told, the
performances so resolute, and the pictorial values so exceptional that Hudson can be
overlooked.

Many westerns from silents to the 1950s were sympathetic to the native tribes before
revisionism arrived. If film historians knew more early westerns they would have to
revise their views on revisionism.

Hi Richard,

Though a long time ago, I received a B.A. in History. Won't deny, memory fades as we get older and pay less attention to continuing our educational indulgence.

You are absolutely correct. Before European and Spaniards arrived on their shores, many Native American nation's fought battles against each other. War was not limited to Europe, Asia or Africa so to portray a general image of native Americans being wiser and more benevolent is a myth. Some of their society's were very brutal in nature as you pointed out.

But they were overwhelmed by our industrial strength and robbed of their culture and way of life, forced to give up their lands and live on reservations which did not have the resources to hunt and be self sufficient while forced to assimilate into Western culture. When treaties were agreed upon, they lasted until the need to use their land for resources and expansion brought on by the railroad and towns emerging along route. Buffalo, which was a mainstay of their food supply, were killed for their skins and left to rot. That is our legacy.

As far as Hollywood is concerned, there were some excellent silent films depicting the plight of these first Nations (the Canadian term) including The Vanishing American and Red Skin. And I'm glad to see a recognition and respect for their culture, admiration for achievements like diverse cliff dwelling communities, how they were able to survive under brutal wintery conditions, often being nomadic.

Sure, many Apaches are making a fortune with the casinos. In New Mexico it seemed there was one every hundred yards. But Las Vegas and Atlantic City shake money out of addictive white people as well.