I am a fan of genres of film and an avoider of others. I could care less about the latest Jurassic Park or Marvel movies for example. I don’t go to movies about soccer or car racing. I love the James Bond movies and other films in that genre, and I’m nuts for westerns. That’s why I was so excited to see Costner’s magnum opus, coming out in four parts, called “Horizon: An American Saga”.
The movie has a long running time, in the neighborhood of three hours, but it didn’t seem long to me. The movie has been criticized as “jumbled and confusing”. I suppose if one made frequent trips to the restroom or the concession stand, continuity might be a problem. There are several story lines which a mature, observant audience member will have no trouble following.
I’ve got a Bachelor of Science degree in History, a Masters’ degree in Social Studies Education, another Masters’ degree in History, have read widely on the subject and taught history at both the high school and college level for over three decades. I base my review on having seen the film and my knowledge of history.
First, there is the “town” of Horizon itself. In this, the first installment of the story, it is more of a tent city than anything else. People are enticed with flyers promoting the site, written by a promoter who clearly has never been to “Horizon” himself. This is an historically accurate depiction of hucksterism in the Old West. For example, Langsford Hastings published a “shortcut” to California through the Sierra Nevada mountains that supposedly would cut 400 miles off a pioneer’s trip west. The Donner Party took him up on it. They faced a cruel winter trapped in the mountains and resorted to cannibalism to survive. Hastings had never taken the “shortcut” himself and didn’t actually know if there really was one. The flyers promoting the town of Horizon in the movie are spot on historically, as well as the consequences that settlers face trying to establish the town.
Second, Costner has taken heat for depicting some Native-Americans as murderously ruthless in their attempts to dislodge the settlers at Horizon. This too is accurate historically. As whites moved west, there was a debate among Native-American tribes as to how to react. When whites simply passed by without disruption of Native life or buffalo herds, perhaps an occasional effort to trade with the white passersby or a sortie to steal horses was mounted but not much else. However, when whites stopped and settled on Native lands or disrupted buffalo or other game sources then Native-Americans sprang into action out of self-defense of their territory and way of life.
Costner depicts that dynamic within one tribe. The older generation says metaphorically, “Don’t whack the hive and bring the wrath of the countless, teeming masses of whites down on us.” The younger generation of Native-Americans says basically, “If not now, when?” The younger generation’s argument is to make settlement of their territory so unpleasant for whites that they move on and leave the Natives alone. That tension is played out in the first installment of Horizon.
Also depicted accurately is the white man’s thirst for revenge for Native-American “atrocities” as well as the whites’ difficulty in finding the offending Indians or in fact locating any indigenous people at all. That leads to frustration and atrocities committed by whites as well. Again, Costner is spot on in an agonizing and accurate way.
Third, a wagon train is introduced near the end of the first film with Luke Wilson as the wagon master. The troubles, tribulations and tensions of traveling west with a mixture of tenderfoots and misfits is explored, again accurately. At the end of the film, it is clear that an explosive situation is building within the wagon train as well as potential threats from those Native peoples less than pleased at this white intrusion.
There are three love stories intertwined in the film. One is an English couple seeking a new life in the West as part of the wagon train. There is a widow who is finding new love with a cavalry officer. Then there is a love story with Kevin Costner and a lady of the evening who “inherits” a toddler as a result of an earlier “love story” that doesn’t quite work out the way one thinks it will. Clearly, this will be revisited in the next installments.
The costumes, weapons, wagons and other accoutrements of the Old West are flawlessly accurate. About the only thing that isn’t accurate about the cast and their outfitting is they are all universally attractive and entirely too clean for the period and the climate. It is a minor quibble. It is a movie after all.
The scenery is breathtaking. The camera shots are panoramic and artful. The movie is beautiful to look at and well-acted. The Natives are portrayed as people, their motives are genuine and their conflicts real. The settlers are clueless, why can’t we live together – the land is vast, room for all etc., seems to be their question and attitude. A few seasoned grizzled white westerners, like Costner and Wilson as well as Sam Worthington who plays the world weary cavalry lieutenant, are clued into what’s what but the rest of the cast learns lessons that are obvious to us now but are entertaining, moving, gripping and occasionally difficult to watch on screen.
I loved Horizon. I can’t wait for the next installments. I’m concerned that we’ll never get – as Paul Harvey used to say – “the rest of the story”. That’s because this first installment cost $100 million to make and market but, so far, has made only $25 million at the box office. It’s a good movie, worth your time and money. The sights and vistas are magnificent and should be seen on the majesty of the big screen.