Der Mann, den sie Pferd nannten

at the beginning of this movie,there is a blurb about how the events portrayed are taken directly from historical documents of the period.the South Dakota Sioux Indians also had a lot of input into the movie.so,we can assume it is fairly accurate.one thing it does is show the Native American Indians as being just like any other people.this movie took awhile to get going,in my mind,but once it does,it's action packed,and it's very well acted.Richard Harris is the title character.he is a British Lord who is captured by the Sioux in the mid 1800's.first he is treated with disdain,as nothing more than a servant to the aging mother of the chief.gradually,though,things change,though,and he becomes much more.this is a very touching and heart breaking movie.it's also very thought provoking.overall,i give A Man Called Horse a 6/10

A MAN CALLED HORSE (4 outta 5 stars)

Classic western epic stars Richard Harris as an English nobleman on holiday in the American wilderness who gets taken captive by a band of American Indians. He is brutally treated at first but his captors come to accept him as one of the tribe as he gains more knowledge of their different way of life... where one needs to earn his/her place in the hierarchy... unlike British aristocracy. Harrowingly violent scenes may make this film tough to watch for some... but Harris gives one of his usual great performances and the movie provides an atypically (for its time) sympathetic depiction of the Native American people. Much more realistic but just as sincere as that other 70s classic "Little Big Man."

I have to laugh sometimes when I read otherwise sane comments from amateur reviewers. This film has fairly awkward productions values compared to the present, also many of the actors playing native people are very much NOT native. That aside, this is a BREAKTHROUGH movie for Hollywood circa 1970. This movie is not similiar to Dances With Wolves-it's effectively the other way around. I find it strange so many people make that comment. This movie predates the other by more than THIRTY YEARS!!! Anyway ackward production values aside the presentation of the Lakota is far from the touchy feely view Costner presented,we see the brutal side of their way of doing things also, which is as factual as what we see today just not very PC. This is a great period classic,well worth watching.

This movie offered a different perspective of the Sioux, and although controversial, it is worth a view. Director Elliot Silverstein doesn't glamorize the Indians and he doesn't make them victims of white injustice. He just tells it like it is, and I have to admire him for it. Many activists protested what they believed to be inaccuracies; nonetheless, the film is the other side of "Dances With Wolves" (really, it's more like "Run of the Arrow"). For an in-depth interview with Silverstein and the making of "A Man Called Horse," read "Making the White Man's Indian: Native Americns and Hollywood Movies." It's a great behind-the-scenes read of this and other popular Western pictures.

I first saw this film in the theatre when it came out in 1970. It was a welcome departure from earlier films about pioneers sitting among their circled wagons shooting whooping Indians like ducks in an arcade.

I saw it last weekend for the first time since, and I think that it holds up well. Whatever the flaws, it is a reasonably good depiction of Dakota Sioux going about their business in the 1820s.

This movie demonstrates that a story can be told with very little dialog and a lot of non-verbal expression. Harris might be the most prominent character but, cumulatively, the cast of small characters weighs in just as heavy.