Buffalo Bill

I enjoyed watching the film "Buffalo Bill." Unfortunately close blood relations of Buffalo Bill were still living at that time, and they should have made an effort not to make errors.

Louisa Frederici met Cody in Saint Louis, and served out the end of the war there planning on making her his bride. They were married in her father's home (John Frederici) on South 8th Street in Saint Louis. They left right away for a steamboat to Kansas. Her father did not go along, and was NOT a Senator.

It is a fine film, and entertaining. When Bill Cody returned to the West in 1866 he was married! There was no Linda Darnell's character. Just once I would like for Hollywood to do an exact biography without changing the facts!

I am a Frederici descendant. Terry Alan Klasek Saint Louis, Missouri

While as Biography, "Buffalo Bill" is probably as accurate as the depiction of Custer in "They Died With Their boots On", it is still excellent film making and a fine vehicle for stalwart Joel McCrea, who, despite performances in excellent non-westerns such as "Sullivan's Travels" and "Foreign Correspondent" was known primarily as a Cowboy Star.

I would also hold this film up as another example, along with John Ford's Cavalry Trilogy, of a film which depicted Native Americans as a noble race, victimized by the march of western civilization, long before the advent of films such as "Little Big Man" or "Dances With Wolves" The White Man is clearly the villain in this and the Ford films. Early on, Cody admonishes a Government representative, telling him that Yellow hand (Anthony Quinn, who also plays Crazy Horse in "They Died With Their boots On") is a Prince of his people, and should be treated as such.

Plus, if the reunion at the shooting gallery and the Wild West Show farewell scenes don't put a lump in your throat, better check your pulse.

"Buffalo Bill" (1944) is a a fictionalized biopic of the life of "Buffalo Bill" Cody (Joel McCrea) who worked as a scout for the US Army and later traveled East, establishing his Wild West show and becoming an international sensation.

Director William Wellman and a writer worked for months on a script that told the true story of Buffalo Bill, including that he was a drunk, a charlatan and an unfaithful husband, but -- ultimately -- they said they couldn't destroy the legend, so they destroyed their screenplay and hired writers to write the myth.

This explains people's criticism of this classic Western, but if you can accept that it's more myth than fact it's quite entertaining, especially considering the time it came out. Several things surprised me about this movie. For one, it clearly takes a pro-Indian stance and this was a full two decades before it become "hip" to do so. Secondly, the depiction of the Indians is good and they used real Natives as peripheral characters. Although Anthony Quinn plays Yellow Hand, he looks convincing, probably because he had Native blood.

The Cheyenne and Sioux are portrayed in a noble manner as people protecting their way of life from the Europeans who don't keep their word and slaughter the buffalo en masse for no logical reason. There's a stunning scene when the Natives confront the cavalry and Yellow Hand stands up to Buffalo Bill. After the battle, Bill holds the body of an Indian woman he knew (Linda Darnell) and someone asks, "A friend of yours?" Bill sadly responds, "They were all my friends."

Interestingly, a black boy is shown in one of the carnival scenes and even has a line, which is notable considering this was a full two decades before the Civil Rights movement.

Some facts: The character of Yellow Hand was taken from the real-life Cheyenne chief Yellow Hair whom Cody shot, stabbed and scalped after Little Big Horn. As already noted, the movie is a whitewash and omits the fact that Cody sued his wife, Louisa Frederici (Maureen O'Hara), for divorce in 1905. They had four kids, but two died when they were young.

Some criticize the way Bill stands at attention while prince Yellow Hand walks in half-naked wherein Bill lifts his hand and says "How." My Response: Didn't the Europeans (sometimes) talk with half-naked Natives when they met, which was fitting since it was the heat of the summer? So what's the problem with depicting this in the film? And wasn't "Howgh" an actual greeting with some tribes? It was. "Hau" was a greeting of the Lakota/Dakota Sioux, which is one of the two tribes depicted in the film; in fact, this greeting is still used by Sioux people today. Other tribes had similar words for greetings. As such, what's wrong with depicting this in the film, particularly since the actors pulled it off? Besides, at that time in the early 40s it hadn't become the stereotypical cliché that it later became.

Bottom Line: Yes, there's some roll-your-eyes myth-making in "Buffalo Bill" (like the kid with crutches at the end), but the story maintains your attention and there's a lot of rollicking entertainment, especially the exciting Cavalry vs. Indians segments. Beyond that, McCrea and Quinn are great, the locations are spectacular, the women are beautiful and the Natives are presented in a respectable and believable way, particularly considering the picture was made in the early 40s.

The film runs 89 minutes and was shot in Utah, Arizona and Montana.

GRADE: B+

ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY: "Buffalo Bill" was one of the first pro-Native Westerns, which came into vogue by the 60s/70s. This is a good thing because it's important to see the other side of the Indian Wars, but let's not whitewash history. The Black Hills were first inhabited by the Arikara tribe followed by the Cheyenne, Kiowa, Pawnee and Crow. These tribes were defeated by the Sioux, who migrated out of the Minnesota woods (actually chased out by their enemies, the Ojibwa and Chippewa). The Sioux then used their superior numbers to take the Black Hills from the other tribes that resided in the area.

I point this out because Native Americans were guilty of the very thing we accuse European settlers/soldiers/prospectors of doing -- invading lands that weren't theirs.

Furthermore, applying modern thinking is a dishonest tool when inspecting the relations between Native and settler/soldier/prospector.

We always hear of the injustices committed by the US Army or settlers and get a handful of examples: Wounded Knee, Bear River and Sand Creek. Yet we never hear the other side of what caused these events nor do we hear of the atrocities of Natives committed against New Americans. For instance, we never hear of the Dakota "War" of 1862 (Santee Sioux went on the war path and murdered between 600-800 white settlers, which constituted the largest death toll inflicted upon American civilians by an enemy force until 9/11), The Ward Massacre, The Nez Perce uprising which killed dozens of settlers in Idaho and Wyoming, and the Massacre at Fort Mims. We never hear of the countless innocent settlers who were murdered by roaming bands of young "warriors": While a chief was signing a peace treaty on the tribe's behalf they were out robbing, raping and murdering.

I'm just saying that it's easy to be pro-Native sitting on the comfort of your sofa, but not so much when you and your loved ones are threatened with slaughter.

The Europeans wanted the Native's land and resources while the Indians wanted the technology of the Europeans. Both sides used treaties to make peace while still trying to get what they wanted when war was too expensive. Both sides made war when they felt no other option.

I love Native American culture, but the whitewashing of Native atrocities and this revisionist history stuff is dishonest and unbalanced.

"Buffalo Bill" is a highly romanticized picture of 'Buffalo' Bill Cody. While IMDb is correct that most of the things in this biopic are actually based on Cody's real-life exploits, most of the relationship between him and his wife was pure hooey. Sadly, there was no great love in Cody's life--or if there was, it wasn't his wife! Most of their life was spent apart by his choice--and there were other women in his life. But, this image of Bill would not have gotten past censors back in 1944, so the studio fictionalized this aspect of his life. The rest, however, is reasonably accurate--something that surprised me as I watched the film. He was a scout for the US Army in the west, he fought in the Indian wars and he did start up an incredibly successful Wild West Show.

Another aspect of the film that struck me was its treatment of the American Indians--particularly the Cheyenne. It was odd, as the major roles of the 'Indians' were played by Linda Darnell and Anthony Quinn!!! This insensitivity was pretty much the way American Indians were portrayed in American films through the 1950s. HOWEVER, despite this insensitivity, the film did correctly assert that the Indian wars were forced on these people due to how they were treated by the government. And, in this way, the film was much more balanced than many westerns of the day.

Overall, a somewhat inaccurate film that looked nice and featured the excellent acting, as usual, by Joel McCrea. Worth seeing--just not exactly the Gospel! And, the final line of the film might make you throw up--so when that little kid in the audience stands up, PLUG YOUR EARS!!!

By the way, the film made one HUGE mistake. General Sherman NEVER said "The only good Indian is a dead Indian". This quote was actually from General Sheridan--though it's not exactly what he said. When he was asked what a good Indian was like, he said very succinctly "...a dead one".

A lavish Technicolor potboiler shot by Leon Shamroy, who later collected that year's Oscar for colour cinematography for 'Wilson'; although here the most spectacular scenes are obviously the work of Otto Brower's second unit, with the close ups of the leads shot back at the studio.

It commendably takes the side of the American Indian (represented here by Anthony Quinn and Linda Darnell, the latter wearing lots of makeup and the former very little of anything) against the vested financial interests back East, and also gives the plight of the buffalo a nod.

Maureen O'Hara thought her first western "would be forgettable, but it turned out to be one of the biggest moneymakers 20th Century-Fox had that year" and that Joel McCrea although "a very nice man, a good actor, but not rugged like Duke or Brian Keith". He's likeable, however and as usual gives the film heart.