Alvorecer Branco

Philip Kaufman is a filmmaker I find fascinating, but few other people seem to share that enthusiasm (or even know who he is). He made some oddities in the 1960s and 1970s, before having an amazing streak between 1978 and 1988, directing: Invasion of the Body Snatchers (an improvement of a remake), The Wanderers (most underrated coming-of-age movie), The Right Stuff (that one's literally perfect), and then The Unbearable Lightness of Being (very different to the book, but great for different reasons). His '90s output - or at least what I've seen - is interesting, but not as impressive; movies like Henry & Jules and Quills are both boundary-pushing and a bit patience-testing.

Anyway, seeking out something that's obscure even by his standards was always going to be interesting. Enter The White Dawn, which can't really be included as part of his hot streak. It is pretty decent for what it tries to do, but it lacks a certain something. Maybe that's the point. Kaufman operates on a strange level most people don't really click with. Even I've only clicked with his stuff a handful of times. But what a handful!

The White Dawn is about three European (I think) men getting stranded in the Arctic and then rescued by an Eskimo tribe. I liked how there was subtitled language for the tribe; perhaps even more of their dialogue than English dialogue. There was also a level of respect or at least empathy that you don't always get in films of this age, dealing with some kind of cultural divide.

I guess it fell apart a bit narratively and pacing-wise. It's sort of just a slice-of-life film, at a point, and in an odd way. It continues on for a bit and then it ends, and I was fighting the urge to drift out of it. I think it falters in some areas but I appreciated the authenticity and the way it looked at a different culture of people. The authenticity also carried over to the look and feel of the film; it's an effectively chilly one.

Full disclosure I only watched this film because I admire Warren Oates and I had recently watched The Paper Chase and enjoyed Timothy Bottoms in that movie. I had only a vague notion of the theme of White Dawn and checked it out from my local library.

To begin I disapprove of seeing this film as good vs bad or savage vs civilized. I see far too many summaries of this film through that lens. The story, evidently, based on real events and was subject of a novel of the same name White Dawn, tells of four men who were part of an American whaling vessel in the Baffin Bay and while on a whale hunt are wrecked and stranded on the Baffin Island. The ship thinking those men dead turn about and sail home. One of the four stranded men died early on and we know nothing of him. The three remaining men struggle across the frozen barren until fortuitously they are discovered by some Inuits. The men are taken in and fed and provided shelter. Over time the men are initially given respect and are given wives, although Oates character is a devious man who wins his wives in a game. Naturally there are cultural misunderstandings and this eventually turns to friction. The Inuits are occasionally visited by a shaman who warns the tribe the newcomers are trouble. Somewhat a slow film but it builds to a tragic end.

The film is beautifully shot. We see a seal and walrus hunt and it appears to give an authentic look at Inuit life. I say appears because I am no authority on the Inuits, but the author of the novel, James Houston, on which the film was based lived with the Inuits to learn their ways, so I am trusting his observations. We see the Inuit life is hard and simple. It alludes the Inuits occasionally suffer from starvation. The film was shot on location where the events happened. You get a sense of the isolation of the place.

Overall I enjoyed the film, mainly because I was fascinated with a look at a people oftentimes forgotten and of the location which is isolated and formidable. Oates, Gossett and Bottoms deliver great performances.

This movie contains what is surely one of the strangest, most unique, and most fascinating scenes in the history of cinematography.

The scene is of an Inuit (Eskimo) ritual. I believe it to be authentic. The screenwriter (who also wrote the original book) lived among and studied the Inuit people for decades and was probably one of the world's foremost (non-Inuit) experts on Inuit culture. Furthermore, the movie was filmed on location and using actual Inuit people as actors.

In the ritual, two girls sit cross-legged on the floor, facing each other. They seal their mouths together and take turns blowing air forcefully across the vocal cords of the other person. It creates one of the eeriest sounds I've ever heard. It's kind of a continuous huffing dronal chant, reminiscent of the background drone of bagpipes but without the shrillness. The strangest aspect of it is that there is an undertone of human voices in the sound. You get the feeling that if you listened hard enough, you could make out actual words. It is like no other sound you've ever heard - hair-raising. Who could have ever imagined that the human body could produce such a sound? Basically what they are doing is playing the other person's body like a musical instrument.

The girls continue doing this, apparently for hours, hardly stopping to take a breath. They've got to be hyperventilating, or experiencing a buildup of carbon dioxide in their lungs and blood, and it is incredible that they can go on and on like this without fainting. They must go into some kind of dizzy trance-like state.

I have never seen or heard of this ritual/technique anywhere but in this movie. I was in Alaska the summer of its Centennial year (1967) and was so fortunate to see a great many demonstrations of Inuit culture as part of the celebrations. But I didn't see anything like this, nor have I come across any description of it in my reading.

This movie would be worth seeing, preserving, and collecting on the basis of this one scene alone! (But actually the rest of it is also worth seeing.)

This little-known film of Philip Kaufman's is a look at a culture not seen much in films, that of the Innuit, or Eskimo people of Arctic Canada. Three whalers (Warren Oates, Timothy Bottoms and Louis Gosset Jr.) are stranded among them after a shipwreck. The year is 1896 but it could just as well be 1996 or 1796 as far as we can tell in this simple world where survival against nature is always the biggest concern. Surprisingly to me, the culture clash does not seem to be that great through most of the movie, and when it comes, it does so rather quickly. I think this makes for a less strong film but it's still an interesting one that really fascinates at times.

Cinematographer Michael Chapman ('Raging Bull') provides some great shots of the Great White North and Henry Mancini's score is very nice also. Martin Ransohoff is usually known as a producer but co-wrote the script here with Thomas Rickman.

It's 1896 in the Artic. Four whalers are stranded when their small hunting boat runs into ice and their ship fails to find them. Billy (Warren Oates), Daggett (Timothy Bottoms), and Portagee (Louis Gossett Jr.) leave behind their dead comrade and get rescued by passing Inuits. The Inuits see them as Dog-Children.

The Inuit culture seems authentic. There is a realism in the people and their way of life. The main drawback is the three survivors. They are not appealing characters. One of them needs to be heroic but the opening already lays bare that aspiration. Daggett and Portagee readily abandons a weaken Billy to die in the open. At least, Daggett should go back and try to comfort Billy. It's the same for their ship which searched for only a day or so for their missing crew. It portrays a western culture of personal greed and its corrupting influences. It doesn't mean that the Inuit culture is an utopian one. It is still very much a human world with its own villain. I simply didn't like the characters which detracts from my enjoyment of this film. I wish I like Daggett more.