And yet, despite the positioning of this story within a Native American milieu, the characters stand alone as thorny individuals whose decisions remain mysterious all the way to the last scene. In that sense, “Wild Indian” owes more to a violent, antihero-driven film like “Affliction” or “Taxi Driver” or “Menace II Society” as it does to a so-called “problem picture” that’s intended to raise awareness of the plight of a group of people. Culture and history are important to the characters—just as, say, Travis Bickle’s war experience, sexual hang-ups, and mental illness are important in understanding him—and they help partly explain why they made certain bad choices (and why certain traumas were visited upon them and their people, through no fault of their own).
But there’s a lot going on in this movie beyond explanations, maybe too much for clarity’s sake. This is not a movie that wants to hold your hand and explain what it means. It seems very likely that the filmmaker couldn’t explain what he means by every choice, because so many of them seem intuitive, from the montage of silent images of young Makwa’s domestic violence-battered face regarding the future murder victim with his girlfriend, to the final shot of a man contemplating eternity. The performances, too, keep things close to the vest. Greyeyes plays Michael as a tormented and confused man, but with an arrogant edge that appears to have been the product of emulation (he wasn’t like that when he was younger), but the question of whether the character is “likable” is not on the radar of the actor or the filmmaker. Ditto Spencer’s performance as the adult Teddo, a decent-souled person who seems to have an instinctive rapport with his sister’s boy and is carrying a massive amount of guilt. They aren’t spoon-feeding the viewer information or trying to micromanage our sympathies. They’re just playing the roles.
The brief running time, coupled with the economical acting and somewhat elliptical writing and directing, will leave viewers with a lot of question marks. But these are all features of the project, not bugs. It seems clear that Corbine wanted to make a personal movie, not a history lesson or morality play aimed at hypothetical white viewers, and it’s impossible to look at the finished product without feeling that he succeeded. Whatever its merits as a self-contained and freestanding story, “Wild Indian” may one day be regarded as a major work, not just within the context of its director’s career, but cinema as a whole. It is not interested in mediating its characters, story or themes for the benefit of a culture that makes it nearly impossible for films like this to get made and seen. It’s a declaration of independence.
You can view the original article HERE.
