April 23, 2015
In the Land of the
Head Hunters – Canada, 1914
It is said that Edward S. Curtis’s In the Land of the Head Hunters has great historical significance,
and I cannot dispute this. The cast of the film is made up entirely of members
of the Kwakwaka’wakw tribe of British Columbia, and it captures that tribe’s
unique artistic legacy, as well as many of its cultural practices, including a
gift-giving ceremony known as the potlatch, which was banned by the Canadian
government until 1951. All of this makes the film important and worthy of study
and preservation. It does not, however, create an involving narrative, and
praising a film for its cultural importance while ignoring its narrative
defects would be akin to recommending a bad Hollywood film for its special
effects while ignoring its confusing and lackluster plot.
The film’s biggest problem is its use of intertitles, for
instead of using them as dialogue or as a way of explaining what characters are
thinking or doing, Curtis elected to use them as a way of explaining what happens
next in the film. Therefore, viewers read explanations about someone’s arrival
on an island and then that person arrives. In one scene, the intertitles tells
viewers that the film’s villain leads an attack on a fishing boat and then we
see the attack. The result is not so much excitement as déjà vu.
The film’s other problem – one that it never truly recovers
from – is its absence of a true hero. This does not mean that the film does not
have a protagonist, for it does. That role falls to Motana (Stanley Hunt), the
son of Chief Kenada (Paddy ‘Malid). After putting himself through a series of
challenges, thereby proving himself to be a man, he sets out to marry the love
of his life, Naida (Sarah Constance Smith Hunt). There’s just one slight hitch –
it seems Naida has been promised to the sorcerer in the next village. If Motana
really wants to marry Naida, he is told, he must sneak over to the sorcerer’s
village, kill him, and bring back his head. Mind you: Montana is the protagonist in this story. Just imagine
what someone has to do to be the villain.
Now imagine the focus of the movie reversed. A young
sorcerer has been promised a young woman’s hand in marriage. He has no reason
to doubt that the wedding will take place, as he believes the words of Chief
Kenada to be iron clad. Imagine his surprise when the chief’s son arrives to kill
him. Told this way, Motana would be the villain, and any act of vengeance that
followed would seem entirely justified.
Truth be told, there is not much of a narrative in the first
place, and because of that, long stretches of the film’s running time are
devoted to the presentation of the tribe’s rituals. Viewers are exposed to
Motana’s early tests of courage, which includes a whale hunt that looks
entirely authentic; a “dance of acceptance”; Motana’s wedding ceremony, during
which three canoes arrive led by three men in bird costumes; and a celebratory dance
in some of the most magnificent costumes imaginable. All of this is interesting
to the eye, and I watched it with an interest not unlike that of someone
visiting a new culture for the first time.
However, the film also includes numerous instances of heads
being used as trophies, and several scenes show men – both “protagonists” and “antagonists”
- returning from battle with the heads of their victims and handing them to
family members, who act as if they have just received a gift from loved ones who
were returning from a long vacation. Seeing it, I couldn’t help wondering what
the effect was on the audience that saw the film in 1914. Did they cover their
eyes in horror, or did they watch with the fascination that often accompanies
seeing something you think is authentic and that may in fact reinforce what you
already believe to be true?
Edward S. Curtis spent much of his professional life
photographing the American West and Native Americans, and his film is evidence
of his remarkable talent. Some of my favorite moments in the film are shot from
a distance and give the audience the sense that they are observing something
from a distance, the same way a photographer may. In one scene, Curtis films a
meeting of tribesmen from an elevated position, and I felt as if I were eavesdropping.
In other scenes, Curtis seems intent to put his camera in position and just allow
his audience to witness what must have been to many members of the audience entirely
new customs and dances. As I’ve said, the film is historically and culturally
important, and as such, it will delight. For people more interested in
narrative films, it will likely feel deeply flawed and not nearly as rewarding
as it had the potential to be. (on DVD and Blu-ray)
3 stars (as a narrative)
3 and a half stars (as a historical document)
*Much of the film only exists in still photos, and
intertitles have been added to fill in the gaps in its narrative.
*A shorter version of the film was released in 1973 as In the Land of the War Canoes.
No comments:
Post a Comment