Review of Buffalo Bill and the Indians, or Sitting Bull's History Lesson (1976) by Tim S — 03 Mar 2015

Buffalo Bill and the Indians, or Sitting Bull's History Lesson continues Robert Altman's trend of finding the reality within the fiction, and vice versa. Released in 1976, it came along at a time when the U.

S. was celebrating its bicentennial, not to mention the blockbuster success of Jaws (with Star Wars on the horizon), so to say that a post-modern western (especially one that has strong ties to its original stage play counterpart) wouldn't be well-received isn't too much of a surprise.

Altman's continued use of messy dialogue-heavy soundtracks with diffused lenses is partly what turns me off about this film. This specifically feels like a work that didn't require that kind of style.

It feels like it should be more perfunctory in nature and less stylish. Not that Altman is incapable of delivering a product that feels fresh or different, but I felt that this project didn't need his usual overt touches.

It feels more straightforward. The presence of Paul Newman, first of all, seems to be off-kilter most of the time. He doesn't feel like he belongs in this ensemble, but then again, I couldn't imagine Warren Beatty or Elliot Gould in it either.

The cast does some great work, of course, but there are never any great performances or great dialogue pieces that stand out anywhere. I've said elsewhere that I'm not a big Robert Altman fan, but I do appreciate some of his work and genuinely love a couple of his movies, but this is a case where it's hard for me to defend the material.

It's not a terrible movie by any means. If it were, it would be more memorable, but I felt mostly neutral about it while watching it. Some good performances mixed with an over-zealous style equals boring results.