Film Analysis – Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee The film “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” is about the assimilation of Native Americans into American culture and society. The film is a historical drama directed by Yves Simoneau. The film begins by showing the defeat of the U.S. Army at the Battle of Little Bighorn, then shows their continued efforts afterward to remove the Sioux Indians from their own lands. The film shows a boy named Ohíye S being taken by his father to be assimilated into American culture, giving him a new name: Charles Alexander Eastman and abandoning his old life for this new one. Years pass and Charles is a grown man turned doctor, and he fights for the rights of his people using his unique position being on both sides of the conflict. Meanwhile, his former tribe is constantly harassed and attacked by American forces, forcing them to attempt to flee to Canada to survive. Too difficult, the tribe ends up giving up and joining a Native American reservation, where Charles comes to treat the sick. All hope seemed lost until Wovoka began teaching members of the reservation the Ghost Dance, a dance they believe will give them back their land. This leads to the death of Sitting Bull and the massacre of around 200 natives. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The film contains numerous accuracies and inaccuracies. One clarification that the film corrected was Sitting Bull's death, which happened the same way in the film as it did in reality. Another clarification was that Charles Eastman was at Wounded Knee and helped the wounded and recovered the bodies of those who died in 1890. A major inaccuracy that caused much controversy was the way Sitting Bull was depicted. In the film, Sitting Bull did things such as whipping two fellow Indians, which would never have happened, and that he was instead a holy man who cared for others. Finally, another inaccuracy was how Henry Dawes was portrayed as caring for the Native Americans, but in reality just wanted them forcibly removed from their lands. Personally I really liked the movie, it definitely wasn't my favorite that we saw so well. far this year due to its slow pace. I feel like this film was aimed at a specific audience and I wasn't on that spectrum. The film has historical value because it was mostly historically accurate, aside from things like the behavior of certain people. If I were to create a solution to the "Indian problem" in the late 1880s, I personally would have left them on their own land and instead tried to slowly combine the two cultures with peace rather than force or violence. Canada is presented in the film in a manner similar to how I would approach it, with gracious hospitality and attempts at communication..