10 differences between Kevin Costner’s Dances with Wolves and the book

Dances with wolves is surprisingly similar to the novel on which it is based, but multiple differences still separate them. Considered one of Costner’s best Western films, Dances with Wolves was the first film that the actor himself directed. While Dances with wolves is a bit controversial now for its depiction of Native American characters, it was a landmark debut, winning seven Oscars, including Best Picture. Costner’s Later Films Have Never Been Equaled Dances with Wolves, which has a positive score of 87% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Dances with wolves began as a script by writer Michael Blake, a friend of Costner, who suggested it might be better as a novel. Blake rewrote it, Costner bought the rights so he could direct it, and Dances with wolves became one of Costner’s best films. Costner plays John Dunbar, who discovers he sympathizes with the Lakota Sioux population he is supposed to be in conflict with, earning the name “Dances with wolves.” How Blake wrote the screenplay for Dances with wolvesthe film and book are similar, although not in all aspects.

10

The film focuses primarily on Dunbar’s perspective

The novel is told from the perspectives of several characters

As Costner is the main character and the best known of the entire cast of Dances with wolvesthe film is firmly centered on his perspective. This meant that while the story was told in a much clearer way for viewers, they also missed out on some of the knowledge that came from reading Blake’s original novel, which gave voice to Stands With a Fist and the Native American characters.

THE Dances with wolves novel tells the story through the eyes of several charactersincluding Wind In His Hair, Stands With A Fist and even Major Hatch. Changing this for the film was understandable, as Costner was the main attraction, but it may not have been the right choice, as the novel added insights into significant scenes, such as Stands With a Fist’s powerful ritual mourning scene, which is told from his perspective.

9

The book explains why Fort Sedgewick was abandoned

In the film Dances with Wolves, Dunbar arrives and is shocked

THE Dances with wolves The novel has a short section told from the perspective of Captain Cargill, who is unhappy, losing his teeth, and furious over the lack of supplies and repeated Comanche attacks. In this scene, Cargill tells the men to pack their bags and begins the march back to Fort Hays. The extended director’s cut of Dances with wolves show this scene of the book, but the theatrical cut does not.

In the theatrical version of Dances with wolvesDunbar arrives at Fort Sedgewick expecting a community full of supplies, but is confused to find the post abandoned. It’s surprising that the abandonment scene was cut, as it shows how unprepared the Union was for life on the Plains and underlines the desperate situation Dunbar found himself in. While Dances with wolves is not a true story, these bases of the Union existed and men struggled to adapt to the environment.

8

The book is about the Comanche, while the film is about the Sioux

This was due to logistical problems during the filming of Dances with Wolves.

While the novel and film are much more similar than many book adaptations, one key difference is in the Native American population. THE Dances with wolves novel originally had Dunbar forming a relationship with the Comanchewhile the film changed this, with Dunbar joining the Lakota Sioux. This was due to the lack of buffalo in the planned filming area and the shortage of Comanche-speaking Native American actors.

However Dances with wolves is a product of its timeIt was groundbreaking when it was made, for its nuanced portrayal of Native American characters, extensive attention to historical detail, Native American actors (rather than actors painted white), and a large portion of the film spoken in Lakota. While the depiction of Native American people isn’t perfect, one historian praised Costner’s work Western epic for its “reasonably accurate“Portrait of the Lakota Sioux.

7

Stands With A Fist is 26 years old in the book, but she is much older in the film

Mary McDonnell was 37 when she appeared on Dances With Wolves

The book describes Stands With A Fist as having a “sturdy and tiny frame“, and a”wild“appearance. Her birth name was Christine, and she is believed to be based on the real-life Cynthia Ann Parker, who was kidnapped by the Comanche Nation and grew up as a member of their community. Stands With A Fist is 26 years old in the book, which means that the Dances with wolves the film had a very unusual age difference in Hollywood.

Mary McDonnell was 37 when she played Stands With A Fist in the film adaptation of Dances with wolvesmaking her older than Kevin Costner, who was 35 at the time. The vast majority of Hollywood romances feature a large age gap, with male characters and actors often being more than a decade older than their female co-stars. However, Costner specifically wanted an older actress to play Stands With A Fist.

6

The book was not announced while the film had two different advertising campaigns

Dances With Wolves Had Trailers Aimed At Male And Female Audiences

It is not always commonly known that Dances with wolves it was a book, and unlike many successful books, there were no large-scale advertising campaigns for the original novel. In truth, the novel only grew in popularity after Costner’s film hit theaters and the history of its production became known. However, the film had an unusual and genre-bending advertising strategy, with two main trailers being released to different audiences.

The trailers were released to appeal to different audiences, with the publicity team assuming that female audiences would prefer a romance, while male audiences would enjoy the action aspects of the film. A trailer emphasized the love story between Dunbar and Stands With A Fistwhile another focused on the epic action scenes in Dances with wolves. This strategy could have alienated both audiences, but it seemed worth it, with Dances with wolves becoming a box office success.

5

Kevin Costner looked drastically different from Dunbar in the novel

Costner’s mullet was a product of its time (as was Mary McDonnell’s hair)

Not all historical elements Dances with wolves were praised, with one historian explaining “it’s simply not true“in its depiction of the Civil War. Although Dunbar’s uniform was based on actual Civil War-era uniforms, an aspect of the style in Dances with wolves was heavily ridiculed. The book barely describes Dunbar’s physical appearance other than a few basic details, it can be assumed that he looked like most other Civil War soldiers, who the Native American characters call “hair mouths“for your beards.

Costner’s flowing mullet and clean-shaven face seemed more suited to the 1980s than 1863 when Dances with wolves has been defined. Mary McDonnell’s hairstyle was also different from the character in the book, as it was Hollywood’s attempt at “wild and tangled hair” described in the book. Her bangs and back hairstyle may not have been noticed when the film was released, but modern viewers notice the 1980s “big hair” to look.

4

Dances With Wolves claims its name in the film

His famous line to Lieutenant Elgin is not included in the book

When Dunbar is captured at the end of the film, Lieutenant Elgin tries to talk to him as his men are unsure whether Dunbar is white or Native American. However, a bloodied and beaten Dunbar first reveals himself to be white and speaks English, but later speaks in Lakota, telling Elgin “My name is Dances with Wolves. I have nothing to say to you. You’re not worth talking to.“

This scene is one of the most powerful in the film, as Dunbar turned his back on the kind of man he once belonged to and reclaimed his new name. But Although Costner’s character was captured in the book, the scene does not include this dialogue or Lieutenant Elgin, and instead says that every time he was asked a question, “he responded with a murderous glare and spat out a long string of Comanche insults.”

3

Dances with Wolves comes out for a different reason in the film

He offers to leave to protect the Comanche from the book

Both the Dances with wolves book and film share a significant plot pointin which Dunbar (now known as Dances With Wolves) plans to leave the Lakota Sioux with Stands With A Fist, whom he married. However, the two versions offer different reasons for this. In the novel, he volunteers to leave to protect the Comanche, as the white soldiers will hunt him down as a traitor. The Comanche, however, have a different plan.

In the novel, the Comanches tell him he can leave, but that they will hide and protect him if he stays. But in the film while Chief Ten Bears also tells him that he is part of his people and is welcome to stay Dances With Wolves and Stand With A Fist go on a mission. The two intend to try to reach “those who would listen” and persuade people in authority to leave the Lakota Sioux alone.

2

The book ends quietly and thoughtfully, while the film’s final scene is visually powerful.

The wind in your hair has a final emotional moment

Dances with wolves the original ending may not have translated well to the screenand this is one of the biggest changes the film made from the novel. The novel leaves Dances with Wolves and Boss Ten Bears smoking in their tent as a snowstorm rages outside, before moving on into spring, with an ominous note that their time is running out. The film’s final scene, on the other hand, had more emotional impact.

Dances with wolves the ending is one of the best and most iconic scenes in the film, echoing an earlier scene in the film. Wind In His Hair, played by Rodney A. Grant, sees Dunbar and threatens him, raising his spear and shouting “My name is Wind In His Hair and I’m not afraid of you.“Later, as Dances with Wolves and Sticks to the Fist leave, Wind in His Hair appears on the summit and shouts:”you will always be my friend.”

1

The novel Dances with Wolves has a sequel

A film adaptation appears to be in development hell

In 2001, Blake published a sequel to Dances with wolves called The Sacred Road, which sees Dances With Wolves on a rescue mission after Stands With A Fist and her three children are captured by white guards. Rumors of a film adaptation have been circulating for years, featuring historical drama director Salvador Carrasco. But since that still hasn’t happened after all these years, the film may be in development hell and would need to happen without its main star.

Kevin Costner said Roger Ebert “I will never make a sequel,” and so, although it is still possible that The Sacred Road may one day be adapted into a film, Costner will almost certainly not reprise his Dances with Wolves role. While the film may be much more similar to its source material than other book-to-film adaptations, the biggest difference between the Dances with wolves book and film it may be that your story continues in one and not the other.

Source: Roger Ebert