No, you are not alone. The film clearly is on the side of the Indians, and makes them the "wise" ones in a sense, along with York.
A lot of people today mistakenly have the opinion that films from the forties and fifties were "anti-Indian", but fact is that most were just like this. The Native Americans were pictured as honorable, and the bad guys were almost always some creepy white guys.
This film was one of the few who made the villain a three dimensional white guy. Most of the time, the villains were like "Meechum", greedy, corrupt, white men.
I saw this film as a boy in the early seventies, and remember my elders, who were young people in 1948, being of the mind that they also cheered the Apaches in these films. This was actually the popular view of Americans, even white ones, during those days.
While we cheer for Cochise, I think most of us feel a sense of regret for the mistakes that Thursday made, in the sense that he was a Shakespearean tragically flawed "king". He was probably less flawed than MacBeth and Hamlet, but perhaps similar to Lear.
I wonder why the name "Thursday" was used for the obvious "Custer" character? There may be a back stage reason, but I prefer to think it is because he came in on the "Thursday" of the Apache war front in terms of a work week. The first 3/5 of the frontier days were done, and he was the fourth day, with the fifth day being York.
Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time
reply
share