MovieChat Forums > Fort Apache (1948) Discussion > Cheering for Cochise - Am I alone?

Cheering for Cochise - Am I alone?


After Thursday practically spits in the face of Cochise, I found myself cheering for the Apaches. He could have easily taken aside the greedy government agent who was the cause of an entire Indian war and told him "I would suggest you resign and leave the territory before you have an unfortunate 'accident'. Thursday was an arrogant idiot and genetically not nice enough to be Shirley Temple's biological father.

reply

yes,it looks like you are.

reply

You are not alone. He insulted the man and deserved what was coming.

''they should have a spell check button for non-native speakers''

reply

Right. And I guess all those soldiers had it coming too, for... what? Obeying orders? I'm guessing that the two morons who "root for Cochise" have never served in anything more military than a dance troupe.

"It ain't dying I'm talking about, it's LIVING!"
Captain Augustus McCrae

reply

Well, Captain, while I am not cheering for Cochise, I have to say that Col. Thursday's shortsighted grab for glory really screwed the pooch. I view the Apaches like I do the Rhedosaurus from 'Beast from 20 thousand fathoms': while dangerous it was still a 'sympathetic' character.

reply

Right. And I guess all those soldiers had it coming too, for... what? Obeying orders? I'm guessing that the two morons who "root for Cochise" have never served in anything more military than a dance troupe.


Captain, I am surprised you managed to type that while you were waving the flag so hard with your other hand.

reply

You're missing the point, unlusan, and accusing him of "waving the flag" is both unnecessary and incredibly myopic.

He's pointing out that the members of Thursday's command had no choice but to follow his moronic leadership (much like Custer's men, on whom this film is loosely based), to their inevitable doom because of his arrogant nature and unquenchable thirst for personal glory.

It's always the grunts and no-named soldiers who are the real casualties.

I'm surprised that was lost on you.

I don't act...I react. John Wayne

reply

"Captain, I am surprised you managed to type that while you were waving the flag so hard with your other hand."

That wasn't what he had in the other hand!


And come on Captain! We all have had commanding officers that were total buttholes. Dangerously stupid and unwilling to use their brains; thinking only on their own vain glory.

reply

It was entirely Thursday's fault.

reply

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

it didnt take Thursday's actions for me to cheer for the apaches. Been cheering for them for a long time, they had their land stolen their people killed and turned into drunks.





-only uneducated minds are not open to any ideas other than their own.

reply

Really? You know the Apaches used to be in Texas before the Comanches chased them out of there & into Mexico & Arizona--you can guess how the Comanches did it & you no doubt can guess how the Apaches went about securing their position as 'meanest mothers in the valley' vis a vis the Yaquis & Navajos & other smaller, weaker indian tribes who were already in the Southwest...





Why can't you wretched prey creatures understand that the Universe doesn't owe you anything!?

reply

Goodness you ot the wrong end of the jusification stick there. But keep trying. I'm sure you'll figure it out sooner or later.







-only uneducated minds are not open to any ideas other than their own.

reply

Justifying? Nah...just part of the circle of human history-they steal it from somebody & somebody else steals it from them-or outbreeds & supplants them.

I always find it 'amusing' that when they discuss 'Indians' the Sp*c & Porker Empires (and to a lesser extent French & British ones as well) always get overlooked & their sins get laid on the US-you'd think Howie Zinn & his underlings would be more careful with their chronology & facts.







Why can't you wretched prey creatures understand that the Universe doesn't owe you anything!?

reply

I never said the Brits, French and Spanish hold no blame, but when they were thrown out America took their battle to the next level. No one is pure white innocent, but there is a difference between local fighting for resources and a concerted effort (most hatefully using alchol and biological weapons) to steal a whole country from the indigenous people.









-only uneducated minds are not open to any ideas other than their own.

reply