Film Review: Pocahontas

by Jim Hill  www.jimhillmedia.com

 

As with most people, my first exposure to Pocahontas was the preview released with the holiday re-release of The Lion King in 1994. It was, of course, the song Colors of the Wind, and to me, this preview made the whole movie look like a shish kebab of politically correct garbage and extremist environmental brainwash.  These low expectations stuck with me, even as I watched the media buzz around the film grow (in response to the mega-success of The Lion King). On the first day of release, I attended the first showing at a local theater, heading out of the smothering Minnesota summer day and into the comfortable and cool theater.  All the perceptions I had about what the film would be flittered away once I heard the drumming in The Virginia Company and saw the drawing of England blend into the living animated image. After giving it a chance, Pocahontas became, before the films became too numerous (and too loved) to discern among, my favorite of the post-Eisner animated films.  Unfortunately, I have always seemed to be somewhat lonely in this strong affection for the film. Even those who love The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Hercules often find nothing endearing in the film, which is too bad. Pocahontas is an amazing film on several different levels.

 

Visually, the film is astounding. The animation is Disney animation, which is enough said. The backgrounds are eye-popping and the styling of the film is breathtaking, reminiscent of Eyvind Earle’s work for Sleeping Beauty. The computer animation is seamless, and the character design is consistent throughout. Technically, Pocahontas is equal to any other in the Disney canon.

 

As for its music, Pocahontas would be the first collaboration between Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz (who would also collaborate on The Hunchback of Notre Dame). The first song to come from their collaboration was the soaring ballad Colors of the Wind.  Colors of the Wind, as showpiece song of the film, won the Academy Award for best new song of the year. But even this high acclaim hardly begins to touch on the beauty of this song.  Lyrically, the vivid use of poetic devices makes the words come alive in the hands of actress Judy Kuhn. For example, the assonance (the repetition of vowel sounds) in the line, "Have you ever heard the wolf cry to the blue corn moon" brings out the sounds of a wolf howling at the moon. Alliteration (the repetition of consonant sounds) in "sun-sweet berries" emphasizes the sweetness of the berries by highlighting the syrupy sound of the s. Similarly, in a most ingenious line, the repetition of the r and a sounds in "Come roll in all the riches all around you" creates a aural illusion of rolling. Reading the lyrics for other uses of these devices shows how Stephen Schwartz practically wrote the accompanying music himself just through his ingenious use of words.

 

In addition to this, the content of the song itself rises above these techniques. As a function of the plot, it allows Pocahontas to challenge John Smith’s thinking concerning the New World, which is key to him being able to re-evaluate his thoughts concerning it and Pocahontas. Furthermore, in the time spent together during the span of the song, the two get to know each other and fall in love, a love which takes their relationship beyond the love at first sight level. The poetic phrasing in the song is astounding, presenting the necessary content in such a way as to make the astute listener take a new look at what is being said. For example, it would have been simple for Schwartz to say, "You’ll learn things you never knew about," but instead, he presents it as "You’ll learn things you never knew you never knew." This original presentation of a stale concept forces the listener to really think about what is being said. The first phrasing suggests general knowledge (such as the name of a shrub) whereas the phrasing Schwartz uses goes much deeper, to suggest a life-changing understanding (or at least, something one would really want to know).  Similarly, the lines "Come roll in all the riches all around you/And for once, never wonder what they’re worth" is a challenge not only for John Smith but also for the viewer. As established in the film, the English characters arrive to find wealth and financial prosperity. In today’s world, money drives lives. With the use of the word riches, both John Smith and the viewer are challenged to redefine their senses of wealth and prosperity.

 

Unlike most songs in the Disney canon (or in any musical film or stage production), Colors of the Wind not only fills its duty as a catalyst for plot or character advancement, it is also a song of big-picture ideas. Listening to the song once is not enough to fully appreciate or understand what it is saying. The song, as a whole, is a metaphor. To be able to paint with the colors in the wind is to see and appreciate the beauty in the world around you. It is neither a superficial look at nature nor a simple hug a tree passion. It is the kind of love that inspires the writer to find escape in a tree-lined park, a painter to find inspiration in a mountain, or hunters to find joy in hours of wandering the forests, even when their search ends with as many bullets in their gun as they began. But the song never states this directly; instead, it provides the listener with phrases which force them to think more deeply about the meaning.  Another great play on words in the song is "You can own the earth and still/All you’ll own is earth until/You can paint with all the colors of the wind." Besides containing a brilliant rhyme, the word earth is used in two meanings, one being the planet, the second meaning dirt. This awesome phrasing is the equal sign to the whole song, reinforcing the idea that true value is not found in worldly wealth. As if these rich images, word choices, and phrases weren’t powerful enough, the tune of the song is also beautiful. Likewise, the images presented on the screen during the song are visual poetry. The breathtaking image of Pocahontas forming in the wind suggests that she is part of the beauty of the New World that John Smith is learning to love. This image then blends into the sight of her holding his hand, leading him to jump over a steep cliff and waterfall, representing the great leap of ideas which she is leading John Smith to make. As further visual representation of the main metaphor, the image of deer frolicking in the wind, besides being an amazing image, reinforces the concept of the wind representing the beauty of nature.  And this is just a hint of the visual poetry in the song.

 

Despite all this, one must not think Colors of the Wind is the only song worth investigating, for the rest of the songs are also very good. Some people comment that the songs are not fun or that there are too many ballads, but this is only because Menken and Schwartz were following the artistic needs of the film, not a preconceived formula where there’s one introductory song, a love ballad, one song for the villain, a showstopper, etc. Furthermore, the music and lyrics of the other songs also stand up to scrutiny. From the metaphor in Just Around the Riverbend, to the play on words in Mine, Mine, Mine, to the gentle metaphor in Listen With Your Heart, the songs are amazingly well-written and composed. While maybe not as fun-filled as might have been expected, the songs in Pocahontas are excellent.

 

In addition to this, Pocahontas is more than just moving entertainment. The film also challenges viewers to reconstruct their worldview by presenting, through natural dialogue, ideas that cause the viewer to think in new ways. One such instance is when Pocahontas and John Smith sit down to talk at the edge of the river. In conversation, John Smith comments on the strangeness of the Native words he has learned. The viewer, too, sees his point (even though most Americans have a familiarity with Native American words), but then Pocahontas comments on how the English have "most unusual" names as well, bringing to the forefront the name John Smith, which happens to be one of the most common name combinations on the tongue of most Americans, since it is a generic name thrown out as easily as John Doe. This simple conversation (which also includes a great scene of Pocahontas experiencing her first handshake), highlights cultural differences and how greatly perspectives can vary.  This theme, which builds in the film, is also made apparent in another brilliant section of dialogue. When John Smith calls Pocahontas’ people savages (and uncivilized), she highlights one of the fundamental concepts in cultural understanding when she redefines the word by saying, "What you mean is, not like you." This addresses many instances in life, like, for example, if someone unfamiliar with a black church attends one, he or she might be surprised to see that verbal responses to the sermons are not only common but expected. The unfamiliar person may leave the service saying it is childish, disorderly, or uncouth. Or, for that matter, it is like someone unfamiliar with a white (or traditional suburban) church walking into a church where the congregation is quiet during the sermon and leaving, saying that the congregation was unengaged, unspiritual, or stuffy. It is only a matter of cultural differences, as so many things are, and yet, this simple line from Pocahontas brings to light the basic root of cultural misunderstandings--misinterpreted differences. It’s an eye-opener.

 

In a similar fashion, the film uses eye-opening lines to illustrate the subject of natural aesthetics/non-financial happiness. During one of their meetings, John Smith tells Pocahontas that his men are looking for gold, which he describes as being yellow, coming out of the ground, and being really valuable. Pocahontas shows him gold, true gold--an ear of corn. Besides being another example of cultural misunderstanding, it’s a vivid illustration of wealth. Which of the two items are intrinsically more valuable--the one that can be grown and provide nourishment or the one that has human value placed upon it solely for its visual quality? It is the natural presentation of lines like these that help make Pocahontas powerful.

 

The film also contains a number of symbols to help communicate its themes and ideas, which is a fairly rare occurrence in any film. Early on, as Ratcliffe boards the ship, a rat, which becomes a visual symbol for Ratcliffe (notice his name), sneaks on board as well. The animal characters of Meeko, Flit, and Percy become more than comic relief but a symbol for the relationship between the New World characters and the Old World characters, visualizing both their battles and their final ability to make peace. John Smith is, as clearly identified in the film, represented by the spinning arrow in Pocahontas’ dream, showing that he is the one Pocahontas was destined to meet and, as a result, with whom she would change the course of her people and of the English.

 

As for Pocahontas herself, as established in the song Just Around the Riverbend, she is represented by the unsteady river which cannot be held by boundaries. When John Smith meets Pocahontas, it is in the river, surrounded by untamed beauty as he faces, what he perceives to be, untamed beauty. The three Native American words he speaks to her as they get to know each other by the river are, in sequence, two river names followed by Pocahontas. This image is reinforced early in the film as Pocahontas faces a fork in the river while in her canoe. To the left is the steady river, wide and easy to navigate, and to the right is the small, winding river, the one that will provide excitement, challenge, and promise. When she chooses the winding river, it not only foreshadows the events to follow, it symbolizes her own personality.

 

Since its release, many have attacked the film for being politically correct and environmentally sound, but these claims are not warranted. First of all, just because a movie stars Native American characters does not imply that it is politically correct. Native Americans are people and deserve to have stories told about them as much as anybody does. Furthermore, the film does not stereotype them or present them in stereotypical situations. Being accurate is not the same as being politically correct. There is a big difference. Perhaps more daring than any live-action film would portray, Pocahontas shows the flaws of the Native characters. In the two Savages songs, the Native characters are shown as being as culturally biased as the English characters are. In fact, the Native characters are shown as having difficulties with Pocahontas’ relationship with John Smith just as much as the English characters have difficulties with John Smith’s relationship with Pocahontas. Similarly, Ratcliffe’s attempt to kill Powhatan is no less vicious than Powhatan’s attempt to kill John Smith; the desire for blood on the side of the Natives is no weaker than the desire on the part of the English. The fault is shared between the two groups, both of them are ready to kill as a result of their biased beliefs. This would not be the portrayal if the film was attempting to do anything more than present accurate characterizations. However, because this is Disney, most of this film’s critics would consider it nothing but extremely politically correct unless it portrayed a completely negative image of Native Americans; in which case, they would then attack Disney for that. If one watches closely, though, it instead presents a multi-dimensional view by painting both parties as victims and antagonists. Because of this, Pocahontas rises above many other historical films which offer more simplistic portrayals of Native Americans. 

 

As for pushing an environmental agenda, the film speaks for itself. Just as many Native American cultures valued respect for nature, the worldview presented in the film suggests the same. But this is a far cry from pushing an environmental agenda. Just because a film values nature doesn’t mean it’s pushing anything. If the film ignored this view, it would not be accurately portraying Native Americans, but most critiques would not have refrained from this criticism unless the film supported the misuse of environmental resources, in which case, they would hitch up a whole different bandwagon in which to attack Disney. Similarly, the film also doesn’t condemn hunting. While Pocahontas prevents John Smith from shooting the bear in Colors of the Wind, this is because of what John Smith doesn’t know--that the bear is a mother. In early images of the film, a Native man runs through a herd of deer carrying a bow, which is a weapon used in hunting. In addition to this, the Natives are shown spearing fish in the water. When looking at both images, it is clear that the film does not intend to shun hunting. Besides these issues, some have taken shot at the film’s presentation of Native religious beliefs. Unlike many other films (such as Free Willy), Pocahontas never preaches or endorses belief in spirits or in other beliefs of the tribe. Instead, these beliefs are presented as the historically correct view of these people who did believe in the presence of spirits and a Great Spirit. To ignore this would be to candy coat, and hearing them in the story is just as appropriate as was the presentation of Christian beliefs in The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

 

Another popular artistic criticism of the film is of the character development for Ratcliffe. Some say that he is thinly developed and too broad, which may be the case; however, historically, there had to have been people like Ratcliffe. How else can some of the shocking displays of barbarian acts be explained, such as explorers who arrived and befriended the Native Americans, only to enslave them or kill them. The lack of dimension in Ratcliffe’s character is probably not all that far removed from historical reality.

 

Apart from visual merit, literary merit, and defending it from rash critics, the film is also filled with charming comic relief which is balanced extremely well with the rest of the film. Because Meeko, Flit, and Percy cannot speak, the humor relies heavily on the visual, supplying the audience with genuine laughter and original humor. Furthermore, this humor grows out of the characters. For example, Meeko has a host of funny looks and gestures, such as the mugged smile he gives Powhatan after falling from the shelf and into Pocahontas’ arms. In addition to these, there are some hilarious visual gags, such as Meeko taking Flit as his sword or the sight of him playing coonskin cap on a deadpan moose. There is also much humor centered around the speaking characters, namely John Smith’s witty quips and Grandmother Willow’s affection for John Smith. These character seem less created to make laughs as they appear to have the laughs sprout from their rich character development. As a result, while the film may not be as funny as other films, its humor is perfectly balanced with the rest of the film, never seeming out of place or forced, and because the humor is not forced, it provides richer opportunities to laugh.

 

The structure of the story, characters, and situations are also expertly accomplished. The characters are richly depicted and likable; one cares very much for the plight of the forbidden lovers. The story is centered around the archetypal plight of forbidden love, and naturally, the rebel spirit inside us responds to that. This is evidenced in the strong emotional conclusion where Pocahontas and John Smith must forever+36 part ways, complimented powerfully by Menken’s underscore and perfect character animation from Glen Keane and John Pomeroy, all of which cumulates into one of the most moving scenes in the Disney canon.

 

Besides being entertaining and moving, Pocahontas has many qualities with which it pushes the envelope of aesthetic quality and thematic completeness. If you’ve written Pocahontas off your slate, I encourage you to take another look at this magnificent and moving masterpiece of Disney animation. There are 101 reasons (or thereabouts) to do so, and in the end, you just might like painting with the colors of the wind (or at least like the film that teaches it).