3/10
Manipulative AND racist, or racist AND manipulative...take your choice
16 February 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I try very hard not to judge old films through 21st century eyes: instead, I try to consider the context of the times and society in which they were made before I form an opinion. Most of the time I succeed, but The Battle of Elderbush Gulch pushed me beyond my limits: heck, I read the plot summary ("The fact that an Indian tribe is eating puppies starts an action packed battle in a western town") before watching the film and thought it was a distasteful joke that had slipped past the IMDb gatekeepers. No film could be based on such a ridiculous premise, I thought, but as the film unreeled it all proved horribly true: yes, there are puppies, and yes, we see Native Americans indulging in a doggie din-din.

Another reviewer states that some Native American tribes did indeed eat dog meat. Fair enough, but the provenance of the sweet wittle puppies who fall into the Indians' hands in The Battle of Elderbush Gulch suggests an ulterior motive on Griffith's part. He's not just interested in portraying a strange aspect of Indian life: he's interested in heightening viewers' sensitivities by highlighting the owners of the cute pups, two white orphan sisters. Newly arrived in town, the girls are informed by their landlord that dogs are not allowed in the house...so they are left outside in a basket...from which they escape...only to run straight into the arms of a pair of hungry Indians...which results in a full-scale battle...I am sorry, but beyond the obvious racism, this is simply one of the stupidest plot devices ever concocted.

Griffith made many excellent shorts for Biograph, some of them intelligent, sensitive, thoughtful, and open-minded. Then there's this one. Avoid.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed