Plenty to Like, Plenty to Dislike

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

One of the stupidest most inaccurate movies I have ever seen! From a real live "raw meat eater". We didn't kill female babies, females are just as important as a male babies. And the part about sharing wives is such BS, culture had some wife swapping and to the Inuit people sex was something that happens not a taboo, people have sex that's how babies are made even we savages knew that.It's a MYTH that the elderly were left on ice flows or in a snow drift. In the Atomic age even us savages knew what a gun was and golly gee we even saw those metal birds a flyin over head. Ugh.Someone wrote "far northern natives that lived almost exclusively on the arctic ice". How stupid. Do you suppose we all lived in kayaks and Umiaks during the spring thaw and summer months? We hunted on the ice sometimes when we weren't hunting caribou deer and moose we are MEAT EATERS. No hunter would kill a dog to warm someones' hands', he would have never let the trooper get that bad to start with. A live dog would have warmed a person as well as pull you to a place you could get help. Or we would have eaten the animal should the need arise. Hunt a polar bear alone, ridiculous!And giving the dead seal a drink of fresh water. Unbelievable! Yes we would surely have given thanks to the animal spirits. Sea mammals don't drink fresh water, they get all the liquid they need from the foods they eat. Look it up. The clothes were authentic for sure but from different cultures of Inuit.All in all the reviews praising this movie for "culturally authentic" are from people who have no idea what they are talking about and believe all the things that they see in movies. It's a movie not a documentary. Par for the times they didn't hire real Inuit or even American Indians to play the parts Anthony Quinn and Japanese Chinese played as Inuit's is funny. Too that nobody would bother to hire on a real Inuit as a consultant was standard for the times.Entertaining maybe, insulting to THE MEN absolutely.

"The savage innocents" is Ray's last real movie, his two epics "King of Kings" and "55 days at Peking" ,in spite of their (often unfairly overlooked) qualities cannot be called "Nicholas Ray' s movies .The rest of his filmography includes a movie made with his students and the questionable Wenders collaboration "lightning over water" .Not only Ray was the director whose influence was huge on the rock generation ("Rebel with a cause " was the first movie which rocked ,a feat for it was a work which did not include songs)but "savage innocents" inspired Bob Dylan a song which Manfred Mann made a big hit in the sixties.Mighty Quinn indeed.Anthony Quinn was par excellence the perfect good all-around.a cursory look at his filmography is revealing:from Fellini's "La Strada" to his portrayal of Quasimodo in the French version of "Notre Dame de Paris" (Delannoy) From Barrabas (Fleischer)to an Eskimo.Like so many Rayesque heroes ,Inuk does not follow the rules :in a way he is akin to the youngsters of "Rebel" ,to Davey Bishop ("Run for cover" ),to Nick ("Knock on any door" ) and of course to the outlaws ("the true story of Jesse James") .But anyway Inuk cannot follow the Whites' rules for ,in his naive innocence,he is incapable of understanding them,which proves they are not universal.Margaret Mead had already showed that what is good and what is bad is not the same wherever you live in the world..My favorite scene is the priest trying to make the "savage" understand that he's lived a life of sin: what can a tale of long ago and far away mean for a man whose life is a constant struggle against a hostile nature ? It's the same pragmatism which we find in Luis Bunuel's Oeuvre."The savage innocents " is half documentary half fiction;the documentary side shows its age :correct me if I am wrong but "Eskimo" (=raw meat eater) is not a term the Inuit would appreciate nowadays.Besides,they did not live in igloos which were only used during the hunting season.Entirely filmed in studio ,the pictures are magnificent though,a real symphony in white.The white color dominates everything (tinged with blue)except for this extremely moving scene when it turns black when the old woman is left in the snow to die (it will remind the young cine buffs of Imamura's "Narayama Bushiko" (1983))."The savage innocents " sets the nature and its quietness -although it's a cruel mistress;when you fight a bear,it's you or him-against the "civilization" here represented by alcohol,pop music ,money and the Law.Ray had already been an ecologist ahead of his time in "Wind across the everglades" These two works are like "twin movies" and should be seen one after the other.After all "King of Kings" was also perhaps a Ray movie:Jesus himself was not born to follow the rules.

I saw this movie many years ago. My recollection of it is that is a documentary comment on the interface of two widely different cultures. I also just finished reading Kabloona a book written by a white Frenchman in the later 1930s about the Eskimo Culture. The points made in the book confirm those points made in the movie. The Eskimo apparently is a guileless innocent whose life consists primarily of staying alive and fed. The innocence of these people was highlighted in the scene where Anthony Quinn came back to his igloo and found that his wife had given birth. He asked her the baby's name and when she told him, he responded in amazement, "How did you know?" As far as the scene where a man's hands were stuffed into a recently killed dog is concerned, the speed with which freezing occurs at 50 below zero is not to be believed. That scene demonstrates the fact that the Eskimo regards his dogs as livestock and useful. Shocking, but apparently realistic.

I haven't seen this film for years.......but would love to again. I remember this film as an accurate description of Inuit culture and mores of the time. It is an educational journey into innocent tundra social structure (if any) intermingling occasionally with modern (at the time) Western culture. Anthony Quinn was brilliant in this role...and probably created for it. And..., oh my God,....that was Peter O'Toole in his very first role??? No wonder I loved him afterwards......even being dubbed (why??) he showed sensitivity in dealing with both the savage(?)Inuit lifestyle, the current legal structure of Western society of the day, and his own personal feelings in the interactions with these primitive peoples. Hey! Where else can a man offer gourmet larvae to his esteemed guests, then offer his wife for any man to "laugh" with, and then take his mother-in-law miles away with a dogsled to go die on the ice with her approval?? Way to go!!