Reviewing the subject at hand, I am of two minds:
1. I agree with ET that Malick probably shouldn't have touched that story.
2. I also agree with Sam that Malick did a lot of justice to that story.
It breaks down with what our preconceived cultural notions of who Pocahontas was. The cultural consciousness of Pocahontas has been completely spoiled by the overtly propagandistic portrayal in Disney's 1995 animated film. POCAHONTAS was a massive box office success. Since that film will likely never be given the SONG OF THE SOUTH treatment (though it probably should), any subsequent positive or accurate depictions of that story are ultimately a good thing because it restores justice to that piece of history. And yet, it doesn't completely restore justice because the narrative is still being written by the victor instead of the victim.
Sam claims the film doesn't exist in a cultural vacuum. Correct. Et claims the filmmaker doesn't exist in a cultural vacuum. Also correct.
One more thing. Steven Spielberg initially rejected directing THE COLOR PURPLE. He felt he wasn't the correct director for a number of reasons - one of which was his race. But Quincy Jones, the producer, knew that there were no black directors at the time who had commercial pull to get the project off the ground. He expressed this to Spielberg. The movie is one of his best films and launched the careers of several black actors and artists that not only still work today, but helped provide opportunities for other black filmmakers. It was recently just announced that the musical adaptation of THE COLOR PURPLE will be made into a film. The director? Samuel Bazawule, a Ghanian music video director.
"I saw KING LEAR yesterday. Mrs. Siddons as Goneril. The idiots had given it a happy ending."
"That will not last. The Great Stories will always return to their original forms."