Page locked

This page is currently locked for editing by another user. You have to wait until this user finishes editing or the lock expires.
Currently locked by: 216.73.216.141
Lock expires at: 2025/08/26 19:05 (12 min)
This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
====== Errors in fact ======
In the movie, they made Pocahontas much older than she really was at the time of meeting John Smith in 1607. Which in a way, could be considered a 'good' thing for the movie based off of her love interest with John, which was also never a thing. --Lindsey Sowers

Pocahontas did not have a romantic involvement with Captain John Smith, and would have been much younger during the 1608 timeframe.  She would actually marry fellow Englishman John Rolfe in 1614 after being held captive and converting to Christianity. There are no talking raccoons or hummingbirds. – Andrew Mullins

//To add onto that point, tress also do not talk. Native American religion is beautiful and diverse but it does not tend to involve many talking trees. There is a connection between the natural environment and religion/ the spiritual world that is present in many native religions, but this is over dramatized and played out in the film to make it seem like all Native Americans were running around talking to trees. The scene where John Smith and Pocahontas talk to grandmother willow is entirely fictional and in my opinion, slightly disturbing.—Grace Corkran 
//

One of the errors that stood out to me the most was that Pocahontas wasn’t close to Smith’s age-she was around 10 and he was in his late thirties. According to Indian Country Today, Disney knew that she wasn’t a teenager or a young woman but decided to increase her age in order to give the film an emotional romantic impact (Schilling, V. 2017).  Upon further research, I found out that Pocahontas was not the name she was given at birth but a nickname meaning “playful one” or “ill-behaved child” according to the Smithsonian magazine (Mansky, J. 2017). Her real name was Matoaka and she was married to Kocoum. In the film Kocoum was her potential suitor and had an unrequited love for Pocahontas. Although it was based off a historical event, they took a lot of liberties to make it into a love story and to ensure it made plenty of money.




Mansky, J. (2017). The True Story of Pocahontas. Smithsonian. [online] Available at: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-pocahontas-180962649/ [Accessed 3 Sep. 2018].

Schilling, V. (2017). The True Story of Pocahontas: Historical Myths Versus Sad Reality. Indian Country Today. [online] Available at: https://newsmaven.io/indiancountrytoday/archive/the-true-story-of-pocahontas-historical-myths-versus-sad-reality-WRzmVMu47E6Guz0LudQ3QQ/ [Accessed 3 Sep. 2018].           - Johana Colchado

At the end of the movie Pocahontas has the hard decision of leaving with her love John Smith or staying, she ends up staying with her tribe. In real life, she was taken by the English back to England and married off to this guy John Rolfe who wanted to teach her all about the cool times of Christianity. Together they eventually moved to Brentford in Middlesex, then she died though in her early twenties, they’re thinking is was the good old tuberculosis that got her in the end. If you want to watch the Disney inaccuracies of this ending, there’s always Pocahontas 2.  -Amiti Colson

Other than the obvious things that Disney got wrong on this movie, Disney forgot to mention the fact that Pocahontas was not an only child. Like mentioned in class, she had many siblings that she had to fight with to obtain favoritism from her father Chief Powhatan, which did not last long. Also, as noted by another student in class, the first settlers in Jamestown were in fact soldiers, except for Thomas, John Smith’s friend in the film who was afraid of a gun most of the time. Also, another thing Disney got wrong; No such thing as talking trees. –Alyx Wilson


Was the portrayal of Governor Ratcliffe being better off than the rest of the men (living in his own tent, getting to miss out on physical labor, and having better possessions) accurate to the actual living conditions of the men at Jamestown? Were all of the men in the fort regarded as equal, or did rank and class affect the experiences of the settlers? -Maddie Shiflett 

One thing that I kept thinking about after Dr. McClurken’s lecture is how successful John Smith’s revisionist history was. Smith’s memoirs were already quick to posture himself as the hero, creating the John Smith that exists within our public consciousness, and then the movie exaggerated his (already exaggerated) positive qualities. As a result, the movie shows off a charming, charismatic guile hero who is adored by all who meet him (and is at times annoyingly Australian). The real John smith was—by all reputable accounts—Grim, taciturn, and so despised by his men that they tried to kill him on at least one occasion. John Smith should be taken as a lesson to all about what good PR will do for you. -Justin Curtis

Do you think that the love story and the fictional peace that ensued as a result was an irresponsible portrayal of history or a message that two groups can get along with one another in a way that the movie demonstrated? -- Grace Corkran 

I thought it was really interesting how they chose to depict the Jamestown settlement. What was the purpose of adding waterfalls, cliffs, and mountains? It seems silly to change the geography of the land for aesthetic purposes. Also - the colonists and Native Americans would not have been able to communicate with one another, and especially not in American accents. --Maryanna Stribling

John Ratcliffe was not a governor of Virginia. He was a captain like John Smith and sent to build a fort at Point Comfort only to be found later at Nansemond tortured to death. --William Roszell

I have not watched Pocahontas in years, so watching it now, as an adult, I had a completely different take on it. For starts the geography of that area was incorrect. As Maryanna stated above, what was the purpose of adding the waterfall and mountains? Also, Grandmother Willow was depicted as a Weeping Willow tree which are native to China and not America. So if the colonist in the movie were the first ones to settle there, there was no way a non-native tree got to the area over 200 years ago (Grandmother willow said that was how old she was in the movie). --Caroline Collier
"Salix Babylonica - Plant Finder." Missouri Botanical Garden. Accessed September 05, 2018. http://www.missouribotanicalgarden.org/PlantFinder/PlantFinderDetails.aspx?kempercode=c148.


I thought it was interesting that even though from what we learned in class, the Powhatan people were a matrilineal society, in the movie you really only saw two female characters, Pocahontas and her friend Nakoma (who is barely mentioned by name in the film). Even in the group shots, it shows mainly a male dominated population. Was that just a misinterpretation of fact or a direct choice by the director? --Ellora Larsen

During the song that Ratcliffe sings about mining for gold after the settlers land, they seem to use barrels containing some kind of explosive to displace the earth more quickly and expeditiously, but Smith's account makes no mention of this--nor, in fact, of any mining activity undertaken by the settlers at Jamestown. ~Will Everett

This movie depicts John Smith in a very wholesome and good light. At one point, John Smith argues with Ratcliffe, telling him that where they had landed was the land of the natives and not theirs. He is depicted very pro-native when in reality he was proud of his attacks on the natives and wanted to find riches in the new land as much as the next settler. -Erin Andrewlevich

It was interesting to note that while there are obviously a lot of historical errors, they seem to be rooted in some factual evidence. Historically we know Pocahontas married Kocoum, so Disney's portrayal of him as a potential husband seems like they were aware of this fact, but changed it to make for a good story. Kocoum did not die as portrayed in the film, but went on to marry Pocahontas. The landscape in the film is also completely unlike Virginia, there are no massive cliffs or waterfalls in that area and certainly no place for a ship to dock on a narrow river next to a totally wooded area.-Jessie Fitzgerald   
====== Things the movie got right ======

The movie got right the name of the ship “Susan Constant” that Smith, and Ratcliff sailed on.  The general years of the interaction with the Powhatan Indians, the names of some of the characters, and the use of the Algonquin language spoken by the Powhatan Indians. (they actually used an Algonquin native as advisor) They got right the name of The Virginia Company that first colonized Jamestown, and a lot of the indigenous tribe names and places in the region.  There was also a significance of the compass utilized by John Smith but served to save his life with another tribe’s king. – Andrew Mullins

John Smith was in fact a well-traveled explorer and did come to Virginia around 1607, where he did work with a man of the name John Ratcliff, so in this aspect, the movie was accurate. Also, Pocohontas's father was Chief Powhatan. --Lindsey Sowers

Disney did not go as far as adding Pocahontas’ mother, which history knows little about. The only time her mother is mentioned in the film is when her father, Chief Powhattan, bestows Pocahontas a necklace that belonged to her mother as a wedding gift/heirloom, which may have not even existed. Certain names like the main characters, Ratcliff, and Chief Powhatan are correct. –Alyx Wilson

One interesting detail I noticed they got right was in regards to who actually first arrived when Jamestown was founded. People seem to believe there were some women who joined the men on the initial excursion to Jamestown when in fact, it was an all-male operation. This is likely because when the Virginia Company of London first sent people out to settle what would become Jamestown, the need for women was not yet necessary (most likely because the Virginia Company wanted to know if it would actually be possible for a colony to be settled there before they sent women and children over). In the film, they held true to the lack of women who initially arrived to settle Jamestown, which is a small historically-accurate detail I can appreciate. -Robert Dallas

I thought it was interesting how the movie actually pays a certain amount of lip service to the inherently brutal nature of colonization. It would have been easy to make all the Europeans romantic heroes, as western culture had for centuries, but Disney (likely inadvertently) depicts European colonists as the victims of an inherently corrupt system, displaying more awareness than one might expect. Of course, whether the movie squanders this in the end by having the entire system redeemed by love between cultures is something that deserves some debate. --Justin Curtis

What I found interesting is how they did play up the racism of the colonists. John Smith maintained a racist attitude until a "beautiful woman around his age" showed him otherwise. I also found the "Savages" song to be somewhat accurate, especially given what we discussed in class about how each side thought of the other as abhorrent and perverse. The colonists wouldn't take the time, save for sexy John Smith, to get to know or work with the Natives, instead focusing on plundering the land for gold. I wish they had shown more interest in the other resources they were seeking out, but the focus of all the colonists on gold was spot on. -Erin Shaw

The movie held true to the fact that the Colonists were attempting to follow the Spanish's lead in looking for gold in the New World. I also believe that it accurately showed the cultural differences between the Native Americans and the Colonists, such as in Colors of the Wind, but also in rituals, weaponry, dress, etc. --Maryanna Stribling

The film sort of accurately portrayed the British interests in going to the New World. The drive for gold and glory were real motivations for the British after the Spanish were successful in bringing back gold from Latin America. The Virginia company and the settlers who went to Jamestown were expecting to find gold to make themselves wealthy back in Britain. Pocahontas’ first husband being the native American warrior Kocoum was also accurate.-Kyle Moore

There were a few things that I noticed that Disney got right in this film, but most of them were general ideas rather than specifics. The first thing I noticed was that they did emphasize how dangerous it was for these settlers to sail across the ocean. I also noticed that when introducing the Native Americans they showed the women farming and the men fishing. They also emphasized that the Governor’s motivation was to find gold and get rich, which was the main motivation for the English going to the new world. – Carolyn Stough


Though Disney did not do the story of Pocahontas justice, in my opinion, they did get a few things correct. Disney seemed to have done their research on characters names in the movie. John Smith was in fact an explorer, Chief Powhatan was Pocahontas' father, and Kocoum was a a Native American warrior. Although their specific story lines might not be true of the real John Smith, Chief Powhatan, and Kocoum,they at least got their names correct. --Caroline Collier

In the interaction John Smith has with Pocahantas just before she sings "Colors of the Wind", Smith's description of the colonists' mission to "help" the Native Americans use their land "properly", and his characterization of the Native Americans as being "uncivilized" because they "don't know any better", perfectly represent the concept of 'the white man's burden'. This was a concept used by white imperialists to justify their colonialist actions as being paternalistic, and supposedly beneficial to the people who were native to the colonized area(s). Despite the fact that the term 'white man's burden' was not coined until much later in history, the ideas Smith expresses were common for Europeans of his time, and align perfectly with this concept.
~Will Everett

This part wasn't exactly accurate but it wasn't wrong how in the end John Smith had to travel back to England because of an injury. The injury wasn't the same and their longing goodbyes most likely did not happen but the fact that John Smith had to travel back and movie Pocahontas probably doesn't actually if he survived or not is kind of like a different telling of the truth. -Erin Andrewlevich
====== Questions about interpretation ======
The Disney film actually skews favorably towards the native Americans in depicting the English settlers as conquerors intent on colonizing and killing the natives in the name of the King of England. But is significantly inaccurate the romantic relationship between Smith and Pocahontas, and her age.  Ratcliffe is portrayed as a villain but there is not mention of that in the primary source letter by Smith.  There also appears to be some discussion amongst historians as to whether Pocahontas was married to the Kokuom character who was killed in the movie.  – Andrew Mullins

Camilla Townsend, who spoke to the Smithsonian Magazine, is a history professor at Rutger University has this to say about the film, “She admires the white man, admires Christianity, admires the culture, wants to have peace with these people, is willing to live with these people rather than her own people, marry him rather than one of her own. That whole idea makes people in white American culture feel good about our history. That we were not doing anything wrong to the Indians but really were helping them and the ‘good’ ones appreciated it (Mansky, J. 2017).” Although I hadn’t seen the movie in a long time, rewatching it now made me pay attention to the portrayal of natives and how shapes and influences the viewers’ interpretation. Even now, I see what Townsend refers to-Pocahontas is very curious about the new people and at first doesn’t seem to think any harm will come from them. Then there’s also Pocahontas and Smith’s first encounter where he tells her that they want to teach her people how to make the best use of the land and how they have already helped so many savages. This is not the historically accurate film made by Disney but it does represent events that occured during that time period and the mentality that most settlers had-own land, find gold, and become rich.
 Mansky, J. (2017). The True Story of Pocahontas. Smithsonian. [online] Available at: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-pocahontas-180962649/ [Accessed 3 Sep. 2018]. - Johana Colchado

This movie makes it look like they were out for gold but reading the text from John Smiths journal it appears that they were more concerned with trading for food than finding metals. I know the movie and the general reason for going was gold but the original contact and meetings was about food and safety. --William Roszell

I wonder why Disney made the choice to show the story of Pocahontas when they were deciding what movies to make. Pocahontas was an interesting character but it definitely seems like the did not do background research other than to get basic names. Were they just trying to increase their diversity of their Disney "Princesses?" --Ellora Larsen

====== The movie as a primary source of its time ======

The film could be considered an accurate representation of a primary source of historically based fantasy animation for the mid-1990’s. And, is the first time a female native American princess is in a Disney film.  The movie takes liberties to incorporate some of the lore-based details to portray Pocahontas as a heroine. It is also an example of Mel Gibson and Christian Bale as actors in 1990's animation. – Andrew Mullins

//The movie showed the nicer side of how people might want the story of Pocahontas to be portrayed. The message in the movie was about two racially different groups of people who feared the other because of their differences and this was only overcome by the love and compassion shown in Pocahontas’s love for John Smith. This is not how the history actually played out and instead there was bloodshed that stained this crucial part of American history. 

The movie rewrites history in a way that shows how people in the 1990’s wish to view their past.  The openness and acceptance that they felt in the 1990’s is imposed on the 1600’s which is detrimental because it makes it seem like these were lessons learned long ago and not modern reform that is still ongoing. 

If we believe that Native Americans and European settlers got along after Pocahontas it erases the untold number of deaths due to intolerance in the centuries that followed. The message of toleration is important when understanding the attitudes of those who worked on the movie in the 1990’s, but not helpful when trying to understand the mindset of settlers in the 1600’s.//--Grace Corkran

This movie corrects past stereotypes that appeared in films from earlier time periods. It corrects the notion that Natives are “savages." Many films before Pocahontas did not always cast Native Americans in a positive light. Within this movie, Native Americans of the 1600’s are shown as empathetic people with a highly valued culture. Regardless of the countless inaccuracies of this movie, at least the native Americans are not the enemies. The entire plot of this movie was rooted in an old rumor, where a young Pocahontas saved the life of Captain John Smith from execution. It takes that story and dramatizes it on unproportionable levels in order to teach children a lesson about acceptance. Disney in the 1990’s wanted to broaden its horizons and give more groups representation in film. Also, it shows that movie producers of the 90's had a vested interest in entertaining their viewers and making sure that movies sold, which is probably why they changed the story line so much. -Maddie Shiflett 


The film Pocahontas is a good source on the evolution a story can have overtime when retold over many years. It is also a good source on how Disney uses source material in their movies. What is presented by Disney is more of a Romeo and Juliet story with the setting and characters of John Smith’s story. This tactic was used by Disney on many other stories like Snow White, Cinderella, and Little Mermaid to make it more accessible for a wide audience.- Kyle Moore

There is a reason people refer to these stories as being “Disney-fied” especially the ones during the time this film was made. Disney has never been a company that wants to rock the boat or get involved in any sort of controversy. This is especially inherent with this film in particular because the true information about Pocahontas’s story was available at the time this movie was made, but Disney chose to simplify and “Disney-fy” it in order to make money and not have the content of their film become concerning to parents. – Carolyn Stough

====== Comparing the reading to the movie ======

I found that reading was very detailed and at times was challenging to follow due to its use of 1600’s Kings English.  The reading doesn’t substantiate the relationship between Smith or Pocahontas as romantic and there is no mention of her ‘saving’ his life by intervening when the father of one of the men killed by Smith comes to take revenge. – Andrew Mullins

One thing that I noticed in the reading was that Captain Smith had a strong relationship with many native tribes. They knew who he was and welcomed him when he arrived; many natives also ventured into the English fort with him. In the reading, Smith also had many encounters with Chief Powhatan. Yet in the movie, Smith and the English settlers do not have conversations with the natives and stay to themselves. Of course relations between the English settlers and the natives did eventually break down, but the film denies that John Smith interacted with the natives.              - Maddie Shiflett 

I thought that the movie altered the true personality of Captain Smith that we see in the reading. In real life, Smith seemed to be very dedicated to his men and his purpose of colonizing for England. Yet, in the movie, Smith is cast as a day-dreamer who sneaks off and leaves his men to manage without him while he goes to spend time with Pocahontas. -Maddie Shiflett 

As stated in the reading and this Youtube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EPY1CKFecs&frags=pl%2Cwn), Pocahontas was “a child of tenne years old,” not a grown adult who falls in love with the first white man she sees. In the reading John Smith also admits to observing mysterious “Religion and Ceremony,” which translates to a ritual he does not understand, such as one where he thinks he is being killed. The movie fails to portray John Smith’s interactions with Powhatan, including a description of King James I to Powhatan in which John Smith notes that “he admired: and not a little feared” the king of England. The movie also does not portray Powhatan proclaiming John Smith as the “Awerowanes of Powhatan” and the great esteem the followers of Powhatan showed to Smith.  I presume the directors avoided discussing John Smith’s complicated relations with numerous Native tribes to propel the forbidden love story and ‘overcoming barriers’ narrative of Pocahontas. -- Jessica Lynch

The reading definitely emphasizes the difficulties faced by the colonists when they arrived, whereas the movie hardly mentions them, other than the lack of food. However, this could be because Miko ate all their biscuits. The historical John Smith is somewhat similar to the film John Smith, in that he seems to be more willing to work with the Natives than his counterparts. However, we can't know that for sure, since this is Smith's writing. He does seem to revere Pocahontas, albeit not in a romantic way, because she is a "princess", which is the narrative Disney is also pushing with the film. Pocahontas is special to colonists and those of us who only learned the colonists' side of history because of their ideas about her, not who she truly was. -Erin Shaw
====== The "So, what?" question ======

Was it right for the authors of the film to have portrayed Pocahontas as the love interest of John Smith and subsequently the savior of her people at the expense of historical accuracy, especially when so much is known about her age and actual marriage to John Rolfe? – Andrew Mullins

At the beginning of the film, there was a map that Ratcliffe was looking at and I wonder if it was accurate? Mexico was Mexica and everything North of that was Virginia. There were places that had a treasure chest drawn next to them and I don’t know if that meant he knew for a fact there was gold and had been there or if they were assumptions that gold was there. - Johana Colchado

So, what’s the point of this movie? Why did Disney go out of their way to pour millions of dollars into animations and voice actors to create this film? Well I’m sure Disney was searching for their next big movie of the time and Director Gabriel brought this movie to life. Or maybe Disney was just itching to release further content teaching the youth of America that we should love each other, hold hands and sang songs. It plays with the theme, that if we don’t learn to live with one another, we will destroy ourselves. Disney is all about that feel good, happy ending movie. This movie was ever meant to be an accurate portrayal of those earlier events in history, it’s just supposed to be a movie that teaches people to be kind human beings and to learn from one another.  -Amiti Colson

What is the significance of the film's ending? Why did Disney dissatisfy viewers by separating John Smith and Pocahontas in the end? It is not like Disney had issues with making things up that did not really happen. -Maddie Shiflett

There are multiple questions that can be taken from this movie, and all of them relate back to the fact that this film was released in the middle of what is known as the Disney Renaissance period; a period in Disney's animated films where they continued to release hit after hit. Keep in mind that the three movies that were released before //Pocahontas// were //Beauty and the Beast//, //Aladdin//, and //The Lion King//. Why did Disney decide that the story of Jamestown's founding was going to be the next big hit? If they were going to make such drastic changes to the source material, why even use this story? What was its overall significance (if any)? Admittedly, I don't think this question can be answered with just Pocahontas alone, because the next two films Disney released after this were //The Hunchback of Notre Dame// and //Hercules//, both of which are now considered mediocre nostalgia trips, and both which have so many inaccuracies to their source materials (much like //Pocahontas//). -Robert Dallas

How does Disney’s Pocahontas change the American public’s perception of Native Americans? Along with a celebratory enthusiasm for Columbus Day in public schools when we were children and portrayals of imperialists as riveting adventurers, Pocahontas continued to minimize the complete decimation of Native populations due to European disease and violence. Pocahontas appeals to audiences by portraying an unconditional romance, and as a result, young audiences are not cognisant of the truly detrimental effect colonialism had on the environment, a 90% decrease in Eastern Woodland Native populations, or the dangerous precedent which perpetuated the marginalization of Native Americans until present day. Although today Native Americans are still the most underrepresented group in the nation, a noticeable shift in awareness regarding their maltreatment has emerged. Indigenous Peoples Day replaces the holiday once used to celebrate Christopher Columbus, and most people can now look at Pocahontas and say “wow this is not at all legit.” Needless to say, we still have a long way to go. -- Jessica Lynch

So why is Disney starting to use Pocahontas again in their advertising of the princesses? Pocahontas is appearing in Wreck it Ralph 2 as a part of the Disney princess cast. When I was a child, after her movie, Pocahontas was not advertised or marketed much. I find it interesting that she is becoming more popular again as Disney is scrambling to diversify its films. However, I think using Pocahontas as a marketing tool is equally as offensive as her movie, because it feels like pandering. If Disney wants to use her, they should correct her past with a reboot film, in which she is a child and not in love with John Smith. Perhaps they could even tell her story with John Rolfe better than her story with Smith (and her straight-to-VHS movie). This would be the only Disney reboot that may be worth the money. -Erin Shaw

The history of English settlement and relationships with Native Americans is so important in our nation’s history, and I find it very concerning that there is a children’s movie so popular that is so inaccurate to this history. I know now as an adult that this is not how it really happened, but if I had watched this movie a million times as a child instead of "The Aristocats" I would have been much more confused about the actual relations between Native Americans and English settlers when I learned the truth in school. To me it is very important for children’s movies not to mislead. – Carolyn Stough

This movie came out when I was 7. I had never heard the story, or anything involved with it. It wasn’t until eighth grade that as a class we re-watched it and discussed the inaccuracies and discovered the truths in the story.I think it’s great that Disney can plant these little seeds of knowledge to get people to dig deeper into history. There is a key point in the film where its at 44:48 where Ratcliffe is talking to his aide and asks, “Why are they trying to attack us” and the aide says, “because we took their land, cut down their trees, and dug up their earth.” That is for the adults. We know this film is inaccurate, but it does well to start to introduce children to history.  I was totally not confused when I learned the real story. I was also not upset when I learned the real story. Movies don’t equal real life.--William Roszell

Tackling Native American storylines in movies accurately consistently becomes a challenge for most directors, screenwriters, and etc. How can that be changed for the better so that even though their target audience is for children, if there was to be another movie like Pocahontas, the story would still be accurate about what it was like to be a Native American and their vast cultures? -- Ellora Larsen