Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee 2007

The film, drawn from Brown’s historical work and other sources, centers on four figures whose lives intersect during a turning point in Native American policy: Charles Eastman, Elaine Goodale, Henry Dawes, and Sitting Bull. Eastman, a physician and reformer, and his future wife Goodale, a reformer from New England who serves as Superintendent of Indian Schools in the Dakotas, work to improve life on the reservation. At the same time, Dawes lobbies President Ulysses S. Grant for a more humane approach to policy, pushing a plan that originates with the Dawes Commission to break up the Great Sioux Reservation so white settlers can claim land while leaving enough for the Sioux to survive. The plan encounters stubborn resistance from Sitting Bull, a towering Sioux leader who remains a symbol of indigenous independence and resistance. Eastman is asked to help persuade tribal leaders to accept the proposal, but after witnessing conditions firsthand on the reservation, he makes the difficult choice to refuse.

Against this political backdrop, the spiritual surge of Wovoka enters the story with his Ghost Dance movement, a messianic revival that offers hope to many Native Americans for an end to their suffering. The film traces how these beliefs spark both cautious optimism and deep tension with a government determined to implement its agenda. Tragedy interrupts the fragile hopes when Sitting Bull is assassinated, and the subsequent Wounded Knee massacre at the creek on December 29, 1890, marks a devastating end to the era of large Native American uprisings and ideals.

The narrative then turns to the broader push for assimilation led by Henry L. Dawes. He advocates the Dawes Act of 1887 and later plays a central role in the Dawes Commission’s ongoing work through nearly five decades. The film lays out the sweeping consequences of these policies: vast tracts of treaty land—about 90 million acres (roughly 360,000 square kilometers)—are stripped from Native communities, and as a result, roughly 90,000 Native Americans are left landless. The forced reorganization and division of tribal lands disrupt traditional communal life, erode cultural cohesion, and reshape the social fabric of the tribes.

Throughout, the film maintains a steady, informative tone that invites viewers to weigh the human cost of policy decisions. It presents a careful, historically anchored portrayal of reformers and leaders, the pressures they faced, and the often devastating outcomes of promises made in the name of progress. In doing so, it underscores how the intertwined efforts of reform, policy, leadership, and spirituality culminated in a watershed moment for the Sioux and for the broader history of Native American relations with the United States.