“Horizon: An American Saga: Part One” may just be Academy Award Winner Kevin Costner’s magnum opus. Or at least, that’s what he was hoping for. A thirty-six-year passion project that couldn’t seem to get off the ground until Costner himself invested a hefty 38 million, “Horizon” was set to be the new Western elite. A four-part series, with the original two parts set to premiere this summer, Horizon chronicles twelve years during the Civil War following the journey of Western expansion and the conflicts and struggles that the many characters face. If we’re just looking at Part One though, which is all we have to look at since it’s the only thing that’s been released, I’m not sure this is anywhere near the glorified piece of art Costner intended it to be.
With a three-hour and one-minute run time in just the first installment, it seems so silly that this wasn’t just made into a television series. The entire movie held the same aura that we see in television pilots. There is no anchor to the story and the viewers constantly feel themselves ripped in different directions trying to keep up with what’s changing. It’s clear this installment’s purpose was to set up the backstory for what will eventually be the “saga”, but it’s so disjointed that it feels hard to connect. Though there is never really a lag in the material, the editing style is so awkward and chunky that it’s confusing to even grasp what’s happening. The characters feel completely underdeveloped, with no opportunity to gain real substance before being thrust into egregious violence that does nothing to further the plot.
The story often feels like a white man’s western wet dream. The Indigenous characters are painted as savages, with only a little backstory given well after several horrific scenes supporting that narrative. Though the scenes of these characters interacting with one another are wonderful, probably due to the dynamic chemistry between Pisosenay (Owen Crowshoe) and his father (who I can’t seem to find listed as a character on any of the websites despite my best effort?). I also really enjoyed young Gregory Cruz who plays Tuayeseh, a Hispanic orphan who was adopted by the Chief. They share a beautiful moment where the elder attempts to comfort his son, after gifting a token to his brother. Tuayeseh tells him that the greatest gift he has given him is allowing him to continue speaking his natural language, accepting all parts of him. It’s one of the few heartwarming moments we’re blessed with during the film.
The cinematography and directing are gorgeous. There were several moments throughout the film where I paused to simply admire the landscape portrayed. One scene in particular is especially powerful when young Elizabeth Kittredge (Georgia MacPhail) stands by the men digging the grave of a loved one who sacrificed himself to save her and her mother. This is probably one of the coolest easter eggs in the film, but the late character is played by Costner’s own son, Hayes. ET discusses the young man’s acting debut and what it meant for the father and son to work together in their article here.
The Kittridge family is only one of the many subplots we’re introduced to. I’m sure eventually they will all connect as the movies continue but right now it simply feels like we are waiting for the story to actually begin. To properly review the film, I think we need to ignore the editing entirely. Let’s pretend it was presented as a conjunct series and not a discombobulated mess in the hopes that the subsequent parts will hit their stride.
The first subplot introduced follows the initial settlers of the valley and their subsequent demise. One thing that is true for every subplot is that there’s an excess of violence and gore. I found myself thinking early on that the movie is told through the eyes of a white male fantasy. The women are rarely dressed, often in sheer layers, and are often mistreated. There is no depth to their character except for their trauma and their value to their male counterparts. There seems to be a preference for that in the genre but it felt a little heavy-handed. An argument can be made that it was a preference of the time but I do believe there’s a way to portray it that allows for a more holistic approach that actually urges the plot forward.
Costner himself, playing Hayes Ellison, a rugged man faced with a whole host of new problems upon arriving in the West, doesn’t even appear until an hour into the runtime and has very few scenes throughout the movie. Throw in a prostitute (played by Abbey Lee who is a whopping thirty-two years younger than Costner, which means she hadn’t even been born yet when he originally was pitching this film) and a child being hunted by a band of very attractive psychopaths led by Jon Beavers as Junior Sykes and Jamie Campbell Bower as his brother Caleb Sykes. Honestly, these two probably hold the title of the most developed characters we get to see. Driven by revenge as they hunt for their father’s mistress after she shoots him full of lead and takes off with their son, these two are deliciously deviant. While Junior seems to have some morality, Caleb is nothing short of diabolical, with very little regard for consequence or innocence. Bower excels, as always, bringing Caleb to life. There’s a fantastic article on Esquire here where you can learn more about his process with these chilling characters he plays.
It’s a challenge to wade through the insane amount of material provided to try and figure out exactly what information is going to be valuable going into the rest of the series. We’re given glimpses into a group still making the crossing, led by Luke Wilson, but again, nothing of real substance seems to happen. We see Juliette Chesney (Ella Hunt) half naked and interrupted by two of the creeper members of the caravan spying on her and learn her husband (Tom Payne) doesn’t care to get his hands dirty with much other than his art materials. We’re introduced to Diamond Kitteredge (Isabelle Fuhman) briefly. There was quite a bit of press about her casting which doesn’t seem to translate to how small the role was so I’m assuming her story will continue to unfold. I will say I’ve been a fan of her since The Hunger Games so I was really happy to see her back on my screen.
There’s also a building romance between recently (and traumatically) widowed Sienna Miller playing Frances Kittridge and General Trent Gephart (Sam Worthington) but again, we don’t see any depth to Miller’s character. We see her tragedy, her trauma response, and then her obvious growing affection for her rescuer. Miller is allowed two scenes to shine, where we witness her trapped with her young daughter, with death knocking and her determination for their survival, and then her subsequent response to their rescue. There’s no substance added by dialogue or material here though. It was Miller’s one acting talent that provided the impact needed for those scenes and she excelled with very little to go off. Serious trigger warnings on those scenes if you also suffer from claustrophobia though.
We also have the brutal and often disturbing trackers subplot. Led by Jeff Fahey (who is given no name other than Tracker), this part dives deep into the brutality of the Civil War and the hunt for indigenous people (and anyone who may pass as such) by white settlers as we follow a young boy seeking revenge against the Apache tribe that slaughtered his family and his town. There’s a powerful moment where the consequences of the boy’s actions slam into him, causing him to drop to his knees in one of the most aesthetically pleasing and powerful moments of the movie. However, not only is the movie itself fragmented but so is the press material, because I can’t seem to find a character name or actor name for the boy even though he was in more scenes of the movie than Costner himself.
I’m going to be honest with you, dear reader, and tell you I have given enough hours of my life to this monstrosity of a movie already and refuse to give a moment more than what will be required to finish this review to try and search for the name. Feel free to be a doll and drop it in the comments if you figure it out. Either way, the boy seems like one we’re going to want to keep an eye on for future installments.
Another huge issue comes into play about ten minutes before the end of the movie. There is no set point where you learn that the current installment is ending, no final scene that gives you that cathartic high that you’ve achieved something sitting for three hours watching these people. Instead, it flashes immediately into a high-adrenaline trailer for the next installment. The viewer is completely thrown by what’s happening on the screen, attempting to figure out if they’ve just missed the actual movie. I will say the scenes had things I’d be interested in seeing.
I understand completely what Costner was trying to do here. Maybe as a whole, the project will be the epic that he is hoping it will be. If we are just looking at this singular part though, I have to say it felt like a complete waste of time. I’ve written a lot of reviews and this entire process has been legitimately painful. It feels like the same regurgitated white male fantasy we are constantly fed. It’s over-the-top violence just for the sake of gore, flat characters with very little chance to develop, and a story that just seems to be awkwardly thrown together.
At this point, I feel like I’m committed to the chaos though so I will probably be watching the subsequent parts, but it’s purely out of spite and not an actual desire to know what happens. If I’m being completely honest, I preferred 1883 (the Yellowstone prequel) and even Walker: Independence which is streaming on Max now to this film. They’re both only one season each and feel so much more fleshed out and developed than this thirty-six-year project.
I do think you should watch “Horizon: A Great American Saga” though, for the simple reason that I would like vindication that other people agree just how bad this film was.
And if you disagree? I’m dying to know why. Enlighten me.
Find Horizon: An American Saga on Max and on HBO.
