Talk:Taza, Son of Cochise

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Westerns: Film Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Westerns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Western genre on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WesternsWikipedia:WikiProject WesternsTemplate:WikiProject WesternsWesterns articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Film task force.

This film, due to its multiple levels of distinction as a "bad" or at least gratuitous movie, should have more description in its wiki entry.[edit]

As a 3d film, it lacks some of the gratuitous use of objects seeming to come at the camera POV as almost all other 3d films employ. Also how can the fact that the White American actor Rock Hudson plays a renegade Indian as well as 98% of all other characters meant to be Native American being played by White American actors.

Both of these facts make it a more interesting, complicated, entry then that of a simple Western film. It is horrible in its depictions of "Indians", cliche in its pap and pablum plot as well as its flat pointless dialog serving not even the ridiculous story, but 50s social mores instead of the supposed drama they were all making.

The latter facts could be said of almost any film of the 1950s let alone pre revisionist-westerns. Put it all together with White Rock Hudson and being a Hokey three dimensional movie, this Wikipedia entry NEEDS MORE 2600:8800:5C87:4E00:2540:5FEB:68E3:506B (talk) 20:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can learn to edit Wikipedia an improve this page yourself! For plot sections, you do not need in-line citations as long as you are simply summarizing what happens in the movie. To add the information about the film being bad, you will need to find a review that says that, summarize it in a a new section (like "critical reception"), and cite your source. This is because original research, like the idea that the film is cliche, is not allowed on Wikipedia. We are limited to summarizing what people have said in reliable sources. Good luck! Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 19:02, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]