Although publicized as a dramatization of Custer's Last Stand, this bears little relation to the events as known. It is a story of.... well, it is one of the most morally ambiguous pieces of Griffith's that I have seen. Griffith spent most of his career using his serious pieces to dramatize society's problems, even when he had no solution to offer, from WHAT WILL WE DO WITH OUR OLD to his last credited directorial job, THE STRUGGLE. I think Griffith meant to raise questions and tell an exciting story, as he always did.<br /><br />The first question is: which massacre? After some setting scenes, we witness a massacre as a cavalry unit attacks an Indian village. We are not told why they are attacking it. Then, when that is over, we see a wagon train moving west. Was the massacre of the Indians intended to leave their lands empty for settlers? The camera pulls back, and we see a wolf watching the wagon train, then a bear appears and drives off the wolf. Then the bear is driven off by an Indian scout in a bearskin.... and he brings the Indian forces that massacre the wagon train, leaving only Blanche Sweet and her baby alive.<br /><br />To which massacre does the film's title refer? Who is to blame? Who began this cycle of massacres? Who benefits? Was there no beginning and can there be no end?<br /><br />Although Griffith directed more than five hundred pictures, almost all of which survive, he has a vast corpus of works that are rarely seen, because so many people concentrate on his best features and perhaps a dozen of his best-known shorts. Kino is to be applauded for including a sizable number of his lesser-known, but equally powerful shorts in their most recent compilation, and for hiring John Mirsalis to do scores.