After watching, I thought I should have saved this for Friday. Further research told me that Cinco de Mayo commemorates an event nearly 50 years before the Mexican Revolution, depicted herein. In fact, Porfirio Díaz, one of the heroes of the Battle of Puebla, is pretty much a villain this time around. It must be hard to remain in the good graces of the common people after 35 years as president.
The focal new hero is Emiliano Zapata (Marlon Brando), one of many peasants whose land has been stolen and who find Díaz unhelpful in their quest not to starve. He becomes a general of the rebellion that ushers in a new president. But the movie's only about half over before he and his brother, Eufemio (Anthony Quinn), find something a greater challenge than war: peace. If "peace" is the right word.
You're probably rubbed the wrong way by the star. I'd call it "brownface" if it weren't in black and white. Thankfully, Brando makes a more convincing Mexican than Charlton Heston in Touch of Evil, even if it's odd to hear his distinctive voice with a slightly different accent. Quinn rightly thought he'd've been a better choice, not least for having been born in Mexico during the revolution, but he lost the pee-for-distance contest(!) that finalized the principal casting. He must have felt better, tho, after winning an Oscar for his role when Brando got only a nod. (If anyone else here rings a bell, it's Alan "Fred Flintstone" Reed as Pancho Villa. Picture that if you can.)
If that contest makes you think of high amounts of masculinity, you're not wrong. Jean Peters may get second billing as Emiliano's girlfriend/wife Josefa, but it's a man's movie first and foremost. I don't like how Emiliano treats women sometimes, as by threatening to take Josefa away by force. At least he has no tolerance for Eufemio claiming other men's wives as payment for services rendered.
Fortunately, while the film may deviate from the facts a bit, taking cues mainly from an Edgcomb Pinchon book, it does not try to idolize Emiliano. He's a brusque fellow and comes dangerously close to turning into the next Díaz in his disregard for the immediate needs of the populace. As Hollywood goes, the movie is pretty mature in its recognition that changing the system, or even just working within it for the greater good, isn't easy. Every man makes more of a case for his actions than "What do I care about them?"
The dialog gets unusually epigrammatic ("We make our tortillas with corn, not patience"). One scene presents little more than an exchange of adages between Emiliano and some women. I credit Oscar-nominated screenwriter John Steinbeck. Director Elia Kazan must not have hurt either. Say what you will about the House Un-American Activities Committee informant; he didn't shy away from depicting the desperate anger of poor farmers.
Actually, this movie might carry more right-wing appeal than most. John McCain has called it his personal favorite. One factor is Emiliano's opposition to an order that civilians turn in their guns during peacetime; he knows how easily they could go back to square one. And that's basically what happens.
The other major things to like about this movie, both Oscar-nominated, are the set and scoring. The latter was also nominated for AFI's 100 Years of Film Scores.
Overall, I think the positive aspects greatly outweigh the negative. We wouldn't get a film like this made today, but as bitter historical dramas go, it hits a lot of high points.
No comments:
Post a Comment