Hamilton | Kevin Barrett's Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Hamilton’

No Soy Yo

Posted in Movie Review, Movies, Music and Concerts, Quotes, Reviews, tagged Alice Bloomfield, Beauty and the Beast, Cab Calloway, Charles Aidman, Daniel Valdez, Edward James Olmos, El Pachuco, George Shearer, Hamilton, Henry Reyna, John Anderson, Judge F.W. Charles, La La Land, Library of Congress, Marry Poppins, Paint Your Wagon, Poor to Moderate movie recommendation, South Pacific, Spanish, Swing Dancing, Tando, Target Audience, That's Entertainment, The Lion King, The Little Mermaid, The Wizard of OZ, Tyne Daly, United States National Film Registry, West Side Story, Wikipedia, Zoot Suit (1981) -- movie review on August 9, 2023| Leave a Comment »

“Zoot Suit” (1981) — movie review (my advance apologies: this is a long review)
Today’s review is for the musical / drama movie “Zoot Suit” starring Daniel Valdez as Henry Reyna (the main character / “gang leader”), Edward James Olmos as “El Pachuco” (Henry’s conscious and the film’s narrator), Charles Aidman as George Shearer (Henry’s Defense Attorney), Tyne Daly as Alice Bloomfield (civil rights activist / journalist), John Anderson as Judge F.W. Charles (the racist judge in the trial). This film is about the trial of some young Mexican gang members which roughly corresponds with some Mexican-American race riots in the Los Angeles area in the early 1940s. The film is an adaptation of a theatrical play of the same name which explored the event, trial and aftermath as a social / racial commentary.

Background: For many decades after the Mexican-American War, American’s of Mexican descent were the subject of open “racial” discrimination in the American Southwest – particularly in Southern California. A “zoot suit” is a men’s two-piece suit with high-waisted (typically to the lower ribs instead of at the waist), wide-legged, tight-cuffed, pleated trousers with button-suspenders and a belt (typically 2-3 inches below the top of the pants), and a long (typically knee-length) coat with wide lapels and wide padded shoulders. The suit was almost always worn with a long watch-chain (from waist to mid-calf and back to the pocket) together with a wide-brimmed fedora (“Tando” / hat). The look was a fashion fad carryover from the big band (Cab Calloway) era of the 1920s-30s and became widely adopted by many African-Americans and other minorities – particularly young Mexican-Americans in Southern California who had the nickname “pachuco” (which roughly translated to “young gangster“).

Basic plot: Shortly after the death of a “pachuco” at a dance, members of a rival gang are arrested and tried for the death. The film shows only four of the gang members, but their were actually closer to twenty (in real life). The film showcases the abusive treatment and the flagrant prejudice on display at the trial. All of the four are found guilty, but all are subsequently freed after appeal (lack of evidence and improper judicial procedures during the trial which prejudiced the jury towards a guilty verdict). The play ends with a number of actors listing how Reyna’s (the main character) life played out – 1) goes to war and wins a Congressional Medal of Honor; 2) commits another crime and goes back to prison for life; and, 3 ) gets married, has five children and lives a full life.

Within this story we are shown the “discussion” of societal circumstances, prejudice, a lack of work opportunities, and peer pressure intermix in the life of a young charismatic Mexican-American (Reyna), which is portrayed as a conflict between Reyna and his conscious (El Pachuco). Pachuco is extremely negative and claims this IS reality and Reyna’s only reality and certainty for the future.

So, is this movie any good? How’s the acting? How’s the singing / dancing? And, is this movie worth seeing? In order: so-so; terrible; okay (with qualifications); and, it might be.

Any good: I first saw this movie during it’s theatrical run back in 1981. I was unimpressed then. I am still unimpressed. I seem to have a bias for musicals and I’m not sure how to describe it (the bias). Either I really like it, or I don’t. Like: “The Lion King“, “The Little Mermaid“, “Beauty And The Beast“, and “That’s Entertainment“. Unmoved: This movie, “Hamilton“, and “La La Land“. And then there are musicals where I only like one or a couple of songs, for example: “Marry Poppins“, “Paint Your Wagon“, “The Wizard of OZ” and “South Pacific“, but don’t think much of the overall film.

The idea of a movie about a play where audience members are part of the flashback scenes was just very off-putting to me. I felt like: make up your mind! Do a play and have the audience on stage or do a (musical) movie and don’t show the audience, just the actors when they’re in the flashback. It seemed as if the director was trying to create an artificial fourth wall and then break it and re-create it when it suited the story. Except I never felt it suited the story to reintegrate.

Acting: Plays which are filmed tend to suck. This movie follows the rule (it’s really more of a general observation). Plays are actually quite different from movies. An actor in a play (particularly and older play) can’t rely on being “mic’d” up and so they not only have to exaggerate their voice, they have to exaggerate their expressions to convey what’s happening to a live audience. The problem is: WE are NOT a live audience. As acting in a play, the acting was okay to good. As acting in a film – it was terrible!

Singing / dancing: As bad as I know this will sound – I DON’T speak Spanish and despite the music, the songs did nothing for me! If you are going to make a movie with Spanish songs – exclusively – then give me sub-titles, so I can understand what you are trying to convey. Music itself is expressive, but if there are accompanying lyrics, I want to know what’s being sung. Now, I know the cost of sub-titles “may” have been a problem back in 1981, but I don’t believe it was. (And I don’t think it’s too much to add closed captioning, now.) I think it was just laziness or inconsideration to your potential audience during production. …Or, maybe I just am not a part of the “target audience”.

Despite the above comment, the dancing was pretty typical (very good) staged dancing for a play or for a film. The style was “swing” so there was a lot of spins and gymnastics and there was a good mixture of wide-angle shots and close-ups to help us appreciate the spirit of the music and the artistry of the dancers. I was also struck by how much color there was in the dance numbers. It reminded me of a number of Indian musical films I’ve viewed over the last few years.

Worth seeing: I have very mixed feelings here as I did when I first saw this film forty years ago. As a Mexican-American, I felt a certain sense of pride in being depicted “at all” in a film. This film does illuminate some aspects of our culture and our desire to both exist in and stand out in American society / culture. As a minority, we still had (and have) much to offer this country (our home). On the other hand, I felt a bit like I (my culture) was being used as a cultural re-tread of “West Side Story“. And, yes, the film left “ME” with the feeling that “our” story was really more about the mistreatment of the working families than it was about the mistreatment of young gangsters. This is the problem of seeing “yourself” so infrequently represented in film. I want each story to convey a positive message; not a mixed or negative one. But, I guess that’s me being sensitive… …And, it’s not very close to reality where every sub-culture has its good and bad aspects.

Final recommendation: poor to moderate. [Wikipedia says:] “In 2019, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant”.” As much as I would like to feel “biased” for a representative film, this film may be culturally representative, but it’s just not a very good film. I wanted to feel more sympathetic during the movie, but I just never got that far because the movie never gave me a reason to feel close to the gang members. Of course, I was emotionally outraged by the trial scenes and the blatant racism of the prosecutor / judge / court, but it (the racism) wasn’t “surprising”, or really, even “unusual” feeling. It was just (to me tragically) expected as this trial was also representative of America in the 1940s. Maybe, if you are fluent in Spanish, you’ll get more from this film than I did.

One additional comment: Back in 1981, before the internet allowed us to look these things up, I felt Olmos’ character was “El Diablo” (the devil / a demon) and not Henry Reyna’s conscious. I felt the same after this viewing.

.
Click here (9 August) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.