08/9/17

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (2005), is a Post/Neo Western movie, directed and acted by Tommy Lee Jones. It tells the story of Melquiades Estrada, a Mexican illegal migrant who enters Texas in search of a job and a new life. Soon enough, Melquiades and Pete Perkins (Tommy Lee Jones), become friends and work partners. However, this new and unfiltered friendship is soon tested when Melquiades is killed and Pete is forced to find his friend’s killer and to fulfill the promise of burying Mel in his home town in Mexico.

I think that Three Burials is a post/Neo Western movie because it retains elements of conflict of the traditional Western genre movie such as good versus evil (cowboys’ vs Indians/Mexicans), freedom versus settlement, solitude versus cooperation and wild versus civilization. Nevertheless, other new and interesting elements are brought into the mix of Three Burials as a way to reinvent the Western genre and to challenge pre-established social and cultural norms impose by society which are based on stereotypes the ‘other’ as foreigner and evil. For instance, in the case of The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada, both Pete Perkins as well as the audience are forced to come to terms with the concept of friendship, honor, ‘the other’ and traditional family values. As we have seen in previous Western themed movies such Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) and The Mark of Zorro (1920), movies have being responsible for constructing pre-established notions of how society should look-like and where white American cowboys redeemed themselves in foreign lands (Mexico in the case of Sierra Madre). This is to say that, some values are more important than others: honor, solitude, tradition, and nature. In the case of The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada, the West belongs not only to the white American cowboys of Texas but it opens a cultural and social space for Mel himself to enter this Western world as a baquero just like his counterparts.  Here, the US-Mexico border, is a fluid zone where identities are recognized but allowed to coexists, cultural hybridity is present, and spaces take different meaning and values. Among this fluid Mexico-US border area, Pete’s mission to find the killer of his friend and later his mission to bury him in Mexico also challenge the notion of the typical Western movie.

The value and meaning of true friendship is highly explored in Three Burials. For once, the way in which Pete welcomes and allows Mel to work in his Texan ranch and to become his friend, shows that the view of the Mexican as the ‘other’ does not apply in the same context as it did in movies such as Zorro or Sierra Madre. For example, there is a clear intention by Pete to carry out Mel’s wishes of being buried in his homeland and what he does to accomplish this is what makes the movie interesting to analyze. Not only does Pete find out who Mel’s murderer is but forces Officer Norton to carry Mel’s dead body through the US-Mexico border, across the desert (on a mule’s back) and buries him in his ‘home’ town. Hence, showcasing the overall sense of dedication and friendship for his Mexican friend and demonstrating loyalty for others beyond social and cultural boundaries. For this reason, Perkin’s reason is not only driven by his desire for vengeance but instead love and solidarity for his friend are paramount drivers of this post-Western film.

The difference among the importance of family values giving in The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada, deserves close attention. In fact, the way in which Officer Norton’s house hold is presented vastly contrasts that one of Mel’s family ideas or among those of Mel and Pete’s, who in some respect has become a sort of acquired family for Mel’s. Officer Norton family is in crisis. Norton and his wife seem to be at lost (bored in a new city and lost in this new job). Instead, Mel’s family values are around his ‘wife’ and children and his relationship with Pete are portrayed as good, honest and carefree. Pete cares a lot for Mel’s, so much so that he introduces him the companionship of Lou Ann Norton, Officer Norton’s wife, to be his romantic partner. It is like if Pete is a father figure to Mel and race, origin, and blood does not matter to him but what really matters is his friend’s happiness and well-being. What transpires in the end and really matter for Pete is to restore the respect and dignity of his good friend Mel. Hence, the three consecutive burials lead Pete to force Mike Norton to take a road trip to Mexico so they can give Mel a proper burial.

To finalize, Lou Ann Norton and Mel find their own way to be happy in the motel room. It is here where Lou Ann is the happiest. It is in the motel room, among this liminal space, where she escapes being raped by her husband the border patrol Officer. It is in here, the motel room, where Lou Ann takes charge of her destiny and help ease Mel into being himself. Language does not matter in this motel room liminal space. Hence, music, television and dancing become excuses to get to know each other better. Sex is not necessary. Only their intimacy for one another is what allows them to escape their realities and to forget their sorrows. For this reason, Lou Ann and Mel brake the conventions of family values in the motel room and allow themselves to be happy for a while before returning to their day-to-day spaces. In the case of Lou Ann is her role as bored house-wife and for Mel is an illegal cowboy in Texas.

Lastly, it is important to mention that Lou Ann escapes her stagnated reality when she leaves the Texan town of Van Horn after her husband goes missing. On the other hand, Mel only escapes his illegal and foreign condition when he is mistakenly and wrongly killed by Officer Mike Norton. Hence, choice of action versus fatal destiny are put forward in the movie as circumstantial themes which conducts the action within the movie.

07/22/17

Touch of Evil: Justice and the Law across the Mexican border

Touch of Evil (1958), acted and directed by Orson Welles, is a movie about violence, corruption and murder in the Mexican border town of Los Robles. The movie begins with the activation of a time-bomb mechanism. The explosion of this bomb will go on to unleash a series of events which will affect all the characters in the movie (main and small ones) and lead them to pain, tragedy, and death. The story-line is well-intertwined given that the bomb has a direct link to an American builder contractor and his girlfriend who are killed in the explosion.  This is to say that, the main characters in Touch of Evil, Mike Vargas (the Mexican detective) and Susan Vargas (Vargas’ wife), have to stop their honeymoon in the U.S- Mexico border town of Los Robles, when the explosion occurs. Mike Vargas and Susan Vargas will face the giant American Police captain Hank Quinlan who is brought to life by Orson Welles himself.

There are many excellent movie sequences in Touch of Evil, but I will be referring only to three segments of the film which stayed with me and which I think are important to explore. The first scene I want to analyze is the one after the car explodes at the crossing over the Mexican border. The second scene is the interrogation of Sanchez. Thirdly, the incriminating scene between Vargas, Menzies and Hank.

First, during the first minutes of the movie, the viewer gets to see the cross-border town of Los Robles and the security border check points on each side. Vargas, a Mexican police investigator, and his American wife Susan, cross the border by foot to the U.S’ side. Hence, the movie depicts a sort of free or fluid accessibility across the border in where people from both countries can come and go with no problem. The only question asked is: Are you American? For which Susan answers yes and this allows her and her husband to cross over the check-point and to enter U.S.A’s soil without showing a passport. Nevertheless, later in the same scene, the viewer can see how the American police enter Mexico illegally. This reference is important because it is not just the Mexicans who crossed illegally here but the Americans do it as well.

One of the lines which resonated with me came from the woman who drives with the contractor by car and are about to die, “I got this ticking noise in my head.” The ticking noise to which she is referring, as all the audience knows, is the time-bomb itself which is about to explode in the car. However, she is quickly dismiss by the border American officers with a simple, yes! And never gets around to ask what’s really happening. I find this scene interesting because the ticking bomb in her head counts the remaining time she and her boyfriend have left. Additionally, right after it, Susan appears talking with Mike saying, “You realize this is the first time we’ve been together in my country?” Mike replies back saying, “Do you realize I’ve not kissed you in an hour?” For this reason, I like the immediacy given to time in both lines marking the end for some and the beginning of suffering for others, as well as, their final triumph.

Second, the characterization of both, Mike Vargas and Susan Vargas, is exemplary of good people. Mike, a Mexican Narcotics officer main mission is to bring down the Grandi family and their illegal drug business. For her part Susan, a typical American-wife, follows her husband’s orders and suggestions to the letter. In a sense, their commitment to their marriage is demonstrated on screen. This is not to mention their undeniable love for each other (a romantic theme) and their resilience to remain good in the midst of evil which allows them to remain together in the end.

For instance, when Susan is waiting for her husband at the motel, she faces off the gang of Grandi’s boys. These men and women thugs and drug addicts enter Susan’s room in order to scare her with the idea of rape, just as uncle shorty ordered it. But, at that moment, it seems like Susan is about to be raped by these three criminals and even one of the women says “I want to watch.” It is not until the end, when these same women are seen talking with ‘uncle shorty’, when the audience knows that Grandi only wanted to scared Susan, so as to incriminate Vargas’ wife for drug possession and murder. One way or another, we as the audience are not sure if Susan was raped or not and maybe this element in the movie is another shade of evil which spills over the good characters of Susan and Vargas to highlight their goodness.

The final scene in which Menzies teams up with Mike Vargas to get Hank’s incriminating confession on tape, is of great importance. For once, this long sequence highlights the brilliant writing skills of Welles. The creativity, fluidity and suspense of the lines spoken by Hank are stellar and build up to the dramatic ending of the movie. It also takes the viewer through a historic timeline given that Hank sees at the beginning of this shot two of his most important friends, Pete and Tana. Hank asks Tana to read him the tarot for which Tana tells him that he has “no future” as a way to foreshadow his ending. Later, when Hanks leaves Tana’s house, Hank accuses Pete of becoming an idealist for partnering up with Mike Vargas. It is important to mention that, Mike and Pete’s partnership contrasts directly with that of Hank and Shorty’s. The first partnership is good and lawful one while that one of Hanks and Shorty is shady, illicit, and evil.

What’s more, the dialogue of Hank is great because he also contemplates what’s around him while being drunk and on his way to death. Hanks realized that the Mexican oil fields are “pumping money” and questions the financial situation of his own life. “Don’t you think I could have been rich? A cop in my position?” With these questions, Hanks shows his immorality, contempt for his profession and, more importantly, his greed for money. Hence, when he dies at the hand of his best friend, Pete, there is a clear justification for this action and the audience don’t feel so bad given his evilness of character.