My dad grew up during the sixties, so when I was a child all the music I would listen to was either Beatles or Elvis: so I know his style and i actually like(d) it. That said, as Gabi and Jon pointed out, I am not sure what the purpose of Fun in Acapulco is and what made Elvis recorder these songs, which were a flop even on he music side. I will try to underline some common elements I found in the movie.

Fun in Acapulco is the second movie we have seen set in Acapulco. The first one The Man from Acapulco has a complete different plot and setting. As we already discussed in class, it is hard to say who the man from Acapulco is and, especially, if the movie is really set there. In this second movie, however, we can actually the city of Acapulco. After reading in the article how the city of Acapulco has changed during the years, I was honestly expected a different city.

I also found some analogies with both Flying Down to Rio and Down Argentina Way. For example, the three movies are musical where the songs helps the plot keep going and developing. Unlike in The Treasure of Sierra Madre, where the soundtrack just empathized scenes, here the songs are a completing part of the movie. The style resembled the one we found in FDtR and DAW.

My attention was also caught by two other elements: the language used in the movie, especially when Elvis was singing, and the relationships that developed in the movie, especially between Margarita and her father. As we saw in FDtR, here as well the family and its bonds played a very strong role. For instance, as it usually happens in Latin families, one can get a job thanks (or because?) of some relative, in this case a cousin. What reminded me of FDtR was, on the other hand, how the father tried to control Margarita’s life by “forcing” her to get engaged with Mike just to get the visa for the States.

Lastly, I found interesting that Mike had to go to Mexico to “forget” what happened and how he failed; it was precisely in Acapulco, that he can gained his confidence back. Likewise what we argued about DAW, Latin America is portrayed as the place where someone can find money, love and, more important, possibilities to get his (usually it’s a male character) confidence back and to make his ego grow.

If I could exclude all the “negative images” that this movie shows about Latin America (the ones that both Jon and Gabi already discussed), this would be a decent movie.

I found this film to be quite perplexing due to the flexible relationships and unique character roles portrayed. Particularly the way that Mike Windgreen (Elvis) was depicted; as extremely desirable from the first scene of the film, yet his actual success did not occur until scenes later when he performed his first successful gig as […]

 

Al momento de rodar Elvis Fun in Acapulco (traducida al español como El ídolo de Acapulco), la situación del cantante y actor no era la mejor en México. En 1963 Elvis Presley estaba lejos de ser considerado “el ídolo de Acapulco” y su figura era cuestionada abiertamente en el país. Esta situación se remonta hacia mediados de los años cincuenta cuando un político mexicano había querido contratar a Presley para una fiesta privada de su hija adolescente enviándole un cheque en blanco para que pusiera allí el precio que quisiera por su actuación. Aparentemente la respuesta de Elvis fue devolver aquel cheque y para 1957 un periodista de farándula del diario Excélsior recoge las siguientes declaraciones del cantante: “preferiría besar tres mujeres negras antes que una mexicana” seguida de las declaraciones de una chica mexicana afirmando: “preferiría besar tres perros antes que un Elvis Presley”.

Estas declaraciones sin fundamento realizadas por los propagandistas de la farándula y motivadas por el político mexicano empezaron a ser tomadas en serio por los medios, quienes llamaron a boicotear al artista, quien fue tildado de indecente, homosexual, e incluso se llegaron a quemar sus discos públicamente. Esto llevo a que el cantante al enterarse de la difamación intentara limpiar su nombre de alguna forma, hasta cierto punto, su papel como figura central de la cultura popular norteamericana y su repercusión en México requerían acciones, por parte del artista y sus representantes. Las películas Flaming Star (1960), Fun in Acapulco (1963) y Stay Away Joe (1968), pertenecen a este intento de aproximar a Elvis a la cultura mexicana.

Paradójicamente Fun in Acapulco, la película correspondiente a este post, no fue rodada en México, sino en estudios de Hollywood y en las playas de Santa Bárbara ya que al cantante se le había negado la entrada al país considerado como “persona no grata” (Hay sin embargo quien afirma que estuvo en Acapulco por un corto periodo de tiempo entre Diciembre de 1962 y Enero de 1963 recorriendo las locaciones junto a un fotógrafo), siendo sólo el equipo de técnicos quienes realizaron las tomas de exteriores. La película al igual que sus discos quedaron vetados en México hasta 1971, ya saben, por eso de que vandalismo, degeneración moral y rock and roll van de la mano según “La Liga de la Decencia”. Sí, ese era el nombre de una organización religiosa mexicana de la época con el suficiente poder como para censurar películas en el momento.

Como podemos ver, las cosas pintaban mal para Elvis en México. Y la circulación de la película fue casi nula en territorio mexicano quienes en su mayoría no lo escucharon cantar “viva el vino, viva el dinero, viva el amor” prefiriendo la cerveza al tequila en una reproducción de cantina mexicana mientras intenta cortejar a la torera Dolores (y luego a Margarita). La película no escatima en recurrir al “color local” a cada momento para dar la impresión al espectador de seguir al ídolo en una experiencia auténticamente mexicana, mariachis, sombreros, guitarras, tequila, desfiles con tambores, clavadistas, enchiladas, llegando a su momento culminante con Elvis cantando “¡Guadalajara Guadalajara!” “ay mis hermanos mexicanos” en un despliegue coreográfico propio de una producción hollywoodense del estilo (como ya hemos visto en Fliying down to Rio y Down the argentine way).

El amor, la amistad, la música, el sol, la playa y la bebida construyen este Acapulco turístico, que desde mi punto de vista puede ser leído como una continuidad de la representación de América Latina como un lugar de diversión y pasatiempo desde Hollywood, con el añadido de que nos encontramos ante la idea de percibir un lugar turístico famoso en el momento, promocionado por una figura aún más famosa de la cultura popular. Las relaciones entre turismo y cine están abiertas. ¿Y Elvis? Bueno, la situación de Elvis, la película y México nos da material para pensar en las relaciones entre cultura popular, censura y nación en el momento de rodaje de la película.

 

John Parker July 26

Fun in Acapulco (1963). I agree with Gaby totally about this corniness of the obsession with “siesta” and “fiesta;” as well, I too am having a hard time determining the point of this film. Did they really have to call the lifeguard-diving champion “Moreno?” Is Tequila really the cultural icon they make it out to be? Nevertheless, I accept this film for what it is: an Elvis sixties movie meant to purely entertain, not enlighten. So I will try to mention some likeable elements of the film in my post this evening when I’m done with the bad. I grew up in the sixties, as Jon likes to point out, when everyone was crazy about Elvis. His Las Vegas act and career eventually imploded (exploded?) and the excitement died down. He recorded some of the classics of Rock N Roll, as well as hundreds, maybe thousands, of less memorable tunes, like those of this film. His singing here really was awful and his dancing worse. He did manage to do the famous hip moving that he was notorious for, but the bull-fighting-pseudo-flamenco moves were pathetic. The lyrics of the songs were pure corn and made no sense. But, for an early sixties audience that loved him, there was a tremendous market for this kind of film. As well as singing, Elvis, lifeguards, dives, dances, romances, befriends poor Raoul, drinks tequila properly to impress the female bullfighter, eats Vichyssoise with poor manners, even speaks a bit of Spanish, albeit poorly.

James Bond sixties and seventies movies were iconic for having racy Bond Girls, more for their dress than for their spying ability. Ursula Andress arrives out of the pool for Elvis in the same bathing suit and sore stomach muscles that came out of the ocean for Sean Connery. Then there’s the diving so that Elvis can get over his phobia of heights and re-join the family business back in Florida. Luckily for him, and the hotel guests, he doesn’t have to do much as a lifeguard; thanks again siesta. He has time to practice diving on the low board so he can save the day at the end of the film by doing a perfect dive from the dangerous cliffs. I’d believe it if I were an Elvis fan!

The film was entertaining, with musical interludes featuring Elvis and the hilarious-to-watch backup musicians. They did seem to catch Mexican rhythms and folklore; lots of mariachi singing, including “Guadalajara!!” and guitars and maracas. Tourist-resort local culture has to be taken for what it is. The music you hear on Margarita night (pun intended) is, of course, not what the locals listen to. The nightclub entertainment is just that, entertainment. The movie as a whole was fun to watch and gives us an interesting impression of the American perception of Mexico in the early 1960s. For the patrons of the nightclubs, Elvis was the “North American singing sensation;” Sleepy Mexico is not the United States or even part of the same continent.

John Parker July 26

Fun in Acapulco (1963). I agree with Gaby totally about this corniness of the obsession with “siesta” and “fiesta;” as well, I too am having a hard time determining the point of this film. Did they really have to call the lifeguard-diving champion “Moreno?” Is Tequila really the cultural icon they make it out to be? Nevertheless, I accept this film for what it is: an Elvis sixties movie meant to purely entertain, not enlighten. So I will try to mention some likeable elements of the film in my post this evening when I’m done with the bad. I grew up in the sixties, as Jon likes to point out, when everyone was crazy about Elvis. His Las Vegas act and career eventually imploded (exploded?) and the excitement died down. He recorded some of the classics of Rock N Roll, as well as hundreds, maybe thousands, of less memorable tunes, like those of this film. His singing here really was awful and his dancing worse. He did manage to do the famous hip moving that he was notorious for, but the bull-fighting-pseudo-flamenco moves were pathetic. The lyrics of the songs were pure corn and made no sense. But, for an early sixties audience that loved him, there was a tremendous market for this kind of film. As well as singing, Elvis, lifeguards, dives, dances, romances, befriends poor Raoul, drinks tequila properly to impress the female bullfighter, eats Vichyssoise with poor manners, even speaks a bit of Spanish, albeit poorly.

James Bond sixties and seventies movies were iconic for having racy Bond Girls, more for their dress than for their spying ability. Ursula Andress arrives out of the pool for Elvis in the same bathing suit and sore stomach muscles that came out of the ocean for Sean Connery. Then there’s the diving so that Elvis can get over his phobia of heights and re-join the family business back in Florida. Luckily for him, and the hotel guests, he doesn’t have to do much as a lifeguard; thanks again siesta. He has time to practice diving on the low board so he can save the day at the end of the film by doing a perfect dive from the dangerous cliffs. I’d believe it if I were an Elvis fan!

The film was entertaining, with musical interludes featuring Elvis and the hilarious-to-watch backup musicians. They did seem to catch Mexican rhythms and folklore; lots of mariachi singing, including “Guadalajara!!” and guitars and maracas. Tourist-resort local culture has to be taken for what it is. The music you hear on Margarita night (pun intended) is, of course, not what the locals listen to. The nightclub entertainment is just that, entertainment. The movie as a whole was fun to watch and gives us an interesting impression of the American perception of Mexico in the early 1960s. For the patrons of the nightclubs, Elvis was the “North American singing sensation;” Sleepy Mexico is not the United States or even part of the same continent.

I’m not entirely sure how I feel about the film Fun in Acapulco, moments of the film definitely had me laughing while watching it due to the ridiculousness of it. In the end I was just left confused as to what the whole purpose of the film was. The film opens with credits and we are introduced to Mike, (Elvis) a young handsome American working on a boat. The daughter of the boat owner he is working for flirts with Mike in the very first scene which right away makes him the so called “hunk” or “eye candy” of the film. However, Mike pays no mind to her and she seems to be upset that she threatens to have her dad fire him. Later on in the bar El Torito’s we come to see that this young girl does in fact use Mike when her dad sees her there and she blames Mike for bringing her and her underage friends there. In this same scene we meet Dolores Gomez a mexican bull fighter (and one of Mike’s love interests) who also seems drawn to Mike’s attractiveness after having watched him sing a song that says “Every day siesta, every day fiesta, I think I’m gonna like it here, your troubles are gonna disappear”.

The lines of the first song we hear remined me very much of the theme song in Down Argentine Way giving it a feel as if it were a commercial ad. I actually felt this way throughout most of the film due to the songs and the fact that Mike was working at what seemed to be an all inclusive resort making me think of a Sandals commercial. This first song though made me think of some approaches I have heard about Mexicans and latinos in general. Being half Mexican and half Salvadorean when I tell people my background I usually get the typical, “Oh, so you’re basically just full Mexican” which eventually leads to inappropiate “jokes” or the notion that latinos’s are lazy but they do know how to have a good party, eat tacos, and drink tequila. It’s honestly just the worst when I find myself in a converstion like this and the line of the song “Every day siesta, every day fiesta” although to some may be a fun jingle it can set up an inaccrutate represenation of a group of people. At least this is how I viewed it having that there seems to be a huge repetiton of the siesta idea in the film.

The relationship that Mike forms with the little boy Raoul brought me back to think of the films Flying Down to Rio and Down Argentine Way. Mike seems to push him away at first but then sympathizes with him when he comes to find out he has no mother or father. Raoul acts as Mike’s manager helping him find a job they call each other partners but in the end of the film they become true “amigos”, reminding me of the Good Neighbour Policy idea that was portrayed in the previous films. The one thing I found funny about Raoul is that his charcter brings the idea of latin american’s having big families with all the cousins he has. All his connections in getting Mike a job are done so because he has a cousin that can help or he has a cousin that heard this and that.

Mike is caught in this unusual love triangle with Dolores and Marguerita. Both woman become jealous of one another’s relationship with Mike creating tension between both. Although, Mike seems to want to pursue Marguerita more because she seems to be more of a chase whereas Dolores basically throws herself onto Mike telling him that next time she sees him she’ll bring her station wagon. We don’t know exactly where Marguertia is from but we do come to find out that her father would like her to marry him to gain U.S. citizenship. The end of the film is very ambiguous, we don’t know much of what will happen next or which woman Mike decides to choose. After his great dive we see that Dolores kisses him as Marguerita is right beside them but he later turns to Marguerita and says that is was just a reward from her and she in Mike’s arms. Overall, I am still unsure what purpose this film serves and am very interested in what others have to say.

What do you know about French rap from the 1990’s? MC Solaar, one of the most notorious French rappers, provides his own interpretation of the Western style film in his song Nouveau Western from 1994. In it he compares the common themes and characters, bandits and Indians, gun manufacturers and the setting of westerns with the world he lives in. While at the same time, he lays out his own definition of post-western film, Neil Campbell brings up similar points in his critique of early westerns and how they evolved with a changing American West.

The film The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is the clearest example of this transition according to Campbell and I agree. Viewers of the film will think they are in a Western as the classic Western situations come up. However, the failure of the pioneers in a foreign land, the ultimately fruitless exploitation of the land and the death and mental fragility of the lead actor indicates that this film was making a stronger and more controversial point than its predecessors.

MC Solaar argues in his song that Hollywood deceives us and that the US exports its beliefs around the world while dictating what is good and bad. Throughout the song Solaar is indicating that the western image of America still applies today. To him, he is a part of it, living in the concrete version of a desert but struggling with his own issues. As Campbell notes, imagining the western film in new light means considering how 1940’s and 50’s America was not the same as the images portrayed in westerns. Gone were the days of  entrepreneurial, settler culture. Instead, “the culture and political landscape was urban, multi-racial and globalized, juxtaposing traditional forms of life with an ever changing, contingent experience.” This is where both John Huston and Solaar find their inspiration. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is a display of competing images of the individual and the community, greed against temperance and asks moral questions such as justifications for murder. The American West was maturing, industrializing in the post war era and the history of the region was began to be understood differently.

Campbell repeatedly uses the transition of Western film from ‘movement’ driven to ‘time’ driven as an argument for proof of post-western film style. The ruins, the ‘Norther’ wind and Hobb’s dramatic death at the hands of Gold Hat, show the inability to bury the past and influence time has on landscapes. As MC Solaar demonstrates, the imagery and themes of a western are timeless and still relevant today. They can be transported across the world and across languages. Cowboys on horseback with revolvers will forever be an icon of Hollywood and America. Nevertheless, the genre continues to evolve and challenge new social issues and more recently explaining history with more accuracy.

Yasaman Rafiei, July 24

Touch of evil is about the unlimited decline of the human nature. The plot is suspenseful, well written, with good pace. The movie is about the battle between an American policeman (Hank Quinlan) and a Mexican policeman (Ramon Miguel Vargas), who are symbolic representatives of their countries.

The opening scene of the movie (tracking the bomb) is dramatic. I enjoyed the suspense in which I knew the bomb is going to go off but without knowing what and who is going to be hurt and why?

The music reminded me of the music in Tarantino’s movies that induces a different sensation from the scene itself (romantic music on violent scenes). In Touch of Evil, the Latino and Jazz music throw me off balance and for me was a bit distracting (e.g. the hotel scene, where they wanted to inject heroin into Susie).

In this film, Femininity is arguable as it is defined as a symbol of desire. Women in a hyper-sexualized way are mere sex objects; this includes Susie (Miguel’s wife) and all other women of the movie, who are mostly sex workers and play passive roles with weak minds. Touch of evil, like many other Hollywood films, objectifies women and claims that the only reason for their existence is to please men. The depict of a weak woman is tangible in the scene in which Susan wants to go back to Us. She crosses the border to Mexico and her first impression of the new country is that Mexico is not safe; thus, she requests to go back to a hotel in the US border to be “safer”. Vargas as a Mexican tried to prove the true face of his country and he emphasises that “you know this is not a true Mexico”. Vargas believes that the image which is shown from Mexico in the border of United States is the false representation of his country. Susan after seeing the chaos on the border wanted to go back to her country, but she easily changed her mind when she got a letter from Pancho. The sexual attractions of Mexico seduced her to stay.

Another important theme of this movie besides decline of human nature is the matter of identity. The very first sign of identity and changing the identity is when at the border, the officer asked Susan “what is your surname?” she said her paternal family name and then Miguel (her husband) emphasised his Mexican surname (Vargas); this moment is important in two aspects. Firstly, in terms of gender and the dominant masculinity that shapes the woman’s identity, the personality of Susan in the entire movie is framed as Vargas’s wife. Secondly, in terms of nationality, he tries to impose his Mexican origin over hers, as an effort to familiarize her with his country, culture and origin.

On the other hand, Hank as a symbol of the United States is trying to prove that Mexicans are the cause of all chaos and sabotage on the border. While the only way for Vargas as a Mexican to deal with these lies is through consistent resistance and struggle. He tries hard to prove himself and his words. When Miguel Vargas understood that the American policeman pretends that he has found a dynamite in a box, nobody believed him and the American police accused him of covering up for the Mexican delinquent. In the story, the Americans are not being investigated as much as the Mexicans; moreover, the two policemen don’t have the same level of influence on the issue. The process is such that the Mexican part is to blame unless otherwise is proven with a valid certificate, such as a voice recording. In Touch of Evil, the colonized side, which is symbolized by Miguel, could conquer the colonial power (i.e. Hank) by resisting and challenging him and looking at him as the colonist.

Finally, what I really enjoy about this movie is its characters, especially the ambivalence character of Captain Hank Quinlan, played by Orson Welles, who demonstrated his acting skills as a hero and a villain. The general ambient of the movie is dark, gloomy, and melancholy; but, the drama benefitted from this. The events continued in their dark aura until the climax of the movie was reached with the karmic cliché and moral conclusion that the world will get back at those who do evil.