Today, as part of our “Kazan Redux” series, we’re going to re-review director Elia Kazan’s eighth film, “Viva Zapata!” This movie has always been one of my least-favorite of Kazan’s nineteen projects, but as I re-watched it for this re-review, I actually developed a new appreciation, until I got to the ham-fisted ending. The review below was first posted on February 18, 2017 and has been slightly revised.
Viva Zapata!
Directed by Elia Kazan and featuring Marlon Brando, Jean Peters, and Anthony Quinn
Twentieth Century-Fox, 1952, 113 minutes
By 1952, director Elia Kazan had achieved extraordinary artistic and commercial success on Broadway and in Hollywood. But the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) in Washington D.C. was also interested in Kazan because he had been a member of the American Communist Party from 1934 to 1936 and his films advocated social progressivism. Perhaps in deference to increasing pressure from HUAC, Kazan made “Viva Zapata,” a salute to the revolutionary proletariat, but also a veiled indictment of Stalinism. “Viva Zapata” was released in February 1952 and Kazan was called to appear before HUAC in April when he testified as a friendly witness, naming names of fellow communists and earning the undying wrath of liberals. Kazan’s following two films, “Man On A Tightrope” (1953) and “On The Waterfront” (1954), also attacked Stalinism and attempted to justify his HUAC friendly testimony.
Plot
A group of Mexican peasants petitions right-wing dictator, President Diaz, for land reform. The patronizing Diaz notes the insolence of one particular individual, Emilio Zapata (Marlon Brando). Zapata grows in stature as a leader of the people with his spirited brother, Eufemio (Anthony Quinn), at his side. His peasant army joins in the Mexican Revolution of 1910 to overthrow Diaz and install liberal reformer, Francisco Madero, as president. As Zapata’s fame and influence rises, he marries Josefa (Jean Peters), the daughter of a rich merchant. Impatient with the well-meaning but befuddled Madero, Zapata continues the fight for agrarian reform. Madero is felled in a coup led by General Huerta. Zapata and the the other rebel generals eventually drive Huerta into exile. Zapata is appointed president of Mexico, but quickly resigns in frustration. Mexico’s new rulers, former leftist revolutionaries, hunt down Zapata, eventually killing him in an ambush. Journalist, Fernando Aguirre (Joseph Wiseman), a shadowy figure and former adviser to Zapata and the other revolutionary leaders, has a hand in Zapata’s death.
Commentary
Unfortunately, acclaimed novelist John Steinbeck’s script does not flow easily. You’ll need a scorecard to keep track of all of the politicos and los comandantes. First, the bad guy is Diaz. Then it’s Madero. Then Huerta. Then Carranza. Ay, caramba! We know from later interviews with Kazan that the Aguirre character was meant to represent unscrupulous Stalinism, but the average viewer would never make that connection on their own. Zapata and his revolutionary compadres are romanticized a great deal by Kazan. The last reel is as hokey as it gets with the peasant rebels denying Zapata’s death and his white horse galloping off into the sunset. One hundred years after the Revolution, Mexico continues to struggle politically and economically. Brando, Peters, and Quinn turn in fine performances with Quinn winning a supporting Oscar. As a trivia note, Jean Peters was the second wife of the eccentric Howard Hughes. Also, revolutionary, Pancho Villa, is portrayed by Alan Reed who would eventually end up as the voice of Fred Flintstone. The “Viva Zapata” Blu-ray was released in 2013, but offers no commentary or special features other than the trailer.
Additional thoughts from a believer’s perspective
Perhaps the most truthful moment of this film is when Zapata has ascended to the presidency and a group of peasants present him with their grievances. Zapata angrily takes down the name of the most insolent peasant just as as Diaz had taken down his name several years before. The oppressed become the oppressors. The hearts of men are desperately wicked.
People look to their nation, government, and society for their identity and fulfillment. While God’s Word says Christians are to be law-abiding citizens so as to be a good testimony to our unbelieving neighbors, our primary citizenship is in Heaven. We are ambassadors and emissaries for our Heavenly King as we journey through this world. Real freedom and fulfillment come through rebirth and identity in Jesus Christ, not through nations, governments, political parties, or revolution.
On deck: “Man on a Tightrope” (1953)
Dropping by with a hi! It’s 65 F here and raining here which is weird for us here in May! What’s the weather there?
LikeLiked by 1 person
👋🏼 Wow! That’s ROC weather. Cloudy here and 59F with more rain expected tonight.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow awesome. It stopped pouring for a little bit and now I’m waking reading Sproul’s book that you reviewed!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m grateful that Sproul, JMac, D. James Kennedy, and Ankerberg condemned ECT and defended the Gospel of grace.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am too. I’m on page 136 so far!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I remember that book not being a breezy read.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can see why!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I remember I liked the action.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Bonnie! Yup, there’s definitely a lot of action in this movie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow this movie is by a script from Stenbeck? And it takes place in Mexico? Fascinating! ANd also interesting that Marlo also starred in this one! Reading this review made me realize I haven’t watch a movie in a while
LikeLiked by 1 person
Steinbeck and Kazan were good friends and would team up again a few years later in “East of Eden.” I’m sure a lot of people expected a great story knowing Steinbeck was the screenwriter, but the plot is a bit discombobulated. The only movies I’ve been watching are for these Kazan re-reviews and I’m running behind for the next one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gotcha it’s neat to see friendships of famous people in history
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, they had something in common after both started out as radical Left in their early years and became more moderate as they got older, and then were hounded by the government during the Red Scare years for their radical past.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow can see why they would be friends with those similarities
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you also for the trailer!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks! Yeah, I’ve been adding the trailers for these Kazan re-reviews. Gives folks a chance to catch a few snippets of the films. I get a chuckle out of these old-school trailers because they’re so hyper-dramatic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sometimes I feel trailers of the past is better than trailers today
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am enjoying these movie reviews. You make them sound interesting,
I don’t remember having seen this movie.😊
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Crissy! I’m not much of a movie person but I enjoy re-trodding through these old Kazan flicks and mining some spiritual lessons. The fundamentalist church where I was discipled as a young Christian was against watching just about all Hollywood movies, although they countenanced various other things that were harmful.
LikeLike