File this one under Questionable Timing.
Disclaimer: I am not a fan of pulp movies, "retro" movies, or movies that are supposed to be "cool," or "witty" because they "harken back to exploitation flicks of the 70's." I don't think the "exploitation flicks of the 70's" are worth harkening back to. I hate Quentin Tarantino. I think dressing up gratuitous, in-your-face violence as wink-wink art or some type of "edgy" cultural statement is a cheap and unimaginative ploy. What some think passes for humor I think of as an excuse for one's inability to actually be funny. But that's just me. I'm a film snob.
Evidently, Robert DeNiro, Lindsay Lohan, Jessica Alba, Cheech Marin, Don Johnson, Danny Trejo, and Steven Seagal disagree. I'm not surprised at the last name--I'm disappointed in the first. The rest I frankly don't care about.
And no, I haven't seen this movie. No one has, in fact. Directed by Robert Rodriquez, it's coming out late this summer, when the temperature in Arizona will be pushing 120 degrees and the enforcement of the Pass Law will have just begun.
More
The backstory is that the "Machete" film was originally written by Rodriquez nearly twenty years ago. A fake trailer (You need to see the trailer to understand where this Diary is coming from) was released, directed by Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino accompanying the DVD of Planet Terror. The movie was then made, and in May an abridged form of the above trailer was released with the lead actor, Danny Trejo, appearing at the outset, saying he "had a message for Arizona".
The film focuses on Machete (Trejo), a renegade former "Mexican Federale". After a shakedown with a druglord (Seagal), Machete roams the towns and streets of Texas looking to do yard work in exchange for money. Michael Benz (Fahey), a local businessman and spin doctor, explains to Machete that McLaughlin (De Niro), a corrupt senator, is sending hundreds of illegal immigrants out of the country. In order to stop this, Benz offers Machete $150,000 to kill McLaughlin. Machete accepts the murder contract. As Machete attempts to assassinate McLaughlin during a rally, he is double-crossed and one of Benz's henchmen shoots him. It is revealed that Benz orchestrated the entire attempted assassination as part of a false flag operation to gain public support for McLaughlin's harsh anti-immigration laws. By setting up Machete as the patsy, the conspirators make it appear that an outlaw illegal Mexican immigrant has tried to assassinate the senator.
OK, I get the idea that there's an element of "justice" here. I get the idea that this movie, at least ostensibly, is trying to impugn the motives and characters of the anti-immigrant reactionaries. And I get the idea (from watching the trailer) that this is all pretty much tongue-in-cheek, not to be taken seriously. So I'm sure all that view this movie will treat it with the circumspect scrutiny and perceptive nuance that it doubtless requires. Because the audience for this is clearly, thoughtful savvy liberal bloggers with an eye for genre parody.
Not.
You see where this is going. There may some cinematic merit to this project, although I doubt it, considering the source (yes, that's my own gratuitous swipe). And I'd really prefer not to be dragged into a discussion of "artist's rights" and the "First Amendment." This movie appears to be deliberately, if not gleefully, inflammatory. Perhaps it is intended as satire. Well, so was Starship Troopers. People interpreted that movie either as satire, a celebration of fascism, or a simple action film.
It would be nice if we had the luxury of interpreting "Machete' as a satire, a celebration of violence, a pro-immigrant polemic, a dark comedy, or a simple action film. It would be nice to have that debate in the rarefied air of 2008 or 2009. But the timing of this seems to me to be peculiarly ill-advised. And for the record, someone at TPM disagrees with me, while I find myself more aligned with some on the right who are sputtering about this movie, albeit for different reasons.
My question is ultimately, "How is this helpful? What does this do for the debate? And does it do more harm than good?" Funny or witty or edgy as it may be, what we have here is a Mexican gentleman armed to the teeth, trying to kill a US Senator to avenge his undocumented brethren. That's the plot. Opening in downtown Tucson at a theater near you. This Summer.
I debated whether to set up a poll after this Diary or instead to consult my friend Dieter, who is my cultural guru in all things "film." The following is a transcript of the conversation we had over the phone this evening:
DIETER:: What, you're suggesting that Rodriguez sublimate his artistic impulses simply on the assumption that his film will inspire violence? What kind of sorry progressive thought is that?
Me: I'm just a little concerned about the timing of this...
DIETER: Well, what time is a good time for censorship, Dartagnan?
Me: Sometimes a little self-censorship can be a good thing.
DIETER: Hmmph--in the case of your Diary, I would agree.
Me: So, it's your opinion that it's OK if a few people are inspired to violence as long as Rodriguez' artistic impulses are protected?
DIETER: Enough of this fascist claptrap. You never could appreciate high art. CLICK
Sigh.
It's gonna be one Hell of a Summer.