Tradimento

Isn't it so telling how the liberal filmmakers who were blacklisted generally re-emerged with their most groundbreakingly progressive works, or at least their edgiest? After Trumbo was reinstated into the Writers' Guild, he made Johnny Got His Gun, completely turning the conventional sensibilities of his own Guy Named Joe on its head. Dmytryk began working with the socially impactful liberal filmmaker Stanley Kramer. It was after Kazan testified that he made the revolutionary On the Waterfront and the prophetic A Face in the Crowd. One could say that American B director Jules Dassin was transformed as a filmmaker by his time in Europe, having made his masterpiece Rififi in France, but Up Tight! could've only been made by an American, with his finger truly on the pulse of the American state of affairs, which is to say very few Americans could've made this film.

Repressive, fascistic conservative policies and propaganda are constantly suppressing freethinking and truth, but they only make it rebound more outspoken and with more passion than ever before. Up Tight! is a quintessential case in point. It's a candid handling of black militancy. A little to my amazement, it doesn't cop out. There's no regressing toward an appeasing moderate end. The zeal and attitude of black revolutionaries are seen face to face with us, with little in the way of consolation for white liberals maybe even including myself.

Black communities celebrated this complete surprise discovery on my part as a film that said something for them. It had audacity enough to represent the rage of the ghetto. And its characters behave and think like it. It's outstanding that a major studio like Paramount backed and distributed this film. Whenever Hollywood itself has gotten involved in the envelope-pushing independent filmmaking sensibilities, it has made it viable for other movies to reflect on the American reality.

Julian Mayfield is sturdy as granite in his depiction of Tank, the informant. It's a thorny role since Tank is by and large garbled and unversed in his own intentions. But Mayfield moves with conviction. When Tank pays a visit to a wake, his bewilderment and anguish are so poignant. Raymond St. Jacques, as a centrist turned radical, is commanding and somewhat startling. He has awesome screen presence. Ruby Dee is affecting, moving and absolutely beautiful as Laurie, Tank's girlfriend.

Up Tight! is a high-quality and attention-grabbing film mainly owing to separate elements. It has no-nonsense and plain-spoken dialogue. It has more than a few commanding performances. It has moments of truth, as when the cops mow down a radical leader, while residents of a projects bucket down tin cans and abuse. These moments have their own life and continuation. To see them on the screen is sufficient.

Dassin returned to the U.S. after a long and transformative absence to deal with a precise time and setting, and he has a great deal he wants to show us about it. This triggers challenging changes in the movie's pitch as he moves between his underdog protagonist, a heartfelt, half-wit alcoholic informer, and the rebellious leaders, straightforward, skillful, fanatical, vicious. Our feelings become mixed. This is good! When whites saw Up Tight! in 1968, many alleged to have been troubled by the audience reaction: There was a shout of approval each time a white guy got hit. Huh. Well, this should've been an enlightening experience, affording us whites with a fraction of the same kind of gut reaction that blacks had for a seeming eternity when a black guy got hit. Or had to scuff their feet. Or had to squeeze inside the Mantan Moreland and Sleep 'n' Eat stereotypes. Up Tight! brought those days to an end, that is before black filmmakers began pigeonholing themselves.

I too saw this movie when it first came out. I was in college and involved in the student movement for more multi-cultural curriculum on campus. The movie was right on target and sensationally provocative at the time. At the end of the movie, just when you think there will be a political cop out in the story line, you're mistaken. The movie follows through on its no holds barred depiction of African American life in the USA at the time. It also depicts accurately how the 'black power' movement was resonating very powerfully in the countries urban ghettos. It is a terrific movie with a fabulous cast.A few years after seeing the movie I became very friendly with one of its stars, Raymond St. Jacques, he told me that "nobody could find a copy of the movie, not even Jules Dassin", it director. Many people felt that the movie industry and "gov't" had moved to squelch the showing of this film. It is curious that no one seems to be able to find a print of this film. Finally the sound track is amazing. Booker T of the MGs created just the right propulsive tension to capture the story's essence. I still listen to the sound track because the songs have such a great groove.

I saw this movie when it was first released with my girlfriend (later, my wife). I would love to see it again but it seems to have disappeared. Not only can't I find a copy of this movie, I can't find anyone else who has seen it. If I did not have the sound track, I would start questioning if I saw it or not.

It was not a "great" movie but much better than many of the Black subject movies made at that time. I also saw the "Informer" from which this was taken but I prefer "Up Tight". I hope someone re-releases this movie. A generation has passed without anyone knowing that several "large", named stars acted in this largely unknown movie.

I recall seeing Uptight when it came out. I was in high school. This was promoted very much like the Blaxploitation movies of the period, but it had much more substance and message. The plot line taken from the John Ford movie the Informer, adapts well to the political climate of the sixties for inner city African Americans. The cast was exceptional. Many like Ruby Dee, Raymond St. Jacques and Dick Anthony Williams came out of theater. These talents were important for this piece, as the movie is driven more by the the drama and conflict than action scenes. I was taken with the movie but I know that much of the nuance was lost on me because of my age at the time. I'd love to see it again. I believe that if it were found, a revival would have much appeal.

Set in Cleveland in the days after Martin Luther King's funeral, this gorgeous film interweaves several stories about what seems like typical Black urban America. There are people struggling to survive, there are revolutionaries (this is 1968), and there is the leading man, Tank, who is troubled by failure and drink, and by King's death. So crime in the name of racial justice collides with ordinary people who have their own kind of individual justice, or just decency, but strained and compromised. In a way, this is about life, ordinary life, except the times are not ordinary at all, and the drama of having a social cause elevates and distorts ordinary things. The director, Jules Dassin, is known for a couple or three great noirs, and maybe that suits the mood here, twenty years later. But the big credit is just him taking on a movie with this kind of topical meaning, and with sincerity. The political meeting in the center of movie is a bit clichéd no doubt, but it feels close enough to get the point across. The story has classic roots, in a weird way-it's based on a 1925 book, "The Informer," about the Irish resistance. It was made into a British (ironically) film in 1929, and then a more famous (and highly regarded) 1935 John Ford film. This tranferrance to the Black Revolution, with parallels to the Black Panthers in their insistence that guns are necessary to real revolution, is strong and interesting, and it comes straight from the period, without the filters and aesthetic distance that a later film would have not avoided. I have to say this is a beautiful film. Almost every scene is at night, and the stark interiors and dramatic exteriors, with layers of light and rain and sweat (and a notable early scene in the shower) make it really sizzle. Cinematographer Boris Kaufman really gets it. It's vivid just on visual terms (including a 720 degree camera spin after a shootout, another at the end). He shot "On the Waterfront" and "Baby Doll" and "Long Day's Journey into Night" for just three classics. However, it isn't uniformly thoughtful, and an attempt at some humorous surreal commentary at a funhouse is both fun and awkward. This is followed by a born-again street preacher who might seem believable to some but it seems more symbolic, and pushy. But then, this is followed a scene of family and friends in a big, quiet meeting where Tank arrives drunk, and the editing and filming seems to compare to the careful head shots in Dreyer's "Passion of Joan of Arc." Seriously. This is an almost entirely black cast, and set in squalid, cramped inner city situations. Look for fabulous performances by Ruby Dee (as a mother filled with dignity), and Rosco Lee Jones (as a homosexual), in addition to Tank, played by Julian Mayfield. For those who like blaxploitation films, this is more sincere and yet still filled with the exaggerations and details of urban Black America from that same era (or actually a few years before most of them).