O Vingador

As I watched "The Fighter", I enjoyed the movie very much. However, again and again, I kept asking myself "why did they change the original story so much?" as I watched. In a few cases, perhaps it made some sense...but often it just didn't...and I cannot understand why they didn't trust the original Jack London story ("The Mexican").

Richard Conte, of all people, stars as Felipe Rivera. Casting him and Lee J. Cobb as Durango just seemed weird. After all, they clearly were NOT Hispanic and had no trace of a Mexican accent. I am not saying this because I am Mr. Political Correctness...it's more that it really seemed unrealistic to have the pair playing Mexicans.

Rivera recently crossed the border from Mexico to El Paso, Texas. It turns out his village was wiped out by federal troops loyal to the dictator, Porfirio Diaz...President for Life in Mexico. Now he plans on working with other dissidents in Texas to help topple the regime. His greatest skill is his ability in the boxing ring and he boxes to fund the revolution.

As I mentioned above, a lot of details from the original story were changed...and in some case I had no idea why. For example, Rivera murders an evil General....but in the movie the victim is a Colonel and he's not killed by Rivera but shot by revolutionaries. Also, the reason for Rivera's village being wiped out was changed...perhaps because the production company thought it might seem 'left wing' to have them killed following a strike by employees. All I know is that I sure would have liked to have seen the original tale.

Now if you ignore the changes and weird casting, the film STILL is quite good....slightly better than the very low overall score listed for the movie on IMDB. Not great...but very good despite itself.

By the way, although it's not important, I noticed that when Rivera and the lady went to the shooting booth at the carnival, they never paid to play the game yet were given prizes after shooting. Not paying their dimes was an interesting tiny omission.

The film is too short and ends where it actually should begin. However, those intense 90 minutes are loaded with drama and pathos, and Richard Conte (although too old for the role) is perfect in characters like this, the underdog who has nothing to lose (having lost everything already) and for that reason the more to fight for. Lee J. Cobb as the rebel leader Durango is always good and reliable, and the only objection against the film should be against its abrupt ending without a proper finish. What makes the film enjoyable, in spite of all the atrocities and rough fighting, is the delicious guitar music all through by Vicente Gomez, which actually adds a dimension of poetry to the drama. The Mexical scenes are delightful, reminding of films like "The Mark of Zorro" and the Mexican "The Pearl", and you are grateful for the idylls like oases in this grim drama of revolution and oppression. Richard Conte is always good and worth watching, and perhaps here more so than usual.

Richard Conte does a fine job playing a young Mexican prizefighter in the early years of the last century. It's a trade he took to in an effort to raise money for the cause of overthrowing Porfirio Diaz.

I have to confess I was a bit shocked learning that this film comes from a Jack London novel based on a real character, at least according to the narration. Fine writer that he was London had some truly racist views on Asians. Apparently that did not hold true for Hispanics.

The plot has Conte falling under the influence of revolutionary Lee J. Cobb after his village is destroyed in a barbaric act perpetrated by one of Diaz's generals Rodolfo Hoyos. Conte flees to El Paso and hooks up with the exiled supporters of Francisco Madero.

Where in order first to just have three hots and a cot he takes up prizefighting and gets quite a local reputation as an up and coming club fighter. Let's say Conte out of necessity finds a way to combine his newly acquired pugilistic skills with his revolutionary politics. His fight scene at the climax of The Fighter is one of the most brutal ever filmed.

London liked telling tales of the brutal realistic underbelly of society and in The Fighter he also mixes his politics in with his skill as a writer. This is a really good adaption of one of his stories. Fans of London, Conte, and Lee J. Cobb will like it and others will become fans.

All long this excellent little social drama, I thought of John Garfield in the main lead character. But don't misundertand me, Richard Conte is excellent though, I would say as powerful, impressive, I mean for this film. Not for the whole Garfield career; Garfield was greater than Conte. That said, I did not know this director Herbert Kline, whose career was really short. This explains that. The movie is unfortunately too much predictable. That's not my all time favourite in terms of social drama, I guess that one or two decades before, starring Henry Fonda or Richard Barthelmess, it would have been better. With also a William Wellman behind the camera. It would have been a topic for him.

Plot-- A peasant rebel fighting against Mexico's government in the early 1900's is separated from the main force and seeks to rejoin them with the 1000 rifles they need. But the only way he can finance the rifles is by returning to the boxing ring.

Oddball movie adapted from a Jack London story. I expect London's version gels better than the film, though the latter does have its moments. Unfortunately, the boxing sequences are typical Hollywood hokum in which blockbuster punches never miss nor is defense ever practiced. I guess that's because missed round-houses and defensive jabbing lack drama while film is expensive. Nonetheless, photographer Howe (and perhaps uncredited Crosby) alternate camera angles in unusual and compelling fashion that keep the viewer interested.

Too bad, IMDb doesn't report where the Mexican scenes were filmed, because the grimy hovels and city streets look authentic as heck. I wish I could say the same for the clumsy exterior backdrops that mar some scenes, but at least they're not over-used. Still, there are several darn near sublime scenes. That's when the camera suddenly drops us behind the lovers sitting seaside. In contrast to the movie's high-key lighting, this is a poetic night world in which the lovers appear to contemplate a noirish eternity that stretches out before them. To me, these are the movie highlights.

As an old movie fan, I'd never heard of this 1952 indie entry. Moreover, I expect it got crushed by the same year's release of Marlon Brando's Viva Zapata. Then too, I expect political lefties like actor Cobb, writer Kandel, and director Kline were drawn to the politically charged material. Unfortunately, for them and maybe the film too, the McCarthy purges of Hollywood lefties was gaining momentum. So likely a cheap indie like this didn't get much distribution, nor do I recall it showing up on a late show in film-conscious LA.

That fine actor Conte manages in the lead role, while Cobb's out-sized presence fits that of a revolutionary leader. Nonetheless, the conflicting sides are made up of stereotypes, right down to the well-scrubbed peasant women and the cruel Federales. All in all, the 70-minutes has an interesting look to it. Yet the parts do shift back and forth erratically, failing ultimately to merge into anything memorable.