It deals a bit with the revolution themes. Letâs say a half-Zapata.
(Question: How many Zapatas are a Huerta?)
You got me (donât like to admit that): No idea what youâre asking
Not a real question. Goes back to the question why they are called Zapatas and not Villas. Or Maderos. Or whatever.
In Germany they are simply called revolution westerns. And thatâs what they are.
I think Zapata western was name given by Corbucci to revolution westerns.
From the all three IMO Zapata itâs the most famous world wide, of course Villa is also Known, (Medero is less known, only in Mexico and by History nerds like me, and even so, only cause of SW) but being from the south of Mexico (Villa was from the North, a worry to the USA, who made a punishment raid into Mexico against Villa with no sucess, lead by general Pershing the future comander of USA troops in Europe during WWI), the revolucionary groups of the Chiapa region (south) are called Zapatistas, their fight itâs still the same of Zapata the phrase Itâs better to die on your feet than live sat, itâs famous and belongs to Emiliano Zapata Salazar
The main players back then in Mexico (between 1900 and 1920) were Zapata, Villa, Porfirio Diaz, and Francisco Medero and General Huerta.
Most of SW scenes which we see the pleasents Villistas or Zapatistas being gun down by machine guns by the hundreds, are based in the real life battle of Celaya, itâs calculated that the Army of Villa lost between deads and injured ,more than 10000 men some historians say more than 30000 men, due to use by the mexican army of machin guns, he and the remaining surviving force was later ambush and shot like seating ducks, during the night in what it must have been the first military use of flares, all this guns came from the US supporting the government of Carranza (a Madero follower).
The film 100 rifles for instance itâs also based in some true facts, as a reply to all the man killed in Celaya, Villa launch an attack at the railroad being build by the americans in Chihuahua and killed 16 american engineers, president Wilson did not reply then, but later after Villa atacked teh city of Columbus and Fort Furlong near by, he gave the the authorization for the Pershing raid.
In the end ZApata IMO his more known because itâs name sounds better
Zapata chega e mata
Come Zapata and Kill like we use to say in Portugal
Can Tepepa be considered a Zapata western? That would make a favourite of mine in the genre.
Absolutely. Tepepa is a quintessential Zapata Western I would say. Far more so than Run Man Run in my opinion which I always felt was set well before the 1900s.
I have in my life more heard or read about Pancho Villa than Zapata. So I would have assumed that Villa is (or was) the more famous of the 2.
Interesting info by El Topo.
Like Stanton, I have always thought Villa is the better known of the two, but to whom? And why?
In history lessons their names were never mentioned as far as I remember (there was next to no attention at all for Mexico), and I have never developed a special predeliction for the country of Mexico or its history in later life. Maybe Wallace Beery and Yul Brynner made more impression as Villa than Brando did as Zapata.
I donât know. I think Alk0 is a historian and has some expertise on Mexican history.
Would be interesting to hear what he has to say about this
Well this running out a little it off topic, but like you must have notice I do my living as an account, but my real love itâs history and I would love to have became a historian, but in Portugal you only could go teatching with that professional choice or degree (and teatching was not my thing). But still love history, and afer the bikes and dvdâs itâs where I spend most of my money, ;D (almost) subscriving some spanish magazine, Historia Y Vida Clio, French Clio, and some Militar History Magazines.
The History of Mexico Post Spanish Invasion itâs somehow famous not only because of the frontier with the United states and their commun history, but also because of the European Interventions, most famous the French one with Napoleon III trying to put Maximilian brother of the Austro Hungarian Empire Emperor FRancisco Jose (in Portuguese) as EMperor of Mexico and Subservient to the French, of course he American didnât like that much that move (this was during the American Civil war). The French Foreign Legion Fought n Mexico, and one of their most famous batlles was in Cameron Whrer they fight to the last men against a much superior force of the Mexican Army, but that itâs aother story by itself
I think Kazanâs Viva Zapata is better known than the films with Beery and Brynner. But apart from them when there are films, comics or books which are set in or around the Mexican Revolution they are generally nearly all dealing with Villa.
And of course the âheroesâ Villa and Zapata are much more known to everyone than the âbaddiesâ Huerta or Diaz or a politician like Madero. Just like the name Robin Hood which is more famous than the Sheriff of Nottingham.
Where did you hear that? Would be interesting if Corbucci were ultimately behind it.
Any political leanings that can be gleaned from SWs certainly seem to me to be much closer to the Zapatismo movement than the Villismo one, although Villismo is pretty hard to pin down in any case.
A truly great read in English is âVilla and Zapata: A Biography of the Mexican Revolutionâ by Frank McLynn.
Maybe some movie magazine, canât remember for sure right now.
Maybe you can help me out Novecento, I think not sure Solima was a member of Italian Comunist Party (one of the strongest in Europe at the tiime 60/70âs ), I think the Martino brother were also active menbers, not sure also,itâs obvious that many SW deal with importan issues of class struggle and not only the Zapata SW, (Mannaja for instance), can you confirm this, did the Italian directors (Martino, Solima, Corbucci even Leone) took advantage of their films to pass a political message?
Letâs not forget the times Vietname war, May 68, the last days of the colonial empires and all that
@ El Topo: Since youâre interested in history, politics and all that, you should probably read this article (if you havenât already):
http://fistfulofpasta.com/index.php?go=articles/spagpolitics1
No I must say I havenât. Thankâs Sherp for showing me, by the way itâs very well written, Iâve always focused in the left wing politics of the SW, something similar to what happen in Portugal after the revolution, but not in Spain where Franco was smarter and gave moviemakers more freedom but censured the exhibitions for the public. I never made the analogy of the civil war.
The Italians were very much dividid and Mussolini still had to answer to the King, for instance their navy was reluctanted to say the least in fighting for the fascits, they were brave (remenber the almost suicidal use of the mini submarine by the italians) but where the first ones to fight with the allies. AiAi but that itâs another story
Thankâs again Sherp I will read it âknowledge itâs the food for the brave soul not gloryâ
It says in Fraylingâs book âFrom Karl May to Sergio Leoneâ that Corbucci called his films Zapata spaghetti
Most Italians were pro-Mussolini, this only changed when the tide of war changed
The overwhelming majority of Italians didnât take part in the civil war though, but remained neutral until the war ended
In the post-war years when âfascistâ became a four letter word, the popular image was probably that Italians had never been followers of Mussolini, and that they all fought the nazis and fascists
And Mussolini was a left-wing himself, he started out as a socialist but eventually rejected the marxist ideas of class struggle and international communism
The Civil war was conducted by the Comustic party almost intirely, and if tolerate by the allied Command was not with great satisfaction that saw the guerrila warfare but could do little do change things at the time, and in anyway it was of use in some behind the lines ops, Italy was also a secundary war scenario after Normandy and the bloody battles of Cassino and Anzio that were victoreis with great losses and with no real or great tactical gains besides the conquest of Rome.
By suporting alone the Italian side (very few italian militar units fight with the allies, and those that done it were in great majority from the navy) of the fight against the fascits, the PCI (comunist Italin Party became very powerful after the war, being the most strong comunist party of the eastern coutries, even stronger than the French one.
Itâs said that the Comunist part did not win the elections in 1948 cause of the interference of the CIA cthey create the Christian democratic party and gave them great support and lots ofmoney, in the end they won confortably, but some still say that the electoral books were changed by the CIA wit the help of the Cosa Nostra at least in the big cities.
Some of the members of the comunist had become used to the use of violence killing a lot of people (priests, landlords etc, during thr civil war, like in Spain) and were not very popular in some places, in the end the story belongs always to the winners
And itâs true that Italy became the most politcal instable of the estearn countries after WWII