JimBell Blog

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada

Under discussion:
The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (2005)

Under discussion:

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (2005)

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (2005) (R) is a message movie. Judging the movie on its own terms, we ask how clear the message is and how effectively it is developed.

First, though, a sketch of the plot: A racist young border patrol officer (Barry Pepper) shoots an illegal alien (Melquiades Estrada) working as a ranch hand for Pete Perkins (Tommy Lee Jones). The officer covers up the fatal mistake (burial number one) and mentions it to no one but is troubled by his careless murder. The local Texas bureaucracy also covers up the killing, first by refusing to investigate and then, when they know what happened, by refusing to press charges. They quickly inter the body (burial number two). But Melquides had been Pete’s best friend, and when Pete learns via the grapevine who killed his friend, Pete takes justice into his own hands. He kidnaps the guilty officer, makes him dig up the corpse, and forces him to accompany him and the body on a trek to the spot in Mexico where Melquiades wanted to be buried (burial number three).

The film has two messages: one does not work and the other does. The film criticizes the way in which Americans treat Mexicans. The screenplay by Guillermo Arriaga portrays every American negatively—the police chief is corrupt and sexually impotent, the border patrol officers are racist and contemptuous, the only two women specialize in boredom and gratuitous sex, and so on. The only exception is, of course, Pete, who speaks Spanish, likes Mexicans, and could more or less pass as Mexican. All of the Mexicans we meet are good people who simply want a better life. Not that we get to know any of them in any depth, but, for example, Melquiades is a generous and gentle soul who would give his exceptional horse to his friend, who would feel petrified going into a motel room with a sexy young thing he did not really know. The criticism of American attitudes toward Mexicans does not work because it is so lop-sided that it is better described as “racial correctness” rather than “racial understanding.”

But the other, and dominant, message is one of doing what is right. The young border patrol officer, Norton, refuses to own up to what he did but instead tries to make it all disappear, sweep it under the carpet, cover his ass, and deny everything. The bureaucracy irresponsibly hides behind its own regulations, using internal secrecy to undermine justice. But Pete thinks the young killer should admit his mistakes, change his ways, and say he is sorry. Unless you, the viewer, get that this is what the movie is about, you will be bored silly because almost nothing overtly exciting happens in a journey that must take up half the movie. First Pete confronts Norton with his crime by making him dig up the body. Then he introduces Norton to Melquiades’ life—his house, his table, his mug. The young thug is forced against every fibre of his being to drink water from the filthy wet-back’s mug. And that is just the start of the journey of redemption. Along the way, Norton spends day after day with a man who is honest and fair. For example, at one point Pete undoes Norton’s handcuffs and gives him back his cowboy boots “because we have to walk now” up a steep slope, and he adds that if Norton tries to run, he will shoot him. By this point, Norton knows what this means: They have to walk now because the slope is too steep for the horses, and if he tries to run, he will be shot. Weird, but Norton gets used it. Along the way, a Mexican saves Norton’s life, and Norton helps the Mexicans shuck corn. Slowly the arrogance, racism, and self-absorption diminish. Still, on the third burial, Norton is reluctant to ask his victim’s forgiveness. But he does. Ironically, while this slow and painful character growth has been going on, Norton’s cute young wife has declared him “beyond redemption” and left him. But when Pete says Norton can keep the second horse and rides away, Norton calls after him, in the last line of the movie, “You’ll be all right?” The egocentric young jerk has grown enough to actually think of someone other than himself. This impressive character transformation is believable because it takes so long. The character change develops the message of taking responsibility for your actions instead of hiding behind the skirts of the bureaucracy.

Inevitably, given the political climate in North American and the wiring of the human brain, some people will want to politicize this message of redemption. The film critic for the influential Village Voice criticizes Peter for being “unquestionably right, stubborn, unflappable, adorably gruff, distrustful of social education, naturally at one with ‘the West,’ so bullshit-free he'd rather not talk than say something imprecise.” The problem is that “this slope-headed paradigm is so attractive to Americans, and [that] we have lately gone so far as to elect it to president. [Director Tommy Lee] Jones might be a low-profile Democrat, but in his movies he's our living neocon nightmare.” But I’d ask this: Is saying you’re sorry for hurting someone right wing or left wing? Does speaking in an honest and straight-forward manner mean that you are a laissez-faire capitalist or that you believe in labour unions and socialized medicine? Does honouring your best friend mean that you are a fundamentalist neo-conservative or a bleeding heart liberal? Most of the important issues in a person’s life and in our society are not a matter of right wing or left wing.

Jim Bell

posted on Thursday, February 22, 2007 1:09 PM by JimBell

Was this review helpful?

Comment Email me new comments.

Like what you're reading?

RSS 2.0

Search
Go

Browse previous

February 2007

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

Dig through the archives

Categories

Reviews (106)