Hoffa (1992)

How could I resist watching a film, based on a script by David Mamet, about a union leader? Impossible. My enthusiasm waned a bit a few minutes into the film and it kept waning, because Hoffa (dir. Danny De Vito) is simply not a very good film. Do I get a wider understanding of the labor movement in the USA? Well, maybe a little, but not really. An interesting thing here is how fiercely Hoffa & his Teamsters brethren (this is a male thing) take a stand against communism - considering the political climate in the US and A at the time, this was maybe simply an act of realism, but still. As a film about a political movement, this movie is, I think, a failure. de Vito focuses on the action-packed rallies and picket lines  (fighting the scabs) along with the crime association and as far as context gets, we end up with very little. Hoffa wasn't an awful film, but it turned out to correspond with my expectations about what a film about a union leader would be like to a very large extent, which, in this case, is not a good thing. Some good acting - yes (Looking at Jack Nicholson's gestures, I really believe that this man is living for the Teamsters, even though I can only guess at the significance of that). The best scenes in the film are the more relaxed ones, where these union gentlemen talk shit and drink coffee. But they are very few. It is the kind of film in which almost every line should be as information-packed as possible. So what kind of image of Hoffa does the film present? He ends up neither a scoundrel nor a saint. This neutral aspect of the film has its merits, but also flaws, as the image of Hoffa is at times too secretive. We see his official face and actions, no more. What I intend to say is not that there should be more intimate bedroom scenes with conversations with his wife - but rather that we do not gain an understanding of what kind of fight this man is involved in.