Films focusing on history can be fascinating to watch in terms of knowledge gained and in how they portray their subjects. You either learn new things about something familiar or learn a completely new topic. Different angles and perspectives can create intriguing stories both in subject matter and for dramatic effect. Recently, I watched one of the most peculiar and odd historical films in its execution. That being the 1987 film Walker.
Walker is the brainchild of director Alex Cox. Cox is most well known for the hit 80s comedy Repo Man. After the success of that film, he went into production on Walker intending to make a film to respond to the Regan Administration’s recent actions with the Iran Contra Affair. He even filmed the movie and edited it in occupied Nicaragua during the conflict and had Joe Strummer of The Clash fame do the score. The film was considered too violent and unmarketable at the time and was not given a proper wide release resulting in the end of Cox’s larger film career.
The film is about Alex Walker, a man who was fixated on the ideas of manifest destiny and led unauthorized expeditions into other countries in South America and Mexico. He ends up assisting the Democratic Party of Nicaragua in a civil war conflict and eventually places himself as the president. It only lasted for about a year as he forged relations with outside powers inside and outside the country and was forced out by foreign military groups. He would try to return to Central America but would be arrested and executed in Honduras.
Walker’s rise and fall in power is portrayed in a way that is less direct and more abstract. Ed Harris portrays Walker and he does so in an aloof and distant way. He waxes poetic about his ideologies and the righteous goals of his conquest, yet seems to not know what his end game is and seems disconnected from both his fellow soldiers and the people he claims to rule over. The battle scenes especially show him unsure of how to lead an army with him outright stating that he only knows how to advance. This is further compounded by how he seems to conquer Nicaragua out of luck and outside forces coming to assist him. He almost feels detached from everyone around him and always walks through the chaos of the war of his own making unaffected and unharmed.
While it may look odd, the portrayal of Walker might be more metaphorical than anything since it represents a sense of detachment from the true violence of imperialism that those who state its virtues either aren’t directly affected by or don’t think will affect them. Some of the Spanish-speaking Nicaraguans such as his mistress insult him directly, but Walker doesn’t seem to notice and continues to believe that he is being praised and is always correct in what he does. When he does notice backlash from both the public and his peers, he either uses the press to drown it out in propaganda or lethal force to push it back. He ignores clear warning signs in his choices given directly to him by others such as executing the president he put in place for crossing him and trying to strike back at the businessman who set him on this course in the first place. By the end, his dominion crumbles and he destroys the capital out of a sort of burnt earth policy. He gives a haunting speech about how America is destined to return to control Nicaragua and that they should always think about their inevitable return.
All of the historical elements are a bit loose and dramatized, but they reflect the ideas of what Walker represents well. He is an embodiment of the imperialistic mindset that has driven American interests in foreign countries for a long time. Perceiving their actions as just while using those perceptions to justify violence and corruption. Focusing only on their wants and needs while disrupting a foreign environment irreparably. While the idea of America as an imperial power has been perceived by some as an element of older history, Cox makes sure to clarify that he recognizes that these traits are still within some of the nation’s DNA.
He does this through the most bizarre element of the film is how it uses out-of-time elements such as vehicles, technology, and modern consumer products like magazines and cola. At first, one would assume that they are out of place and come out of nowhere. However, I realized that they only appear in the film when Walker directly takes over as president. The usage of these elements intends to create a juxtaposition and direct comparison to modern imperialistic efforts. The aspects of modern consumer elements are seen as a sign of a higher economic and cultural standing in a country like America. In the film, however, they are used as a sign of chaos and the tightening of control from Walker’s end. Cox is using them to show how the perception that America has regarding imperialism being a way to bring enlightenment or a higher standard of life is more often destructive in the countries they intervene in. It’s no coincidence since during the credits of the film, we see news footage of the American involvement in Nicaragua and the Contras happening around the mid to late 80s and using specific words from political figures that are similar to the ones said by the characters in the film with the same result of violence and chaos being ever-present. Even the end of the film bluntly connects the past with the present with a modern helicopter and military men coming in to escort American citizens while blindly shooting at everyone else. Using a modern image, but connecting it to the past to show that some elements have not changed with time.
This is the secret genius of this film. In presenting a story about an imperialist in the past, the film connects the actions on screen to any similar event in American history that is driven by similar motivations. While we can see biting satire political or otherwise now in a lot of films and shows, something about this film and the way it presents its subject is quite aggressive. It’s no wonder that it did not get much of a release back in 87 given that the general public was not as open to this type of critique about their country. We see it now consistently and it sometimes occurred with events like the Vietnam War back then, but a film blatantly focused on criticizing the then powers that be and a broader element of American power was risky. In a way though, it was ahead of its time and has aged like wine both in its subject and how it tackles it. It’s a shame the film did poorly and Cox’s career suffered for it, but in a way, it’s admirable that he took the career boost from Repo Man to do something bold and ambitious rather than selling out his ideals. I am very glad that I came across this film and feel that it is such a unique and engaging experience. What a film presents will always stay around longer than the career of an artist and will find an audience that understands it eventually.
