michael_the_nermal I understand "Matewan" is a historical fiction drama that uses actual events as a way to convey a fictional story, but it nonetheless evokes a real time in American history that is seldom ever discussed in the popular media, mostly because the issues of that time speak ill of American technological and social evolution rather than anything that one could feel patriotic about. Artistic works that discuss the clashes between labor and capital during the Gilded and Progressive Eras will undoubtedly include a discussion of radical political beliefs that those with conservative tastes in 2012 may find offensive or un-American. Nevertheless, the clashes between workers and the owners of companies are an important part of American history, certainly as much as the Civil War, World War II, or the tumults of the 1960s, and it is important for writers and filmmakers to mention them now and again. In this sense, a quality movie like "Matewan" is an exception rather than the rule with regards to period dramas related to important events in American history. The sensitive and poignant way by which John Sayles tells the story of West Virginia coal miners and a labor strike which culminated in bloodshed make the audience engaged in the plot and, by extension, the real life events described in the movie.The film itself is seldom boring, and the protagonist characters (Chris Cooper, Mary McDonnell, and Will Oldham) are sympathetically credibly portrayed. The harsh realities of the West Virigina miners of the 1910s and 1920s is portrayed in such a graphic and grim manner that the audience has an actual stake in their struggle as it portrayed in the film. The antagonist characters--the thugs hired by the Baldwin Felts Detective Agency to put down the strike by any means necessary--are less interestingly portrayed: they are evil to the core, with nothing in their portrayal that would make them redeemable or three-dimensional. Some viewers will not like that the antagonists are not treated as realistic persons, but rather as monsters. There are few shades of grey in Sayles' movie: the miners are the good guys, and the mine owners and their hired thugs are the bad guys. Notwithstanding the dual morality depicted in the movie, the film is stark in its realism, and there is little to take away from it that will leave the audience with a warm feeling. While "Matewan" ultimately comes across as a polemic film with an obvious message about the struggles of the working man, it is still a powerful and well-made drama that viewers will find involving. The real Battle of Matewan and the West Virginia Miners' Strike of the early 1920s are obscure events in American history, but are nevertheless important as part of the greater trend of social unrest inherent in America's Industrial Revolution. John Sayles shows courage by making a film about a seldom-mentioned and uncomfortable part of America's history. Highly recommended.

chaos-rampant After a streak of Godard films that left me a little exhausted, I was looking for a big narrative to immerse myself in, a film where artifice does not jump to our attention but is transparent and the world of the film believable. I immediately remembered about John Sayles and his nouvellas of cinema. With Lone Star I bemoaned the lack of a visual imagination, but coming to a Sayles film for a narrative like I did with Matewan, I leave completely satisfied. The man excels in telling us stories with scope and values of importance.What a lovely world he creates here, among the derelict shacks and cabins of the Pennsylvania foothills of Matewan a moral struggle is fought, flawed characters with faces blackened by coaldust fumble with great ideals and big hopes for a better future, and the one thing that stands between them and justice is their own prejudice. I like how the film suggests that for the collective to be reformed the individual must be reformed first, that we need to look inwards first before we make a stand. The stand in the film is heroic but also desperate, a bit of a lawless old West on the way to emancipation. John Sayles is a leftist and this comes across loud and clear in Matewan, but unlike a Godard film like Week End, Sayles doesn't call for blood, he calls for social justice.The narrative here sprawls in and out of log cabins where sullen faces plot strikes and discuss ideals, in and out of makeshift tents and muddy town streets where coalminers live and die and sing, now a fiddle or harmonica is calling out from the dark the sad tune of a life of suffering, and the finale is sealed with a shootout filled with tragedy and hope. Sayles' camera doesn't intrude in any of this, rather it's invited in and hankers down out of way to quietly listen or conspire.Matewan makes a great doublebill with Martin Ritt's The Molly Maguires, another forlorn drama of the oppressed that speaks of moral devastation in the Pennsylvania coal fields, but more, it stands by itself as one of the great American narratives of the 80's.

Emil Bakkum Being a European I had some difficulty in understanding the occurrences in this film. It tells the true story of the labor conflict of coal miners in Virginia around 1920. They are dissatisfied with the working conditions and go on strike. The company uses the truck-system, and the workers live in company houses. So the company takes with the other hand, what the one has paid out in wages. Right at the start we see the strikers in action while stopping a train and trying to thrash a group of so-called scabs (who apparently were unaware of the prevailing conflict). In addition the strikers employ anarchist methods to intimidate the employer, like sabotage with dynamite sticks. It is not surprising, that the employer has placed a machine gun at the premises. On the other hand the employer himself uses similar methods, and has hired a private security firm in order to intimidate the people. He tries to bribe the mayor and the sheriff. Yes, they still have a real sheriff over there, complete with a badge and belt and pistols on both sides, like an ancient Sam McCloud! Fortunately for the miners, this local establishment remains on their side. When the bandits of the security firm try to evict several families from their company homes, the sheriff maintains that this action is illegal and puts an end to it. However, we as the audience lack the information needed to judge which of the quarreling parties has the supreme law on its side. Luckily we still have the union of miners, and they send an organizer Joe Kenehan into the area. This man is as best as you can get them. He has a social hearth and strongly opposes violence, firstly because it is against his principles, and secondly because the workers will eventually lose an armed battle. The union brings some material support to the strikers, like camping tents, which transform the area into a kind of refugee camp. During the night the company bandits have a raid and fire at random. The climax is reached when two young men try to steal coal, and one of them gets his throat cut by the security bandits. The miners revolt, and a gun battle ensues in which the mining company is temporarily defeated. However, both sides suffer severe losses, among which is the fatally wounded unarmed organizer. The film suggests, that this was the start of a long range of armed collisions between employers and workers. In Europe we have never seen similar scenes, and in my eyes the film looks more like a western than like a film about unionism. Perhaps it has some similarities with the French film Germinal, which however narrates a story about a labor conflict around 1870 - so half a century before! And even in that tragic event the national guard was immediately present as the legitimate defender of the law. I guess the differences reflect the weak position of the authorities in the American Federation. There was hardly any authority or legitimate law in the newly conquered land, and the people had to take matters into their own hands. Of course the most powerful party will always win, but in American states like Virginia there was no strong local or regional authority, that could play the role of mediator in order to mitigate excesses. The narrative suggests that the film director Sayles sympathizes with the miners, but essentially the whole mess turns out to be a display of stupidity. But perhaps this is European prejudice. Apart from this drawback, the acting is convincing, the dialogs are realistic, and the film shots aptly convey the local conditions.

flnyira A number of movies have been made over the years dealing with the history of labor relations in this country, but so few have the power and honesty of "Matewan". This movie takes place at a time and place in our history when men literally spilled their blood and lost their lives to fight for the right to unionize, especially in the coal mining industry, where miners were often paid in company script instead of money which could only be used to purchase overpriced goods in company owned stores and the company held the title on their rented homes, so they could evict any "troublemaker" at any time for any reason. This movie shows what happens when men decide not to accept their fate anymore, and the extent the companies would go to keep the men working as little better than indentured servants, including murder. A sad, brutal period in our history, magnificently acted and beautifully filmed. A little known, but must-see film.