Not surprising, given its subject matter, the movie "Cesar Chavez" is both inspiring and depressing in roughly equal measure - depressing because it portrays a society sadly built on the exploitation of the disenfranchised and powerless, and inspiring because it reminds us of the power of both the individual and the collective to change the course of history for the better.

In terms of structure and execution, this is a fairly standard biopic of the man whose name has become virtually synonymous with collective bargaining and civil rights. The movie begins when Chavez is already a family man, working as an organizer for a Latino civil rights group, the Community Service Organization. We're briefly informed of the fact that Chavez was born in Yuma, Arizona, but that, as a child, he was forced to migrate to California when his family lost their farm in the depths of the Depression. The trauma of being ripped away from the land he loved and compelled to work as a laborer in the field for virtually no money never left Chavez and, indeed, it became the defining force of his life. Thus, he returned to those fields years later for the purpose of organizing his fellow workers into a union (eventually to be known as United Farm Workers), taking on the massive power structure that, through a combination of greed and racism, kept them virtually enslaved to their masters.

What strikes one most while watching "Cesar Chavez" is the tremendous courage displayed not only by Chavez and his family but all the workers in standing up to the verbal abuse, physical violence, racism, jail time and threatened loss of employment that was regularly thrown at them in an effort to get them to back down and accept their inhumane working conditions without question or complaint. When striking didn't get them what they wanted, they turned toward mass marches and boycotts, the latter of which was particularly effective in winning the general public to their side and eventually bringing the growers to the bargaining table and ultimately acceding to their demands - no easy task given that many of the local politicians, law enforcement officials and judges were already in the pocket of the wealthy growers. Luckily, the movement also boasted some powerful allies from around the country, i.e., politicians like Senator Robert Kennedy and the United Auto Workers Union. The movie also captures the fact that Chavez frequently had to contend with members of his own group who often felt that passive resistance was inefficient in achieving their goals and wanted to employ more direct and violent methods in taking on their oppressors.

Like many movies that attempt to capture the totality of a famous person's life, "Cesar Chavez" often falls short of the mark. Because the movie's running time is so limited, certain aspects of Chavez' life inevitably get short shrift. The relationships with his wife and long time partner, Helen (well played by America Ferrera), and with his oldest son are sketchy at best. Famed union activist Dolores Huerta (Rosario Dawson), who worked beside Chavez in many of his endeavors, tends to get shuffled into the background a bit more than is warranted given the prominent role she played, an obvious casualty to the limits of time. Michael Pena bears an impressive physical resemblance to Chavez, but he lacks the fire-in-the-belly necessary to convey the true essence of a man who inspired millions and changed the world. John Malkovich, on the other hand, effectively portrays an unsympathetic grape-grower without resorting to overstatement and caricature.

Writer Keir Pearson and director Diego Luna faced a daunting task in bringing Chavez' story to the screen. That they only half succeeded is perhaps more inevitable than it is regrettable given the self-imposed constraints of the medium they were working in (a TV miniseries might have given the subject more justice). But anyone with an interest in Chavez in particular and the fight for human rights in general should definitely watch this film.

Would it be weird to say that "Cesar Chavez" was a laugh riot? Well, for a film which depicts people being beaten and sprayed with pesticides, the script contained tons of laugh out loud lines of dialogue. OK, I'm not sure if that came off as completely insensitive or not, so I'll just move on:

An independent production directed by Mexican actor/filmmaker Diego Luna, "Cesar Chavez" is an educational partial biography of (you guessed it) Cesar Chavez which chronicles his participation in the California (and abroad) civil rights campaigns during the 1960's, which addressed fair wages and better working conditions for migrant farm workers, his infamous 25 day hunger strike and the UFWA (United Farm Workers of America) grape boycott.

While I did find myself really enjoying this movie, "Cesar Chavez" is yet another example of a PG-13 film which attempts to depict a rated-R snapshot of American history. On a technical level, Luna does display above average directorial chops and his film is overall more historically weighty than something like last year's "42" (a PG-13 movie which glossed over many of the more violent atrocities of racial intolerance in the 1940's) it is obvious that Luna does pulls some punches in an attempt to make the Cesar Chavez story accessible to a wider audience.

There are good biopics and there are bad biopics. The downfall of many biopics is that they take fascinating characters and simply tell their story, while failing to bring their world to life, failing to spark interest with an engaging back-story or failing to build an emotional connection with audiences. And while those types of biopics may be interesting to some, they usually alienate those who didn't live through the events or may not be familiar with said character. Luna and Michael Pena, who plays Chavez, seem to understand this, as they come together to depict a Chavez that is completely 3 dimensional and complex. That said, Luna does not escape my praise without scrutiny, as he and screenwriters Keir Pearson (Hotel Rwanda) and Timothy J. Sexton (Children of Men) fail to give Chavez much of a back-story; so much so that it feels as though "Cesar Chavez" is missing its entire first act (the story of how Chavez started down the civil rights road to begin with).

Pena's performance stands as one of the more surprisingly pleasant aspects of this production. He nails the Chavez look and mannerisms, and when he speaks he sounds like a civil rights leader. And during the fasting sequences, Pena looks like a man who hasn't eaten for a substantial amount of time. Although quite enjoyable in other movies such as "End of Watch" and "30 Minutes or Less", his role as Chavez is by far my favorite.

Final Thought: This shouldn't be a movie which only resonates with those who lived through the events, but if you have no idea who Chavez was going into this, for you the timeline may get a little choppy in the final act and questions may be raised about Rosario Dawson's purpose in this movie since Dolores Huerta (a woman who played a massive role in La Causa) is hardly referenced here. Then again, if you are a Californian and don't know who Cesar Chavez was, you should be ashamed of yourself to begin with. After recently sitting through a stretch of shockingly below average movies depicting the Mexican/Mexican-American/Chicano struggle (Filly Brown, For Greater Glory and A Better Life) I will say that I was quite entertained by this good, not great, biopic which salutes this important man and equally important moment in relatively recent California history.

We live on the edge of a time when mass movements could once again become decisive. Cesar Chaves, Diego Luna's latest film, reminds us that heart is what empowers people to overcome injustice.

Luna has picked a fabulous cast and a respectable script that brings to life the immense story of a very intense struggle to give farmworkers the basic right to organize. Filmed where the real events took place, Luna captures the stark,windswept and washed out beauty of the vast Southern San Joaquin Valley. He shows us the faces of the people who toil so that we might live. Through a strong performance by John Malkovich, Luna captures the patriarchal mentality that allows one to exploit others to build wealth. This sparks outrage and one is moved to identify with the Chaves and the small brave band that he led.

Michael Pena as Chaves is believable and endearing because the methodical, measured intensity of the man comes through and when moments of rage and deep emotion well up in his character the contrast is riveting. You understand why people followed. But it is the women that I found most interesting, particularly America Ferrera as Helen Fabela Chaves. And without Dolores Huerta (Rosario Dawsom) he could not have succeeded. She was the more politically adept. It was the women in his life that empowered him to be great.

The film is not flawless and the 101 minute running time is the key problem. The story is simply too big given the number of compelling characters and the complexities of the real events. I longed to understand more about his son, his brother, the growers, Huerta and Helen. I would have appreciated seeing more of the power struggles among leaders, which must exist within any movement.

But overall, I am pleased that Luna, his cast and crew respectably brought to the cinema this very American story that helps me to remember why I love this country. Social movements do make progress despite darker forces because valiant hearts bonded by the vision of a better world do not give up.