Stand and Deliver (1988)

"The only thing I ask of you is "ganas". (Jaime Escalante)
"What is the domain?" (Jaime Escalante)

"What do I get?" (Jaime Escalante)
"Protection homes." (Angel Guzman)

So I was thinking up Movie Title "before and afters" and I came up with X-Men 3: The Last Stand and Deliver.

And about an hour later I found myself watching Stand and Deliver. I hadn't seen it in a long time.  I mostly remembered that Edward James Olmos taught Latino kids calculus. And true to form, I got basically everything I expected, and it was glorious. Movies about teachers being inspiring are cliche,but I think of this as one of the genre makers. I hope there were people who were inspired to be teachers by this movie. Movies with positive societal outcomes are rare.  This is probably one.

On a historical note it is extremely interesting to look back and realize that Stand and Deliver and Dead Poet Society were released within a year of each other.  Stand and Deliver (1988): Dead Poet Society (1989) And each got their lead actor and an Academy Award nomination for Best Actor.  Obviously, there wasn't enough time for DPS to look at the return and acclaim for Stand and Deliver and then make changes.  So each was conceived independently and by competing studios.  It was the Volcano and Dante's Peak of inspirational educators in 1988-89.  I mean no disrespect to DPS or Robin Williams...but Edward James Olmos and Stand and Deliver did it first.

Lastly, I want to comment that I actually loved the acting of the supporting cast of Latino students that includes Lou Diamond Phillips, though I will not single him out as spectacular.  I will single out Ingrid Oliu as being perfect and putting a lot of heart into her role.

On a scale of limit is 0 to limit is 1, I give Stand and Deliver 3.79 stars out of 5.

****  Important announcement for those if any of you that are avid readers.  I heard some feedback that most of my movies fall into the 3's out of 5 stars.  I decided that I should standardize my scoring in hopes of giving you all some basis of comparison. (I have an excel that outlines my new scoring system.)  For reference .1 differences are actually quite significant given that I generally bracket into 5 parts.

0.00-1.00 Stars:  This would be reserved for technically, emotionally, artistically unsaveably bad films.  In essence one must try hard to get in this category as one's film must be available for mass consumption ie: MADE and not be in any way laughably bad. (That would at least make it into the 1 star range.)  Be on the look out if this ever happens as most youtube clips would still merit 1 star.

1.01-2.00  This is the range where I believe that somewhere someone  sometime thought that the idea for this film could be good. It ended, Hindenburg style, but still has celluloid value. Films in this category will generally contain innumerable technical errors, lack clear direction, violate good taste, and are a waste of life. They may even be harbingers of bad choices by directors, actors, film houses etc.

2.01-3.0 This is the general domain of just worthless time sucks. Films without merit and without heart will find this range their home. Films in this bracket will only have mild technical errors, generally poor acting, vaguely competent editing, and fail on the higher arts of story, writing, drama, interest, costumes, effects etc.

3.0-3.9 If the film is made with any kind of cohesion and attention, it should fall into the 3 star range. Anything over 3.5 is really a pretty good.  No shame. Lots of films are at least made with this level of dedication and thus in this category a .1 or ,05 difference is significant. Many films in this category are actually quite good or excellent in specific categories like acting, editing, directing, music, dance, story, special effects etc. Even some (many) Oscar winning films -which I don't necessarily like as a metric- fall in to this bracket.

4.0-5.0  This is the realm of the spectacular.  Films in this bracket have the makings of or are timeless and iconic as they get closer to 5. Movies here are flawless or so close as that no one can care when it comes to direction, shot selection, and editing.  The actors don't all have to be their most brilliant but they must be perfect in their roles and as an ensemble. Sound editing, foley, and lighting are of highest caliber. In particular, the stories must be spectacular and inspiring (good or bad). Quotes should be easily memorable and usually have application in the world around us.  Films in the category often dive successfully into the deep end of symbolism, art, color usage,and connect to the lives of the audience.  These are the kinds of movies that change hearts and minds. (not all have to.) They usually have historical or temporal significance too.