Why must every Latino "epic" be compared to the Godfather?

Ok, I like reviewing films that deal (for the most part)with Latinos. Two of those films, "My Family, Mi Familia" and "American Me" have been compared with the epic tale of the Corleone family, "The Godfather". The patter surrounding this flick was not different. But again, I fail to see the connection. Especially with this film, which is frequently disappointing and bears no resemblance to "The Godafather" at all. But, wait, there is a story of a family of swarthy looking, dark-eyed, wavy haired "criminals". A few scenes of "authentic" ethnic flavor are thrown in, a little emotional yelling and pathos and BAM!! You've got an epic saga of ethnics, Hollywood-style. How convenient. But not true in the case of Blood In, Blood Out. Hell, it isn't even up to the standards of "Godfather III"(and that's saying something).

"Blood In, Blood Out" tells the story of Miklo(Damian Chapa), a young man with an Anglo father and a Chicano mother. Being mixed, Miklo fights for acceptance by the gangs of East Los Angeles. Miklo does such a bang up job with this that it frees him up to spends most of his free time in prison. He become an important figure in the Chicano prison gang structure. Chapa's portrayal is a bit self-indulgent for my taste. I felt the two supporting roles were portrayed more strongly. Miklo's character should've been a supporting role anyway(but hey, he's a criminal and gang leader, he's gotta be the lead!) The two other main characters of this triad of cousins go a different way, Paco(Benjamin Bratt) into the police force, and Cruz(Jesse Borrego) into a life as an artist, but after a crippling injury, he's also a drug addict.

The main problem with this film is its cloying preachiness. We are preached to about drug use, about violence, about how important the family is, about how vengeance is bad... And on, and on, ad infinitum. It is like a really long public service announcement with a measure of violence thrown to "keep it real". It betrays its' contention of being "real" because it is constantly making appeals like some Prohibitionist crusade or some such zealous group. If this film were made by a Chicano himself/herself, the lines would not have been so delineated, not so easy and starkly drawn. It is the majority of Anglo America that likes its stories, even about criminals in neat boxes. It makes the film, which really could have been a lot better without this cookie-cutter approach to things, insufferable at times.

For example you've got the perverbial friends from the "wrong side of the tracks" who then end up on "opposite sides of the law"(how original), the gangs whose violent clashes destroy innocent young lives, and of course, the ex-con who can't get an "even break on the outside" and returns to a life of crime with ultimately tragic results.

The character of Cruz(Borrego) is perhaps the only exception to the annoying stereotypes. Cruz is a talented painter depicting life in the barrios. His character is portrayed with sensitivity and real care. Cruz is beset by tragic events -- he's crippled by gangs, and this leads him to drugs and this drug use causes his little brother's death. But all of this is played well, not going over the top or becoming too syrupy. Paco(Bratt) is portrayed with fire and emotion, but I think he seemed to be reaching sometimes. I wasn't impressed as much with his role, maybe that was the script and not so much him.

Director Taylor Hackford said in interviews that "Blood In, Blood Out" was an attempt to show the actual "realities of Chicano life in East Los Angeles". Ok, if that's the attempt, it failed. The movie just does a good job of offering up images for consumption the viewers have already seen. These are cookie-cutter East L.A. Chicanos. There is no authenticity here. There was not attempt to provide a nuanced, gradated look at life in East L.A. There are students, teachers, nurses, office workers, artists. There is fluidity and mobility. Yes, there are criminals in East L.A., but even in telling their story, it might be nice for once to see them as they used to be, how they'd like to be. It would be nice to see them in their multiplicity of roles: father, lover, son, brother, criminal -- because at least then we might be able to more easily relate to them as fellow humans instead of objectifying them. Even vatos deserve love.