John Leguizamo's Latin History for Morons

source: John Leguizamo's Latin History for Morons

The premise is very interesting - Latino American history explained through stand-up. The reality is its neither historically interesting or accurate nor funny. It takes for ever to start a premise and yarn it just turns into a random pile of rambling, imitations and weird face making. The performers reliance of a fake son who seems like a complete caricature illustrates more lack of parenting abilities rather than progresses the plot or highlights a joke. I certainly hope they are not parenting anyone. It's just too many 2018 memes that aged loke milk rather than a cohesive performance. Maybe it's made for a niche market of particular people but I wouldn't even bother with this in 2022 tbh.

Well researched, cleverly written and brilliant performance. This is fine theater! a must watch!

A fantasy that picks and chooses what Latin means (indigenous or Spanish? It depends on what's better at the moment), and idealizes the pre-Columbian civilizations. Sometimes funny.

I've seen John on screen before, but never in the context of a stage - and what a discovery that was. The flow and pace of his performance is phenomenal. He overshoots just a little here and there, but his style of storytelling through the prism of many personas and cultures is hands down outstanding.

It is a beautiful combination of a stand-up show, a one-person theatre play, and a shocking history lesson. I am living in the Middle East and, apart from the Hollywood , I have little information about the Latin history. Probably, I wouldn't learn any of these historical facts, if I didn't watch this show. So, it was surprisingly informative for me. The comedy part was not top-notch but, instead of the usual "one person & a mic" formula, the theatre setting with good music pieces and light tricks was a refreshing choice for the stand-up genre.

A few minutes into it, I realized the format is going to be interesting. It was an eye-opening masterpiece - hundred years worth of history shrunk into 1.5 hours. It conjured curiosity and feelings about the sad parts of history that are left untold in classrooms. My 10-year-old actually came out to sit with me and watched the whole show! I didn't mind my kid hearing some cursing here and there because he would probably never learn the history he watched John talked about at school. Thanks to John Leguizamo for such an amazing show. This is a must watch.

Wow... Wow. A kind of theatrical genius you don't expect anymore.

When I watch a stand-up comedy I want to laugh, nothing else, and in this case I just didn't. I even fell asleep at one point, that's how "good" it was to me. I normally do like John Leguizamo, as an actor, and after watching this stand-up comedy I think he should stay an actor and leave the stage for funnier people. His show was like taking a history class, spiced up with an odd joke every now and then. I have nothing against history lessons, and even if as an European it's all very far from my bed it's still interesting to learn new stuff, but not in a stand-up comedy. Most of the stuff he said I learned in school, not everything but most of it, so even that was a bit boring. I won't say there was nothing funny at all about his show but it was for sure not good enough to keep me awake the whole time. Disappointing!

The only part of the show that was funny was Leguizamo's attempt at teaching history: 1: The natives had indeed lacked immunity to the European diseases that would decimate their numbers. Leguizamo leaves out that Cortes had the support of former vassals of the Aztecs who were tired of living under Aztec tyranny. While he took offense that his son supposedly said that the Aztecs sacrificed virgins, the reality is far worse: they sacrificed and cannibalized their victims. It is perhaps the biggest reason why other natives supported Cortes. They were tired of the abuse. 2: He wants to pretend that Europeans didn't have a technological advantage but ironically brings up the canon as a major factor in the defeat of the Aztecs. 3: He takes issue with Spaniards "raping, pillaging, murdering" the native population, but when he needs a 'Latin connection' to the American Revolution, he makes it through the Spaniard Bernardo de Galvez. White Spaniards are no longer the bad guys when it benefits his agenda. Now they're 'one of us' when it suits him. 4: He says Latins are 40% native Amerindian, 25% Black, etc. It depends on where the person is from in Latin America. You have people of pure Amerindian heritage in Bolivia, for example). You have people who are White from Argentina to Mexico. You have people of predominantly Black ancestry in the Caribbean. You have all sorts of mixes. To pretend they have the same admixtures across Latin America is wrong. 5: He has a portrait of Loreta Velazquez on stage to represent great Latinx women. The story goes, she dressed like a man to fight for the Confederates. The story is false. She did not fight in the war. She wasn't even Cuban. She was a con artist trying to see a book: this is well established. She no doubt was familiar with the story of Deborah Sampson. Sampson was a woman dressed as a man to fight in the Revolutionary War. 6: There were a few other minor annoyances, but I think I made it clear that Leguizamo fails at history. As for the attempt at humor, the key word is 'attempt.' It wasn't funny, and the laughter from the audience seemed forced. As is typical of Leguizamo's humor, it's low brow. Most of the humor is sexual or, in other words, comedy on the cheap. Maybe I'd laugh if I was in middle school, but I'm an adult.