Cocaine Cowboys chronicles the rise of the cocaine trade in Miami in the 1970's and 80's. The film uses first-hand accounts of those involved, as well as extensive news footage from the period, to illustrate how the drug-trade in Miami went from being centered around marijuana, to the small-scale importation of cocaine, and then into a multi-billion dollar industry comprised of an extensive network of smuggler, distributors, and dealers. Many Cubans, Columbians, and Americans were involved with smuggling drugs into the U.S. As drug-traders' wealth accumulated, millions of dollars went into legitimate businesses in Miami. Whereas in the late Sicties and early seventies, Miami was a small, economically stagnant town, the late Seventies and Eighties saw the city explode with project financed by drug money. However, in the 1980's, the drug trade became extremely violent, ultimately leading to the fall of the "Cocaine Cowboys."
Cocaine use has an interesting history in the United States. For mush of the Twentieth Century, it was not very popular as a recreational drug, and most cocaine used came from medical supplies. Following the First World War, The U. S. took a leading role in discouraging cocaine's use and production worldwide. Although it was not a major issue for most countries The U. S. nonetheless aggressively pushed for its criminalization. Following the rise of American power around the world after World War II, most of Latin America was "compelled" to follow along, despite histories of local coca use. It took a while for illicit cocaine production to take off; it was not until the mid to late 1960's that cocaine smuggling into the U. S. came to be of note, and even then, it was minor to what it would become in the 1970's and 1980's. (Gootenburg, Paul. Pre-Colombian Era of Drug Trafficking: the Americas, 2007)
As we see in the film, cocaine became a big deal in America, during the the 70's and 80's. Coletta Youngers chapter "Collateral Damage: the U. S. War on Drugs and its impact on Democracy in the Andes, focuses on the American Governments response to the cocaine boom. According to Youngers, the strategy of combating drugs by taking actions in "source countries" (where the drugs are produced), begun in 1989 with the "Andean Initiative" of president George H. W. Bush, has had extremely negative impact on democracy and regional stability in Latin America, as well as encouraging human rights violations. These negative effects of U. S. drug policy are the result of the United States supporting corrupt military units in actions against civilians.
One aspect of the movie covers the corruption of local law enforcement in Miami. Many cops not only turned a blind eye, but assisted in drug smuggling operations. This kind of corruption reached so far as the White House, as it has been uncovered that under the Reagen Administration, that Contras operating in Nicaragua were receiving money and weapons from the United States... and sending back cocaine.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Bus 174 (2002)
Bus 174 (2002) is a documentary that takes a an extremely detailed look at an event in recent Brazilian history, the Bus 174 Affair. The film follows the event, in which a young man, Sandro, held several people hostage on a bus for over four hours. The film pieces together the story through testimony from the former hostages, the victims remaining family members and friends, and the police involved in the situation. While the events that occurred on the bus (which were broadcast on national television) form the crux of the film, it is the hijacker, Sandro's, background, as well as the struggles of other street youth, that are the real focus of the film.
The incident on Bus 174 begins with what was most likely a simple routine robbery. Sandro entered the bus with a gun, and demanded valuables from the riders(this kind of robbery is quite common in Latin American countries. A similar routine robbery is described in Alberto Salcemo Ramos' short piece The Drive-by Victim. Fortunately for Salcemo, his hold-up did not in the tragedy that Bus 174 did). However, the bus becomes stopped, the police become involved, and a standoff ensues. Reporters and news-cameras show up, ensuring that the situation will be seen by millions. Several of the hostages tell their side of the story, as well as some of the police officers present. The tragedy of the Bus situation is death of Sandro, and a woman named Geisa. The failure of the police to take advantage of opportunities against Sandro, leads to a situation were Geisa is shot by an officer, and Sandro, who is shortly thereafter smothered to death in a cop car. That this tragedy occurred, when it could have been avoided, speaks to the fact that "the weight and power of municipal authorities have been weakened significantly in cities where crime and overcrowding have made life a cheap, and disposable, commodity." ("I Saw a City Invisible", The City as Division, Mark D. Szuchman, p. 25)
Sandro took to the streets after witnessing his mothers death at a young age, . From there, he gets wrapped up in the bleak existence of a social outcast. Street children are a major problem for Brazil, because of their chronic crime, drug abuse, and violence, and the lack of resources at their disposal. Furthermore, they are looked down upon in general, if they are even noticed at all. Sandro was one of these kids. He began using cocaine and sniffing glue, and getting involved with theft. Hundreds of thousands of children live this way in Brazil, millions throughout the world. Another important event in Sandro's life was the Candelaria Church Massacre, where 7 street kids were gunned down. Sandro was one of the survivors, but the event would haunt him. At several points during the affair, he yells about being one of the survivors, while blaming the police for the deaths.
The film makes the point that this marginalized existence is one of the main factors that led Sandro to commit his crime. Furthermore, the film takes a lot at the awful and ineffective prison system of Brazil. The bleak prospect of a return to prison is possibly responsible for Sandro's decision to take hostages.
The film ultimately portrays Sandro as a social victim. Though a criminal nonetheless, it was a desire to be recognized by society, and receive validation, even if as the "bad guy", that led him to do what he did. The film points out the social structures and inequalities that perpetuate these injustices.
The incident on Bus 174 begins with what was most likely a simple routine robbery. Sandro entered the bus with a gun, and demanded valuables from the riders(this kind of robbery is quite common in Latin American countries. A similar routine robbery is described in Alberto Salcemo Ramos' short piece The Drive-by Victim. Fortunately for Salcemo, his hold-up did not in the tragedy that Bus 174 did). However, the bus becomes stopped, the police become involved, and a standoff ensues. Reporters and news-cameras show up, ensuring that the situation will be seen by millions. Several of the hostages tell their side of the story, as well as some of the police officers present. The tragedy of the Bus situation is death of Sandro, and a woman named Geisa. The failure of the police to take advantage of opportunities against Sandro, leads to a situation were Geisa is shot by an officer, and Sandro, who is shortly thereafter smothered to death in a cop car. That this tragedy occurred, when it could have been avoided, speaks to the fact that "the weight and power of municipal authorities have been weakened significantly in cities where crime and overcrowding have made life a cheap, and disposable, commodity." ("I Saw a City Invisible", The City as Division, Mark D. Szuchman, p. 25)
Sandro took to the streets after witnessing his mothers death at a young age, . From there, he gets wrapped up in the bleak existence of a social outcast. Street children are a major problem for Brazil, because of their chronic crime, drug abuse, and violence, and the lack of resources at their disposal. Furthermore, they are looked down upon in general, if they are even noticed at all. Sandro was one of these kids. He began using cocaine and sniffing glue, and getting involved with theft. Hundreds of thousands of children live this way in Brazil, millions throughout the world. Another important event in Sandro's life was the Candelaria Church Massacre, where 7 street kids were gunned down. Sandro was one of the survivors, but the event would haunt him. At several points during the affair, he yells about being one of the survivors, while blaming the police for the deaths.
The film makes the point that this marginalized existence is one of the main factors that led Sandro to commit his crime. Furthermore, the film takes a lot at the awful and ineffective prison system of Brazil. The bleak prospect of a return to prison is possibly responsible for Sandro's decision to take hostages.
The film ultimately portrays Sandro as a social victim. Though a criminal nonetheless, it was a desire to be recognized by society, and receive validation, even if as the "bad guy", that led him to do what he did. The film points out the social structures and inequalities that perpetuate these injustices.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Cidade de Deus (2002)
Cidade de Deus tells the story of a favela in Rio de Janero. The story of the Cidade is recounted by Rocket, an aspiring photographer hoping to escape the poverty of the favela. Rocket's coming of age, along with those of many of the kids around him, forms the bulk of the film's story, while frequent flashbacks place them into the greater context of the Cidade's history. Life in the "City of God" is brutal and unrelenting. Murder, drug-abuse, and corruption are rampant, and the denizens cursed to poverty.
The origin and economy of the favela are important aspects to consider when watching this film. Rocket speaks about his family's migration, along with many other similar families, as refugees from the agricultural interior fleeing the devastation of widespread flooding. The mid-twentieth century saw a massive migration to cities, and in Brazil it was no different. in Brazil, from the 1930's through the 1950's, the lack of agricultural mechanization, poor conditions, and grueling nature of the work contributed to the migration to the cities. Once in the cities, the migrants formed a 'subproletariat', not a bona fide working class, but a body of workers that could be exploited on a piecemeal basis by industries that did not have to pay them benefits or substantial wages, due to the impermanence of the jobs for which these laborers hired. Furthermore by 1960, 100 economically active people in the favelas accounted for 179 economically in-active people, solidifying these peoples role as a 'subproletariat'. (Pino, Labor in the Favelas, p. 20). Cidade de Deus tells the story of this group of people and the informal economy in which they took part. This informal economic activity in its legitimate for (such as day labor, cottage industry, etc.) often did not pay the bills, many people turned to truly 'informal' economies, in the form of drug-dealing and crime.
Race is also certainly an issue in the favelas, though life in them was not necessarily determined by race, as people of all descents inhabited the favelas. However, in Brazil "social mobility among Brazilians of African descent has historically been the lowest among all ethnic groups." (Santos Oliveira, favelas and Ghettos, p. 77). Many of the characters in Cidade de Deus, including Rocket, are of African descent. They live in poverty, and will likely to continue to live in poverty. The cyclical nature of violence and poverty is an important theme in the film. Rocket however, manages to break free from the cycle. He does this through his photographs, which are published by a middle-class, white newspaper. Rocket breaks from from the favelas poverty by "becoming white".
The origin and economy of the favela are important aspects to consider when watching this film. Rocket speaks about his family's migration, along with many other similar families, as refugees from the agricultural interior fleeing the devastation of widespread flooding. The mid-twentieth century saw a massive migration to cities, and in Brazil it was no different. in Brazil, from the 1930's through the 1950's, the lack of agricultural mechanization, poor conditions, and grueling nature of the work contributed to the migration to the cities. Once in the cities, the migrants formed a 'subproletariat', not a bona fide working class, but a body of workers that could be exploited on a piecemeal basis by industries that did not have to pay them benefits or substantial wages, due to the impermanence of the jobs for which these laborers hired. Furthermore by 1960, 100 economically active people in the favelas accounted for 179 economically in-active people, solidifying these peoples role as a 'subproletariat'. (Pino, Labor in the Favelas, p. 20). Cidade de Deus tells the story of this group of people and the informal economy in which they took part. This informal economic activity in its legitimate for (such as day labor, cottage industry, etc.) often did not pay the bills, many people turned to truly 'informal' economies, in the form of drug-dealing and crime.
Race is also certainly an issue in the favelas, though life in them was not necessarily determined by race, as people of all descents inhabited the favelas. However, in Brazil "social mobility among Brazilians of African descent has historically been the lowest among all ethnic groups." (Santos Oliveira, favelas and Ghettos, p. 77). Many of the characters in Cidade de Deus, including Rocket, are of African descent. They live in poverty, and will likely to continue to live in poverty. The cyclical nature of violence and poverty is an important theme in the film. Rocket however, manages to break free from the cycle. He does this through his photographs, which are published by a middle-class, white newspaper. Rocket breaks from from the favelas poverty by "becoming white".
Monday, March 28, 2011
Che: Volume One (2008)
Che: The Argentine, is the first part of a two-part film chronicling the second half of the life of Argentinian revolutionary Ernesto "Che" Guevara. The film picks up several years after the end of The Motorcycle Diaries (2004), which focuses on Guevara's formative multi-country motorcycle trek. Che focuses on Guevara's involvement in the Cuban Revolution, from his initial introduction to Fidel Castro, until the War's end. The majority of the film focuses on the guerilla campaign of the Cuban Revolution, but interspersed through this narrative is a depiction of Che's visit to the United Nations in 1964.
Though most of Che focuses on Guevara's role in the Cuban Revolutionary War, a brief bit pays homage to Che's meeting with Fidel Castro in Mexico. In the film we see Che agreeing to join Castro in his Cuban expedition, a moment that would be fortuitous in his growth as a revolutionary and socialist leader. However this scene in Mexico leaves out an important aspect of Che's life between the events portrayed in The Motorcycle Diaries and Che. Both of these films focus on formative and defining periods of Guevara's life. However, the years Che spent in Mexico in the time between Diaries and Che, were not a time of revolutionary active for Che. At this point in his life, Guevara was struggling with a floundering medical career, and the new-found strains of domestic life (he had recently become a father and married, something it seems he had not planned on). To deal with his new situation, Guevara spent most of his time "with leisure travel and idle contemplation." (Zolov, "Guevara in Mexico", p. 2). This goes against the myth of Che as a ceaseless revolutionary. Zolov goes on to speak of Che's overall lack of political activity in Mexico, prior to meeting Castro. Despite what Che later became (and not to deny his conscience for social justice acquired on the travels of his youth), it seems like at least part of the reason he joined Castro was for adventure, and an escape from the doldrum that his life had become.
The bulk of Che is spent portraying the struggle of Guevara in the Cuban Revolution. Though ultimately victorious, Guevara's mission in Cuba was extremely difficult, compounded by his asthma. During the war, Guevara pioneered many tactics that would form the center of Guerrilla warfare strategy. In the film, Guevara and his men creep through the jungle, maintaining hidden bases, working symbiotically with the peasant population, and striking Fulgencio Batista's forces with surprise attacks. The methods of the Revolution were extremely successful, and would be collected and expounded upon by Guevara in his book Guerrilla Warfare: A Method. Guevara explained the tactics in a way that revolutionary groups throughout the world could put into practice in overthrowing tyranny. Following the success of the Cuban Revolution, Guevara would take these strategies to other countries, leading and teaching fighters in the techniques successful in Cuba.
Though most of Che focuses on Guevara's role in the Cuban Revolutionary War, a brief bit pays homage to Che's meeting with Fidel Castro in Mexico. In the film we see Che agreeing to join Castro in his Cuban expedition, a moment that would be fortuitous in his growth as a revolutionary and socialist leader. However this scene in Mexico leaves out an important aspect of Che's life between the events portrayed in The Motorcycle Diaries and Che. Both of these films focus on formative and defining periods of Guevara's life. However, the years Che spent in Mexico in the time between Diaries and Che, were not a time of revolutionary active for Che. At this point in his life, Guevara was struggling with a floundering medical career, and the new-found strains of domestic life (he had recently become a father and married, something it seems he had not planned on). To deal with his new situation, Guevara spent most of his time "with leisure travel and idle contemplation." (Zolov, "Guevara in Mexico", p. 2). This goes against the myth of Che as a ceaseless revolutionary. Zolov goes on to speak of Che's overall lack of political activity in Mexico, prior to meeting Castro. Despite what Che later became (and not to deny his conscience for social justice acquired on the travels of his youth), it seems like at least part of the reason he joined Castro was for adventure, and an escape from the doldrum that his life had become.
The bulk of Che is spent portraying the struggle of Guevara in the Cuban Revolution. Though ultimately victorious, Guevara's mission in Cuba was extremely difficult, compounded by his asthma. During the war, Guevara pioneered many tactics that would form the center of Guerrilla warfare strategy. In the film, Guevara and his men creep through the jungle, maintaining hidden bases, working symbiotically with the peasant population, and striking Fulgencio Batista's forces with surprise attacks. The methods of the Revolution were extremely successful, and would be collected and expounded upon by Guevara in his book Guerrilla Warfare: A Method. Guevara explained the tactics in a way that revolutionary groups throughout the world could put into practice in overthrowing tyranny. Following the success of the Cuban Revolution, Guevara would take these strategies to other countries, leading and teaching fighters in the techniques successful in Cuba.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
The Motorcycle Diaries (2004)
The Motorcycle Diaries details the story of a trip made by a young Ernesto 'Che' Guevara, and his older friend Alberto. The trip, which Che and Alberto made largely on motorcycle, took the pair through several countries in South America, and brought them into contact with a wide array of peoples of all walks of life. The encounters and experiences that came out of this trip had a profound effect on the young Che, and would play an important part in the formation of Che's revolutionary social views.
It is important to note that this was not the first time Che had traveled. He grew up in a middle class family, with wealthy and prestigious familial connections, and was therefore able to enjoy a fairly high standard of living. He had traveled often as a youth, and his family moved around a lot as his father took different jobs. As an avid reader, Che also gained an understanding of the world outside Argentina from various travelogues. The motorcycle trip he took prior to finishing his medical degree undoubtedly had the most profound effect on him. He and Alberto set out with an end-goal in mind (the leper colony in Peru), but the voyage itself was the focus of the trip. Che wanted to meet the lower classes, the Indians, and the working poor. To this end the travelers made a point of going off the beaten path, eschewing tourist destinations in order to get in touch with the common peoples of South America. Also important to note is that while Che was on the move, so was much of South America. During the 1950's millions of people flocked from the countryside to the big cities, as urbanization boomed. Many of the people Che encountered were people like these, headed for the cities. (Elena, Eduardo, Point of Departure)
Another important aspect of Che's philosophy that took shape during this voyage is his conception of the unity of South America's peoples. At this point in South American history, a strong racism was present among European South Americans, resulting in a strict segregation in the post-colonial period between these elites and their indigenous countrymen. These racism of the elite classes was highlighted by the changes occurring around them as a result of the massive urban migrations of the mid-twentieth century. Che was aware of this, and came to be more and more appalled by it as he traveled. Thus the idea of pan-Latin American unity became very attractive to him. This ideal would become integral to his revolutionary theories. Towards the end of the film, Che makes a toast to the "single mestizo race" of South America.
It is important to note that this was not the first time Che had traveled. He grew up in a middle class family, with wealthy and prestigious familial connections, and was therefore able to enjoy a fairly high standard of living. He had traveled often as a youth, and his family moved around a lot as his father took different jobs. As an avid reader, Che also gained an understanding of the world outside Argentina from various travelogues. The motorcycle trip he took prior to finishing his medical degree undoubtedly had the most profound effect on him. He and Alberto set out with an end-goal in mind (the leper colony in Peru), but the voyage itself was the focus of the trip. Che wanted to meet the lower classes, the Indians, and the working poor. To this end the travelers made a point of going off the beaten path, eschewing tourist destinations in order to get in touch with the common peoples of South America. Also important to note is that while Che was on the move, so was much of South America. During the 1950's millions of people flocked from the countryside to the big cities, as urbanization boomed. Many of the people Che encountered were people like these, headed for the cities. (Elena, Eduardo, Point of Departure)
Another important aspect of Che's philosophy that took shape during this voyage is his conception of the unity of South America's peoples. At this point in South American history, a strong racism was present among European South Americans, resulting in a strict segregation in the post-colonial period between these elites and their indigenous countrymen. These racism of the elite classes was highlighted by the changes occurring around them as a result of the massive urban migrations of the mid-twentieth century. Che was aware of this, and came to be more and more appalled by it as he traveled. Thus the idea of pan-Latin American unity became very attractive to him. This ideal would become integral to his revolutionary theories. Towards the end of the film, Che makes a toast to the "single mestizo race" of South America.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Soy Cuba (1964)
Soy Cuba (1964), is a colorful look at the history of Cuba through the lens of the people’s struggle against oppression and imperialism. Much like Que Vive Mexico (1979), Soy Cuba is told in an episodic fashion, detailing the events leading up to, and during the revolution of 1959. Though it does not span as much time as Mexico, the film depicts life in Cuba under an oppressive regime. The role of the United States in supporting the exploitation of Cuba is hinted at not discreetly.
Imperialism took on a different nature for Cuba following independence from Spain. Latin Americans took a Marxist approach to analyzing their history. In this outlook, they acknowledged that their societies had been built on exploitation, where a privileged few gained at the expense of the population. When the colonial government left, they were replaced by multi-national corporations from the United States. (Chasteen, p. 264-265) The first part of this film begins with an unflattering portrayal of the role of Americans in Cuban society.
An interesting aspect of the film is its portrayal of race-relations in Cuba. Blacks are shown to suffer just as much as people of Spanish descent. One episode of the film focuses on the struggle of a young black woman who is sexually exploited by American capitalists. At the end of this scene, we are taken on an impromptu tour of a shantytown inhabited mainly by blacks. The socialist realism of this scene acknowledges the racial diversity of Cuba, and includes all the peoples of Cuba in its portrayal of the oppressed. The Nationalist struggle would only succeed if race issues were reconciled. (de la Fuente)
This film is important also as a symbolic representation of the union between Cuba and the USSR. It was made not long after the US and Cuban relationship had gone sour. Though the Soviet-Cuban relationship was not always perfect, the message behind this film is important to the universal struggle against imperialism.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Que Viva Mexico (1930-79)
Que Viva Mexico is a valuable film for the glimpse that it gives us of Mexico in a time passed. The montage of images that comprise the episodic stories relating to Mexico's history are fascinating, but the story it tells is oversimplified. The reality of this film is an idealized re-telling of the Mexican story, from pre-Colombian days until after the revolution. Furthermore, the story is filtered through the ideological lens of the Soviet Union.
The film is a sort of Soviet-Hollywood version of history; much as Hollywood recasts history in a way to increase its box-office appeal, this film portrays the past in a way that glorifies international revolution. Whether or not this is director Eisenstein's intent is debatable, as his control over the film was compromised, and he never got to finish it. Regardless, the version of the film widely available today favors the working class by illustrating their struggle against oppressive hacienda owners, while vilifying Spanish colonial figures by portraying them as skeletons during the "Dia de los Muertos" celebrations.
Regardless of the films political message, it is an interesting depiction of Mexican life. Throughout the film we see glimpses of day-to-day life, as well as a few notable cultural events. The film begins with a montage of images envisioning the ancient Mayans against a backdrop of the pyramids of Mexico, paying homage to Mexico's past while connecting it to the present. Next is an idealized story about a young couple in Mexico before the arrival of Europeans. The Mexicans during this time enjoy an idyllic life of sleeping in hammocks, harvesting bananas, and trading in the local village. The young woman, Concepcion, is in the midst of assembling a golden necklace, part of an age-old practice whereby a woman works to create a necklace of gold coins, which she gives to the man of her choosing as a dowry (this scene may serve to highlight gender equality in Mexico, an ideal embraced by the Soviets and used as leverage against the West). The next section of the film deals with the conquest of Mexico by the Spaniards. It focuses on the new (Christian) religion brought to the Mexicans, and how this is used to subjugate them. Also shown is the bullfight, a hallmark of Spanish imperial culture brought to the Americas. The next part of the film is set at the beginning of the Twentieth Century, under the dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz. This chapter is important because it describes the Hacienda system, and the conditions that led up to the revolution. In this chapter, poor workers are exploited and abused by corrupt plantation owners, the descendants of the Spanish conquerors. The abuse a young man's wife leads to a revolt that ends in tragedy. This scene is symbolic of the Mexican peoples struggle for social justice that would culminate in the Revolution of 1910. The final chapter is yet another idealistic portrayal of Mexico, this time in the present, post-revolution era, where all people are equal and happy.
This film is certainly not historically accurate to a T, but it does however reflect an oversimplified vision of Mexican history. Popular sentiments about Spanish conquest and the hundreds of years of oppression are outlined. Furthermore, its portrayal of Mexican culture is fascinating.
The film is a sort of Soviet-Hollywood version of history; much as Hollywood recasts history in a way to increase its box-office appeal, this film portrays the past in a way that glorifies international revolution. Whether or not this is director Eisenstein's intent is debatable, as his control over the film was compromised, and he never got to finish it. Regardless, the version of the film widely available today favors the working class by illustrating their struggle against oppressive hacienda owners, while vilifying Spanish colonial figures by portraying them as skeletons during the "Dia de los Muertos" celebrations.
Regardless of the films political message, it is an interesting depiction of Mexican life. Throughout the film we see glimpses of day-to-day life, as well as a few notable cultural events. The film begins with a montage of images envisioning the ancient Mayans against a backdrop of the pyramids of Mexico, paying homage to Mexico's past while connecting it to the present. Next is an idealized story about a young couple in Mexico before the arrival of Europeans. The Mexicans during this time enjoy an idyllic life of sleeping in hammocks, harvesting bananas, and trading in the local village. The young woman, Concepcion, is in the midst of assembling a golden necklace, part of an age-old practice whereby a woman works to create a necklace of gold coins, which she gives to the man of her choosing as a dowry (this scene may serve to highlight gender equality in Mexico, an ideal embraced by the Soviets and used as leverage against the West). The next section of the film deals with the conquest of Mexico by the Spaniards. It focuses on the new (Christian) religion brought to the Mexicans, and how this is used to subjugate them. Also shown is the bullfight, a hallmark of Spanish imperial culture brought to the Americas. The next part of the film is set at the beginning of the Twentieth Century, under the dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz. This chapter is important because it describes the Hacienda system, and the conditions that led up to the revolution. In this chapter, poor workers are exploited and abused by corrupt plantation owners, the descendants of the Spanish conquerors. The abuse a young man's wife leads to a revolt that ends in tragedy. This scene is symbolic of the Mexican peoples struggle for social justice that would culminate in the Revolution of 1910. The final chapter is yet another idealistic portrayal of Mexico, this time in the present, post-revolution era, where all people are equal and happy.
This film is certainly not historically accurate to a T, but it does however reflect an oversimplified vision of Mexican history. Popular sentiments about Spanish conquest and the hundreds of years of oppression are outlined. Furthermore, its portrayal of Mexican culture is fascinating.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Camila (1984)
Maria Luise Bemberg's 1984 film Camila, is a historical romance, based on a true story, that not only depicts a captivating love story, but makes a powerful statement about Latin America's political history, past and present. The tale takes place in Argentina in 1847-48, and centers around Camila Gorman, the young daughter of a wealthy and influential Argentine family, and Father Ladislao Gutierrez, a young priest with familial connections as lofty as Camila's. Free-spirited and very intelligent Camila is drawn to Ladislao, who betrays a strong sense of social justice in an early sermon. The two become illicit lovers, as Ladislao's priesthood forbids him romance. When the two flee, a scandal erupts, ignited by the fury of Camila's father, and the scorn of the powers that be.
Camila closely follows the true tale of Camila and Urladislao, mirroring it in all of its melodrama. The two lovers' story is one beloved by many Argentines for its timeless romance. Bemberg's film maintains the romance, but at the same time transcends the typical conventions of melodrama, by inserting a powerful veiled message about (then-current) political trends in Argentina. In addition, the film deals with the challenging aspects of Argentina's history in the post-colonial period, including oppression, overbearing patriarchy, and some of the questionable positions taken by the Catholic church during this time. The story itself, despite its popularity, was repressed by the Church, due to its unscrupulous role in the condemnation of the lovers.
The film takes place during a tumultuous period in Latin American history. Argentina won its independence in the early 1800's. Following independence, a state of near-constant war existed in the country. This period is characterized by unrest and division between the many differing colonial, indigenous, and racial interests of Argentina's inhabitants. Power changed hands many times before a national constitution could be established. Juan Manuel de Rosas was a typical Latin America ruler of this period. He came to power in 1829, and established a country where wealthy landowners held power. He increased the holdings of the Argentine state, despite being at war with various European interests, including a French blockade, throughout his rule. He maintained power through terror, and demanded total support from all factions of society, including the Church. He mandated the wearing of red ribbons as a sign of support, an icon that is very visible throughout Camila. It is important to note that Argentina under Rosas was oppressively patriarchal, another theme that plays an important role in Camila.
Despite the historical setting of the film, Bemberg uses the classic love story as an allegory for Argentina durning the lat 1970's and early 1980's, when the "National Reorganizing Process" waged a "Dirty War" in which over 30,000 dissidents and opponents of the state simply disappeared. The mood of stifling repression ever present in the film reflects the mood in Argentina during this recent era of history. The role that Rosas plays in the film, in which he does not actually appear, but maintains an aura of malicious omniscience, is symbolic of the modern Argentine state, in which Bamberg lived and worked.
Camila is a melodramatic love story on the surface. One that was cherished by the Argentine people. On another level, it is a subtle critique of current affairs in Argentina at the time it was made.
Camila closely follows the true tale of Camila and Urladislao, mirroring it in all of its melodrama. The two lovers' story is one beloved by many Argentines for its timeless romance. Bemberg's film maintains the romance, but at the same time transcends the typical conventions of melodrama, by inserting a powerful veiled message about (then-current) political trends in Argentina. In addition, the film deals with the challenging aspects of Argentina's history in the post-colonial period, including oppression, overbearing patriarchy, and some of the questionable positions taken by the Catholic church during this time. The story itself, despite its popularity, was repressed by the Church, due to its unscrupulous role in the condemnation of the lovers.
The film takes place during a tumultuous period in Latin American history. Argentina won its independence in the early 1800's. Following independence, a state of near-constant war existed in the country. This period is characterized by unrest and division between the many differing colonial, indigenous, and racial interests of Argentina's inhabitants. Power changed hands many times before a national constitution could be established. Juan Manuel de Rosas was a typical Latin America ruler of this period. He came to power in 1829, and established a country where wealthy landowners held power. He increased the holdings of the Argentine state, despite being at war with various European interests, including a French blockade, throughout his rule. He maintained power through terror, and demanded total support from all factions of society, including the Church. He mandated the wearing of red ribbons as a sign of support, an icon that is very visible throughout Camila. It is important to note that Argentina under Rosas was oppressively patriarchal, another theme that plays an important role in Camila.
Despite the historical setting of the film, Bemberg uses the classic love story as an allegory for Argentina durning the lat 1970's and early 1980's, when the "National Reorganizing Process" waged a "Dirty War" in which over 30,000 dissidents and opponents of the state simply disappeared. The mood of stifling repression ever present in the film reflects the mood in Argentina during this recent era of history. The role that Rosas plays in the film, in which he does not actually appear, but maintains an aura of malicious omniscience, is symbolic of the modern Argentine state, in which Bamberg lived and worked.
Camila is a melodramatic love story on the surface. One that was cherished by the Argentine people. On another level, it is a subtle critique of current affairs in Argentina at the time it was made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)