Every year at least during the last decade, Argentinian cinema comes up with a single film that is superlative in many ways. Just back to 2014 we had Relatos Salvajes (Wild tales, Foreign film Academy Award nominee), The Clan (2015, this one to a lesser extent), El ciudadano ilustre (The distinguished citizen, 2016), and this year La cordillera, by Santiago Mitre. Mitre, still really young, is on his path to claim his spot beside the greatest contemporary Argentinian filmmakers such as Juan Jose Campanella and Damian Szifron.
This was Mitre's first super-production and he succeeded in coming up with something absolutely ambitious. The fact of the film's scale, it's remarkable cast (best national actors by far- Ricardo Darin, Erica Rivas, Gerardo Romano- and great foreign ones- Christian Slater, Elena Anaya) made it highly expected by the big commercial audience, but Mitre has surprised everyone with something so big in it's universal themes (power, greed, corruption) but yet subtle, full of metaphors
and without a closure to the story, which is what the average cinema goer expects. Hence the mixed reviews, popular reaction and the widely spread notion that the film stays half way or that's slow and boring. It can be a really uncomfortable film for some people, it makes one think and in general people go to the cinema just for entertainment.
The pace of the film it's perfect. Neither too slow nor to fast, it allows one to keep thinking about what's there or what's not. I guess it's more enjoyable if someone has interest and knowledge in politics but as I said above what really matters is the universality of the themes that are dealt with throughout the movie.
The only weakness I can find is the inclusion of President Blanco's daughter played by Dolores Fonzi. Even though then I realised this was merely with the purpose of exploring more in depth Blanco's personality and morality, I hardly find Dolores Fonzi credible (I can only recall 2013 "El critico" as an exception). In the long run and after figuring out the reason of her inclusion it didn't really matter. Everyone who's more thoughtful than the average can have a different interpretation of the events or possible outcomes.
It blew my mind.
This was Mitre's first super-production and he succeeded in coming up with something absolutely ambitious. The fact of the film's scale, it's remarkable cast (best national actors by far- Ricardo Darin, Erica Rivas, Gerardo Romano- and great foreign ones- Christian Slater, Elena Anaya) made it highly expected by the big commercial audience, but Mitre has surprised everyone with something so big in it's universal themes (power, greed, corruption) but yet subtle, full of metaphors
and without a closure to the story, which is what the average cinema goer expects. Hence the mixed reviews, popular reaction and the widely spread notion that the film stays half way or that's slow and boring. It can be a really uncomfortable film for some people, it makes one think and in general people go to the cinema just for entertainment.
The pace of the film it's perfect. Neither too slow nor to fast, it allows one to keep thinking about what's there or what's not. I guess it's more enjoyable if someone has interest and knowledge in politics but as I said above what really matters is the universality of the themes that are dealt with throughout the movie.
The only weakness I can find is the inclusion of President Blanco's daughter played by Dolores Fonzi. Even though then I realised this was merely with the purpose of exploring more in depth Blanco's personality and morality, I hardly find Dolores Fonzi credible (I can only recall 2013 "El critico" as an exception). In the long run and after figuring out the reason of her inclusion it didn't really matter. Everyone who's more thoughtful than the average can have a different interpretation of the events or possible outcomes.
It blew my mind.