this is a beautiful piece yet i have always thought what a souvenir sort of feeling it has. but not in the horrible way, just in the stranger's eye captivated by our strange fascination with death and the beauty of our land. it feels that way, not like internalised, but of admiration. and i very much enjoy that.
Interesante, excesiva y accidentada producción por un maestro del montaje. Irónicamente y sin terminar de cuajar, logra captar la escencia de la Mexicaneidad: El amor-desamor, la fiesta-siesta, religiosidad-paganismo, tolerancia-intolerancia, contraste-uniformidad. Gran metáfora de las peculiaridades de una cultura!
Imágenes vivas de un México que en lo profundo no ha cambiado mucho por desgracia: la pobreza, la corrupción, las grandes diferencias sociales, la iglesia como un yugo de retraso, la falta de educaciòn y mil cicatrices que siguen ensuciando de rojo a un país anacrónico que siempre ha querido subsistir de otro modo. Maravillosas imagenes, el genio de un director
Esta rara. En parte da orgullo ser mexicana, en ratos vergüenza -la impunidad sigue igual, por ejemplo, la revolución no sirvió de nada. Si no, muchas imágenes y rostros gloriosos...pero México no logró su libertad y el país es muy diferente al retrato. Me da curiosidad saber cómo habría dejado la obra Eisenstein. Foto increíble, luz increíble, paisajes increíbles. Me dan ganas de viajar al México de los 30.
i want to like it. i liked it in college. It's clear he made this movie when he was happiest. BUT. It's his only movie where sex is a significant factor, and he has some weird ideas about women very much akin to DH Lawrence (whom he admired) and john steinbeck. Thank god when he returned to russia he stuck to what really interested him - men and power (and those are the things that interest me too :) )
A film shot in the 1930's from Russia *about* Mexico? Seems loaded. And it was, incredibly loaded, with generalizations and cliches abound. But the shot composition is pure Eisenstein, and the focus on the "individual" in this "documentary", even if staged, alleviated some of the "primitive peoples" problems I was expecting. Beautiful at times, hokey at times, but I'm glad I saw it.
I was confused by the staged shots since so many wonderful images can be gleaned from Mexico's natural beauty. There are flecks of anthropological insight, and great cinematography, especially the unique use of lighting. If Eisenstein's name wasn't attached to the film, would most viewers have the same reaction?
A lesson on how any auteur must write in his or her will who has rights to edit any of their work. In the case of Que Viva Mexico, I want to believe that Eisenstein was going to construct profound meaning with this collage but what we get is beautiful imagery masked with incidental music as a character/narrator c/o the 1970's editing department of Mosfilm or Soyuzfilm. This masterpiece needs another posthumous edit.
What happens, what it covers, what he raises is a whole piece of what has happened and what is happening today in Mexico. The battle of the low, medium and high social classes. Miscegenation, the constant struggle against the rich dictator, colonization, indigenous and land abuse, the patriarchy country.
Amazing film work which reveals the methods of a true propagandist. The common man is so glorified. How spectacular the agave is. This is where I first learned what pulque is. What a way to use it..to expose the lascivious upper class of Mexico as they rabidly let it flow out of their mouths. Good and evil is so easily laid out in a class struggle. If you love film and have time, you won't regret watching this.