For our last week in class we watched Glauber Rocha’s Black God, White Devil which struck me as a very influential film as it warps the relationship between morality, religion, and the poor man. Whilst watching the film I wanted to highlight one of my favorite aspects which was the cinematography. Rocha successfully maintained his traditional cinematic technique with intimate close up shots, and dramatic framing as he would shoot the characters Manuel and Rosa. Two scenes which I adore is when the duo is in the church about to do the sacrifice with Sebastiao and the scene in which Carisco is talking to the group about the next step in his plan. Sebastiao’s sacrafice scene was in contrast with the rest of the film as it is only of the only scene’s which contained darkness, which is ironic for a religious figure. Being the cult leader he is, we see Sebastiao in dim lighting in a far away frame to which we move in closer, creating a sinister energy in the shot which shows Rocha’s skill in creating tension. This scene is then reversed in terms of shot style as we move into Carisco’s speech as the camera is actually quite close on the subject, moving around in circles around the subject making it seem as if all rules of cinematography are thrown out of the room. The closeness of this shot feels as if we are there in the action, making it as if these two scenes containing our antagonists Sebastiao and Carisco are opposite sides of the coin, with one being a much more formal style of shooting, and the other experimental.

For my presentation last week I was assigned to discuss Glauber Rocha and his documentary Di Calvacanti (1977) in which we discussed the topic of ethics in filming, capturing those who we love, and the documentary style of Rocha. I wanted to touch upon however the concept of which Rocha filmed his deceased friend, Emiliano Di Cavalcanti; and focus on is it unethical to film a funeral in a way such as Rocha. For starters, Rocha filmed in such a way where his film had gotten banned by the family of Cavalcanti, but was this justified? On one hand you can exclaim that Rocha was being irrational, and bringing a grotesque approach to this cinematic technique. However, if looked at by the other perspective, you can say this was perhaps a cry for help in the purest form. From what we see in the film Di Calvacanti, we can clearly see this psychotic state coming from Rocha in describing his friends death. It may seem poorly thought out at first, but rather it is one of Rocha’s purest forms of work as he felt that Di Calvacanti must be filmed in a cinema novo-esque manner, truly praising one of Brazil’s greatest painters.

For this week we delve into films made by Sara Gomez, an inspiring Cuban filmmaker who had passion for her island, Rumba and of course family. Some of the films we had watched were Guanabacoa, Cronicas de Mi Familia, Una Isla Para Miguel, and Mi Aporte. The film that I felt left an impression on me however was Ire A Santiago as I thought it was a great survey of the eastern Cuban city, in comparison to the film we had watched prior, PM by Orlando Jimenez.

PM was a film in which highlighted the nightlife in the Cuban city Havana, showing people dancing all over, and showcasing integration between different Cuban residents. Collectively as a class we watched PM and Ire A Santiago, however in order to compare the two as Gomez’s film highlights the true integration of Cuban civilians as it highlighted the different roles, activities, and lifestyles that Cubans explore; rather than in PM, which solely associates Black Cubans with the nightlife. What I find interesting is the two perspectives both Gomez and Jimenez have on the two areas of Cuba. Perhaps they could’ve have grown up differently in their respective areas of Cuba, possibly holding different meanings of their island. If I were to film my respective home, I would definitely visualize the best aspects of the area and demographic, making it seem more glamorous, but Gomez was able to capture this mode of cinema by capturing the small intimate moments that make Cuba such a beautiful country to live in.

In our first class we were introduced to various different topics and films, however the film I wanted to discuss is La Hora de los Hornos by directors Octavio Getino and Fernando Solana, and their ability to enable didactic means through the act of imperfect cinema. La Hora de los Hornos is primarily about the neocolonialism and economic struggle in Argentina, and in order to show these issues the directors use techniques highlighted in Julio García Espinosa’s “For an Imperfect Cinema”. The sequence I wanted to focus on that primarily uses this educational strategy is the part of the film that shows the indigenous Argentine people.

The sequence mentioned shows insight of struggle faced by Argentine indigenous populations as their land is constantly taken and their people forgotten. In order to show this hardship in a didactic way, the directors use camerawork, available resources and basic imperfect cinema thinking to exemplify the problem. In Julio García Espinosa’s “For an Imperfect Cinema”, García mentions how the root of all perfect cinema involves showing “the process which generates the problems” (¶10,1 Espinosa), the rejection of exhibitionism in cinema and the disinterest in quality or technique; which is all shown in the La Hora de los Hornos sequence involving the Argentine indigenous. Within the sequence we see the elder talking about the colonialism occurring and the sick people in the village, which shows the problem face on rather than hiding it. Another example of this is shown when we see the camera focusing closely on the children’s faces, showing the discomfort that is felt when these hardships are in play in shots that are rough and dismiss traditional standards. This scene can be considered an excellent example of the relation between Julio García Espinosa’s “For an Imperfect Cinema” and Octavio Getino and Fernando Solana’s La Hora de los Hornos.