Even the Rain Reflection In 2010 a Spanish, Mexican film producer Sebastian and his executive producer Costa arrived in Bolivia, escorted by a group of actors and a team of crew members, who were all there to prepare themselves in creating a film that depicted Columbus's first journey to the “New World”. Ignorant about his restricted budget, Costa’s nominates to do his film in Bolivia, which is the humblest (poorest) of nation in South America. There, is where they held auditions for parts in the film and the poorest of locals were so thrilled to audition just to get a part in the film so they may earn the two dollars a day as an extra in the film. Film maker Costa had saved thousands of thousands of dollars by having the underpaid cast members perform labor duties which were meant to be accomplished by skilled engineers. Sebastian had cast a native by the name Daniel for the role of Atuey, who was the Taino chief who directed the revolt against the Europeans; they hired Daniel's daughter Belen for the film which she performed in a vital role along with her father Daniel. The filming began …show more content…
I would love to see a Hollywood movie made from Sebastian’s and Costa’s film Even the Rain, I feel that it show’s some really great aspects of how people were treated because they were/are different when it came to wages for labor, their passion in government, and when it came down to fighting for their rights to live freely. I feel that Costa’s had gotten some great shots on how they were treated by their government and Columbus, I felt that they were one in the same, they both treated the people like shit to fuel themselves and their own. It was basically screw the poorest of people and let’s build up our needs and wants before even thinking of
In today's world there is kids in child labor and many people struggling with poverty. It is important that Francisco Jimenez tells a story of migrant farm workers because many people don't understand the struggles the workers go throw.This is relevant to our lives because people who aren't struggling with poverty or are in child labor take most things for granted and those who struggle would be more than grateful for the most slightest
History can be learned through several different mediums, and it is arguable that the most popular methods are through film and literature. Each come with their own respective advantages and disadvantages, and can each have a different effect on how an event is both portrayed and conceptualized. When comparing the 1987 book Mutiny on the Amistad: The Saga of a Slave Revolt and its Impact on American Abolition, Law and Diplomacy by Howard Jones, and the 1997 film Amistad directed by Steven Spielberg, it is apparent that both the book and the film are able to effectively retell the story of the events that took place aboard the Amistad in 1839. Yet each shed a different light on the matter and have been received by people in a different way.
As far back as Rigoberta Manchu can remember, her life has been divided between the highlands of Guatemala and the low country plantations called the fincas. Routinely, Rigoberta and her family spent eight months working here under extremely poor conditions, for rich Guatemalans of Spanish descent. Starvation malnutrition and child death were common occurrence here; rape and murder were not unfamiliar too. Rigoberta and her family worked just as hard when they resided in their own village for a few months every year. However, when residing here, Rigoberta’s life was centered on the rituals and traditions of her community, many of which gave thanks to the natural world. When working in the fincas, she and her people struggled to survive, living at the mercy of wealthy landowners in an overcrowded, miserable environment. By the time Rigoberta was eight years old she was hard working and ...
The emotional letter that Juan left for his mother might be one of the most emotional scenes in the documentary. The pure emotions that the letter was written by Juan to her mother leaves the audience with the bonds and emotions felt between the kids and families. Juan Carlos’s father abandoned the family years ago and left to New York, consequently Juan believe it is his responsibility to provide for his family. He also wants to find his father in New York and confronts him about why he has forgotten about them. The story of Juan is not just about migration of children, but also the issue of family separation. The documentary does not dehumanize but rather bring the humane and sensitive lens to the story of Juan where the human drama that these young immigrants and their families live. Juan Carlos is not the first of Esmeralda’s sons to leave for the United states, his nine-year-old brother Francisco was smuggled into California one month earlier. Francisco now lives with Gloria, his grandmother, who paid a smuggler $3,500 to bring him to Los Angeles, California. Once Juan Carlos is in the shelter for child migrants his mother eagerly awaits him outside. After she sees him she signs a paper that says if Juan Carlos tries to travel again, he will be sent to a foster home.
Although it is desirable to incorporate personal experiences of others to get a feel of the encounters that occurred to the typical or atypical individual within the Chicano movement, this does not entirely mean that the filmmakers left out those who studied the history of it. Historian Mario T. Garcia was a prominent addition in contributing to the historical experiences within the movement and brings in credibility. The concept of utilizing Chicanos who endured the reign of oppression and discussed their involvements to the impartiality efforts was a thrilling and clever one, there was still a need of a backbone in the factual side of it. By introducing an essence of experience, it generates a personal and emotional aspect in the documentary that can be unfavorable and stray from the informative attitude of a documentary. Having Garcia apart of the documentary grounds this enlightening dimension that insights as preventative measure which is an adept move on behalf of directors Luis Ortiz and Antonio
New Cinema however, also known as Cinema Novo became a film movement that appeared in Brazil in the late 1950s and reached its peak in the late 20 century to be used as a historic, political and economic device This movement sought to Rerepresent a culture while shedding new light on a national cinema which contributed to a new multinational aesthetics; thus thwarting the utopian idea of Brazil by suggesting that the country’s historical, social, political and economic ills were still very much evident. Although Cinema Novo borrowed some attributes from Classic Hollywood Cinema storytelling, these two Cinemas are different and are defined by their greater purpose for visual storytelling.
In this sense, the film tests the resiliency of good human nature. The modern world is becoming increasingly set in its extremes, as the lifestyle of the poor vastly contrasts that of the wealthy. The implementation of NAFTA reflects this movement toward separation, despite the fact that it was intended to boost trade between regions and create more prosperity on both sides of the United States-Mexico border. The Mexican elites saw it as their salvation. Others saw it as “ a death sentence.” The Chiapas region itself exemplifies this gap, as well. The region was split between the relatively prosperous west, which was fertile and characterized by commercial development, and the poor, subsistence-oriented east. It was not by accident that the Zapatista movement began in Chiapas as the struggle between ranchers, landowners, and subsistence farmers was intensified by NAFTA.
The Latin American film genre is one of the most known genre worldwide and one of the most popular and successful of all of the genres in this business around the world. Yearly a number of productions from Latin America become favored and demanded successes, often-earning high levels of recognition and recommendation. In foreign film categories and in events and functions such as the Oscars, which are very highly respected around the world, Latin American films are awarded and praised and unquestionably make audiences sit on seat’s edge to bear mind films being produced in countries here. Latin American films are most likely to be as successful as they are because of the mixture of all of the elements, which their cinema provides, including
As the first major U.S. success for a Spanish language film, Como Agua Para Chocolate (Alfonso Arau, 1992) has had a major impact on Hispanic culture and the future of Hispanic cinema. This film has many implicit and explicit layers that challenge typical cultural ideals, not only in Hispanic culture, but in various cultures across the world. Based on his wife, Laura Esquivel’s novel, Arau used this film, known commonly as Like Water for Chocolate, to bring to the surface the liberation of females through the empowerment of food. Although food and cooking are often associated with the oppression and generalization of Hispanic women, Like Water for Chocolate captivates an empowering view of women using intimate and heightened cinematography of the food.
Failing to find a positive opportunity for work, Maria’s next job is seemingly much worse in multiple ways. Maria gets offered enough money to hold her over for a long time in Colombia, by becoming a international narcotrafficker, even though it still “yields ve...
The movie Amistad is about the basic rights of a human and the rights of those Africans who were stolen from their own land and forced onto a Spanish ship named Amistad. The ideals and principles of justice throughout the film are comparable to those of many philosophical writers and the fundamental forms of justice.
Brazil is a film which rolls up all of the problems which society was experiencing at the time that it was made into one darkly humorous movie. Commercialism, terrorism, technology, bureaucracy and government control, cosmetic surgery and the lack of freedom and individual expression. This movie was not mainstream because of the way that it delivered its message, and also perhaps simply because the government suppressed it somewhat. However, this film provided great insight into these problems, and continues to do so today, as many of these problems continue to exist. Brazil aims to highlight these problems and make the viewer think about what they have seen. This movie was not intended to change the world, but simply to try to prevent it from spiralling down into a dystopian Brazil-like chaos.
Both La Ciudad (1998) and El Norte (1983) show the lives of immigrants in the United States and how they face poverty and destitution. While La Ciudad shows the perspective of various different immigrants already in the United States through vignettes, El Norte follows a brother and sister on their journey to the United States and shows what their life is like once they arrive. Both films, however, have common themes of poverty and destitution for immigrants. For instance, both films show the disappointing reality they face once they actually make it o the US. In addition, both films explore how immigrants are pressured to only looking out for themselves and how they stand up to that pressure.
Spielberg did a wonderful job with this movie. For people who expects to receive straight facts when watching historical films, this would not be the best type of movie to watch to gain knowledge from. As for one who watches as an entertainment, this movie is one that will attain your attention. Although the movie is inaccurate, with information, it has a well put together story line and is not overwhelming when the court scenes are taking place. The role of Cinque does present a possible experience of the slaves that were captured in Havana and brought to the United States of America. This movie overall had it's pros and cons, in which pros outweighed the cons.
What is identified as 'excess' in Western cinematic experience is, therefore, precisely where we locate Third World cinema. -Teshome Gabriel