Strawberry & Chocolate was screened in Cuba and appeared in theaters in the year of 1994. It was directed by Tomás Gutiérrez Alea and Juan Carlos Tabío. Alea is considered to be the most important Cuban film director; it is important to know that: as a director, Alea held an interesting position in the Cuban cultural system. He was a self-declared revolutionary, yet he used many of his films to criticize flaws in the Cuban political system… Alea was in fact, one of the cofounders of the Cuban Institute of Art and Industry. (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 10). In this way I think it was really important that he had this power since he could in some way evade crude censorship. In the same way Tabío is well educated in the audiovisual industry, well known by his documentary works as for his films, also has been internationally awarded many times; this Cuban is another great director. Strawberry & Chocolate was adapted from one of the tales of “The Wolf, The Woods and The New Man”, a book by Senel Paz, Cuban writer. The book concerns about the codes of homosexual and heterosexual relationships and the complexity of politic compromises in the Cuban revolution society at the end of the 20th century.
This film is set in 1979, in a social and political climate in which revolution is all the way developed and all over Cuba, an environment in which people is isolated from external influences and in which being against the regime could cost you too much. A climate where poverty abounds making people incur in black market in order to survive. A climate in which freedom of expression and speech in censored unless is in favor of the communist regime of the country.
The film makes it case by emotional appeal, symbolism and dialectics. I expected nothing less from a Cuban film. As I thought, it was an insightful work that gave an analysis of the society that seems to be getting deeper and deeper in poverty and underdevelopment.
My initial response to the film was to think that societies are full of prejudices against those who are different from the common stereotype in any way. Thus, society tries to get rid of these individuals because they represent trouble to social order. Then I knew that that I have been part of this machine for a long time, since I was sometimes intolerant to certain conducts or ways. Therefore, I’m trying day by day to be more tolerant, and I do this by using what Nietzsche called “the art of mistrust”, in other words, nothing is what it seems. Consequently, in order to see the “real truth” of things we should go beyond the appearances or shapes and look at the main or bottom things. Afterwards, I thought that this was not a movie about Cuban society, but a call to world societies in general, because the real thing is that we should be open-minded with each other and learn to appreciate as well as respect the ideas of people, even though if they are totally different opposite to our owns; and this we should do regardless of matters of race, skin color, culture, sexual orientation and religion among others.
The title is a clear metaphorical connection of the stated just above, as it refers to the two main characters of the film Diego and David respectively, and how different they were in their customs, sexual orientations and ideologies. But how they made it over these disparities and learned from each other, becoming at the end a strawberry-chocolate mixed ice cream.Accordingly, the purpose of the film is to “call for a pluralistic society without censorship or state interference in cultural affairs; it attacks cultural isolationism and calls for a recognition of the need to liberalize the economic system.” (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 24). Likewise, the main idea of the film is to show that people should “see thru” the facades and see what the really important things are. This is a film that tries to teach the audience to recognize, understand and value each other’s differences, point of views and life styles, this is a film about tolerance.
This film is set in 1979, in a social and political climate in which revolution is all the way developed and all over Cuba, an environment in which people is isolated from external influences and in which being against the regime could cost you too much. A climate where poverty abounds making people incur in black market in order to survive. A climate in which freedom of expression and speech in censored unless is in favor of the communist regime of the country.
The film makes it case by emotional appeal, symbolism and dialectics. I expected nothing less from a Cuban film. As I thought, it was an insightful work that gave an analysis of the society that seems to be getting deeper and deeper in poverty and underdevelopment.
My initial response to the film was to think that societies are full of prejudices against those who are different from the common stereotype in any way. Thus, society tries to get rid of these individuals because they represent trouble to social order. Then I knew that that I have been part of this machine for a long time, since I was sometimes intolerant to certain conducts or ways. Therefore, I’m trying day by day to be more tolerant, and I do this by using what Nietzsche called “the art of mistrust”, in other words, nothing is what it seems. Consequently, in order to see the “real truth” of things we should go beyond the appearances or shapes and look at the main or bottom things. Afterwards, I thought that this was not a movie about Cuban society, but a call to world societies in general, because the real thing is that we should be open-minded with each other and learn to appreciate as well as respect the ideas of people, even though if they are totally different opposite to our owns; and this we should do regardless of matters of race, skin color, culture, sexual orientation and religion among others.
The title is a clear metaphorical connection of the stated just above, as it refers to the two main characters of the film Diego and David respectively, and how different they were in their customs, sexual orientations and ideologies. But how they made it over these disparities and learned from each other, becoming at the end a strawberry-chocolate mixed ice cream.Accordingly, the purpose of the film is to “call for a pluralistic society without censorship or state interference in cultural affairs; it attacks cultural isolationism and calls for a recognition of the need to liberalize the economic system.” (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 24). Likewise, the main idea of the film is to show that people should “see thru” the facades and see what the really important things are. This is a film that tries to teach the audience to recognize, understand and value each other’s differences, point of views and life styles, this is a film about tolerance.
No comments:
Post a Comment