LO ECONOMIC
is inconceivable that in a country where the minimum wage (S /. 550) is a quarter of the basket (S /. 2.112), where the budget for education is less than 3% of GDP, where there is no film school, which annually releases national film business does not reach double digits, with an audience away (or rather disappointed) of the rooms to be a Peruvian film with a Programming billboard and airwaves saturated with stupefying Hollywood productions and the like, and that there is no clear policy to support the production, distribution and exhibition of films away from CONACINE criterion, is thought to create a film industry.
Do we need an industry in a country of such conditions?
If so, what are the criteria of production for this industry?
Who would shape their policies and what his mode of support?
Who would support, and why, taking into account the background?
state grant competitions are hiding in the low budget in a country where not given accounts of the money invested in films of low artistic, educational, and is also commercially a failure.
Exceptions do not make the rule.
can not speak of a Peruvian film off the success of Claudia Llosa isolated or Hector Galvez, nor can one speak of successful negotiations for entirely personal achievements. No dawn to open the window.
Should I keep waiting occur only in 35-mm celluloid, and through a production company that "has experience in the middle?
How many 35 mm cameras on the media and how much use without rolls and technicians that know how to use?
THE SOCIAL AND CULTURAL
If 99% of commercial releases are foreigners, and that percentage almost everything is made in the USA, instilling the American way, extolling their policy, culture, economic model, its heroes and criminals, we have only to live in a colonial cultural.
No images themselves, and assume imported.
Under the same principle governing the pseudo art and cultural industries in Peru, using native code in a foreign structure, no identity, no personality, no eigenvalues, more closely associated external sensitivity (not surprisingly, the level of racial contempt that exists in the country) to a look inside. Without having our own way, the donkey will always be tied to the door of the dance. And even in provinces want to imitate (the worst) Hollywood.
What can be expected if consumer's ideal image of cinema is that of a guy sitting next to her friend / girlfriend / etc. Watching a movie gringa, descriptive comments mumbling between every handful of popcorn that spreads in your mouth?
Aesthetics / Ethics
And not just talking about influences, as a personal language is always influenced by global, if not an absence of substance. Movies soulless, empathy with almost any kind of audience. Films are full of clichés gastadísimos of repetidísimos gags, predictable in a sweltering, improbable, of (mal) mounted television, theatrical performances, full of moralizing and false tears of clothes.
are films that have not taken art as a way to find the best way to show the history, philosophy, reality. Have failed in their attempt to show universes, worlds, landscapes, urban or rural, personal or collective, naturalistic or realistic.
have left the previous outrages just being gentrified, superficial gaze explained narratives that do not move, do not inspire, and worse, do nothing, neither the language nor society, nor the public .
A NEW FILM
If there has been industry means that there was no cinema?
The film exists with or without industry, movies are there. There is no tradition, or this is a very poor. Its shortcomings, discussed earlier, lead to the need for a new cinema, a cinema that is not made in any parameter of the old. Only you can save the film breaking.
The art is for it to say and unsay, to move forward and not stagnate. An artist is never conservative, always somehow have to innovate, otherwise its rationale loses value and meaning.
Cinema of Peru lived modernity, art was nonexistent. Until now.
then arises a movement that has not demonstrated, but overlaps. The principles and reasons for making films, and his search for a personal language, free of conventions, the grouped separately from the old.
So Fernando Montenegro, Rafael Arévalo, Juan Daniel Fernández , Raúl Breast , the collective kinesthesia (Marcelo Eduardo Quispe and Jim), among others, are building a platform individually and simultaneously. They are the product of necessity, lack of wealth and the opportunities given by the cheapening of new technologies, access to information from the global cinematic landscape over the Internet, the approach to film the new (and not so new) global trends in the market through "informal" (blessed are you, Powder Blue), and especially the generational experiences, thereby generating the birth of a new cinema, new directors, whose traditions are themselves, they have not asked a penny to CONACINE, despite being in the right, they are public funds that should be better utilized.
alejadísimas His proposals are far from done in these parts, are risky for the experimental and artistic. Their independence is beyond the self-financing, is a way of being and doing, a philosophy, a lifestyle, a certainty to make the film in which they believe, to satisfy a need for expression, to create, to say something new, the most novel and why not personal as possible. Opening a channel for dialogue with the audience closer to understanding this reality, not just studying or looking at it as a phenomenon. Speak the truth, your truth, share and tell the freshness of a new era, enjoying a freedom that that is not accountable but only the self-imposed, to transcendence and honesty.
(In those days, we will continue writing, interviewing filmmakers, posting videos and reviews of new cinema. In the meantime, I leave you with the link fragments Fernando Montenegro Deuna interview published in the Godard *
magazine http://lacinefilianoespatriota.blogspot.com/2010/05/encierro-2009-de-fernando-montenegro.html * Source: cinephile is not patriotic. )
