MovieChat Forums > También la lluvia (2011) Discussion > A lot of potential, but kind of petered ...

A lot of potential, but kind of petered out towards the end...

posted 12 years ago by fatpie42
11 replies | jump to latest

There was a fantastic premise whereby the contents of the film about Columbus and the Conquistadors mixed indelibly with the context of hardship for local people in Bolivia where they are filming. The passion for the movie-within-a-movie's message amongst some of the fictional actors is put to the challenge when they have to react to the real hardship of the extras. The cynical focus of the film industry on money puts the question of hypocrisy in the light of their film highlighting the evils of conquistadors who exploited the people for gold.

When the leading native actor, whose part is central to the movie, becomes a leader in the local demonstrations which are being violently repressed, the filmmakers are put in a real quandary.

However, from there on the film seems to be unsure of where to take things yet. We get a bittersweet ending where we are supposed to ponder what we've learnt, but it's not terribly satisfying. Needless to say though, the whole film is fantastically acted and fantastically shot with great dialogue. But the ending is a very important part of a film and this just seemed to run out of steam.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 12 years ago

Well once the demos start the true politics emerge amongst the film crew and actors, which I found quite fascinating and at times funny. The producer who appeared most mercernary risked his life to help them whilst the others either quit the project and went home or, like the director, chose the film over the lives of its participants. In many ways their actions more than the local politicians were worse as they had assumed a position of ethical superiority.

The making of the film, where this film begins, was replaced by the reality of the politics erupting from the screen into living history. Both were compelling to me.

Why problem make? When you no problem have, you don't want to make ...

[–] fatpie42 12 years ago

But this isn't a true story. Having the producer suddenly change like that was not inspiring, it was jarring. And his actions aren't impressive in themselves because he's a fictional character. Having him save a child from a burning building or jump across a huge chasm would also be amazing feats, but there needs to be a good reason to those things.

Here the only reason for this brave action seemed to be so he could be given a symbolic bottle of water and I found that unsatisfying as an ending.

But absolutely when the main Bolivian actor is leading the demonstrations and he takes the producer's money so he can put it towards carrying on the demonstrations, and even later when he is helped by the other extras to get away as the authorities try to seize him after filming, this was all very exciting and really pulled me in. But the film didn't seem to know where to take it next. In the end it's just like "the demonstrations are over now. Bye." Bit of an anti-climax I thought.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 12 years ago

I'm not really sure what you're saying when you comment that this isn't a true story. I don't think the producer suddenly changes. Rather he becomes more involved with the actor in their film who is also the leader of the revolt against the increased water prices. He would not have acted the way he did for just any of the locals.

The bottle of water wasn't given by the producer but one of the actors (Anton) who chooses not to flee the country but stay and finish the film. He offers the water to men captured by the police and it's symbol is a gesture of humanity, perhaps the last water those men under arrest will drink.

In the end it's just like [spoiler]"the demonstrations are over now. Bye."[/sopiler] Bit of an anti-climax I thought.

But isn't that the way of things? Drama happens, then finishes. We know that there will be further demonstrations in the future because of economic policies in many Latin American countries. The purpose surely is to highlight the conflicts for all involved in making the film and the complexities of any political situation in which economics drives exploitation.

Why problem make? When you no problem have, you don't want to make ...

[–] fatpie42 12 years ago

The bottle of water wasn't given by the producer

No, it was given TO the producer, as a gift to thank him for his bravery.

I'm not really sure what you're saying when you comment that this isn't a true story.

Well if it WAS a true story, they could argue that they HAVE to tell the story like this out of respect for those involved. However, if it's NOT a true story, they have more flexibility in how they tell it.

But isn't that the way of things? Drama happens, then finishes.

If I just wanted stuff that was true to life, I may as well watch a documentary. This is a film. It is supposed to be telling a story. If it involves stuff 'just happening' and then 'just finishing' that is not a story, or at least that is a story which peters out.

You see what I mean?

I think I'm more upset than I might be because I saw so much potential at the beginning and it just didn't seem to go anywhere.

[–] NewID 11 years ago

Its true that films ending is not satisfactory. I was waiting that they would have a documentary at the end instead of their film which is almost like this actual film we saw. And get a prize for it.

Or maybe even films itself says "water is more important than cinema" dont wait for strong drama at the end.

[–] info-996-828544 9 years ago

I too was expecting that there would have been a secretly filmed doc at the end.

However, regarding the water "present", I took this to be a metaphor that water itself, was a gift. You might recall that early in the film, there is a scene where he ask's an aboriginal what the native words is from "water". He is told "Yaku". Another crew member tells him that he wont even remember this in a few days.

[–] info-996-828544 9 years ago

The film was itself based on real events. The IMF made a loan to Bolivia and among other things, demanded that the water industry be privatised. The company that then got the "water rights", progressively lobbied the gov in order that they had a total monopoly on the supply of water. It was even made illegal to collect rain water, hence the title.

There were riots and eventually, the water companies were forced to pull out, but thankfully, not before they had lost a lot of money improving the infrastructure of the system. In case anyone should want to attack me for this comment, I would add that Bolivia throughout the 20th century was one of the most unstable and corrupt countries, and had over 100 different govs, including on one occasion, three in the same day. I sincerely believe that a substantial portion of the proposed $450 a year charge for water, would have found it's way into the wallets of various gov functionaries.

Moving on from your post, I really do hope that one day someone makes a doc about the IMF and the harm they do, particularly in the third world. It seems one of the favourites is water privatisation. These are huge costly capital projects which generally require that the Water companies borrow large sums from the banks. Anyone see a potential conflict of interest here?

Looking at the world news currently, I note that the IMF have in recent years, made loans to both Ireland and Greece, which also led to an insistence that Water be privatised in this two countries, and maybe not on the same scale, but this has also led to significant protests in these countries.

[–] Errington_92 9 years ago

Here the only reason for this brave action seemed to be so he could be given a symbolic bottle of water and I found that unsatisfying as an ending.

I did not find the ending unsatisfying. The bottle of water was a reflection of Costa's development as a character. Costa could appreciate what he achieved through his humane act, which would make him progress through life to understand what is important.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not.

[–] CoSMiGoNoN 9 years ago

Agreed. The film had been brilliant but in the end they fell in old clichés and sappy melodrama.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] usarmycwo 7 years ago

Agree, fatpie42. When the girl's mother came to plead for Costa's help, he'd have stayed in character if he'd begged off. But after he didn't, the film descended into melodrama. Reaching a bottomless pit with Daniel coming to the set, the one where the boat was, at the same time Costa was there.

And what a pity, as until then this was among the most gripping films I've ever seen.

I wish I understood why it happened. Those who wrote the script and directed the first 7/8 of the film were brilliant. What happened, that they couldn't finish the film as they had started it.