Looks, libers and looking that disturb - Ips Cuba
Ahora que QHUP, el polémico y censurado largometraje de Yimit Ramírez, recorre el mundo, ordeno mis memorias sobre cuándo empecé a interesarme por su trabajo. Fue después de ver Koala, corto de ficción que codirige junto a Claudia Claremi en 2013.
True cult of the drill, Koala presumes ingenuity to braid different perceptual stages of a manipulated recipient, forced to the dichotomies of wanting and not being able, and being, ultimately, condemned to perplexity.
On the one hand, it is renounced to tell a story in exchange for showing the mechanisms involved in the production and reception of the short, including marketing effects.On the other, it is sold as a false hook to a cast of popular actors
For the usual machinery that operates with the principles of Star-System.
Add the ironic score that, from the credits, marks the alleged awards achieved in the international arena.A justified mockery to those who give artistic merit to mobilized productions often from the contested lauros.
El koala, la loba marina y el voyeur
Koala is a tease of hair, whose trajectory is completed with the drill of review appeared in number 3 of the leap newspaper where, among other boutades, two "journalists" interrogate the actor Luis Alberto García, about the interpretive complexity of his leading role.Faced with so much irreverence, I only add that, personally, I loved that the Koala was adopted and breastfed by a marine wolf that steals the show.
Other things I saw by Yimit Ramírez: Mataperros (2016), Eternal Gloria (2018), End (2019), but nothing that impacts me as much as Liberame Mirón (2013, co -directed with Claudia Clarami), mocking paraphrases of look at my love (Marilyn Soloya, 2001), a documentary about exhibitionism, its victims and impunity surrounding that practice in the Cuban context.
Look at me impresses by the cruel way to turn the viewer into a voyeur, at the same time that he claims, from the self -awareness of artistic discourse, a debate that exposes to the light a certain scavenging area of toxic masculinities, hidden from heteropatriarcal triumphalismand patriot of the island.
The authors are (us) put in a semi -ruined location close to a beach, used by a subject who likes to skist women (especially white complexion).From there, the visual route is imposed by all that ancient space, crowded with graffiti, which are the expression of the most into the mirror moments.
They accompany us on this journey, the anonymous voices of other witnesses who, at the time, were also summoned to comment on the matter.A single human being does not appear on the set.But physical subtraction is replaced by the sound presence, through the diverse criteria, even contradictory, which are poured from the beginning to absolute voice-over.
There is an intention to saturate from the preeminence of all that porn iconography, from the incessant glood over the images and the physical precariousness of the place.Same as overwhelming is the dirt of space, all the dirt captured, "rinsed" sometimes with images of a sea whose waves break with some indifference on a rough and rough coast, with redness loneliness.
Entre masturbadores y fisgones
It is not the first time that Cuban audiovisual addresses pathological sexual practices.I remember examples seen in the ICAIC young sample: Awakening (Lázaro Lemus), which refers to onanism practiced by a young schizoid;The hand (Daniel Santoyo Hernández), where by fiction female masturbation, voyerism and necrophilia are ventilated.
Closer to Yimit's proposal, Raúl's world is located (Jessica Rodríguez and Zoe Miranda, 2010), where the provocative appeal to mix fiction and non -fiction removes the uncomfortable theme and the finger itself narrates its happy misfortune and makes us accomplicessentimental.
It is wrong who thinks that these approaches to such rough matters pursue a dispensation or justification.If you have a sore and do not attend it, it will end up being a cancer that will end your life.That is the foundation after the interest of young filmmakers to host such subversive, authentic salivations of the systemic, structural and global patriarchy that the world suffers.
The subtraction of every subject in the discourse that controls the argument of Molida Mirón, prevents an identifier maneuver with the situation raised.The documentary annoy directly to the male eye that looks from his oppressive tribune.It is always more comfortable.
As the film screen is unable to return the image of the subject that looks at it, the subtraction of the speaker characters produces an even more disturbing effect: it becomes a vampiric mirror that bounces the anguish of “being in the place of the facts".
The use of the camera in hand is another resource that places us in a self -conscious state and enters rapid contradiction with the pleasant experience of watching cinema from the comfort of the armchair and the transparency of conventional discourse.
By breaking all attempts at the public identification and drawing attention to what happens outside the field, the documentary destroys that “narcissistic regression of the spectator” (as described by Jacques Aemont, in cinema aesthetics), and condemns him to self -imply inThe phenomenon discussed.
Emplazamientos de cámara, desplazamiento de voces
The short responds to a state of ubiquity in terms of focus on the relationship between what the camera illustrates and what is heard commenting.Various voices reproduce the texts, there is even a kind of dramatization on the verbal traces of the masturbator.
In principle we assume that those who film are those whose words we listen, so the illusion of a documentary that is told alone, like any other film story, gives up the uncertainty that there is a scrutinizing presence that exceeds the mere participation of subjectseventual.Even fractures the certainty that it is a documentary, a fiction or a kind of mockumentary.
All that pornography tattooed on the walls has been transferida to the audiovisual image, but their record does not show the speakers.They may have been there or elsewhere, they may have seen those or other similar images.Our narrators are not reliable.We can take care of their criteria, or invent other characters also living in an off -visual and sound field.
We do not know what the camera's journey will be in its scruty mission through that sordid scenographic space, but nothing will prevent us from doing our own mental, selective and motivated assembly.That was based on Eisenstenian intellectual assembly.
Quítate tú pa ponerme yo
The effect of Minto Mirón on a certain male spectator is interesting: rejection, repudiation, but, above all, negative to share the spoiled experience that the cinematographic device raises.When the Imago Festival of the Higher Institute of Art (ISA) was presented in competition, I was part of a jury of three members, two of them men who refused to discuss the video.
I would have rewarded it, aware that it opens a path to the Jungian psychoanalytic debate over all miseries that, converted into shadows, throw more and more sexopaths on the plot of a city, of a country patriarchal knees.
I just watched I want to make a movie (qhup) and I loved it.Still under her influence, I do not dare to write about her, but it is obvious that there is also an obsession with her eyes: what is seen, why you look and where you look.Without the reflective exercise that was raised by looked at me, without having tried the vertigo of looking from a site of power, perhaps qhup would be a debut, a premiere, literally a show.
On the contrary, for me it has something of original déjà vu.She (Neisy) takes the camera to do his own and converts the artist-pool into hostage.The decision to let her occupy the site of the seer and make it taste that privilege is a statement of courage, which only makes sense in the eyes of a woman (2021).