Third Cinema

Che Guevara, La Hora De Los Hornos

In Solanas and Getino’s reading towards a third cinema he discusses how third cinema, also known as Latin American cinema came about. Majority of the article talks about neo-colonialism, and the power of the bourgeois. These oppressed third world countries that are in need of a revolution and he sees that films can be used as a revolutionary tool. The advancement of science, and technical improvements made this possible. The cinema of the revolution is at the same time one of deconstruction and construction: deconstruction of the image of neocolonialism and a construction of a living reality which recaptures the truths.

First Cinema: Is cinema of entertainment or Hollywood Cinema. Solanas describes it as a mechanistic takeover of a cinema, structured, and to be sure to satisfy the commercial interests of the production groups.

Second Cinema: Auteur Cinema, Expression Cinema. The demand of a filmmaker to be free to express himself in a non-standard language and inasmuch as it was an attempt to at cultural decolonization.

Third Cinema: Has 2 requirements “making films that the system cannot assimilate and which are foreign to its needs, or making films that directly and explicitly sat out to fight the system… in a cinema of liberation.”

Solanas and Getino are two Argentinean activist and they directed, wrote and produced an independent documentary call La hora de los hornos. I actually have seen a portion of this and it is very aggressive and in your face. The montage cuts are very tough on the eyes and the images are very explicit. It truly causes you to be an active viewer, and that is one of the goals for this type of film, to get people to stand up and react to it.

Espinosa in his article For an Imperfect Cinema, he is questioning what art is, and what is cinema. The people who mediate it are limiting the artist’s creative freedom. She agrees with Solanas point about the “elite” and that we need to revolutionize. “The revolution is what furnishes all other alternatives, what can supply an entirely new response, what enables us to do away once and for all the elitist concepts and practices in art.”

Perfect cinema is technically and artist fully masterful and is almost always, in some way reactionary cinema, and is structured. An imperfect cinema finds a new audience; those who are struggles and its themes revolve around this. It must show the process which generates these problems, “to submit it to judgment without pronouncing the verdict.” The audience for imperfect cinema believes they can transform the world in a revolutionary way.

Rocha in An esthetic of Hunger, The article compares Brazil and Europe with the case of Cinema Novo. Europeans hunger is for a strange tropical surrealism and Brazils hunger is its national shame. (I do not know what he is talking about her)

Then he moves on to talk about Cinema Novo, stating that it remains marginal to the economic and cultural process of Latin America. Rocha claims that it cannot develop effectively with these limitations. Instead Cinema Novo is a phenomenon of new people everywhere and it depends on the freedom of Latin America. “Cinema Novo is not one film but an evolving complex of films that will ultimately make the public aware of its own misery.”

Published in: on March 17, 2010 at 1:25 pm Comments (0)

Spam prevention powered by Akismet

Skip to toolbar