Abstract:
In this kind of docudrama in the places of the events we follow two friends and other young people who participate in the comparsas of the Gualeguaychú carnival, with a camera with which the director Marco Berger delights in his back stage, with confusing limits between reality and staging and a dynamic that becomes repetitive
Review:
For some time now, many filmmakers are proceeding to tighten the limits of the documentary, intervening in a fictional or metafictional way in the area they address. A recent example is the confusing documentary The Mole Agent, where, in order to make elderly residents of a nursing home speak, they were deceived by introducing an infiltrator posing as a resident."
In the case of Marco Berger's film, it seems that a similar operation was carried out. He presents his film as a documentary, although he makes a caveat in the opening titles. Perhaps it should be defined as "docudrama in situ", since the plot follows two characters who are actors and who are (or are they?) friends (Vilmar Paiva y Franco Heiler). One of them participates in the Carnival troupes and the other participates more as a close spectator. Are they from Gualeguaychú? Do they actually participate in the Carnival every year?
There is a predominance of dialogue scenes (with other young people who are probably really comparsas), a few reportage style, some during the parades and many, but many, in the changing rooms, with the usual gloating of typical Berger close-ups of tails and bundles and some nudes of the boys (chongos) and the backstage of how they are "riding": makeup and a wardrobe that looks like a mixture of starlet and gladiator.
The result and even the objective of the film are at least confusing (helped by a direct sound shot that makes it difficult to follow the dialogues) and tiring because of its repetitions: did the director try to portray a potentially homoerotic environment or substrate in those boys who dress? their outfits and parade with pride and without conflicts or is it all the result of the intervention that he carries out and of his projections and markings?
Perhaps the only clear thing is the concept of carnival as a time of leave, in this case those taken by the young people who make up the troupes, with great enthusiasm and pride.
In this kind of docudrama in the places of the events we follow two friends and other young people who participate in the comparsas of the Gualeguaychú carnival, with a camera with which the director Marco Berger delights in his back stage, with confusing limits between reality and staging and a dynamic that becomes repetitive
Review:
For some time now, many filmmakers are proceeding to tighten the limits of the documentary, intervening in a fictional or metafictional way in the area they address. A recent example is the confusing documentary The Mole Agent, where, in order to make elderly residents of a nursing home speak, they were deceived by introducing an infiltrator posing as a resident."
In the case of Marco Berger's film, it seems that a similar operation was carried out. He presents his film as a documentary, although he makes a caveat in the opening titles. Perhaps it should be defined as "docudrama in situ", since the plot follows two characters who are actors and who are (or are they?) friends (Vilmar Paiva y Franco Heiler). One of them participates in the Carnival troupes and the other participates more as a close spectator. Are they from Gualeguaychú? Do they actually participate in the Carnival every year?
There is a predominance of dialogue scenes (with other young people who are probably really comparsas), a few reportage style, some during the parades and many, but many, in the changing rooms, with the usual gloating of typical Berger close-ups of tails and bundles and some nudes of the boys (chongos) and the backstage of how they are "riding": makeup and a wardrobe that looks like a mixture of starlet and gladiator.
The result and even the objective of the film are at least confusing (helped by a direct sound shot that makes it difficult to follow the dialogues) and tiring because of its repetitions: did the director try to portray a potentially homoerotic environment or substrate in those boys who dress? their outfits and parade with pride and without conflicts or is it all the result of the intervention that he carries out and of his projections and markings?
Perhaps the only clear thing is the concept of carnival as a time of leave, in this case those taken by the young people who make up the troupes, with great enthusiasm and pride.
