This week it was released “Homo Argentum”film starring Guillermo Francellain which as acting feat he had to interpret more than one fortnight of different characters. An artistic challenge that the duo of directors, made up of Mariano Cohn and Gastón Duprathe endorsed the protagonist of “My masterpiece.”
But, unlike that co -starred film with Luis Brandoni, the actor’s work was more irregular. “Homo Argentum” It stands out for its innovative structure, being composed of 16 self -conscious episodes, ranging from 1 to 12 minutes, in which the charismatic comedian assumes a wide variety of roles.
In this realization, the peculiarities of Argentine culture are explored with comic and acidic acid. With a marked satirical tone, the feature film reflects customs, behaviors and attitudes of national identity. A distinctive narrative feature, which Cohn and Duprat has been using since its inception with acclaimed films such as “The man next door” and “The illustrious citizen.”
In that aspect, the specialized cinematographic critic did not forgive the irregular narrative or the defective approaches of the new film. Some of the writings made by the local chroniclers pointed to the failure and lack of precision in the general result of the tape.
“Guillermo Francella embodies a generic media of ‘the Argentine’ and at the same time to specific figures – the old tilingo, the curite, the president, the tree, the film director, the rapporteur, the crypto bro -, everything without the viewer stopping perceiving almost never that it is Francella there, with his voice, his tics and his face of not being able to recognize him in his many masks. For micropsy.
Diego Batlle, from the other Cons portal, said: “The 16 Homo Argentum stories are proposed to ruthlessly address the worst miseries of Argentine society, but – a couple of shorts that partially reach the attributes of crudeness, irony and black sought – the result is almost always disappointing.
For Page/12, Diego Brodersen stressed: “Cohn and Duprat take to the extreme the idea when building the film not from three or four stories but with sixteen mini stories … there are in general a lack of grace than the shorter stories … make even more evident, as if they were sketches of some old humorous program to which they lack a baking jacket in the venue room.”
“With Guillermo Francella as the only great protagonist, the film stays halfway when exposing a sum of stereotypes … they always fall short in front of the number of advertisements that appear uninterruptedly in each story, many times without justification.” Guillermo Coura closed for the nation.
“The most questionable is the ideology that underlies its proposal,” said Emiliano Basile of writing Cinema, a reference of the Association of Cinematographic Chroniclers of Argentina (ACCA), adding: “This ambition fails to hide what really is: a succession of foreseeable stereotypes.”
Francella against independent cinema
In dialogues with news, this week, Guillermo Francella confessed: “I always loved being a popular artist, my whole life. In a time there was something against that, it was the popular against the prestigious, today I feel that everything is more united. It is a distinction for me to achieve both, I do not know if it was a goal drawn, but I wanted to travel different content and it was.”
These statements are linked to what some dias made, in which the main interpreter of Homo Argentum referred to his vision of national cinema in a streaming report. In coincidence with the cultural gaze of libertarian management, he firmly criticized independent cinematographic productions. “There is a cinema that is very awarded, but it turns your back on the public. I don’t like that cinema,” Francella released in the “I dreamed that I was flying” driven by Migue Granados.
Even in the same interview, the actor joked: “There are works that are very awarded and that there are times: what happened? Or are you seeing it and you say, did it end? How did it end?” The box office numbers in the ticket offices will have the last word.
Image gallery
