I coincide in the elevator with a neighbor who crosses the hall crossing herself when verifying the caliber of the one that is falling. We walked together to the first traffic light. A Chinese girl crosses the street, in the opposite direction, with half a watermelon under her arm, protecting herself from the buzzers with a huge black umbrella. Hot days indeed. She hits a Saharan punch, an oven effect in which the electoral chicken browns, a breath of hell that could cause the popcorn to implode of its own free will. I refer to the popcorn to witness, in the audience of the sofa, the debate between Pedro Sanchez and Alberto Núñez Feijóothe only face to face between the President of the Government and the leader of the opposition in this very long campaign, which seems to have lasted since Torcuato Fernández-Miranda was sworn in as President of the Parliament and of the Council of the Kingdom.
You know, on Monday, at ten at night, on Antena 3, La Sexta and Onda Cero radio, a duel in the sun moderated by the presenters Ana Pastor and vincent valles. Which of the two gunslingers will be the more skilled west of the Pecos River?
At home we are very fans of Western movies, especially in summer; they wash their heads and accompany well. We lower the blinds, leaving a foot for the improbable gust of breeze to penetrate, and once engulfed in the sweltering gloom, we don’t care to wait for the 3:10 train to Yuma, or the arrival of the man who killed Liberty Balance, or else the fistful of dollars That is why we are hesitating, yes or no, between swallowing the comedy of the debate or ‘Face to face’ (‘Faccia a faccia’), a ‘spaghetti western’ by Sergio Sollima.
fuzzy border
The film was shot in 1967 between the Tabernas desert and Hoyo de Manzanares, in the Madrid mountains, a setting that symbolizes both the border between the United States and Mexico and a diffuse border between good and evil, the same one that separates the two protagonists: a professor sick with tuberculosis and the outlaw who kidnaps him. The dialogues, the dialectical pulse that settle, are colossal and very deep. Will the debate be similar? Or more of the same? Noise, complacency, shin kicks, bar counter arguments.
Related news
It would be formidable if both candidates in the running explained to the respectable their respective capacity for linguistic sleight of hand, the contortion of where I said Diego. Pardons, for example. Or the agreements with Vox. A serene dialogue would be formidable, in the manner of Montaigne, for whom conversation was the most fruitful exercise of the spirit. “When they refute me,” said the French scholar, “they arouse my attention, not my anger.” call me delusional
The western ‘Face to face’, by the way, is in the Filmin catalogue.