[CRITICAL] PAULINA

The original title of PAULINA, the second feature film from director Santiago Mitre after El Estudiante in 2011, it is The Patota, inspired by the eponymous film of the 60s. The Patota in slang means “youth gang”. In this 2015 version, the young band of boys it is the one that will meet Paulina (very fair Dolores Fonzi). The director has managed the tour de force of build the film on oppositions and power relations that are interwoven at different levels. A difference of social class first of all, since Paulina (very fair Dolores Fonzi) is the result of a social environment very privileged part of Buenos Aires. These young boys who hang out in the tape are poor, and left to fend for themselves. Without references or morality, they wound their anger and frustration in these lands on the borders of Paraguay and Brazil.

A difference of education. Phd student, Paulina, however, has abandoned his studies as a lawyer to the chagrin of his father magistrate to devote himself to his political commitment. Oscar Martinez, cross in The new wild of Damián Szifron, interprets the father very emotional and unsure of Paulina. The relationship he has with his daughter is heartbreaking , mixed with beautiful moments of tenderness and rhetoric. Teens, express themselves, barely, by onomatopoeia. They are rather crude décoffrages, real ” wild “, as described by her colleague teacher. Their lack of dialogue will also be at the origin of the drama.

A ratio of teacher to students as Paulina hosted a workshop in the framework of a programme of Human Rights, during which she strives to be of interest in the politics of their country. And then a balance of power between this beautiful young woman, and this group of boys rather nondescript, mundane.

But especially PAULINA highlights the confrontation between the utopia and almost unconscious of the young woman to want at all costs try to improve the lives and open the minds of these young people belonging to a social class very poor, and the practical implementation in reality. But alas, the word, the will to change the world and the next, the political beliefs and education are not always enough.

The atmosphere in which The director is changing the young woman is sufficiently murky to make it uncomfortable to the viewer and make him a presentiment of the drama. By many aspects, and a rise in the power is quite intense, PAULINA reminds Issuance. Santiago Mitre uses a double-interesting process of going back and forth on the history and changes of points of view: sometimes Paulina, sometimes his father, sometimes by the aggressors. The viewer understands before Paulina triggers of the aggression, severe enough for the movie to be forbidden to under 12 years of age. But this staging has the disadvantage of breaking somewhat the pace of the film.

“PAULINA disrupts and questions the viewer about choices post-trauma of the heroine and the meaning of political consciousness.”

The second part of PAULINA is in fact slower, is to cling to the time of digestion by Paulina to this act and its consequences. Paulina will become aware of a different possibility that is offered to it, and the choices that she’s going to do are, to say the least surprising on the part of a victim. Hanging on to life, in line with its humanist convictions, it will seek to know the truth, when his father will encourage him to seek justice. Up to aggression, we felt a great empathy for the young woman, but of these choices, plus a look too magnanimous focused on its perpetrators, the question. It has frankly been thrown off by the original positioning of the director.

PAULINA is a film where the tension keeps the viewer awake until the end. Tragedy modern, highly political, the film was awarded the Critic’s Prize at the Cannes film Festival 2015 . It has at least the merit of questioning the viewer. He shakes him about the choice of Paulina, the meaning given to the political awareness and the consistency of its actions even after a tragedy.

Sylvie-Noelle