Irving Gamboa
"Man facing southeast" is a complex metaphysical film that defies the conventions of uninteresting simple-entertaining cinema. The very first thing that interested me about the film was the form in which the dialogue was delivered: the internal monologue of the doctor. The sweet combination of his voice and the words he utters is extremely poetic: imaginative, intellectual, painful and truthful.A most memorable quote: "If I speak the truth outside, they'll bring me here". The truth is too sophisticated for the rational man. Rantes, the great master is, to me, a representation of holy martyrs. However, I think that his martyrdom was in fact his downfall: In my eyes he was a warrior, a revolutionary… and his death should have been much more poetic or tragic… instead his death was simple and pathetic. I once read a book called "El caballo de Troya" (The horse of Troy) and the author claims it is based on real events, some call it science fiction, others call it nonsense… In the book he speaks about Jesus being an extraterrestrial who was concerned with the state of the world. He speaks of angels as other extraterrestrials, and as the eclipse during the crucifixion as being a great spaceship revolving above the sacred cross of Jesus. Whether this film was influenced by this book or not it irrelevant; what is important is the fact that Rantes represents a holy figure. As already mentioned, his healing powers, his meek personality and his powers of telekinesis are parallels to the powers of Jesus. On the other hand, the fact that he has sacrificed everything that he had and was not concerned with the material world is very similar to the actions of the Buddha during his "great departure" from his kingdom. Lastly something that really interested me was the blue liquid that emanated from the woman's mouth: The doctor mentioned that she could have been an epileptic; however, it is known that in ancient tribal societies the western disease known as epilepsy is revered and considered a gift, which elevates the sufferer to the position of a Shaman. According to the Shamans, the thin layer they must cross to travel between the worlds is a blue-mirror substance. Thus, the film interested me very much because of the religious and mystical interpretations I drew from it.Returning to the poetic magic of the film, it was extremely interesting to have found similarities in Eliseo Subiela's work and the work of the three greatest writers of Latin America: Jorge Luis Borges, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, and Octavio Paz. What is more interesting, however, is the fact that these three poetic visionaries are extremely different and that their interest and impact in film could be seen as a massive reason why Latin American films are either linear and dramatic, complex, poetic and surreal or a mixture of both. Octavio Paz is Mexico's finest surreal poet: he stands on the edge of liquid mental imagery, collectively or objectively impossible to understand…. An anthropologist of subjective power. On the other hand, Garcia Marquez is the master of magical realism: the charismatic genius of dramatic and romantic narrative stories; the other side of the spectrum. And in the middle sits the blind Argentinean Tiresias whose poetic prose is a labyrinth of surreal narrative. Also, while Paz and Marquez were very political writers, Borges stood outside the perimeter of Politics and concentrated more in his artistic and personal visions.In the film Rantes attempts to teach the blind… he speaks a truth that is greater than the capability of comprehension of the others. Thus, it was, in a way, his fault that his truth was understood: Perhaps he needed to create an archive of his ideas… teaching, and having his students teach others. This idea takes me to a quote by Marquez: "Most important is the creation of a Latin American film archive. I coined the phrase, "we're working for oblivion": We're not achieving anything by teaching kids how to make films, if what they do doesn't last twenty years. What already exists is going to come to an end, nobody's going to remember what we did. The idea of the Foundation is to preserve this" (Page 2). It is therefore that I find this quote both paradoxical and important as a parallel to the film itself: Because the film is not that old, yet it is almost an impossibility to "find"… and because the attempt of Rantes to change the world was his very own destruction. The world will change if we plant seeds… Cinema will remain pure and exist as long as we understand its capability and realize that something beyond the boundaries of bullshit Hollywood exists, waiting, quivering… something explosive, powerful and poetic that needs to be discovered: True Cinema!.
carol-160
One of my criteria for favorably rating a movie is that it does not attempt to answer every question it poses. This movie leaves the basic question of the mental patient's (Rantes) origin unexplained. The plot is a fine vehicle for examining society's definition of sanity. The performance of Hugo Soto as Rantes is exceptional. The other members of the cast play their roles with sensitivity. The film was shot on location at a mental institution and the inclusion of patients in the supporting cast lends an unmistakable authenticity to the production. Unfortunately the English language dub version is disjointed and this detracts somewhat from this otherwise remarkable movie.
akutagawa
I don't normally bother to write comments like this but I was shocked by the other reviewer's perspective. I think perhaps he likes things spoonfed to him. Regardless, this is a fairly obscure film. It's Argentinian. It's a so-called "art movie". It doesn't feature any well known actors. The plot and many of the scenes were reproduced in the recent Hollywood version. Several other scenes have been lifted wholesale and used in other Hollywood movies. That alone suggests that the movie has merit (particularly in terms of story and direction). Over and above that, the acting is very good, and the pace, while slow, builds inexorably. There is no succinct resolution to the plot. That is the point. You have to think for yourself and it is a deeply thought provoking story. I think the central theme is a meditation on thought defining reality and seems to reference the Buddhist belief that our lives are a creation of our minds. But like any good work of art there are many layers open to interpretation. There are no overt references but this being an Argentinian affair, the tone of the movie reminded me of Jorge Luis Borges and Adolfo Bioy Casares. It's philosophical, and quite surreal in places. Some of the scenes are straight out of a Goya painting, and some of the camera motions are so graceful- almost imperceptible sometimes- that I thought of Kubrick. There's an awful lot going for this film. I don't want to ruin the story for anyone but I do rate it very highly.
fred-287
A few scenes of real visual poetry, like when the "alien" & his girlfriend at the classical music concert get up & start dancing, & pretty soon the whole audience follow suit. Except for one shot, they're careful to leave it up in the air whether the guy's really an alien or not. But the ending's a complete bummer, especially for me having known people on psychotropic drugs. I'm planning to steer clear of the new remake "K-Pax." Whether it sticks to the original or not, it'll be depressing either way.
