talked with this high a filmmaker, painted a gringo, a refugee in his glasses to turn to each question, to give context to enable us to better understand their perspective on this country in northern South America, this cursed country that is building.
How did materialize and the movie? Initially
this damned country was a project a bit scattered, had no title or anything. I had some ideas but are not able to structure in a single project. Instead there is a call in the Latin American television in ten countries in each country to make a documentary a documentary essay about the characteristics of each population. I took advantage of that to "recycle" some ideas I had and put you in the format they requested. That result is a version 52 of this same film, but when we were editing in Brazil, a year ago, we saw with the producers, editors and friends was a shame to cut both the material to be had. Finally fulfilled that commitment of 52 minutes, but it worked this new material, the film that is going on these days because I waited to release it in the EDOC.
Will the film a tour of the country?
Actually this film was the reverse of the usual treatment, as has happened in several cities, but would not release yet in Quito. He was in Guayaquil, Cuenca, Riobamba and out at various festivals.
"About the characters, how they selected?
were various characters that were left out, not because they are ill or because the interview have not been good, but because, unlike fiction, the documentary is in the issue where the meaning is armed, although there is a stroke, many things can happen to reach the issue. Two characters who are in the film were not provided in the least. Hector Flores, the native of Cotacachi, married to the Japanese was not planned, I had an idea because he knew, but did not know I was going to give and actually stopped there on his way to Chota, to see what happened. Eventually people will like what they bring these characters.
I must confess I never took the bull by the horns Concerning the issue that some characters were familiar and all. At some point if I thought about and wondered what to do. Here in Ecuador, if one would go to Jorge Enrique Adoum, knows who he is, but outside is different, the reception is different. Outside few connoisseurs who know literature Jorge Enrique Adoum, and hardly anyone knows who Tibán Lourdes, or Jaime Guevara Jaime Enrique Aymara. In Brazil, I passed a girl who saw the film said how nice the old man talking, wise, and I said this is one of the leading intellectuals of Ecuador. Same happened with Lourdes Tibán. Then the ratio of the film with the audience is different and so I decided to leave at the end of all these characters, the same level.
What are the arguments you made this damned country in terms of Ecuadorian identity?
For my documentary raises a number of questions and therefore did not want to establish an argument for some form of thinking or describe the Ecuadorians. What we ask is questions that appear as indisputable truths, but I still have my doubts. The idea of \u200b\u200bidentity based on three or four things: diversity but as an empty statement and limited to ethnicity, the issue of national symbols in this kind of nationalism or patriotism a bit empty but basically all that I see a lot of insecurity, not just what it is Ecuador after a very short time of existence, less than 200 years, but as a set of diverse populations that do not necessarily believe in a very harmonious relationship between them. In Cuenca I say someone, for example, "all good, cool, diversity, but do you have to see this fag with the issue of identity in Ecuador." That tells you that there is an approach to the notion of identity only from ethnic, that is cool to have Indian, black, white boys, who have immigrants, but what is about a homosexual in that?, When he described: Quito father, mother riobambeña, urban middle class, Quito, mestizo, and I think that there are fundamental elements of our way of being. No more arguments in the film, but questions, I wanted to put a number of issues on the table for discussion, but also wanted to do a thesis in anthropology. I read the critique of the Xavier Andrade, the catalog of EDOC, several documentaries Ecuadorians, and I find very interesting. I'm very open to criticism, but I think you can not read a document as read a thesis in anthropology.
this damned country, the name alone sells ...
The truth is that the title was set intentionally. I do not think it easy to attract mass audiences to cinemas to watch a documentary about what is to be Ecuadorian. I think it is a subject that may repel some people, then the title is intended to attract and running. It is a title that attracts you or you question why you put that title?, But manages to attract attention.
In a U.S. festival organizer wrote me and said, cool, select it, come on, but I asked have you thought about changing the title? That also happens.
What will go after this movie, come the beautiful country?
I think the beautiful country is in the documentary. I'm into other projects. I have no overwhelming expectation with this film, if successful and people will see it and generate discussion, cool, but do not pretend to be a blockbuster, no documentary Ecuador has been, and even for national fiction films difficult. You face a circuit that is designed, made, constituted for other movies. So better to circulate, as stated by Pocho Alvarez (with respect to his documentary OPEN, RIGHT MINE), the more you play, pirate and circulate, the better. I personally think this and many documentaries that are in the EDOC should be the subject of interest by, for example, public television.
Now I really am with a couple of new projects. I want to make a documentary, my staff and other things that I have outstanding.
