Posted by: | March 5, 2009 | Comments Off on response

In response to Hudson404, I also thought that was interesting how Charlton Heston was made to look Mexican with face paint. Pease comments in his article that originally Heston was cast to play the role of a white detective, yet this part was eventually changed and instead, he was forced to “make himself up in brown.” Perhaps the American characters are always demanding that English be spoken, merely for the sake of Heston’s character. In reality this was only to cover up his real identity and instead of functionion as a way of social commentary, it was in reality just a way of covering up character flaws. If the film did have Hispanic actors, why didn’t the film crew just hire a Hispanic lead? This seems to emphasize the fact that the American film industry did consider themselves superior in relation to other countries.
In response to Elena I don’t believe we should look at the representation of reality in this film. However if we were to consider how this film reflected present day society, we could consider it having some social commentary about the way people treat one another and the injustice that can be found within any country. Last Thursday we talked about how there are several different types of reality. On the other hand, with time, reality has seemed to be locked in place and defined by how realistic the events are that place within the film. But I do not think this is Welles intension, instead I believe this film was about experimentation. The fact that Heston was an American playing a Mexican could be considered experimental in itself and as Mario stated in his blog, the film would take on a completely different stance and feeling, had a Mexican actor played the main role.


Comments are closed.

Name (required)

Email (required)


Speak your mind

Spam prevention powered by Akismet