Cinema of Venezuela

Cinema of Venezuela
Cinemateca Nacioanal 2009 000.png
National Cinema at Museo Bellas Artes
No. of screens481 (2013)[1]
 • Per capita1.8 per 100,000 (2013)[1]
Main distributorsCinematográfica Blancica
The Walt Disney Company Venezuela
Cines Unidos[2](2011)
Cinex
Produced feature films (2013)[3]
Total21
Fictional18
Animated-
Documentary3
Number of admissions (2013)[4]
Total30,069,381
National films2,429,560 (8.1%)
Gross box office (2013)[4]
TotalVEF 1.42 billion
National filmsVEF 104 million (7.3%)

Venezuelan cinema is the production and industry of filmmaking in Venezuela. Venezuelan cinema has been characterised from its outset as propaganda, partially state-controlled and state-funded, commercial cinema.[5] The nation has seen a variety of successful films, however, which have reaped several international awards. Still, in terms of quality, it is said that though "we can point to specific people who have made great films in Venezuela [and] a couple of great moments in the history of Venezuelan cinema, [...] those have been exceptions".[6] In the 21st Century, Venezuelan cinema has seen more independence from the government, but has still been described as recently as 2017 to be at least "influenced" by the state.[7]

Film was introduced to the country in 1896, with the first national films screened in 1897. Several films were made in the last few years of the 19th Century, with a lower rate of production until the 1970s.

The industry in the country has served political purposes from its early years and Juan Vicente Gómez' governments all the way through to current President Nicolás Maduro, and is also a mass market entertainment base; sometimes the aims overlap. In the 21st Century, attendance grew to a national average that would indicate every citizen visits the cinema once a year, though screenings began to decrease with the ongoing crisis after 2010.

History

Early years (1890s-1930s)

Teatro Baralt in the 1880s, where the first Venezuelan films were screened shortly thereafter
A frame from Un célebre especialista sacando muelas en el gran Hotel Europa, thought be lost for many decades

It is said by film writers that during this time, filmmaking was limited to "a few pioneering filmmakers [...] who survived by selling propaganda-style documentaries and newsreels to the [Juan Vicente Gómez dictatorship]".[5] It is also suggested that Venezuelans as a society were more film consumers than producers in this time, and that artistic films were only produced in the wider context of photography or physical art.[8]

The first films shown in Venezuela were released on July 11, 1896 at the Baralt Theater in Maracaibo. This was, however, not fully known until almost a century later in 1983; cinema scholarship in Venezuela was only developed during its "Golden Age" in the late 1970s, until which point the "official history [...] was limited to amusing stories told by those who were present during the early years."[8]

The early exhibition was facilitated by entrepreneur Luis Manuel Méndez, who had travelled to New York City in June 1896 and acquired a Vitascope, as well as licenses to use it for profit in both Venezuela and Colombia. This made Venezuela the second country in Latin America (after Brazil) to receive film screening technology, and the first to use Vitascope.[8] The films shown included The Monroe Doctrine and Umbrella Dance. Six months later in January 1897 the first films to be produced in Venezuela were shown at the same cinema; these were Un célebre especialista sacando muelas en el gran Hotel Europa and Muchachos bañandose en la laguna de Maracaibo. The reception to the introduction of cinema was seemingly "cold" and "indifferent".[8]

Both these first Venezuelan films, and the credit for bringing Vitascope to Venezuela, have historically been attributed to Manuel Trujillo Durán. Parts of Venezuelan film scholarship have had the tendency to paint Trujillo as the most important film pioneer of the nation; others show that he was simply a photographer who had the ability to operate the Vitascope.[8]

On July 15, 1897 the Cinemagraph was first exhibited in Venezuela, by an employee sent by the Lumière Company, in Caracas. After two months, the Frenchman was run out of the country, but may have helped film this year's Venezuelan film productions, Una paliza en el estado Sarría and Carlos Ruiz peleando con un cochero, shown on November 26. After these, there is little evidence of film production for the next 10 years, though multiple different brands of film cameras and projectors were in the country.[8] In total, there appears to have been 51 films, 37 short films and 14 features, made in Venezuela between 1897 and 1936. All were silent films.[9] The first feature, La dama de las Cayenas, was released in 1913 with a runtime of 60 minutes.[10]

Narrative films, rather than cinema as novelty, began to be produced in Venezuela in the 1910s, with its pioneers Enrique Zimmerman, director of La Dama de las Cayenas, and Lucas Manzano, who co-created what is considered Venezuela's first narrative film, Don Confusio. It wasn't long after their respective debuts that they began collaboration, with Manzano coming to produce La Dama de las Cayenas.[11] As Manzano's short films had been light comedies, La Dama... was instead a parody film, targeting the Alexandre Dumas story The Lady of the Camellias, that told a torrid love story. Manzano recounted that it was so successful that it persuaded Zimmerman and himself to choose to become filmmakers, "peliculeros".[11]

This was not the only film inspired by literature: Jacobo Capriles and Edgar J. Anzola made La Trepadora, based off a Rómulo Gallegos book as many Latin American films of the century would be, as part of their new production company Triunfo Films, which they had founded in 1923.[11] Soon, film education started in the country, and photographer Amábilis Cordero took correspondence classes to make his first film, Los milagros de la Divina Pastora in 1928; though he could have been the first notable director to have been trained, he still openly thought of himself as a "rookie". The second production company, Cinematograficos Lara, was founded by Cordero from his profits.[11]

Despite these companies existing, Arturo Serrano states that Venezuela "did not have a single professional filmmaker" and was lagging behind the rest of the world "in terms of quality and the use of cinematographic language". Serrano compares Venezuela's output to Battleship Potemkin (Eisenstein, 1925) and Intolerance (Griffith, 1916). Whilst the US and Soviet developed technology and identity, and so seem obvious to be leaders in film, Serrano does say that even compared with "some of the other countries in Latin America" Venezuela was behind, despite receiving film before almost the rest of its continent.[11] From the late 1920s, though, even these amateur artistic films almost ceased in production, the industry falling to the government ministries of Gómez and pseudo-documentary films.[11]

Though almost exclusively making informational films, political powers weren't entirely repressive; in 1932 Gómez' nephew Efrain Gómez returned from a trip to the US with technology that would allow sound to be added to film."[12] With the government film agency LCN (Laboratorio Cinematográfico Nacional) having been merged with Maracay Films,[11] Efrain Gómez worked through this company to make La venus de Nácar: Fantasía Aborigen, the first Venezuelan sound film, using only background music.[12] When Gómez died in 1935, the government agencies of production became more chaotic (briefly becoming SCN — the 'S' for 'Servicio') before being shut down in 1938.[12]

The Ministry of Public Works would lease the film equipment to private companies at the urging of Tomás Pacanins, though the two companies that received the most support had Pacanins as shareholder. One of these companies used the resources to create Venezuela's first synchronous sound film — one that records the sounds belonging to the recorded actions — in 1938; the accolade belongs to either Taboga or El Rompimiento.[12] Taboga features both speech and live music, and scholars also claim it as the first Venezuelan film with a "director to understand the artistic possibilities of cinema as a medium of visual expression".[12]

Birth of Venezuelan films (1940s to 1960s)

Film poster of La Balandra Isabel llegó esta tarde

From the beginning of the 1940s, there was an attitude of commercialism.[5] Producers in Venezuela "copied [...] Mexico's mode of film production [and] its narrative and formal patterns", to guarantee at least some cinema audience. The film scholar Darlene J. Sadlier comments that "profit was the main objective" in these decades, but that film producers also aimed to make Venezuelan films relatable for Venezuelan people.[5] Even after the death of President Gómez, into the 1950s, most film profits were made from commercial advertisements and propaganda. These films showcased Venezuelan nationalism, through techniques like landscape shots, folklore-based stories, and film stereotypes to make them publicly palatable.[5] There was also competition with the Mexican film industry in these years, with Venezuelan people enjoying and celebrating the Mexican film output; the Mexican film Allá en el Rancho Grande was screened in Venezuela in 1936, and "beat every picture", with the Mexican stories and production system being supported in the following decades.[5][13] It took only two years for Mexican and Argentinian film to overtake Hollywood films in Venezuelan screening numbers.[13] As Venezuela's film industry was being born in the 1940s, there were co-production agreements established, which let Venezuelan actors appear in Mexican films, in a way to create more Latin American stars and help the Venezuelan films blossom with famous actors from both nations.[13][14] Having Spanish and other Latin American actors in Venezuelan productions also contributed to a "'feel' of foreignness" that made films more successful in Venezuela.[15]

Landmarks of Venezuelan cinema include two Cannes winners from this period: Carlos Hugo Christensen's 1949 film La Balandra Isabel llego esta tarde, the first South American winner at Cannes, taking the Best Cinematography Award at the 1951 Cannes Film Festival, was the culmination of Bolívar Films' efforts to create a real film industry in Venezuela, though it failed;[16] Margot Benacerraf's 1959 documentary Araya, which "was hailed as a masterpiece of poetic cinema",[17] was entered into the 1959 Cannes Film Festival,[18] where it shared the Cannes International Critics Prize with Alain Resnais' Hiroshima mon amour.[19]

The Golden Age: Development of film identity (1970s and 1980s)

In the World Cinema: Critical Approaches anthology, it is said that whilst "Venezuelan cinema began sporadically in the 1950s[, it] only emerged as a national-cultural movement in the mid-1970s" when it gained state support and auteurs could produce work.[20] International co-productions with Latin America and Spain continued into this era and beyond, and Venezuelan films of this time were counted among the works of New Latin American Cinema.[21] This period is known as Venezuela's Golden Age of cinema, having massive popularity even though it was a time of much social and political upheaval.[22]

One of the most famous Venezuelan films, even to date, is the 1976 film Soy un delincuente by Clemente de la Cerda, which won the Special Jury Prize at the 1977 Locarno International Film Festival. Soy un delincuente was one of nine films for which the state gave substantial funding to produce,[23] made in the year after the Venezuelan state began giving financial support to cinema in 1975. The support likely came from increased oil wealth in the early 1970s, and the subsequent 1973 credit incentive policy.[24] At the time of its production the film was the most popular film in the country, and took a decade to be usurped from this position, even though it was only one in a string of films designed to tell social realist stories of struggle in the 1950s and '60s.[24]

Equally famous is the 1977 film El Pez que Fuma (Román Chalbaud).[25]

In 1981 FONCINE (the Venezuelan Film Fund) was founded, and this year it provided even more funding to produce seventeen feature films.[24] Though a few years later, in 1983 with Viernes Negro, oil prices depreciated and Venezuela entered a depression which prevented such extravagant funding, film production continued; more transnational productions occurred, many more with Spain due to Latin America experiencing poor economic fortune in general,[24] and there was some success in new cinema, as well: Fina Torres' 1985 Oriana won the Caméra d'Or Prize at the 1985 Cannes Film Festival as the best first feature.[18]

Film production peaked in 1984-5,[26]:37 with 1986 considered Venezuelan cinema's most successful year, thanks to over 4 million admissions to national films.[citation needed]

Venezuelan capital Caracas hosted the Ibero-American Forum on Cinematography Integration in 1989, from which the pan-continental IBERMEDIA was formed; a union which provides regional funding.[24]

Falling production (1990s)

After the political unrest at the start of the 1990s, film production had very little income despite staying relatively strong through Viernes Negro; FONCINE was issued a bailout in 1991 to restart the industry on a smaller scale.[26]:41 In 1993 Venezuelan cinema saw what could have been another boom. FONCINE attempted to promote national filmmaking by more than quintupling their funding.[24] Venezuela also ratified its first National Cinematography Law in 1993.[24] This law aimed to promote filmmaking, but had failings in financial provisions until it was amended in 2005.[27] The film identity of the decade was most significantly marked by a greater world presence and more festival wins in the mid-1990s,[24] like Joseph Novoa's Sicario (1994), which won the Best Feature Film Award at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival.[28]

Spokespersons for national cinema in the Chávez administration said the collapse of the industry was caused by "a mixture of economic crisis, neoliberal policies and industry instability"; Victor Lucker of the private national distributor Cine Amazonia Films believes that the "governments of that period contributed to the decline", saying that policies were new and unclear.[27]

One documentary released in the 1990s is seen as a key resource in Latin American film history; Alfredo Anzola's El misterio de los ojos escarlata was made using footage recorded by Anzola's father, Edgar J. Anzola, a director in the 1920s and 1930s who never saw much success and moved onto another career; he helped open Radio Caracas. Edgar's unknown history is said to reveal what filmmaking of the period may have been like, as little is known and recorded.[29]

Modern cinema (2000-present)

Actor Édgar Ramírez in 2017
Director Jonathan Jakubowicz in 2016

A few decades after most Western cinemas found their legs, Venezuela found theirs. The 21st Century saw an increase in production aligned with other developments introduced to the country. There were more films made, and to a higher standard. Elia Schneider's Punto y Raya (2004), actor Édgar Ramírez' first film, won four international awards, including the Special Jury Prize at the Havana Film Festival.

One highly criticised film of the time is Jonathan Jakubowicz's Secuestro Express (2005),[30] distributed internationally by Miramax and then-highest-grossing Venezuelan film, which may criticise organised crime. The social narrative is highly discussed, critics generally agreed that social issues are made apparent but not commented on. The lack of depth in favor of presenting ultra-violence is said to compromise the narrative of the film,[31][32][33][34] with said violence also unpalatable to some,[34] and questionable moral undertones of poverty justifying the actions.[35] Though criticised, the negative presentation of the nation was still present, and this "enraged" Hugo Chávez enough to publicly threaten Jakubowicz, a filmmaker who became more prominent and celebrated in the years after this.[36]

Comparatively, many of the films of 2000–2010 have historical settings, and tackle social issues there, from Román Chalbaud's El Caracazo (2005), which was the most costly Venezuelan film at the time, to Mariana Rondón's 2007 film Postales de Leningrado, which was awarded the Golden Sun Award at the Biarritz International Festival of Latin American Cinema, to 2009's Venezzia, produced by Haik Gazarian, which won about fifteen awards around the world in film festivals and is one of Venezuela's most expensive films overall.[37]

In the late 2000s other genres, those seen as neither propaganda nor productive in social criticism, began to make appearances. In 2010, Fina Torres' romance-drama Habana Eva was awarded Best International Feature at the New York International Latino Film Festival. The 2013 horror film La Casa del Fin de los Tiempos became such a success that its director was hired in 2016 to shoot an American remake.[38]

Post-2013

Despite successes in Venezuelan cinema, the Routledge Companion to Latin American Cinema, published in 2017, still makes a distinction between big Latin American film markets in Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil, and the cinema regimes of nations like Cuba and Venezuela. It explains that Venezuela is a particularly obvious case of "how state investments, [and] both direct and indirect support, can influence domestic productions carried out ostensibly by private companies", suggesting that even in the 2010s Venezuelan film productions have some element of state control and propaganda.[7] Maduro had appointed his son, Nicolás Maduro Guerra, as the head of the Escuela Nacional de Cine shortly after taking power in 2014, with critics challenging the 23-year-old Maduro Guerra's credentials and accusing the president of nepotism. Venezuelan playwright José Tomás Angola is reported to have responded that "Maduro's son knows nothing [about cinema] [...] What he does know is how to steal a camera."[39][note 1] By 2019, Maduro Guerra no longer held the position, but was being investigated by the United States for allegations of propaganda and censorship.[40]

Overall, the 2010s films of Venezuela are much more socially critical of the present than previous mainstream Venezuelan films were, including some which deal with homosexuality and homophobia, and dubbed by El País as "hearty revival in Venezuela's movie-making industry".[41] Examples of these like Pelo malo (2013), Azul y no tan rosa (2012), and Desde Allá (2015) are among the nation's most well-known and most successful films, winning multiple international awards.[41][42]

Other films from later in the decade take a stance directly against the government, La familia and La Soledad (both 2017) focus on surviving amid the economic crisis,[43] whilst 2018's Chavismo: The Plague of the 21st Century is, as titled, a distasteful look on the government's Chavist ideology. Carlos Oteyza [es]'s El pueblo soy yo analyzes the populism of Hugo Chávez. Jorge Thielen Armand's La Soledad is described by The Economist as "the latest in a glut of Venezuelan films telling unflinching, complex stories of life in the troubled Andean nation", which also acknowledges that it, and many other films like it, have received state funding; it proposes that the reason is a continuation of Chávez' isolationist policies in an attempt to maintain state control over pictures shown in cinemas. The article then discusses how Venezuela was, in 2017, at a critical tipping point, facing the simultaneous increase in independent Venezuelan filmmaking and mass emigration of directors and cinematographers.[43]

In February 2017, Nicolás Maduro announced that there was a dire need to create a biopic of Chávez, to tell a hero's story and to counter the presentation of the dictator by international film and television;[43] Román Chalbaud had begun production on a Chávez trilogy by mid-2018.[44] In July 2017, the Centro Nacional Autónomo de Cinematografía, previously autonomous if supported by the government, was appointed a new chair in the Deputy Culture Minister Aracelis García.[43]