 | | | | Frida - Naturaleza Viva |  | Studio: PWI Veracruz
Category: DVD
Buy New: $11.95
Buy New from $11.95
Avg. Customer Rating:  (10 reviews)
Sales Rank: 52290
Format: Color, Dvd-video, Ntsc
Languages: French (Original Language), German (Original Language), Russian (Original Language), Spanish (Original Language)
Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: DVD
Running Time: 108 minutes
Number Of Items: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
UPC: 761450820333
EAN: 0761450820333
ASIN: B0000VJFNC
Release Date: December 2, 2003
Theatrical Release Date: February 17, 1988
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 5 more reviews...
 Putting the negative reviews in perspective. May 23, 2006
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
Those who enjoyed the recent Hollywood version of Frida Kahlo's story may be disappointed by Mexican director Paul Leduc's 1984 film, as it makes few concessions to popular taste.
Slow, quiet, nearly wordless, it assumes that its audience is already familiar with Kahlo, and expects you to make some effort as a viewer. The timeline jumps around - the introduction explains that the scenes that follow are random memories flashing through Frida's mind during her final days. Nothing is explained. There are no dazzling special effects, and no famous (American) stars, though the great Mexican actress Ofelia Medina does a remarkable job in the title role, especially considering the lack of dialog.
I am not familiar with Leduc's other films, but his "Frida" struck me as beautiful, poetic, and faithful to the spirit of Kahlo's own work in its dreamy, surreal treatment and the intensity of its imagery. Given the fragmented narrative style, it holds together well and the scenes flow nicely into each other, and you do get a sense of her personality and the major events in her life; they are simply not presented in typical linear bio-pic form. For anyone familiar with early 20th century art, contemporary Mexican cinema, or the films of Raul Ruiz, Jacques Rivette, Peter Greenaway, et al, this is not a stretch and I would recommend it (along with Servando Gonzalez' amazing "Yanco" from 1961). But it is certainly an "art film," not aimed at mainstream audiences.
The Julie Taymor/Salma Hayek film had a completely different agenda - to present Frida to a large audience, most of whom were expected to know little or nothing about her or the Surrealist movement to which her work is related, to say nothing of the Marxist socio-political circles in which she moved. In a sense, the time was ripe for it. In the sixteen years between the two films, Kahlo was thoroughly romanticized and marketed as a pop culture icon. Fueled by Hayden Herrera's 1991 biography of Kahlo, the Cult of Frida spread beyond the artsy intelligencia, and the market was flooded with Frida posters, t-shirts, handbags, fridge magnets, and gear shift knobs. In the USA, the way was paved by the "Southwest Style" craze of the 80s (see also Georgia O'Keefe), and American audiences had been primed for romantic Latin American magical realism by the success of novelists such as Gabriel Garcia Marquez and Isabel Allende, and Laura Esquivel's hit novel/movie "Like Water for Chocolate". Even Madonna was threatening to make a Frida movie.
So...Matters of style and personal taste aside, Leduc's film was slightly ahead of its time. When it was first released and screened in art cinemas and film festivals, there was considerable excitement among people to whom Kahlo's story was already well known, and it was well received. But its lack of mass appeal is no surprise. What is astonishing, however, is how this film has nearly vanished in the wake of the newer one. I saw very few reviews of the newer film that even mentioned this one, even though Hayek herself has acknowledged Leduc's project and clearly borrowed from it.
 Remarkable portrait! June 30, 2005
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
Thinking about the impressive exhibition of Frida Kahlo paintings in London, it is good to remind this singular version of 1985.
The Mexican director Paul Leduc, made, by far, the best adaptation that I know about Frida. This artwork focuses with a major scope, the complex relationship between Kahlo, Rivera and Trotsky. The appropriate illumination was simply top-notch.
And the structure that support the script keeps maintain the whole interest along the film.
Highly recommended for all those who are really interested in knowing the insights of this true icon of the last Century.
 Absolutely Awful Rubbish. April 7, 2004
1 out of 7 found this review helpful
I wish I had read some of the reviews here before renting this awful movie recently. The director (Paul Leduc) should have never made another film after this one (but I'm sure he has). I did not like Frida (the 2002 Hollywood version) and a friend raved about this 1984 Ofelia Medina film - so I thought this might be a superior film. MAN, WAS I WRONG! Where's the script? Where's the acting? I sat thru 20 (painful) minutes of it and could view no more. Don't waste your money even renting this - let alone buying it. The 2002 Hollywood version is a very flawed film but it is atleast worthy of watching.
The worst portrayal of Frida Kahlo July 28, 2003
Before watching this movie,..., I suggest reading "Frida: A Biography of Frida Kahlo", which accurately "reveals a woman of extreme magnetism and originality." This is, without a question, the worst movie I have seen in my entire life because of it's blatent ignorance of the actual people the production was trying to illustrate. It is as if the screenwriter read about Frida, and left out all of the important aspects of her personality! In an early scene, "young Frida" breathes hot air onto a window, and marks some obscure symbol. Shortly after, the scene ends. Taken from the book: "I must have been six years old when I experienced intensely an imaginary friendship with a little girl more or less the same age as me. On the glass window...I breathed vapor onto one of the first panes. I let out a breath and with a finger I drew a "door"...Full of great joy and urgency, I went out in my imganination, through this "door". I crossed the whole plain that I saw in front of me...and I went down in great haste into the interior of the earth, where "my imaginary friend" was always waiting for me. I do not remember her image or her color. But I do know she was [free in her choices]. She laughed a lot. Without sounds. She was agile and she danced as if she weighed nothing as all. I told her all my secret problems..from her voice she knew everything about me. When I returned to the window I entered through the same door...I was happy. I ran with my secret..Thirty-four years have passed since I experienced this friendship and every time that I remember it, it revives and becomes larger and larger inside my world." Just one example of one of her major life incidents swept over like a minor detail. After watching the 2002 version, I eagerly started reading the book to learn more about her tumultuous life, as I am aware biography movies have a tendency to leave out a lot of details one can only find by reading the actual book. When I saw the cover (on accident) at the video store, I figured, hey, it's in Spanish, and it's much older, so it might be interesting. I have never been so wrong in choosing a movie: The movie is very surreal and very abstract. There is little dialogue causing the spectator to become easily confused and mislead ... the imagery is pitiful; conveying no sense of the vibracy and exuberence that Frida so easily created with her persona, the acting can be seen as mediocre, if one pretends that the movie is about some random artist, and not about Frida Kahlo. I suppose I should have known better when renting this movie when I saw that the actress chosen to play Frida didn't even have a unibrow, and when I read that her affair with Leon Trotsky was one of the major events in her life. ...
I would have put no star but that is not an option December 9, 2002
1 out of 4 found this review helpful
Horrible attempt at creating a collage. It ends up making no sense and having no chronology [which helps to understand a person's life/choices] I would recommend you see the newer version of the her life [2002]which though not perfect can be understood. This movie made me feel like the producer wanted to come up with something so original that he did...original garbage!
|
|
|
| | |
