I wouldn't normally do this but could you pass on some thoughts to Eric Hynes?

Eric touches on some good points in asking what the point of all this heart-felt realist cinema is for, what it really changes in the world. To be sure, I ask myself these questions frequently. If I were really out to change the world I wouldn't be doing it through film (or to put it more precisely, I do it in other ways outside my filmwork). That said, I do hope that the film has some effect beyond pure entertainment. At one level, I hope gives us a different awareness about the drug war. Normally, mules such as Maria are demonized by drug war propaganda in the perpetuation of policies that continue to try (in vain) to solve the drug problem through criminal and military solutions. By having people sympathize with Maria I hope the film adds to a reform movement that would like to see the drug problem as public health and economic issue rather than a police issue.

On a more concrete level, we know that the film has saved at least one life. The Colombian co-producer got a call out of the blue from a 17-year-old guy in Colombia who was calling to thank us. Apparently he had signed on to be a mule, accepted the advance and two days before his flight gone to a theater in Bogota to see the film. He decided to pull out, had seen the film three times and said he considered that the film had saved his life.

Obviously, I was not setting out to make government anti-mule propaganda, but that was a very nice benefit. The First Lady of Colombia has convened two screenings in the Presidential Palace for politicians there and the Colombian office of the United Nations has purchased a print of the film for educational purposes. In the U.S., the Drug Czar and the Colombian Ambassador are now setting up screening and panel to have what I hope will be an open discussion about the politics of the drug war in Colombia.

There's no question that Summer movies are intended to be fun and entertaining. But with so much mindless, frivolous trash in the mainstream I think independent cinema has the potential restore some meat and content to the fare. And I don't think that has to be done at the expense of entertainment value. I hope that the box office success of Maria Full of Grace as well as a slew of great documentaries this season proves that point!

Thank you for an intelligent and thought-provoking critique.

All the best,
Josh Marston



Dear Mr. Marston,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my critique of Maria Full of Grace. Your film is quite deserving of its success, and here’s hoping it continues to function - directly or indirectly - as an agent for enlightenment and change. I only wish to clarify the rhetorical question that I posed (and to which you graciously replied). I know you were paraphrasing, but I didn’t question the point of socialist realist films - there are genres far more deserving of such scrutiny, and ultimately all films are made for some reason or another, however opaque or palty the rationale (the remake of Psycho comes to mind). Perhaps it is too fine a distinction, but my question was: who are these films for? I think it’s great that audiences are seeing your film in Colombia, and that potential drug mules are rethinking their choices. But from your film I didn’t realize that men were recruited for the practice. I only know that I’m drawn into the story by the sympathetic face of a beautiful woman. Which is part of the genre, which is narrative technique, which is all well and good. But in putting a face on this specific problem, I wonder if the face - so like the cinematic faces of so many other problems - overwhelms it. And since it so often does, and ten years on we remember more about the actress than we do about the volatile situation dramatized, I mean to address the mildly vampiric relationship filmmakers have with their subject matter, in these films the blood spiked with good intentions. It looks as if Maria Full of Grace has a good chance at achieving the very rare feat of nourishing both parties.

Thanks again for your thoughtful response. I look forward to your next film.

Best,
Eric Hynes



Eric,

I see the distinction. I have yet another for you.

I think I can confidently say that the film is equally for Colombians and Americans. Whether the poorest Colombians will see it, probably not yet as they don't spend their money on movies. But the film will eventually be broadcast on television.

If there is any question that that is related to the fact of having used a very pretty face to tell the story - a charge I am unquestionably guilty of - I can only say that Catalina's visage helps make the film more easy to go down - easier than the pellets to be sure. As you do imply. But I don't know that that implies that the blood has been spiked, as you put it. Had I cast J. Lo or Penelope Cruz (as was suggested by various so-called producers) then definitely there would be something to question, as the face would never have blended with the reality. However I think Catalina does (just barely) fit into the landscape without rupturing the world. That viewers might not learn that men also swallow drugs can only be added to a whole list of things that are not revealed in the film. If there was one thing I learned in the process of re-working the script it was that I could not tell every story at once (something Traffic tried to do, and which - among other things - caused that film to flounder in my estimation). I focused on one corner of one experience of a very large drug trade and drug war. And I used a pretty face to do so. But I'm still sure why that's suspect.

I'm answering you on a plane. I'm happy to say that my over-extended press junket is FINISHED! Which means that you'll have to forgive me if I no longer take the time to reply at length to the reply you're no doubt already formulating. But send it anyway!

Best,
Josh