Context of FICNOVA


violencia en el cineWhy do they call it “action” when they mean “violence“?

Cinema is a reflection of the individual and social process of human beings.

Usually, the visions of the future reflected in cinema are driven by fatalism, prejudices, the dominant violent climate or the simple mechanical projection of the past forward; that is, without questioning the myths and epochal paradigms in which we live enclosed. But also many “creations” serve the propaganda and apology of the “values” of the current inhuman and violent system that only recognises the power of money.

The defenders of this type of fatalism deny the possibility of opening up new paths, pressuring those who go beyond “what is reasonable” by branding them as delusional, utopian and all kinds of disqualifications in the best of cases, or using all kinds of resources to silence them most of the time.

But if there is one thing inherent to human beings, it is the possibility of rebelling against the limits of each moment, despite the “impossibilities” and difficulties of the time. History shows us how the impossible only takes a little longer to achieve, and that it only takes someone who broke through the barrier, representing the impossible, to set his or her intention to achieve it. An act of rebellion that is surely all too familiar to those who undertake truly creative tasks.

Today, many more people recognise the disaster of wars and violence in general in its different manifestations (v. physical, v. economic, v. racial, v. sexual, v. religious, v. psychological, v. moral), but, nevertheless, very few believe it is possible to put an end to this scourge. Indeed, we believe that it is experienced as something unattainable for those who do not move in that direction, but let those of us who work to give peace a chance and try to open new paths from everyday experience, learning to resist violence inside and outside ourselves, giving non-violent responses out of pure coherence with ourselves and with others.

Today, the culture of violence is taught and disseminated by all media as something inherent to human beings. In cinema, in particular, it is masked by the malicious euphemism of “action” cinema, in its attempt to “normalise” violent responses as the only solution to conflicts. A sample of the poisoning of cruelty of the social atmosphere in which we live immersed, as Silo warned in his exhibition in Parque La Reja (Argentina) in 2005:

Because the social atmosphere is poisoned with cruelty, our personal relationships become more cruel every day and the way we treat ourselves is also increasingly cruel.

The great fears of the human being prevent us from giving life a meaningful direction.

Fears of poverty, loneliness, sickness and death combine and strengthen in society, in human groups and in individuals…”.

2005. Inauguration of the Latin American Park
Parks of Study and Reflection La Reja (Argentina)

But in spite of everything, in the face of this disintegrating direction, a tremendous force arises in us again out of necessity, which leads us to disobey the “dictatorship” of violence, to question its “effectiveness”, to denounce its effects and interests and to choose a response that goes beyond it. This process of change that human beings are undergoing in the direction of nonviolence will also be reflected sooner or later in the cinema, and that is why we are opening this new space to help raise awareness.

We can choose to show the culture of non-violence that is growing within us.

Let’s give peace a chance and avoid catastrophe in the future.