NO

Chile, 2012, 118 minutes, Colour.
Gael Garcia Bernal, Alfredo Castro.
Directed by Pablo Larrain.

A nominee for Best Foreign Language Academy Award (but was up against the excellent Amour, which won). Pablo Larrain has become well-known on the arthouse movie circuit with such films as Tony Manero and Post Mortem. With No, he has completed a trilogy of life under General Pinochet.

It is fair to say that it would be well worthwhile to do some reading and research about Chile under General Pinochet and that period. While the film does enlarge on the 15 years experience of the Pinochet regime, and focuses on the upheaval with the American-backed coup against Salvador Allende in 1973, some reflection on the history of Chile would enhance the viewing and give some depth to what is being shown.

The title of the film comes from the plebiscite of 1988 which General Pinochet instituted for the public to vote on whether he should continue for another term of office. The presumption was that he would win the plebiscite. However, after 15 years of his rule, and with some modernisation of Chile and some prosperity, the public was prepared for a change. So were those who suffered under his regime. The experience of oppression pervades the film with many of those who opposed Pinochet having the opportunity to come forward, despite the regime keeping an eye on the plebiscite and the campaigns.
While there is a great deal of serious history in the film, the screenplay sometimes uses a humorous tone, relying on the lightness of touch that those in the No campaign brought to the advertising and promotion. Late 20th century advertising and promotion is central to the film, an interesting look at the role of media, print, radio and television in political campaigns.

Gael Garcia Bernal portrays a modern advertising wiz, Rene Saveedra (a composite character of the two men who organized the advertising for No). The opening of the film shows him presenting a campaign with some modern pizzazz. He has a history in Chile, with his parents and, especially, with his ex-wife who is still an activist. He is invited to consider a proposal to imagine a campaign for the No camp. Ans, eventually, he agrees and much of the film is discussion about the campaign, its format, its ideas, its tone, the prospect of prevailing. He himself advocates for lighter touch, the more positive approach, the hopes of Chilean people for freedom and happiness and provides some exuberant images and lively presentation of people (even a mime as one of his critics regrets). The campaign was also intended to give hope to those who thought no change was possible and were not going to vote.
Fifteens minutes for the Yes campaign were permitted on the media each day. Fifteen minutes for the campaign. The public responded to the campaign. Many examples are seen throughout the film as the plebiscite progresses - and the campaign has to find material for each day’s commercial.
In the background are a lot of discussions, revealing the difference stances, of right and left, in Chile of the 1980s. There is also the atmosphere of the military regime and the possibility of arrest, even torture.

Along with this, there are dangers to the Rene’s safety and well-being and to his family, especially the son whom he is bringing up and who is seen to be bewildered by what is happening, especially in the crowd scenes.

One of the significant things about the film as is that it was made on analogue tape, the kind of material and equipment that was used in the 1980s. This gives the impression that the film was filmed at that time, but it also enabled the film-makers to incorporate a great deal of news footage of the period. This gives a greater sense of authenticity.

A film of great historical and political interest. An opportunity to see something of the history of Chile and reflect on it and the role of General Pinochet, and the changes in Chile in the succeeding quarter of a century.

1. A story from Chile? The 20th century? Coup, dictatorship? The Pinochet era? The 1988 plebiscite?

2. A film for Chileans? For world audiences? Latin Americans? Justice, government, democracy?

3. The film nominated for Oscar for best foreign language film? Ecumenical award?

4. The title, the plebiscite, the campaign? Negative overtones? Positive outcome?

5. The visual style, the 1980s, the use of a 1983 camera, video, colour and light, handheld camera? The range of 1980s footage, incorporation into the film?

6. A media film, television and advertising, the initial campaign for soft drink, Free? The influence of advertising by the 1980s? Visual styles, content? People influenced by television? Advertising and ordinary programs? The role of the No campaign, and its achievement?

7. The public and the response to the plebiscite? Yes? No? The polemic, discussions and anger? Talking heads? The contrast with Rene and his ideas of the future, Chilean happiness? Emphasizing people’s hopes rather than going back over the past?

8. Rene, Gael Garcia Bernal and his reputation in Latin America, Spanish-language films? A symbol for a more modern approach? His age, experience, his father, exiled, the experience of being outside Chile? His media training? His career? The initial advertisement, the discussions, his success and reputation? His relationship with his ex-wife? The meeting, her leaving, her not agreeing with his campaign? Seeing it as too trivial? His care for his son, the scenes with his son, in the protests, his attitude of protection? His involvement in his work, the request to organize the No campaign? His energy? The political repercussions, the role of the government, police, surveillance, physical danger? Intrusion in his house?

9. The committee for the campaign, the interviews with him, the request, his own personal views? The conflicts of left and right in the 20th century? The interviews, the footage?

10. General Pinochet, his role in the coup of 1973, the repression during his regime, the disappeared? And yet the prosperity in the 1970s and eighties? Creating a different atmosphere, and atmosphere for change, for freedom, Chilean aspirations? Pinochet’s attitude towards the plebiscite, his officials, the government meetings, the discussions? Lists? Capitalizing on their history, underestimating the reaction of the public? 15 years in office? His presumption?

11. The political bosses, their stances, tactics? Threats and meetings? The influence? Rene and his reaction?

12. The allotting of fifteen minutes each night for each campaign? The placing of the fifteen minutes? The limitations?

13. The making of the spots, joyful people, crowds, circus, mimes…? Jingles and joy? The reaction of the serious-minded? Failing to realize that this was a media-campaign? The contrasts with the Yes campaign? The achievements of the 15 years? Propaganda? The personal cult of Pinochet?

14. The growing protests, in the streets, Rene’s ex-wife, arrests? The reality of the tension?

15. The buildup to the voting, the result, an atmosphere of suspense? The tensions and the possibilities?

16. The victory of the No campaign, people aware of the role of media, the response of the public to such campaigns?

17. The continual tension between Rene and Guzman? The meetings, arguments, Guzman attempting to persuade Rene, threatening him? And yet Rene returning to him at the end?

18. The work of the director, his trilogy showing the origins, the years, the end of the Pinochet era?