The Cutting Room Floor

The most recent film we have screened in class was "Pantaleon y Las Visitadores" directed by Francisco Lombardi and adapted from Mario Vargas Llosa's novel of the same title. I found the film to be entertaining. It was enjoyable although it seemed to shy away from the meat of the story, such as the political implications or the religious commentary, and eventually ended up focusing primarily on Pantoja's affair, making the second half of the movie far less enjoyable than the first. In my opinion, Columbiana's character, portrayed by soap opera actress Angie Cepeda, contributed to the deterioration of the film. Despite her insistence that there was more to her than Pantoja knew, her character seemed rather one-dimensional. She played the role of a sexually unexhausted "visitor" far more convincingly than she played her poignant moments, and while this helped preserve the light and humorous tone of the film, it was difficult for the audience to connect to her on any deeper level. Ultimately this made her death upsetting only because of the ramifications we knew it would have on Pantoja and not because we felt truly heartbroken over her untimely passing.

Something we haven't discussed much in class is the role that editing plays while comparing a novel to its adapted film. (By this I mean editing as in what footage ends up on the cutting room floor as opposed to the parts of the novel that aren't included in the script.) It hadn't occurred to me that there might be a longer version of the film in existence, however it was mentioned in class that there was a version that bordered on almost 3 hours or so. As mentioned in the similarly titled fatherblog "Screening The Latin American Novel,"  (http://screeningthelatinamericannovel.blogspot.com/) a 231 minute version cut entire scenes. One of these was a scene in which the women impregnated by the soldiers that raped them approach the army official and discuss marriage. He writes, "the need for the service is brought in a somewhat humorous but still more pointed manner." I completely agree with this statement.

It seems as though the editor chose parts of the film that he felt would appeal to a mainstream audience, such as the sexually suggestive or explicit scenes, and sacrificed parts of the film that would have added depth and clarity to the finished production. Finding a balance between the two is crucial to the success of any film and while almost every audience revels in sexuality in cinema, (whether they are offended or enthralled, sex sells..)I think it would have been possible to find a stronger combination of the two.