Roma: A Critique of Cuaron's Feminist and Third Cinema Stances

The author's aim is to demonstrate that Roma is in direct opposition to the principles of Third Cinema, which seeks to emancipate the oppressed from the forces of colonialism and capitalism. Instead of promoting liberation, the film actually upholds the existing power dynamics and rejects new movements that challenge the elites.\n\nCuaron, the director of Roma, is known for his focus on identity politics, particularly the struggles faced by women. This aspect of his filmmaking is seen as a noteworthy achievement. Additionally, Cuaron's directing style is characterized by a preference for narrative and ideological ambiguity, which aligns with the traits often privileged in World Cinema. Furthermore, his visual style is highly revered.\n\nThe author argues that Roma follows in the footsteps of Cuaron's previous films by centering on the plight of women, adopting a counterepic approach, and showcasing a predilection for visual extravagance. However, the author's intention is to reveal how these aspects of Cuaron's film are utilized to obscure the issue of class, which is central to Third Cinema.\n\nIn terms of the production and distribution context, Cuaron can be seen as both a World Cinema director who sheds light on Third World histories for global audiences and a Hollywood director who imposes its products on the Third World. The inclusion of Netflix, a controversial American media service provider, in the discussion serves as evidence of Cuaron's artistic independence and concern for marginalized audiences.\n\nRegarding the characters and story, the synopsis of Roma demonstrates the use of parallelisms. The main character, Sofia, remarks that women are always alone, implying that Cuaron perceives women as being connected to nature and less affected by cultural changes than changes in the natural realm, such as pregnancies and caring for elderly relatives. This emphasis on solidarity between women can be viewed as feminist, although some socialist feminists aim to unite these positions. The author contends that Cuaron is not a feminist director because he does not provide his female characters with a path to political participation and suggests that any attempt to do so is misguided.\n\nThe author criticizes Roma for aligning with second wave Anglo-American feminist theory, which prioritized the experiences of Western middle-class women and silenced the interventions of Black and third-world women. Instead of being a post-Third-Worldist feminist work, Roma is accused of perpetuating a shallow discourse of global sisterhood.\n\nThe author argues that the main character, Cleo, is not a feminist role model, but rather a patriarchal ideal of womanhood. The author warns that Cuaron's regressive gender politics are particularly dangerous as they are embraced by the majority of critics, reinforcing harmful gender norms in the external world.\n\nIn terms of visual and aural style, Roma can be described as a blend of stylization and authenticity, combining epic and counterepic elements. The decision to shoot the film in black and white adds to its "arthouse-ness." The author suggests that dirt, garbage, and detritus are significant tropes in Third Cinema, representing resources for the artistic expression and resistance of (post)colonial subjects against the aesthetic standards of colonialists and the local bourgeoisie.\n\nThe long shot technique employed in Roma has been widely discussed. Some consider the use of long takes as a measure of a filmmaker's artistry, but the author believes that it overwhelms the viewer with too much information in a single shot, becoming a distraction. It is important to note that the film's virtuosity and aesthetic appeal were criticized by proponents of Third and imperfect cinema, who viewed these qualities as a means of conveying the values of the colonizers and higher classes and diverting attention from the political content that the films aimed to convey.