Dioses
YOUR RATING
- Director
- Writer
- Stars
Photos
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaIn January 2017, 'Gods' was awarded as Best Film on Religion in Calcutta International Cult Film Festival, in India.
Featured review
Audacious, unpredictable and totally unconventional
What would we say to God if we could confront him with our doubts, our worries? And with what God would we choose to do it? The God of the religion we profess, the only one we recognize as such? Or the other gods that may exist, even if we do not believe in them?
If this could be an interesting starting point for a long discussion, Gustavo Coletti has decided to go further and subvert the principle. To view the same problems from another angle. The point of view of the gods themselves, if we imagine that they exist and discuss these questions. And with this, the narrative becomes a meta-narrative that questions the foundation of the metaphysical discussion itself.
How does God or the gods look upon men? How does God or the gods judge the result of their own work, the creation of the human species and of the world? After all, who decided what is good and what is evil? God, the gods, or Man himself? The man who turned desires into an object of sin? The man who invented his own sin to justify different scales of values and legitimize the power of ones over the others? The man who makes war in the daylight, fearless, and makes love in the dark, ashamed? The man who does not hesitate to have the presumption of asserting himself as the representative of the deities on earth and thus to define systems of creeds, systems of regulation and moral (and consequently social and political) mediation, systems of rules that do not hide its absolutist and dictatorial vocation, under the demagoguery and the false illusion of free will, or freedom?
This is what about 'Dioses' (or 'Gods', its English title), a tense and provocative work that puts God in a celestial brothel (the first step to 'humanize' him), in conversation with other gods and angels. God in a long Socratic debate, confronted with the judgment of his actions and the questions that his peers address him. A God who, in the image of man (and not the opposite), also has his desires and satisfy them without shame. Because God does not transgress or sin.
Although with admirable dialogues, this is an example of a daring, but above all risky project. Because it does not respect conventions. On all fronts. It does not seem to be a movie because the point of view is always the spectator's, sitting in an audience looking at a stage where everything happens. It does not seem to be a play, because even when sitting in the audience, the spectator participates, through the camera, that approaches as much as it distances itself from the stage, the actors, the dialogues, sometimes fading out. With successive cuts, in an equally unconventional editing, that deep the sense of strangeness about what kind of work this is it.
Although Gustavo Coletti resorts to a cinematic mise-en-scène and shows incessantly that this is a movie, by the way he illuminates everything that shows, focusing and blurring, intercalating the most varied shots in search of images that are exemplary aesthetic compositions. Although Gustavo Coletti resorts to inserts that only through the cinema can be shown, and in the theater only can be suggested.
For all of this, there is also the remarkable work of actors Martin De Léon, Alejandro Keys, Gisela Madrigal and Eva Ángelo. An intentionally stereotyped composition, in the tradition of classical dramaturgy, which confuses verisimilitude with unverisimilitude. Because this is a game of mirrors (and masks), an improbable meta-narrative, at least in the light of what is intelligible to human beings.
An amazing, fast-paced film that manifestly intends to cause emotions, inebriating or annoying. In a sentence, 90 minutes hard to digest if the stomachs are weak. Audacious, unpredictable and totally unconventional.
Victor Eustaquio/Cult Critic/CICFF
If this could be an interesting starting point for a long discussion, Gustavo Coletti has decided to go further and subvert the principle. To view the same problems from another angle. The point of view of the gods themselves, if we imagine that they exist and discuss these questions. And with this, the narrative becomes a meta-narrative that questions the foundation of the metaphysical discussion itself.
How does God or the gods look upon men? How does God or the gods judge the result of their own work, the creation of the human species and of the world? After all, who decided what is good and what is evil? God, the gods, or Man himself? The man who turned desires into an object of sin? The man who invented his own sin to justify different scales of values and legitimize the power of ones over the others? The man who makes war in the daylight, fearless, and makes love in the dark, ashamed? The man who does not hesitate to have the presumption of asserting himself as the representative of the deities on earth and thus to define systems of creeds, systems of regulation and moral (and consequently social and political) mediation, systems of rules that do not hide its absolutist and dictatorial vocation, under the demagoguery and the false illusion of free will, or freedom?
This is what about 'Dioses' (or 'Gods', its English title), a tense and provocative work that puts God in a celestial brothel (the first step to 'humanize' him), in conversation with other gods and angels. God in a long Socratic debate, confronted with the judgment of his actions and the questions that his peers address him. A God who, in the image of man (and not the opposite), also has his desires and satisfy them without shame. Because God does not transgress or sin.
Although with admirable dialogues, this is an example of a daring, but above all risky project. Because it does not respect conventions. On all fronts. It does not seem to be a movie because the point of view is always the spectator's, sitting in an audience looking at a stage where everything happens. It does not seem to be a play, because even when sitting in the audience, the spectator participates, through the camera, that approaches as much as it distances itself from the stage, the actors, the dialogues, sometimes fading out. With successive cuts, in an equally unconventional editing, that deep the sense of strangeness about what kind of work this is it.
Although Gustavo Coletti resorts to a cinematic mise-en-scène and shows incessantly that this is a movie, by the way he illuminates everything that shows, focusing and blurring, intercalating the most varied shots in search of images that are exemplary aesthetic compositions. Although Gustavo Coletti resorts to inserts that only through the cinema can be shown, and in the theater only can be suggested.
For all of this, there is also the remarkable work of actors Martin De Léon, Alejandro Keys, Gisela Madrigal and Eva Ángelo. An intentionally stereotyped composition, in the tradition of classical dramaturgy, which confuses verisimilitude with unverisimilitude. Because this is a game of mirrors (and masks), an improbable meta-narrative, at least in the light of what is intelligible to human beings.
An amazing, fast-paced film that manifestly intends to cause emotions, inebriating or annoying. In a sentence, 90 minutes hard to digest if the stomachs are weak. Audacious, unpredictable and totally unconventional.
Victor Eustaquio/Cult Critic/CICFF
helpful•10
- hlc-cicff
- Feb 28, 2017
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $1,000 (estimated)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content