Pedro Paramo- Film Review

Many things can be true at once- a film can be well made and brilliantly crafted, a story can be smart and creative, a character can be interesting and multi-faceted and it can all add to something that feels like less than the sum of it’s parts. Pedro Paramo is an ambitious undertaking in director Rodrigo Prieto’s debut and it’s clear he has the makings of a great director. The book from which this film is adapted, also named Pedro Paramo, is a Latin literature classic and it’s author Juan Rulfo is considered to be one of the greatest writers of all time. It’s a story that is as powerful as it is enigmatic and while it draws on many common elements, there’s nothing quite like it. But, unfortunately, for all it’s strengths, both visually and narratively, I don’t think this novel really adapts well into the film format.

So, why is this? Well, let’s look at the story:

Pedro Paramo is about a man who is on a journey to satisfy his mother’s dying wish: to go to the little town of Comala where she grew up in and look for his long lost father. But when Juan Preciado, our protagonist, arrives, he finds the town abandoned and derelict. There seem to be a few people here, but something’s not right. They all seem distant or disconnected. Juan discusses the town and it’s history with some of the people. Specifically, he learns about his father, the mythical Pedro Paramo.

Pedro Paramo is a strange and complex figure. Ruthless and conniving enough to seize many of the town’s best lands through malicious and deceptive means, Pedro Paramo becomes the most powerful man in Comala. But he tends to use his power either for selfish personal gain, such as the (s)exploitation of the town’s women, or, in many cases, he doesn’t use it at all, failing to cultivate the land and allowing revolutionaries to effortlessly establish a foothold in the region.

So you’re hearing about all of this and seeing some of it. Basically, Juan Preciado is talking with various characters and as they tell him the stories of the town, we see it through flashbacks. But the narrative isn’t particularly linear and we switch between old Pedro and young Pedro and middle aged Pedro and other key secondary characters experiences and it’s honestly confusing and it’s hard to understand the point, especially early on.

For example, in the first 30 minutes, it’s mostly Juan talking to a childhood friend of his mother and seeing flashbacks revolving around the local priest. We don’t really take a very clean approach into the story, seemingly around and then in. Scenes of Juan talking to this lady intercut with 2-3 minute flashback sequences. The lady disappears suspiciously and is replaced by another woman, Damiona, who he also talks to. But at this point, you’ve been watching the movie for about an hour.

It just feels very slight in some ways and no moment really holds. You might see a scene and think “this will be important” and it’s just not. It adds some context and lore, but it doesn’t move the story. And yet these moments are placed first in the narrative. You can easily tell that this is loyal to the book because this is just not how movies are structured. It becomes more clearly structured in the second half but it never really resembles a Plot Point A to B to C movie format. Shit just kind of happens and you hear about it and some of it is very shocking or interesting, but none of it feels pivotal. There’s no through line in this story.

Now, this is all beautifully filmed. The cinematography is really gripping and the sets and costumes are excellent and are consistent with the time period. This is a very well crafted set of shots and angles and so forth. It’s just that what is being shown doesn’t really add up to something that feels like a movie. It almost feels like a recap of a miniseries set within it’s own narrative structure. It doesn’t feel cheaply made or poorly directed by any means. It’s very artistic. It’s just like “What is going on?”

Also, unfortunately, I think the actor who played Pedro Paramo was not great. I don’t think he acted poorly. I simply don’t think he was a good choice. He’s neither menacing nor sympathetic and instead comes off as dull and ineffectual. Even his best laid plans feel thin and fragile, neither like the domineering mogul he is supposed to be in parts not this tragic passive figure he is supposed to be either. He just feels kind of…meh. It’s hard to see this guy as someone capable of amassing such power, nor is the hopeless romantic passion that drives him into inactivity well conveyed either.

This narrative is just obviously meant to be a book. The two hour time frame of a movie can’t create the immersion needed to really make this story work nor does the narrative function in any other way than the disjointed and non-linear way it is presented here. It’s unfortunate but it’s how it is. I think it’s just not an adaptable novel for the screen.

Which brings us to the script. My god. The most pervasive place where it is obvious this is an adaptation of a novel is in the dialogue. There’s a lot of rhetorical questions and poetic ramblings. Which, in a book, work. You don’t need connective dialogue in a book. It's most efficient to give voice to interior conflict rather than day to day things and it’s common in a novel. In a movie, which is a visual medium, you’re supposed to show it. But the very nature of this narrative means you can’t really show much because not a tremendous amount of actual action happens. It’s a lot of talking. And unfortunately, this does make the film at least a little boring at times, especially since it’s so unfocused in it’s storytelling.

I don’t think this is a bad film. I think it’s just an unfortunate marriage of a great novel that thrives in that format and a medium that is very much not attuned to this story structure. You could make a lot of arguments that this is actually a great film or a terrible film but at the end of the day, it’s failing is that it is a film. The execution is fine, it’s just that this narrative borders on unfilmable. Consider that this book’s closest contemporary, 100 Years of Solitude was long considered unfilmable, most of all by it’s author Gabriel Garcia Marquez. Now, it’s not- in fact the television show on Netflix is one of the best of the year if not decade in my opinion.

But this book makes that book look simple, direct and linear (it’s not.) Pedro Paramo is just too steeped in high novel narrative style to be adapted. It affects everything from the pacing, the structure, the characters to the dialogue. This wasn’t a swing and a miss necessarily. It’s just a bold swing at something that ultimately ended up being too ethereal for this form to ever hit.

So would I recommend it? Yes and no. If you’ve read the book, you may very much appreciate this adaptation. And people should the book. It’s a classic. But if you’re watching it hoping to get into the novel or experience a classic Mexican narrative, you may find yourself underwhelmed overall. I was impressed by the cinematography and overall effort shown across the production. I just think that unfortunately, it works better on the page than on the screen.