Why “Emilia Pérez” Failed to Impress Audiences in Mexico

“Emilia Pérez,” a film about a transgender Mexican cartel leader, has gained 13 Academy Award nominations but received significant backlash in Mexico. Critics have condemned its portrayal of the country and its delayed release. Controversial comments from its creators and the lack of Mexican involvement further fueled discontent, leading to empty theaters and calls for refunds.

The film “Emilia Pérez,” which depicts a transgender Mexican cartel leader reconciling with her past, has garnered 13 Academy Award nominations and multiple accolades, including a Golden Globe for best comedy or musical. Despite its international acclaim, the film has faced harsh criticism in Mexico for its portrayal of the country and its handling of cartel violence, as well as for the lack of Mexican contributors involved in its production.

Critics have particularly taken issue with comments made by its French writer-director, Jacques Audiard, regarding the Spanish language, as well as remarks from lead actress Karla Sofía Gascón related to Islam and George Floyd. The film experienced a delayed release in Mexico on January 23, five months post its French debut, contributing to dissatisfaction among domestic audiences where theaters have remained largely empty, prompting some to seek refunds.

In contrast, an online parody short film targeting “Emilia Pérez”’s French influences has enjoyed considerable popularity. The feature has been a source of memes on social media and has faced backlash from families of violence victims in Mexico. Francisco Peredo Castro, a film expert at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, described the situation as a “real disaster.”

In summary, despite its international recognition, “Emilia Pérez” has fared poorly in Mexico, facing considerable backlash for its cultural representation and depictions of violence. The film’s delayed release, coupled with negative commentary from its creators, has resulted in empty theaters and public dissatisfaction, as reflected in social media criticism and adverse responses from local communities.

Original Source: www.nytimes.com