Sample by My Essay Writer
The 1996 movie “Evita,” starring Madonna, aims to tell the story of Evita Peron, and it accomplishes the approximate political details of the woman’s life while exaggerating many other components. The musical details many of the most dramatic and important moments of the woman’s life. However, its very nature of being a Hollywood movie makes it fall away from the actual life of the woman. The movie itself was decent, but it was not true to the life of Evita, and this makes it a failure at being of any value in the historical context.
Several tools are used by director Harold Prince to create a movie that is more captivating to the audience than what the real-life depiction would be. One of the major components that he tries to bring is more vibrancy in the storyline. He does this by using the character “Che.” He is one of the most significant figures in Latin America’s battle for rights, and particularly Cuba’s fight for independence. While Che and Evita are depicted as being together in the film, it is very likely that they never met. Each of them have the common component to their personality, which is that they are part of a revolution. They were also both controversial leaders and very flawed (Navarro, 1980). Also, their followers adored them and considered them saints. But in actuality, there is no historic documentation indicating that they ever met (Navarro, 1980). And pairing these two together in the film is a disservice to each of them, with the only real intent being to make millions of dollars by creating a Hollywood blockbuster.
Furthermore, Prince creates a love story between Juan Peron and Evita, but the two were never reported to actually be romantically in love with each other, as it was more of a father-daughter type of relationship – though they deeply loved each other (Navarro, 1980). Evita is reported to have written a letter to Peron explaining to him how much she loved him. However, it was never really discovered if this letter was meant to be romantic (Navarro, 1980).
The movie is also playing on a thin line with the treatment of the narrator, who is Che. The audience should realize that the narrator in this case is not necessarily telling the truth, but it is instead his own version of the truth. This makes it difficult to know whether the directors were intentionally leading the audience to believe components about history that are not true, or if it is a mere accurate representation of what Che would say about the situation. Che is not an impartial component to this story. He provides a different point of view about Evita than does the storyline, and at least one component is not telling the real story about the woman. For example, Che accuses Evita of stealing money from her foundation; however, Juan Peron did much of the dirty work in real life (Navarro, 1980).
Many of the components that are used in the movie are difficult to differentiate from real life. However, the relationships that are depicted in the film have been shown to be fabricated for cinematic effect. Furthermore, the opinions of Che are made up, and this is causing not only confusion about the real beliefs of Che, but also the real actions of Evita. In the end, this movie fails at providing an accurate historical depiction of Evita, and many other components and people from the history of Latin America. This causes the move to do a disservice to historical documentation, and to the people who are depicted in this movie.
Works Cited
Navarro, Marysa. “Evita and the crisis of 17 October 1945: A case study of Peronist and anti-Peronist mythology.” Journal of Lating American Studies. 1980. Web. 26 Nov. 2013.
