Dreaming of Julia

I saw this film and heard the writer-director, Juan Gerard, speak at the Santa Barbara Int'l Film Festival.

All I knew about it was that it was the story of an 8-year-old boy at the time of the Cuban Revolution in 1958 and how it affects his home and family.

Its opening scene will bring to mind "Cinema Paradiso". In fact, the film is filled with references to classic films: The Roulette Wheel (Casablanca), "chicken clucking" (Rebel Without a Cause), references to Bunuel, "Touch of Evil"; you'll find more. The homeless man (Georg Stanford Brown)is a reference to Cuban folklore which often uses a black man as a type of Greek chorus.

What this film really is is the culmination of a dream. Gerard's wish to honor his family and medium of film that he has loved all of his life.

This is the true story of Juan Gerard and all the people in it are real,as are the events depicted. Gerard is actually an architect and engineer (and passionate film lover) but his dream was to make this movie. He and his wife decided to live that dream and Harvey Keitel became an "angel" who believed in Gerard and agreed to produce and star in it. Keitel holds the screen powerfully as the mysterious and secretive grandfather "Che". Brown and Keitel are the only Americans in the cast. Iben Hjejle (High Fidelity) and Gael Garcia Bernal (Y tu Mama Tambien) offer strong support in key roles.

Truthfully, the first half of the film suffers from stiff delivery of lines, and some overracting, but stay with it. The last half is much better as the events of the revolution combine for the bittersweet, and honest climax. It is the first effort of Juan Gerard, but it is honest as he is and his passion and heart really come through,in this sincere first effort. I would definitely see it again, and hope that he continues his film career.

If you're expecting to learn something about History and the Cuban Revolution, this is not the movie you want to see. The movie focuses on the life of a boy and how the events of the revolution affect his wealthy family. Since the events of the revolution are unexplained it could give the sense to the viewer that what happened is not complex. There are subtle criticisms of both Batista and Fidel but they are also left unexplained. The US role is not even mentioned. For those that don't know Cuban History, there is different versions of what happened in Cuba (Cubans have one version and Cuban-Americans have another).

Rating

5 - 1 for NOT making the movie in Spanish - 1 for NOT making the movie in Cuba - 1 for the mistakes in acting or directing - 1 for simplistic storyline - 1 for the lack of historical background and explanation + 1 for Harvey Keitel's talent + 1 for Gael Garcia's talent + 1 for having Gael as a Revolutionary + 1 for original story + 1 for having well rounded characters and not making it a Good vs. Evil

= 5

Some of the historic events that are recognized by the great majority of historians that can help as background:

• Batista was a dictator that used torture and widely spread violence to protect his regime and the wealth of the elites. - Fidel Castro had the support of the great majority of Cubans at the time of the Revolution - The revolutionary government did execute about 400 of Batista's close allies. - The revolutionary government did expropriate all the belongings of the wealthy class in the name of the general wealth being.

Cheers to Letvia and Juan for the care taken to depict Holguin,Cuba of 1958.

It is quite a thrill to see the incredible city of Holguin in a movie.

The city, perhaps 100,000 strong in 1958, has grown substantially since then.

Today, you can still fly direct to Holguin from Miami. Well , maybe not you but I can. :)

Armin and Tete, characters in this story, are my aunt and uncle and, yes, they were in Holguin in 1958 the year i was born (in Holguin). Armin and Tete are alive and well and living in Hialeah, Florida.

Marcos@Rodriguez.com. 11/21/2012 http://www.imdb.com/name/nm5020153/

Saw this at the Hawaii Film Festival where the director and his wife (who produced it) took a Q&A afterwards.

I found it hard to believe this is a first time director and all kudos to Harvey Keitel for once again taking a risk and going out on a limb for a script he liked.

Certainly reminiscent of Cinema Paradiso, it tells the story of the young director on the turning of the revolution in Cuba. However, don't expect this to be a movie about the revolution, it's political stance is wonderfully ambiguous. Many references to the directors obvious love of film history (a great "Bicycle Thief" homage") and some whimsical scenes which work with out being pretentious.

Enjoy!

The central theme in this movie seems to be confusion, as the relationships, setting, acting and social context all lead to the same place: confusion. Even Harvey Keitel appears to be out of his element, and lacks his usual impeccable clarity, direction and intensity. To make matters worse, his character's name is 'Che', and we are only told (directly, by the narrator) well into the film that he is not 'that' Che, just a guy named Che. The family relationships remain unclear until the end of the film, and once defined, the family is divided - the younger generation off to America. So cliché. Other reviews discuss how the movie depicts the impact of the revolution on a boy's family; however the political stance of the director is murky at best, and we are never quite sure who is responsible for what bloodshed. So they lost their property (acquired by gambling profits) - so what? Refusing to take a political stand, when making a movie about the Cuban revolution, is an odd and cowardly choice. Not to mention the movie was in English! Why are all these Cubans speaking English? No wonder they did not get permission to film in Cuba. And if family life is most important to look at here, it would be great if we could figure out who is who - we are 'introduced' to them all in the beginning - a cheap way out of making the relationships clear throughout the film! The acting was mostly shallow, wooden, and unbelievable, timing was off all around. The 'special' visual effects were confusing and distracting. References to American films - and the black character as Greek chorus - strictly gratuitous, intellectually ostentatious, and consistently out of place. I only watched the whole movie because I was waiting for clarity, or some point to it all. It never happened.