“Poor” buildings with paint chipping off the walls, deserts and drug runners that Mexicans have criticized of Hollywood’s representations of their country for decades now. Instead of a film about the victims of a violence fueled by the demand for illegal drugs in the US—issue never mentioned in

script. And more importantly, Mexican audiences were robbed of any real representation or a piece of art that could have globally highlighted a real strife that they face by a project that can only be described as LAZY and insensitive. The film falls into the trap of the Sephia filters and run-down

director, Guillermo Del Toto agrees. And some of the performances are strong—Jessi’s phone call to Gustavo for example would have highlighted Selena’s performance had she not been given the incredibly cringey “me duele la pinche vulva” line. En fin, the actors were robbed by a culturally tone deaf

Finally, the fictitious cartels, and nameless corrupt politicians seems to be a blanket critique on Mexico’s political system but doesn’t name names. Probably because it can’t because of its blatant ignorance of the Mexican reality. While the cinematically the film is beautifully shot—even Mexican

Emilia, formerly Manitas, comes to terms with the violence her past self perpetuated. As if she were only able to understand this after her transition into a woman. It begs the question, is Audiard making the claim that women are more in tune with society’s collective suffering?

with the period of violence. Emilia Perez seems to blame these nameless Mexican characters for the misery they face because of the violence. As if they all are either willing participants—corrupt lawyers, politicians, judges or narcos—or unwilling victims. While a reformed drug kingpin and now woman

On which the French director and these non-Mexican actors make a spectacle of that country’s tragedies. It feels like a morbid curiosity—el morbo—really drives the film. It could be called Porno Miseria, but at least porno miseria in Colombia was created by Colombians film makers about their history

We see family members searching for their missing loved ones, possibly the only chance we get to hear from actual Mexican performers is from these nameless secondary characters and yet, the film falls dramatically short of this expectation. The Mexicans are simply the “extras” and Mexico the stage

Zoe Saldaña’s character says she’s Mexican but was born in the DR. Okay, what does it mean to be Dominican and “prieta” in Mexico? She sings about it in one song but we never get a conclusion. The film seems to want to denounce the issue of the victims of drug trafficking and the Mexican state…

In the US. Karla Sofía has a thick Spanish accent, even if she attempts to pronounce her Cs and Zs like a Latin American, she still sounds Spanish. Did her character live in Spain while in Europe? It’s not clear. And I even feel the first song of Manitas was created to hide it.

To be fair to the actors, their performances are not bad. It’s the script they’ve been given. It seems implausible that S. Gomez’s character would use the vocab she uses if her first language wasn’t Spanish—however they don’t explain if she’s even supposed to be Latina. We just know she has family

To begin, Mexican actors in the film seem to be relegated to a secondary place. They exist to be victims of the violence the film seems to want to denounce. However, none of the protagonists are Mexican—even if they play a Mexican, it is obvious they are not because they don’t sound Mexican at all.