Screening Neoliberalism: Transforming Mexican Cinema by Ignacio M. Sánchez Prado (review)

Sticky floors, the smell of stale popcorn, and a sense of nostalgia pervade the opening anecdote of Ignacio Sánchez Prado’s Screening Neoliberalism. An excellent analysis of how Mexican cinema mirrors neoliberal socio-cultural transformations, the book provides a critical discussion of the shift away from state-imposed ideologies toward the diversification of genre and theme and expanding international spectatorship. With the ambitious, overarching goal of providing “the most wide-ranging study of contemporary Mexican film to date” (10), Sánchez Prado delves into close readings of dozens of both high-grossing box office hits and less popular or niche films. Screening Neoliberalism is an accessible text that merges multidisciplinary theory with close readings, appropriate not only for scholars in the field, but also for instructors who teach Mexican cinema.

Sánchez Prado centers his argument on the two-part claim that privatization “led to major changes in the communities of spectatorship and in the social function of film” (6), which “makes cinema a uniquely apt site for studying the social and cultural impact of neoliberalism in Mexico” (7). Instead of addressing this claim chronologically, Sánchez Prado organizes his analysis conceptually. The first three chapters address the decline of Mexican nationalism in cinema, the rise of the romantic comedy genre, and political and ideological shifts in Mexican cinema dating from 1988 (the year President Salinas de Gortari took office) through the late nineties and beginning of the 2000s, when films that embody the zenith of these trends were released. Though this strategy occasionally requires the reader to cross-reference production years, nonetheless the conceptual organization is highly effective since it lays the groundwork for the fourth chapter’s examination of these processes on four internationally-acclaimed Mexican directors. Sánchez Prado mitigates potential confusion through frequent references to films discussed in earlier chapters, which highlight salient characteristics pertinent to newly presented information. In his conclusion, Sánchez Prado takes the reader into the present “after neoliberalism” (209; roughly 2007 forward), questionably labeled given neoliberalism continued expansion and pressures. Still, the numerous films presented in the conclusion indicate increased departure from earlier narrative and aesthetic languages.

Apart from the text’s organization, Screening Neoliberalism employs a unique methodology that builds on the theoretical framework of Cultural Studies scholars such as Néstor García Canclini and Carlos Monsiváis, and social scientist David Harvey’s socio-cultural definition of neoliberalism. Sánchez Prado’s three-pronged approach utilizes Mexican social science literature, responses from Mexican film critics, and analyses from the English-language academy. This framework places close readings in juxtaposition with critical film analyses, while taking into account audience demographics and turnout, censorship and controversy, and production costs, distribution, and investing agencies. Including the latter without short-changing the former strengthens the author’s argument that Mexican cinema draws attention to cultural shifts introduced through neoliberal economic policy.

However, this methodology sometimes elides the negative impact that neoliberalism has had on the poorest social sectors. Though neoliberalism’s effects are adequately acknowledged in the text, its focus on the shift toward middle class concerns and the celebration of Mexican cinema’s diversification, international audiences, and political potential align with the very processes of neoliberal eschewal of the lower classes that the text describes. A progressive intellectual himself, Sánchez Prado acknowledges that, often, critics privilege popular culture and films with artistic or progressive agendas. This, he argues, may lead to “dismissing the culture of the middle and upper classes” (226) and that in contrast, his “study suggests [that] the processes underwent by Mexican cinema during the last twenty-five years have much to tell us: about cinema, about neoliberalism, and about what Mexican society… has to say about itself ” (226). This argument suggests that the middle and upper classes speak for Mexican society writ large, and merits further nuance regarding the role of neoliberalism in that process.

Notwithstanding, Screening Neoliberalism successfully employs an innovative methodology to explain the impact of declining state...