“No” - The Perfect Preparation for “El Conde”

Right now, there is nobody I’m more jealous of than the lucky few who get to watch El Conde at the 80th Venice International Film Festival. Based on the trailer, it looks to be a biting satirical film about Pinochet, the military dictator who ruled Chile from 1973 until 1988 - except that in this story, he’s a vampire who’s finally ready to die. Filmed in black and white, the concept seems to be delightfully witty and unique, but the earliest average people like me will get to see it is September 15th when it comes out on Netflix.

Even though we're forced to wait, though, it doesn’t mean we have nothing to do. As excited as I am for the film, its main character is based on a real political figure, so a certain level of historical awareness is needed. History was always my least favourite class, but luckily, that’s where another film festival movie comes in: 2012’s No, which originally premiered in Cannes and was directed by the same director as El Conde, Pablo Larraín. By combining real footage from 1988 with a fictionalised account of the referendum on whether or not to keep Pinochet in power, it does a fantastic job of showing the audience who Pinochet was, not as a person but rather in the eyes of Chile as a whole.

The referendum, which was authorised by the regime due to mounting political pressure, was simple: “Yes” to keep Pinochet in power for eight more years or “No” to vote him out. While both campaigns were technically only allowed 15 minutes a day for 27 days, the “Yes” side obviously enjoyed the benefit of having the state-controlled media act as a constant propaganda machine working in favour of the dictator. The clips from the “Yes” campaign and the news at the time, combined with the imagined conversations between those designing it, show Pinochet from the perspective of the Chileans who supported him. For them, Pinochet was the people’s leader, despite taking over the government by force, though he was also distinctly separate from them, refusing to wear civilian clothes on air to maintain his appearance of authority. For those who voted “Yes”, he represented safety, patriotism, and the potential for economic prosperity. One woman in the film even goes so far as to say that she doesn’t care that his regime tortured, murdered, and “disappeared” people because her family was doing fairly well - why risk that, especially when Pinochet was promising democracy in the future anyway?

The “No” campaign, on the other hand, is shown to be in chaos as many political parties are forced to work together under the regime's strict watchful eye. Despite believing that the election is a sham, they hire a marketer, René, to help them with their campaign. They have a seemingly impossible task, faced with voters who either don’t want to vote or feel that it’s meaningless to. René understands what the people truly want, though, what Pinochet's government can’t give them. When not working, René is with his son, and just like many who voted “Yes”, what he wants more than anything is for his family to live well - but for him, that doesn’t mean wealth and security, it means freedom. So unlike the “Yes” campaign, he doesn’t rely on cold statistics and fear-mongering, even if that was the original plan. Instead, he shows Chile what Pinochet took from them fifteen years before: hope. Instead of showing the pain of the past, he offers them a vision of the future where they can live fearlessly, enjoying the liberty and joy they had been missing for too long.

The film doesn’t just show the campaigns, of course. It also shows the effect of the dictatorship on the people themselves. Families were torn apart, protestors were violently beaten, and those who were against Pinochet had to hide it for fear of retribution. Despite how fun the “No” campaign is designed to be, these images remind us of the horrors that had led to its creation, the pain that Pinochet inflicted upon Chileans. Even when “No” wins, René walks silently through the jubilant crowd. He smiles briefly as his son whispers something in his ear, glad for the new hope his son’s future holds, only for it to once again fade as he remembers the difficult path that lies in front of Chile, all due to one man's lust for power.

No is a beautiful film that takes a political event and tells the story of the humanity behind it, a perspective that academic texts consistently fail to convey. That’s why the film is a must-watch before El Conde - it reminds us of just who Pinochet was to the people. For many, he was a soul-sucking monster, but for others, he was a charming saviour. Given his dual nature as a charismatic symbol of power and hope-draining demon, his depiction as a vampire in El Conde is incredibly fitting and even feels unsurprising. Chile’s relationship with Pinochet is difficult to grasp, but it will almost certainly be necessary to truly understand his depiction in El Conde. So if you need a refresher on Pinochet, never knew who he was in the first place, or just need a way to pass the time while waiting for September 15th to arrive, No is the perfect film to add to your watchlist.