MEXICO CITY – During our time at YJI’s Global Conference in Mexico City, a couple of us decided to watch the 2002 film Frida in honor of our visit to La Casa Azul, which was my standout visit during the trip.
The house, belonging to Frida Kahlo and her husband Diego Rivera, was itself a bold artistic statement, with its bright blue walls ensuring a strong contrast to the rest of the street.
I was excited to see the house featured heavily in the film, as well as to apply everything I learned about her life while watching Frida.
The story was relatively well structured, although sometimes I felt that certain emotional scenes were cut short in favor of jumping to another part of Frida’s life, notably the aftermath of her bus accident. Sometimes the pacing of the film felt rushed in the effort to cram everything in.
But the way the movie transitioned between images of her actual artwork to the different events of her life kept the film’s structure easy to follow.
The movie itself was visually striking and very colorful – a fantastic creative choice, as key iconography of Frida Kahlo were her bright dresses and flowers in her hair.
Similarly, the vibrancy of light and color helped reflect Frida’s emotion throughout the film, which was complemented well by Salma Hayek’s performance as the lead.
The acting was fantastic, and as a longtime fan of Hayek’s work, I liked how she completely immersed herself in the role of Frida, carrying the emotional intensity on her shoulders with ease.
Alfred Molina as Diego was a great casting choice too, with his character suitably infuriating, detestable and yet alluring, making it more understandable why Frida chose him, despite the pain he caused her.
When we visited her house, we saw a lot of her original artwork on display. It emphasized to me the huge role that Kahlo’s chronic pain had in her art and the dominating effect it had on her life.
But surprisingly, the film didn’t put as much significance on that. Watching Frida, I occasionally I forgot the pain that plagued the artist for most of her life.
While her injuries and illnesses didn’t define her, the huge impact they had on her art made it necessary to remind viewers that it was present during most of Kahlo’s life.
Of particular importance is that despite it all, she wasn’t crushed by the hardships she faced, but resilient.
Inside La Casa Azul, there is an exhibition of several of Frida’s corsets and braces, both of which looked painful to wear. But you can also see the doodling and artwork she did on them, and this feels representative of her perseverance through all the hardship, even with hints of irony at her situation.
Instead of focusing more time on her health and its implications on her life, the film spent more time on Kahlo’s tumultuous relationship with Diego Rivera, and both of their many extramarital affairs, including hers with Russian exile Leon Trotsky.
While I appreciate the role and influence these relationships had in both her life and art, perhaps a more fitting title for this film would have been Frida and Diego.
I expected the film to center around Kahlo and her own perseverance through her difficult life rather than the impact her choices had on her marriage to Rivera.
Gemma Christie is a Senior Reporter with Youth Journalism International from England, UK. She wrote this review.
Sreehitha Gandluri is a Senior Correspondent with Youth Journalism International from the United States. She provided the cover photo.
Anjola Fashawe is a Correspondent with Youth Journalism International from London. She contributed a photo for this review.
Ana Fadul is a Correspondent with Youth Journalism International from Colombia. She made the photo below.
