In “Hurricane,” Flavia Castro is ready to face two challenges. The first, about how the position of Brazilian women was represented about a century ago. The second is how she represents the time in which she lived with little money.
In the first case, the main reference is Miss Cyclone, the brilliant naturalist who attended Oswald de Andrade’s famous Garçonnière party. She is precocious and unconventional, making it almost impossible to avoid the clear realization that she was a woman ahead of her time.
But Miss Cyclone is only one part of the woman around whom the film revolves. They both have a tragic fate in common, but the Cyclone in the film experiences very specific setbacks, such as having the credits for the play she wrote stolen by her teacher and the show’s director.
Here we move to an independent woman working as a typist in an anarchist printing company. Here we have a beautiful representation of the treatment given to women at that time: A female employee wants to be shown how to open a drawer that she had difficulty handling. What remained of his pride was the boy’s lack of skill, destroying an entire box of characters.
This kind of behavior takes us away from 1920, and the film seems to be saying: Have things changed much in 2020? Or has it changed at least enough?
Another problem, of a personal nature, related to the hurricane: miscarriage. At that time, this practice was even more prohibited than it is today. And every now and then she gets pregnant.
It is somewhat necessary to question the feminine issue as the film suggests. That is, a woman who lives a tragic life because of her many talents, especially intellectual ones, finds herself deprived of authoring the text, her status as a worker is diminished, and she is ultimately punished by the ban on abortion.
None of these questions can be considered again. Strictly speaking, only the first can be said to define an era, but not by much – the author’s name has been withheld on the grounds that a female name would hurt the play’s box office.
Men’s treatment of women remains a problem. Just look at the number of violent crimes committed by men against women in recent years. Finally, abortion, as we know, is a major target of criminalization, which affects poor women, as does the protagonist.
The second problem the film has to deal with is more sensitive. Representing this period with limited funds means closing the plot on the face of the actress – Luisa Mariani, who actually performs well -, and there are scenographic limitations that also ultimately limit the scope of Cyclone’s relationships, as she is almost always forced to act with the duo she is in dialogue with, and the viewer’s field of vision: a 1920 remake would be very expensive.
This restriction leads to the option of a theatrical release, which the film never seems to fully embrace. As a result, the outcome depends largely on the receiving audience. For women who are not yet familiar with female problems, it will undoubtedly be useful.
For women who are already fighting for recognition of their usurped independence and rights, this doesn’t add much. To the general public, a film that begins with a mention of a truly extraordinary woman, but does not focus on her tragic path, may seem somewhat disappointing, which is perhaps attributable to the under-budget; But the truth is that whoever pays the price of admission has nothing to do with it.