After winning the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress, Zoe Saldaña, star of Emilia Pérez, addressed criticism regarding the film’s portrayal of various groups, specifically Mexicans. She addressed a journalist who mentioned that the film’s depiction had been “really hurtful for us Mexicans.”
The film’s portrayal of Mexican culture was perceived as not only inaccurate but also harmful. Many felt that it perpetuated a narrow, negative view of Mexican identity, reinforcing biases that affect the way Mexican people are viewed and treated. In a broader sense, critics argued that the film contributed to the continued misrepresentation of marginalized communities in Hollywood, where filmmakers and actors have historically failed to reflect cultural diversity respectfully and authentically.
Emilia Perez Controversy
French filmmaker Jacques Audiard wrote, directed, and produced the film. While the film’s story takes place in Mexico, it was shot in a studio outside of Paris. The director spoke to BBC and defended his decision not to film in Mexico, saying, “It was just too pedestrian, too real. I had a much more stylized vision in my mind.”
The director’s decision to prioritize a “stylized vision” over reality can be problematic in a story involving such serious issues. While stylization can be an effective tool in filmmaking, it risks undermining the story’s gravity. When dealing with sensitive subjects like drug violence, cartel culture, and their devastating effects on a country and its citizens, there is an inherent responsibility to represent the situation with respect and accuracy. Filming in Paris, a city so far removed from the realities of Mexico, diminishes the impact of the film’s message by turning it into fantasy rather than addressing the consequences of these issues.
The director’s dismissal of the “pedestrian” or “real” elements of Mexican culture in favor of a more “stylized” aesthetic highlights a troubling perception: that the authentic experiences and struggles of Mexican people are not deemed worthy of representation in their proper form. This attitude reflects a broader issue within Hollywood, which often favors glamorous, exaggerated, or sensationalized portrayals of real-world problems over presenting them raw and genuine.
casting debacle
The cast of Emilia Pérez accepted the Prestigious Cannes Best Actress Award. The director’s vision for the film did not include any Mexican actress in the cast; instead, his leading cast was comprised of two American actresses and Spaniards. During a Sag-Aftra Foundation Q&A, the film’s casting director gave insight into their decision to alter the characters’ identities to reflect the actors’ ethnicities instead of the film’s initial native Mexican characters.
Emilia Perez, with its focus on the Mexican drug cartel, fails to authentically portray the people and communities impacted by those stories, risking distorting the truth. The decision to rewrite characters’ ethnic backgrounds to fit the actors’ race involved compromising the story’s integrity. This is a recurring problem in Hollywood and global cinema: Indigenous actors and actresses are frequently overlooked for roles in favor of non-Indigenous performers. Even when roles are supposed to be ethnically specific, casting directors tend to favor mainstream, “marketable” talent over authentic representation.
The narrative of Emilia Perez is supposed to focus on issues affecting Mexico, including its Indigenous communities. However, the decision to cast non-Indigenous actresses without understanding or respecting the characters’ cultural backgrounds undermines the film’s potential for social commentary. This also prevents the audience from engaging with the lived experiences of real Mexican Indigenous people who are often caught in the crossfire of social, economic, and political issues, including the drug trade.
Saldaña’s Response
Saldaña’s decision to remain silent about the controversy surrounding Emilia Perez and her eventual response to criticism reflects a highly strategic approach to managing her public image in a Hollywood landscape that increasingly demands accountability for cultural representation. Early on, her silence can be interpreted as a calculated move to avoid engaging in a conversation that could have alienated audiences or sparked further backlash before the film’s success or her career could benefit.
Saldaña, who has a well-established career, likely sought to avoid a negative focus on the film or her portrayal, allowing it to have its moment without the distraction of controversy. However, it wasn’t until after she had won an Oscar that she publicly denounced the concerns a Mexican journalist raised about her involvement in the film. At this point, Saldaña had secured her place in the industry and could afford to make such a bold statement without the immediate threat of career damage. Her criticism of the journalist, who had expressed valid concerns about the stereotypical portrayal of Mexico in the film, seemed to be less about addressing the issues raised and more about protecting her image and defending her involvement in a project.
This delayed response highlights a more significant problem in Hollywood, where individuals often wait until they have substantial industry validation before engaging in or even acknowledging the critique of cultural appropriation or misrepresentation. This deflects responsibility and misses an opportunity to contribute to more meaningful conversations about diversity and inclusion genuinely.
This is not the first time Saldaña has received criticism for her inauthentic portrayal of a character. In a 2016 biopic of musician and civil rights activist Nina Simone, she wore a prosthetic nose and dark-enhancing makeup to resemble Simone closely. She has since apologized for her portrayal and recognizes that better women could have honored her more appropriately.
audience impact
The criticism voiced by the Mexican journalist regarding Saldaña at the Oscars highlights a broader issue of representation in the film industry. This incident reflects the frustrations many feel about the way Indigenous Mexican stories are portrayed, or often misrepresented, in mainstream media. When the film featuring Saldaña was released, the response from the Mexican audience revealed deep-seated concerns about the authenticity of the portrayal of their culture. Many were disappointed, feeling that the film failed to honor the complexities and richness of Indigenous experiences. This response underscores a collective desire for genuine representation and recognition and the emotional impact of seeing their stories distorted or overlooked. Ultimately, the journalist’s critique and the audience’s reaction illustrate how important it is for films to authentically represent marginalized communities to foster a sense of identity and pride.
Emilia Perez serves as a case study of a troubling trend, as it fails to engage meaningfully with the issues surrounding Mexico’s drug cartels and the harm they inflict on the country. Rather than providing a nuanced exploration of these topics, the film turns them into a stylized spectacle aimed at entertainment. This approach misses a critical opportunity to offer thoughtful commentary on the real-world consequences of such challenges. By prioritizing entertainment over authenticity, films like this risk trivializing the genuine experiences of the people they intend to portray, ultimately reinforcing stereotypes instead of fostering understanding.