The Political Gesture in Pedro Costa’s Films

This monograph focuses on the political gesture in Pedro Costa’s films. Through a formal and detailed analysis of his films, I argue that Costa’s reflexive use of filmic formal procedures produces a contingency of meaning, which, in turn, constitutes the crux of his political gesture.

Pedro Costa is a prominent director whose filmography has been recognized in international film festivals and retrospectives. His body of work includes films like Blood (Sangue, 1989), Down to Earth (Casa de Lava, 1994) and a trilogy focused on the neighbourhood of Fontainhas near Lisbon – Bones (Ossos, 1997), In Vanda’s Room (No Quarto de Vanda, 2000) and Colossal Youth (Juventude em Marcha, 2006). Costa has directed three short films also set in Fontainhas – Tarrafal (2007), The Rabbit Hunters (A Caça ao Coelho, 2007) and Our Man (O Nosso Homem, 2010).

Costa’s work extends to documentary filmmaking, as evident in his works 6 Bagatelas (2001) and Where Does Your Hidden Smile Lie? (Onde Jaz o teu Sorriso?, 2001), both centred on film couple Jean-Marie Straub and Danièle Huillet. His documentary Ne change rien¹ (2009) focuses on actor and singer Jeanne Balibar. Additionally, Costa contributed with the short film Sweet Exorcist to the project Centro Histórico (2012), commissioned by Guimarães European Capital of Culture, alongside directors Manoel de Oliveira, Víctor Erice and Aki Kaurismäki.

More recently, Costa directed Horse Money (Cavalo Dinheiro, 2014) and Vitalina Varela (2019), the latter earning him the Golden Leopard award at the Festival of Locarno, with actress Vitalina Varela receiving the Silver Leopard award.

Throughout this monograph, a scholarly investigation is conducted aiming to identify the political gesture in Pedro Costa’s films. By exploring Costa’s use of filmic form, this study seeks to enhance the ways he is capable of exposing the limits of filmic representation through the materiality of the cinematic medium.

Costa’s debut feature film Blood exhibits a stylized quality that incorporates numerous cinematographic references. However, his subsequent films have gradually moved away from overt film references. At first glance, the trilogy of Fontainhas appears to provide insight into the reality of life in the slums. By using real slum locations and non-professional actors who are residents of Fontainhas, Costa seems to amplify his films’ realistic qualities. Nevertheless, these films exhibit a pronounced concern with the formal procedures of the cinematic medium. This aesthetic preoccupation manifests in the use of reflexive filmic procedures. For this reason, my analysis will delve into discussions vis-à-vis modern political cinema. These discussions have been shaped by the critiques of ideology and spectacle as well as the rejection of cinematic realism. Costa’s allusion to realism challenges the conventional dichotomy between political modernism and realism. Consequently, his cinematic style owes to a realist aesthetic; however, his work showcases a significant concern vis-à-vis the formal elements of the cinematic image. Thus, his films are amenable to modernist explorations of film form and its intersection with politics.

The reassessment and newfound appreciation of André Bazin’s realist paradigm by several scholars in recent years have notably contributed to the resurgence of realism within contemporary film theory. Costa’s films have frequently been subject to analysis through the lens of realism and the aesthetics of slow cinema, as these concepts are often found closely related or, theoretically intertwined. However, this monograph presents a distinctive interpretation of Costa’s films. I align myself with the theoretical lineage of ‘political modernism’, aiming to reintroduce and invigorate this perspective within the realm of film theory.

Costa’s films are set in the slums and social housing neighbourhoods of Lisbon’s periphery. This context renders them socially and politically engaged. However, it also renders his films susceptible to various criticisms, including accusations of exploiting misery and misrepresenting Cape Verdean migrants by portraying them as drug users. Moreover, some critics claim that his ‘austere’ filmmaking style is accessible primarily to attendees of film festivals and European art house audiences.²