Directors: María Alchés and Benjamín Naishtat
Artists: Marcelo Subiotto, Leonardo Sbaraglia, Julieta Zylberberg, Mara Bestelli
Year: 2023
Premiere: March 27, 2024
★★★★
When philosophy meets cinema the way a late afternoon sun lands on a quiet street, the results can feel unexpectedly intimate. The opening lands with the death of the head of the Department of Political Philosophy at the University of Buenos Aires. What follows is a sharp, human confrontation between two teachers who share a desk and a difference of vision about the world. One is passionate and quick, deeply intelligent yet stubbornly out of date. The other is precise and seductive, clever in argument and a touch brittle. Their rivalry serves as a microcosm for a broader Argentine dilemma, a mirror held up to a society wrestling with truth, education, and power.
In the first collaboration from a duo that has spent years circling similar themes, the film lands with intensity and a lightness that keeps it from tipping into bleakness. The approach feels both intellectual and casual, a balance that lets the audience walk the fine line between theory and life. The narrative threads through a tapestry of philosophical reference points, nodding to thinkers such as Heidegger, Heraclitus, Rousseau, Hobbes, and Spinoza while never becoming a dry exercise in citation. Instead, these ideas become lenses that refract the story into a living argument about the conditions of public education and the pressures of neoliberal policy. The film treats philosophy not as a museum piece but as nourishment for present action, asking what it means to think clearly in a world where ideas are constantly in flux.
The plot unfolds as a robust exercise in genre mixing. Moments of slapstick puncture the gravity of serious debate, while witty costumes and visual gags become tools for critique. The humor works not to trivialize but to illuminate the stubborn stubbornness of systems that resist change. This is cinema that uses comedy to prompt conscience, inviting viewers to consider how intellectual commitments translate into social outcomes. Through this blend, the film makes a case for keeping public education at the center of cultural life and policy debate, arguing that a healthy republic needs educated citizens who can question authority without surrendering hope.
As the story progresses, the narrative moves toward a different kind of reckoning, one that reframes the discussion around collective responsibility. The sense of crisis that permeates the workplace reflects a larger anxiety about economic philosophy and the distribution of opportunity. The imagined collapse of a corporate empire becomes a metaphor for a society grappling with the consequences of market ideologies. Yet the film refuses to end on despair. Instead it pivots toward a hopeful observation about the dignity of failure and the durable value of activism. The closing mood suggests that human connection, even when institutions falter, can still produce meaningful change and sustain a sense of communal purpose.
From a craft perspective, the film excels in directing and performance. The two leads navigate a dialogue heavy on intellectual rigor while retaining emotional resonance. Supporting players provide texture and nuance, making the classroom, the hallways, and the public sphere feel real and lived-in. The production design, pacing, and sound design all contribute to a lived sense of urgency, where ideas carry weight and consequences. The result is a thoughtful cinematic experience that rewards attentive viewers without alienating newcomers to philosophical conversations. It is a film that asks serious questions and welcomes practical, human answers.
In the end, the piece offers a compact, energized argument about what democracy needs. It proposes that the thoughtful clash of ideas, when tempered by empathy and civic action, can endure beyond the misgivings of any single regime. The film stands as a testament to the value of critical discourse and the resilience of public institutions when supported by engaged citizens. It is a reminder that philosophy is not a distant luxury but a living tool for shaping a freer, fairer society. In this way the movie leaves the audience with a sense that even in difficult times, reason and solidarity can illuminate a path forward. Citation: Film Review Collective, Cultural Studies Journal, 2024.