Victoria Bañales

I was expecting something much more powerful as far as Cleo's character, especially with all the hype about the casting of an indigenous female actress (her acting was great, by the way). It was upsetting that Cleo was portrayed as agency-less and passive, devoid of (her own) family networks and community. It seems all she does is take care of a white family that pretends to accept her as an equal even though she will always be the Native lower-class maid who can't really watch the family night movie (because she has to make tea) and can't really enjoy the vacation (because she not only has to care for the children but also [literally] save them). There is too much of the "noble savage" running through this film, and I'm stunned that everyone seems to be praising the film's cinematography while overlooking some of the underlying disturbing aspects of the film. There is a sinister element of racial and class exploitation glossed over by a deceptive narrative of "acceptance" and "inclusion"--and not just within the film's plot but by the filmmaker himself who is being praised for creating such a film. Is he absolved of participating in a form of racialized colonial exploitation because he "accepted" his nanny? because his family was also struggling due to his parents' separation? because he's produced something that critics see as rich in cinematography? Is this a feel-good movie for white upper/middle class audiences? Who is the intended audience? The film left a bad taste in my mouth, and I am curious to hear what Mexican indigenous communities have to say about this film.