Not the best review- Goodbye Bafana

1. In general, what did you like and dislike about the film?

>Goodbye Bafana is an "okay" movie, mediocre would be a better word to describe it. So the story is about Gregory, the warder of Mandela and his group. The premise itself sounds great on paper, however as an stand-alone film (I mean, fictional) it would have been something good, but in my opinion it feels somewhat forced trying to make the protagonist a "good man" and the main problem is that trying to be a good man doesn't make you one. Gregory doesn't do something for anyone in the entire film, he feels too passive , if there is a problem he won't fight against it and he feels like he is doing some difference. 

Indeed, Gregory changes through the whole movie, but there are no changes overall, it's just the story about someone that tries to befriend Mandela and live with that. The idea of being with Mandela is something that no one would want. Why? Because "He was a terrorist" and by the end Gregory gets the idea of what freedom should be.

I don't like the idea of Gregory feeling that he is doing something like "helping" Mandela but actually does nothing. I can't stand his character at all for the reason of just being nice. The screenplay and the actors are okay in my opinion except for him. The idea of showing the other side of Apartheid is good, but it needs to make a connection with the public.

2. Who was the character you liked the most and the character you liked the least in the film? Why?

>I really liked how Nelson Maldena was portraited. As I mentioned in the other review, it feels like the "second Nelson", the one calm. He looks like a strong man, someone that can overcomes anything and he is really cool about everything.

James would be my second pick, because he is the nicest guy in the movie, but that doesn't mean that he is perfect. The whole movie James is feeling that he is doing the right things but most of them are wrong or makes no difference. Yes, he is a "good father" and "husband" and "friend" , but no one is that perfect in my opinion.


I didn't like the chief at all, he seemed suspicious the whole film. I don't understand why just Gregory was able to work with Mandela, it feels like some excuse in my opinion to keep him or to make "some conflict" , I think that Gregory wouldn't be the only one to know Xhusa in the whole Island.

3. How do the versions of James Gregory, Nelson Mandela, and Winnie Mandela compare between  Goodbye Bafana and Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom?

>In Mandela's movie Gregory appears as a secondary character, and when he is on screen he doesn't do much , but the way he interacts with Nelson is alright, he treats him in a good way , enough to show some kind of affinity with him. In James movie he is a primary character , the focus of the movie is him and his family. I think that Gregory is shown as the best man that can ever be and maybe one of the closest friends to Mandela.

However, the reason of the movie to have Gregory as a character is Mandela. In this film Mandela is shown as the "second Mandela", the one that can get through every situation using just dialogue and I really liked that they are about the same in the two movies, it feels like with that they actually described someone as it is in real life.

We can't talk about Winnie as Nelson in this case. This movie doesn't do justice to who she was. Winnie was a brave woman in M:LWTF , enough to sacrifice her maternity because of her ideals of freedom and anarchism. In this movie Winnie is shown fragile, someone that can't do anything in her own , someone that needs Nelson and it's not mention in the movie at all, so as I said, what was shown about her it made me the idea of she being like that.

Not the best review- Mandela : Long walk to freedom

1. In general, what did you like and dislike about the film?

> The movie itself is great in my opinion. It might not be the best movie of all time, but it has a strong screenplay and the actors did such a good job in their perfomance that you can experience the whole story without thinking about anything else. What I liked about the film is that you can understand most of the context and learn about one of the most important men of South Africa's history, I gotta admit that I didn't know much about Mandela until I read about him in this class and watched the movie.

What I didn't like about the whole thing was that they could use the real footage of Nelson talking to the people through TV, It was a wasted opportunity. The last problem with the film was the sudden ending, It felt unexpected and wasn't a good conclusion.

2. In your own words, how would you compare the "various Mandelas;" the ones from the article and the one from the film?

>Well, the two Mandelas are very different one from another. One is a "troublemaker" and the other would be an "angel". The first one is the Mandela is the one that can do everything to get what he wants, even if that means that things are gonna get violent, that Mandela was revolutionary and aggressive man. I gotta admit that he appears at the beginning of the movie, until he gets caught. At that moment he changes to a better man, I think that he gets the time to think and understand that he can survive and convince the people that he can evolve as a person. That is the Mandela that gets shown on the Film, the one that says no to violence and tries his best to use the dialogue to get to everyone, that Mandela was a mature man.

I think that anyone can be the first one, everybody can use violence to try to change the world or their surroundings. Second Mandela was truly unique in this way, because few people could achieve as much as he did through non violent means, through that experience he also learned much self control and humility, further proving that he has evolved and improved as a person and a leader.

3. What was the role that Winnie Mandela played in the film? Think about the contrast between her and the other ANC members.

>Winnie was a problem by the end , it was a noble act of her to follow Nelson's ideals but I think that she got everything wrong about the way to do it. Yeah, she was fighting for what she believed in but It was influenced by the first Mandela, the reckless and destructive man that got caught. The contrast between her and the ANC is that the last group were capable of making dialogue to get what they want and even if that was the case Winnie wasn't someone proper to follow, her motivation was her anger and her resentment for the people that the whites made suffer.


4.- How do you compare the role of Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress in the struggle against the apartheid and in the post-apartheid South Africa to the Concertación and their role in the struggle against Augusto Pinochet's dictatorship and in post-dictatorial Chile

>If we talk about what make them similar is that they wanted to restore human rights in the country. Mandela was a leader like Allende and instead of eliminate the people that doesn't think like the goverment they just put it in jail. The ANC and the Concertacion could achieve what they wanted at the end, and that was a some kind of freedom in the new democracy that was installed.

About post Apartheid and post dictadura the common thing is that the new goverments promised changes and make things right, i mean, make justice and change the legislation to be a fair and better place but they haven't been able to achieve that 'till now .