If we take a closer look at films produced outside the wealthy Western world, we will easily notice that a certain group of problems- current in the Euroamerican cinema but to a lesser degree- is recurring in each of them: living in slums (the theme being raised particularly in Latin American films, but also in the ones produced in Africa, India or Philippines), migration, poverty and social inequality, violence and ethnic, religious or social conflicts.

All those issues are raised in Brillante Mendoza’s ‘Execution of P’. The film was briskly discussed at the festival in Cannes, where it had its world premiere. In the report from the festival Tadeusz Sobolewski expressed his distaste for Mendoza’s ‘nihilist kitsch’. With no doubt it is an unpleasant, tiring film which leaves the spectator with the feeling of disgust and total confusion, but at the same time it’s a total, outstanding work. Mendoza follows the way outlined by the New French Extremists (Gaspar Noé and Philippe Grandrieux above all); he mastered the use of light, darkness, rhythm, sound, affectively influencing the audience.

Mendoza shows the triviality and ordinariness of evil, cruelty and violence with their physiological dirt and odour, at the same time depriving them of the spectacularity and any power to seduce. The spectator- like the hero- is helpless (also intellectually and emotionally) at what he sees; terrified and disgusted. ‘Execution of P’ is a film about a double initiation of a young man into the society. In the first part we have the initiation into the daily ‘order’, into law order when the protagonist becomes a father and husband, a mature member of the society. In the second part, there’s the initiation into ‘the order of the night’, into an obscene social order based on violence, which is the foundation of this law and order.

Although the young policeman is in a dilemma and is tormented by most literal nausea, he isn’t able to oppose what he sees. Although he knows what’s going to happen to the young woman at the end of the night, he can’t intervene, he even lacks the courage to run away so his hands aren’t stained with the joint responsibility for the crime. It seems that it is his role of a husband and father that doesn’t allow him to become a real ethical subject. He realizes that he won’t be able to provide for his wife and their child without the profits from illegal activities. When he has moral doubts, one glance at his wedding ring is enough for him to quash them.

In the world created by Mendoza there’s no universal and significant truth, in the name of which one could oppose organized violence and inequality. You can only fight so that you are not the one who is beaten, but the one who beats. In this sense the film is nihilist, but it shouldn’t be blamed for it. Its nihilism comes from the world it portrays, and once the nihilist truth about the reality comes to light, it is used against itself.

Jakub Majmurek