Donald F No is an interesting political film, based on real events in 80s Chile. A referendum was held, giving citizens the choice between dictator Augusto Pinochet (Yes/Si) or hold democratic elections (No). Each side is given 15 minutes a day to air campaign advertisements. René Saavedra is hired to lead these productions for the No side, but has unconventional ideas. What if they sold democracy like a product on TV? Happiness, music videos, comedy, unrelated images...along with exposure of censorship and war crimes.Its an odd approach, and morally questionable. Even if it works, is it an ethical path to democracy? Is it what the lowest-common-denominator deserves? Its a fascinating analysis on the human psyche. It amazed me that these ridiculous, 80s-cliche videos were actually on TV. Its well-acted, and portrayed the era well. However, I thought they spent too much time on René, especially with his family. I didn't feel anything towards his ex-wife and kid. His actions outside the studio don't particularly contribute to his character. I wish they spent more time on the creation of the ads and the politics. Heck, it could have been cut out, as I think the 2 hour film is kinda slow.I don't love it, I don't hate it, it was alright. If you like the genre, sure. Its a one-and-done for me. I'd have preferred a true documentary.

Gordon-11 This film is about the phenomenal TV campaign that changed history in Chile."No" tells a story where mentality of the masses is changed by a one month TV campaign. From fear and learned helplessness, the jolly campaign awakens the Chileans and rewrites their brainwashed brain. Though the unconventional campaign is met with much scepticism and resistance, Rene's perseverance is paid off. Never has a NO been so satisfactory.One thing that struck me about the film is the use of cheap lens, with much distortion and fringing of light. This may reflect the poor state of affairs in Chile, or to make archive footage blend well with new footage."No" is a fun history lesson on a piece of miraculous history.

Roland E. Zwick In 1988, fifteen years into his reign as President of Chile, General Augusto Pinochet agreed to allow the people of his nation to hold a national referendum, leaving it up to them to determine whether or not they wanted him to remain as their leader for another eight years. On the surface, this might have seemed like a turn toward democracy for a man who came to power as a result of a military coup and who ruled his nation with an iron fist - sending many dissidents to prison and to their deaths - but many who were opposed to him eyed the elections with a great deal of skepticism and distrust, believing that the vote would be rigged and that his preordained victory would only further strengthen his grip on power and, simultaneously, enhance his image in the eyes of the world.But hold the election the nation did, and it is against this backdrop that the movie "No" is set. Gael Garcia Bernal stars as Rene Saavedra, a divorced advertising executive who lives a profitable and comfortable life with his young son, Simon. Hitherto, he has remained largely apolitical in a country where to voice an opinion on the government or its leaders can put one's own life and freedom in jeopardy (his ex is herself a leftist activist who often finds herself abused and imprisoned for her actions). But when the plebiscite is announced, Rene, somewhat hesitantly at first, agrees to work for the No Campaign, bringing his expertise on advertising for the first time into the realm of politics.While most of the people involved in the campaign want to take this opportunity to expose the horrors of the regime through a hard-hitting series of 15-minute ads, Rene argues instead for a more upbeat, feel-good approach on the theory that people are more likely to respond positively to something that makes them feel happy than something that makes them feel outraged or depressed. The result is a series of TV spots so impossibly bland and innocuous - filled with deliriously happy performers dancing and singing a jingle - that they might as well be selling toothpaste. And I guess that's one of the points of "No" - that in a consumer-conscious society even freedom and democracy eventually become commodities like everything else and can be sold as such.Written by Pedro Peirano and directed by Pablo Larrain, "No" is of more interest as a historical and social document than as a drama, since its characters remain largely superficial throughout. And while the narrative earns points for resisting the temptation to overdramatize an already highly volatile situation, the perhaps inevitable price of that restraint is a picture that actually feels UNDER-dramatized at times. However, the bravery of these individuals in the face of some obvious attempts at intimidation does shine through. In order to more seamlessly blend the action of the story with actual archival footage from the era in which it's set, the movie has been given a deliberately grainy, over-lit appearance by cinematographer Sergio Armstrong that helps to heighten its authenticity.Not quite as emotionally powerful as one might wish it to be, "No" is, nevertheless, a true-life tale of a national uprising well worth paying heed to.

veritasartsinc In elections, people seem less moved by the truth than by their desires. A point made very well in Pablo Larrain's excellent drama about the Oct 5 1989 referendum that ended the 15 year reign of military dictator Augusto Pinochet in Chile.Pinochet's government, compelled by international pressure, is forced to hold a referendum or plebiscite, on whether the government should continue. Gael Garcia Bernal plays Rene Saavedra, a cynical ad man who is tapped to head the "NO" campaign, which is allotted 15 minutes of TV time per night, for a month to make their case on why Chileans should vote "NO" to another 8 years of Pinochet. Meanwhile the Pinochet government follows with their 15 minute "SI" campaign, and in reality the control of the rest of the mediaFrom the outset Bernal rocks the boat as he dismisses his group's desire to air their grievances about Pinochet's political kidnapping, torturing, and executions, in favor of the political equivalent of a Mentos commercial. Bernal is not received well by his compatriots, who accuse him of trivializing, but Bernal is convinced that the Chileans don't want to dwell on the negative past, but want a positive vision of a future of liberty and happiness. Yet this vision, comically, is reduced mostly to musical montages of people dancing, singing, mimes, and kids running through fields. Larrain expertly captures the silliness of 8o's style ads. When Bernal seeks a musical theme for the movement, he insists to the songwriter that he's not looking for an anthem, he wants " a jingle".In the meantime, Bernal's boss is working against him in the Pinochet campaign;his estranged wife is in and out of jail as a political activist; and he cares for his young son. Things begin to get dangerous when pro-Pinochet thugs begin to harass and intimidate the NO campaigners.Larrain holds our attention in this taut drama. He enters in and out of what could be cumbersome political dialog deftly. Though surely the whole story of the Pinochet demise is not told here, the particular way in which the ad men help take down a dictator is riveting. Seldom has a birth of a democracy been more inspirationally depicted.Using video cameras made to deliver images that bleed like the early video cameras of the 80's was an unfortunate choice though. In trying to capture the essence of the time, presenting a documentary feel through video, or perhaps the ugliness of the time, Larrain has only succeeding in distracting and making an exceedingly ugly-looking film. Too bad, for so much else here is superlative.Bernal's character is very detached. We never get a real sense of his emotional involvement in the campaign and its significance to him. This seems to be the point. He comes off like the quintessential , detached professional. From the beginning, he seems more like a careerist who is more into the challenge of the "sale" than any ideology. This detachment is frustrating but ultimately fascinating. Can it be that modernism itself, and the professional cultural manipulators were and are more effective than the ideologues?When Bernal turns it around and uses hard news techniques to sell a soap opera, the irony is thick. In selling democracy or anything else, it seems the only thing that matters is what works.