Being Impossible

Ariel (Lucía Bedoya) is a 20-year-old woman who works as a seamstress in a clothing factory, though feels like she does not fit in. She has sex with her boyfriend, Carlos (Santiago Osuna), for the first time, but only feels intense pain. She mentions this to her mother, Dolores (María Elena Duque), who is ill with cancer. Though she encourages Ariel to keep trying so she can fulfil the role of a woman in their patriarchal society, she does mention that Ariel can visit her childhood doctor, Clemencia (Adyane Gonzalez). At work, Ariel feels more isolated as the other women, even her closest friend (Virginia Urdaneta), show their true colors and try to pry into everybody else's business. Ariel visits Clemencia several times, first being diagnosed with vaginal stenosis and prescribed medical dildos. Through visits with her mother and Clemencia, Ariel becomes more suspicious about what she is not being told, and finds herself in stress just as a new woman, Ana (Belkis Alvillares), joins the factory; Ariel is intrigued by Ana.

With Ariel's pain worsening, Clemencia reveals to Ariel that she was born intersex and was submitted to a series of surgeries as a child to conform to a female body, which upsets her. She begins a clandestine relationship with Ana at the factory, though frequently tries to deny her feelings. Her nosy friend soon finds out and Ariel becomes the subject of homophobia, further conflicting her feelings about her gender identity and sexuality. The friend starts a fight with them at the factory that results in Ariel being fired.[1][2] The narrative is intercut with testimonials from intersex people.

In terms of intersex and film studies, Raphaël Jullien compared Being Impossible to the Argentinian film XXY, also about an intersex youth, saying that XXY's power lies in the suspense of not knowing Alex's troubles, whereas Being Impossible "annihilates any suspense" by placing testimonies from people of non-conforming gender identity at the start of the film.[21] Jullien added that, since the scene where Ariel meets this group is so powerful and moving, the cold open would have been better used as an epilogue.[21] Carlos Loureda also commented on the testimonies, but instead suggests that they merely do not add anything to the film, saying they are "undoubtedly interesting" but that the fictional narrative is strong enough to convey the truth without them.[22] Writers for the Gaze film festival looked at the film both in terms of and beyond the intersex experience, calling it a "thought-provoking inquiry into the nature of how we as human beings allow our physical beings to determine our mental and spiritual identities",[23] while Vivian Belloto described a moment when Ariel destroys a medical dildo she has been prescribed treatment with as showing "the non-acceptance of the culture of penetration and false normalization of bodies".[6]

Belloto's analysis focuses on the presentation of bodies in the film. She discussed its juxtaposition of mannequin forms with the bodies of the main characters, noting how Ortega "constantly uses mannequins as a symbolic form of body standardization", and also talks about the cinematography, mentioning shots blurring characters or showing them through mirrors, which she describes as "a call for self-awareness" and says is used "to emphasize the particularities of each body present".[6] At the start of the film, images of bodies are relegated to the edges of the screen to deliberately obscure expectations of narrative, which Belloto says also alerts the audience to ignorance of one's body.[6] The character Ariel also works at a clothing factory, showing her confinement within a place full of things used to define and conceal bodies; it is also a social space entirely full of women. In the factory, Belloto writes that the choice of shot focusing on the eyes when Ariel and a new worker steal glances at each other shows the construct barring homosexuality in society and specifically in a single-sex space; looking at the eyes, especially when the film has otherwise shown bodies, represents the restriction to looking and not touching, as well as cropping only to the eyes also allowing another shot, of the eyes of a different employee who sees the glances, to be seamlessly shown though alternatively being a glace that is judgmental of homosexuality.[6]

Beatrice Loayza writes about the aesthetics of the film. She noted the award-winning music, describing how the "droning background score [...] overwhelms the senses even in moments of quiet reflection", and so how, beyond image and story, the music of the film also contributes to its theme of a lack of control.[24] She then discusses how the color palette used the film is of natural, muted, tones, being used as an aid to highlight the impoverished area of Venezuela where it is set without outright addressing the nation's crisis, as well as making spots of color, often red, more meaningful, such as the blood shed by Ariel after her first experience of sex or bright red lipstick on mirrors used to write homophobic messages.[24] The cinematic style is discussed by Pablo Gamba, who wrote that it fit the Gothic style that Ortega is known for; unlike her other films, which Gamba said often show Maracaibo in ruins, Being Impossible explores the Gothic by successfully creating the idea of "the monster" and its ever-changing nature.[25] Michele Faggi also commented on the cinematic style, but instead notes the recurring use of reflections. Faggi writes that "Ortega fragments the vision from the beginning" and forces a questioning of Ariel's true identity by her "insistent" use of reflections and mirrors to look at Ariel, as well as editing techniques that allow for various interpretations in terms of Gaze – of these, Faggi particularly notes the use of "the LCD screen of a turned-on video camera" for framing the real testimonies of intersex people, a self-reflective acknowledgement of always being viewed.[2] Paolo Kagaoan also noted the mirror shots, but wrote that they were "cliche [and only] palatable because of Bedoya's performance".[26]

Loayza commented on the social context of the film's production as a product of a Venezuela that is ignoring gay rights laws, and how important it therefore is that it did not end tragically (as could be expected normally), which is especially poignant in a film set in a place where LGBT+ people are not talked about.[27] Jullien further opined that the film shows a critique of life in contemporary Venezuela, noting the traditional gender roles and binary enforced by characters.[21]

Lucía Bedoya as Ariel; she was praised for her performance.

Critics were divided on the film, but generally positive. Beatrice Loayza said that it has "an empowering and incredibly progressive conclusion".[27] However, Raquel Stecher believes that it is "a heavy-handed story" and that audiences "will be overwhelmed by the subject matter";[27] Pablo Gamba similarly said that the film is "clearly 'NGO cinema'", but thought that its focus was clear.[25] Scott Braid highly praised many aspects of the film, including the story it tells and the "incredible performance of smouldering intensity" that Bedoya gives, as well as its cinematography and direction.[28] Kagaoan also complimented Bedoya's performance, but overall found the film to be too ambitious, writing that it falls short in some of the areas it chooses to focus on, particularly its character relationships.[26]

A missing connection to its characters was also noted by Chris dos Santos, who said that the film is "raw and confronting [with] very graphic sex scenes [that] lack emotional resonance".[29] He found that "while Ariel's discovery is highly emotional and life-changing, you never feel that connected to her story [and] where the film thrives is in the support group scenes"; he notes that though the film is not that strong in its narrative, it "should be celebrated" for covering discussions of intersex discrimination.[29] The Galway Film Fleadh also complimented that "there isn't a lot of intersex representation on film and Patricia Ortega delivers a worthy film for the canon".[30]

Raphaël Jullien wrote about how meticulous Ortega's articulation of shots and use of symbolism are, despite some shortcomings in composition; he concluded that though they set off on the wrong foot, it is "a very beautiful film on gender identity" and is pleased with its optimistic ending.[21] Carlos Loureda praised the film and Bedoya strongly, calling it "one of the most beautiful films of the year" and Bedoya "an actress who overflows the big screen".[22]

The film has won several Audience Awards at festivals, which Ortega says she appreciates because it shows that the "difficult" subject is accepted much more easily in other parts of the world to Venezuela.[7]

• XXY – Argentinian film about intersex youth
• Both – Peruvian film about intersex issues
• Films about intersex
• List of submissions to the 92nd Academy Awards for Best International Feature Film
• List of Venezuelan submissions for the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film

• Being Impossible at IMDb