ViewGuide

Created Mar 06, 2011 02:36PM PST • Edited Mar 06, 2011 02:36PM PST

1. Quality

2. Summary

   Barely OK 2.0

   A weird experiment in minimalist storytelling, this provocative drama is about a middle aged chauffeur (Marcos) who tells the young, wealthy teenage girl he drives around (Ana) about a kidnapping that he and his wife have done that has now gone wrong. Nominated for an award at the Cannes Film Festival, I had high hopes for this piece, only to be left scratching my head and asking “What was THAT?!”.

   Director Carlos Reygadas tells the story at a snails pace, using a complete range of metaphorical imagery to supplement any type of pacing. The characters are, for the most part, intentionally completely devoid of emotion. There is rampant sex in the movie, as Ana enjoys working at a local brothel, just for the fun of it. Scenes include full frontal nudity for most of the major characters, closeups of genitalia, and explicit fellatio scenes. Reygadas portrays all of these scenes as completely devoid of any emotion., choosing to show them instead as merely an act, and not a pleasure. In fact, the only emotional response we see from Marcos is right before the final credits, when he cracks the faintest of smiles.

   I think I understand what Reygadas was trying to do, but it just didn’t work for me. Instead, the sex scenes which were obviously designed to provoke a polarizing response form the tedious pace of the story, really end up diasppointing in the end.

   The movie has striking imagery, and that imagery is used to enhance the story, but in the end feels more like hamburger helper, further bogging down the pacing.

   Now, I realize our European friends live in societies where sexuality is much less taboo than it is where I live. And I certainly can understand why the director chose to utilize images as he did. The problem lies in the fact that the story still never fully seems to be understood or developed, and it becomes surrealistic as it progresses.

   It would not be a film that I could recommend on a consistent basis, and in fact, I would urge those who object to blatant sexuality to abstain from this film.

4. Acting

   Barely OK 2.0

   I have to give some props to all of the leading actors and actresses, who each had full frontal nudity. Even when we really didn’t need to see a fat middle-aged man (like myself) naked on the screen, nor his “voluptuous” wife.

   Otherwise, its hard to give credence to a performance that was intentionally devoid of any type of emotional display.

5. Male Stars Barely OK 2.0

6. Female Stars Barely OK 2.0

7. Female Costars Barely OK 2.0

8. Male Costars Barely OK 2.0

10. Film

    Pretty Bad 1.5

    Nice imagery didn’t carry the story well enough for me, and as a result, the film suffered.

11. Direction Barely OK 2.0

12. Play Pretty Bad 1.5

13. Music Bad 1.0

    Really non-existent except for a military band (Which was bad in its own right).

14. Visuals Barely OK 2.0

    Again, some interesting scenery shots,but the didn’t carry the movie.

15. Content

16. Edge

    Sordid 2.8

17. Sex Explicit 5.0

    It’s hard to see how a closeup of a woman’s genitalia can really not be considered pornographic in this case.

18. Violence Fierce 1.7

19. Rudeness Salty 1.7

21. Reality

    Glib 1.2

22. Circumstantial Natural 1.0

23. Biological Natural 1.0

24. Physical Glib 1.5