Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Listonixio Fresh and Exciting

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

John Styber This movie takes your heart and soul. This movie freezes your heart and wants you to cry, smile and cry again all at the same time, and above all almost screams at you about the horror of life in Medellin at the time which it presents. This film moved me to the core. Love story which might offend some people is gorgeous and true. An older gay guy falls in love with 18 years old street gay boy who desperately seeks love and security which he did not have all his young life. He can't step away from the habit which became his second nature, killing the guys like himself, young and lonely. In the movie killing becomes almost as understandable as breathing or eating and becomes part of love of the older guy to the beautiful Alexis. To my astonishment, all the killings all of the sudden became acceptable to spectators. I love this movie. I love the story. I love the plot of true feelings of the older guy toward his young lover and vice versa. Human spirit which emanates from this film is mesmerizing and almost blinding and the love is heartbreaking and beautiful.

tedg In a way, I've been looking for a better "Breathless," for years. The original, the template, struck me as more of an essay on the emptiness of French film than anything else. It did create a narrative tone, but that tone required the absence of narrative structure. The story was that there was no story. It seemed possible for there to be something a bit more complex than a selfaware void and reference to American gangster films.We have that here. Its the same form: life has somehow locally had the plug pulled on purpose. A writer appears back home after a successful life at creating narrative and now discovers its all used up. He is prepared to die. The movie consists of several adventures with death, several dream-hallucinations that present a narrative of death (with a character that appears in "real" life and announces death), and a number of encounters with story in music and religion. Any of the encounters with death might be successful and the rest of the movie that during-death vision. Or any of it could be the author's writing of what happened before prompted by what happened before. Or it could all be post-death, which is to say post- writing. It still is all suspense and on the surface no movement, but the viewer moves as the narrative possibilities increase.Oh. He's gay and there's some folding of his character with a dead woman saint contained in the crypt of a certain church. So the "lady" is himself. In this world of coke, murder and perversion, no one smokes.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

Carlos Martinez Escalona There are lots of comments on this film. A feature film from Colombia! Well, that's not exactly true, because this film was made with french money and producers.Fernando Vallejo is, by far, considered the best living writer in Spanish. Wow! Will this dismiss the idea that Garcia Marquez is the best writer in the world. Well, no, and yes. Fernando Vallejo is one of the most straight forward writers in any language. He uses prose as poetry and vice versa. His narrative is full of ludicrous contradictions devised by his own experience and his point of view of life and religion.He may be one of the most explosive writers ever, because of two facts: he can't see the grays in between. His life is as black and white as possible. So, his position is always one of extremes.The script was completely written by him, not only based on his novel. It is as faithful as possible to it with the exception that his kids kill more than one hundred people! He's directed some other films while living in Mexico, to depict the Colombian tragedy. These films were banned in Colombia.I recommend to all the viewers of this film not to regard it as a Shroeder film, but as a Vallejo film. Shroeder shot the whole thing with Vallejo behind his shoulder. Even the actor they cast is Vallejo himself, except for some very subtle features.If you could read his work, maybe you'll find out many explanations to his anguish and horror -and love, that seem to be exactly on the same plane.

desperateliving This is one of those movies that you're wary about, because the criticisms are so obvious. Yet I think this is something close to a minor masterpiece. This is quite rich material -- very literary, in a way -- and the invoking of Catholicism (and, for me, Genet) through the title is apt, for the way it delves into accepted perversions. At first I was wondering what the much-discussed shocking aspect of the film was, thinking perhaps it was the (would-be) sensuousness of this Latin boy-lover (the shared drink is not something you'd get in common fare), but it seems like it's more the violence that people react (or object) to. While it didn't upset me, I think the violence is interesting in two ways: one, the digital video makes the dispassionate killings have little impact, because it makes the film seem somewhat amateurish (with aid of the acting), like a genre film made on a shoestring budget; and two, the film as a whole is anti-dramatic -- for instance, when the revelation occurs, in a dramatized film it would be devastating: the truth of your lover revealed, and the swirl of emotions it creates; here, nothing -- so there is no cathartic violence (as in "The Godfather," for example), and it isn't lush. But it isn't brutal, either -- you don't get your nose rubbed in it, and I cherished that generosity to the audience.The digital also helps keep the film grounded -- the only really attention-grabbing aspects of the film, as cinema, are the opening and closing framing of very beautiful music, and one nice over-the-wall camera move. It's like a cleverer "Man Bites Dog," in the sense that this *doesn't* draw attention to itself, that there is no winking or overt displays of cleverness. The film as a whole is subtle (at one point it feels like magic realism, even though we are told, I guess, that it's not), even though individual scenes are not (that the euthanizing of the dog is the only killing that has feeling is very heavy-handed). It's also incredibly easy to watch, and I think that must be due in part because the digital -- clear, crisp, and clean, with a smooth lucidity -- helps you seep into the film quicker, without any fuss. Indeed, without any film atmosphere at all. 9/10