Reseñas de usuarios

It is very much worth watching this early film of Almodovar from 1986, with a painfully young Antonio Banderas also at one of his first major screen presences. As many of his latest great movies it's a film hard to put in a precise square, a combination of comedy and tragedy, of crime, love and corrida movie with a touch of absurd and a touch of passion taken directly from life.

Although many of the major themes of passion, sexual desire and ambiguity, relation between love and death are already present the movie is somehow simpler in action and easier to watch than some of the later films. The story of two sexual predators and murderers, united in life by the passion for bull fights and in death by their passion for each other is acted with accuracy by a good team of actors and directed with an already recognizable style by Almodovar. The hand of the young master is certainly already there, and the film ages well 20 years after is premiere.

Matador is an early Almodovar work that explores the relationship between sex and violence through the medium of bullfighting. It follows a love quadrangle between a retired matador, his repressed student, the matador's lover, and the student's lawyer, as a series of murders takes place in Madrid. Dark comedy ensues in the midst of murder investigations and extremely loud eighties fashions.

The performances make this decidedly odd film work. Assumpta Serna is great as the lawyer, while Antonio Banderas makes an early appearance as her client. Carmen Maura also has a small role, even though her character is somewhat lacking in development. The characters remain convincing even as the plot spins into the out right bizarre.

Some viewers might complain that the film's explicit sex and violence make it little different from an exploitation film, and indeed it opens with a character masturbating to a slasher movie. Furthermore, its commentary on sex and violence at times seems pretentious. However, the film is far more creative and well made than any exploitation film, and is well worth your time.

Essentially seen by many as a warped sex fantasy that uses the codes and conventions of the detective thriller to disguise a darker, more psychological film about the wayward perversions and sinister desires of a seemingly affluent area of contemporary Madrid; Matador (1986) can also be seen as a not-so-subtle comment on the nature of modern-day relationships, aspirations and obsessions in a meta-textual form that makes continual use of its titular, bullfighting motif. Although it does have some slight thematic problems, particularly in terms of the overall tone of the film and eventual motivation of the characters, it is, nonetheless, one of Almodóvar's most interesting and perplexing films of this particular period; featuring a refinement of many of his earliest interests and characteristics from films like Dark Habits (1983) and What Have I Done to Deserve This? (1984), as well as being the film that signalled the move into the second phase of his career.

As the implications of the title would suggest, the film's narrative is bolstered by numerous references, both spoken and visual, to the obvious role-play and iconography of the bullfight. It is also a film about violence, and the sexuality of violence; an uncomfortable idea that is reinforced by the film's provocative opening sequence, in which we find the central matador of the title, Diego Montes, masturbating to violent scenes of exploitation cinema. The scene establishes the nature of the matador, both as a character and as a social phenomenon, as well as introducing the link between sex and death that will come to form an important thematic strand to the narrative. As the story progresses, the mechanisms of the drama conspire to throw together two separate characters that come to complement the unspoken desires and murderous lust that they seemingly share with one another, with the eventual courtship and inevitable seduction presented by the director as a surrogate bullfight in its self.

Where the film falls apart slightly is in the presentation of the character played by Antonio Banderas, a hyper-sensitive, implied homosexual who idolises the matador to the extent that he actually attempts to rape his young, fashion-model girlfriend (an act that eventually leads him to confess to a string of serial killings as a result of his mother's enforced, catholic guilt). It is a complex character, impeccably performed by the young Banderas, but his appearance ultimately sends the film off on a tangent that detracts from the central crux of the drama. Though the inclusion of this subplot does allow Almodóvar the chance to make a satirical comment on the nature of everything from fashion, to religion, sexuality, etc, these themes often feel like they've been handpicked from a completely different film, not always complimenting the central story, and too often leading it in directions that in the end feel unfinished or slightly unformed. Many of these loose ends can be glossed over, while some (the last minute implication of "second sight" as suggested by a solar eclipse) really seem to come out of leftfield.

Nevertheless, these are minor criticisms that don't necessarily destroy the ultimate intentions of the film - which really only become clear in the final scene - or the fantastic direction of Almodóvar and the performances of his cast. Although Matador certainly has its flaws (not to mention its detractors), it is, in my opinion, a fine little film and one of Almodóvar's most original and audacious creations. The performances are all incredibly committed, including the central pairing of Assumpta Serna and the late Nacho Martínez, as well the fine support from Banderas, the gorgeous Eva Cobo and Almodóvar regulars Carman Maura and Eusebio Poncela; whilst the central idea behind the script and the bold stokes of the director's intuitive grasp of the various film-making processes further refines and develops a number of themes that have come to be at the forefront of Almodóvar's career for the last twenty-five years.

I am not sure what to expect when the opening scene is a man masturbating to torture porn, a term that was probably not even invented in 1988.

From there we go to alternating clips of Antonio Banderas asking the ex-bullfighter Nacho Martínez about women and he compares getting a woman to bullfighting, while we watch someone do exactly that. We are no, of course, prepared for the necrophilia twist in that encounter.

We find our boy, Antonio, and he is a boy in this film, in a strict Catholic household. I would have to guess that his mother was Opus Dei. He attempts to rape his neighbor and confesses to four murders which we know he did not do. This is just Almodóvar's take on religion and repression. He revisits that subjects again in the film, so it must me a theme for him.

But, then the story shifts to Nacho and Assumpta Serna, with Eva Cobo in a minor role. This is where the story gets interesting with the police trying to solve the four murders and the real murderers trying to lay it on Antonio.

It gets bizarre at the end with Antonio seeing the killers in his mind and leading the police to them. But, they arrive too late as the climax of sex and death occurs simultaneous with an eclipse. How weird is that?

The connection between sex and death is not a novel one. Elizabethan poetry would occasionally use the latter as a metaphor for the former. Pedro Almodóvar's sixth feature is about three people who have erased the line between the two: Nacho Martinez, a matador gored in the ring, who now teaches students on the art; Antonio Banderas, one of his pupils; and Assumpta Serna, a lawyer defending Banderas who is charged with raping and killing two girls.

In other words, it's one of Almodóvar's movies about the weird kinks of the world. This time, however, he is not concerned with the people at the edge of Spanish society, but at the center of the normal world... assuming there is such a thing. We are all weird, we all act outside the norms, and the people we respect can be the most bizarre.

It's rather slow-moving for one of his movies, probably because this is not one of his shock comedies - although there are comic elements. Visually, it is sumptuous, with a focus on colors, particularly bright reds that draw one's eyes. Miss Serna is a sharp dresser, and she wears a cape in several scenes, which she whirls like a bullfighter going in for the kill.

Is Almodóvar decrying bullfighting? Or in favor of consensual activity of whatever sort? Has he simply presented his bizarre story, and left his audience to draw the moral conclusions it chooses? Or is this simply the sort of story he likes to tell? I think the last is true, but there's nothing simple about it.

Diego Montez is a former bullfighter obsessed with videos of violence. Ángel (Antonio Banderas) is one of his students and vows to prove that he's no fag. He tries to rape his neighbor and Diego's girlfriend Eva Soler. With his religious mother's prodding, Ángel confesses the rape to the priest and then to the police. Eva refuses to press charges and then Ángel confesses to murders. He leads the police to the bodies buried near Diego's home. They don't believe him with his fear of blood and an apparent alibi for one of the murders. María Cardenal takes the case as his defense attorney although she is the one who is seen doing one of the killings earlier in the movie. It's a tale of perverse sexual obsessions and murders.

The story telling can be confusing with this Pedro Almodóvar film from his earlier days. It's a young fresh-faced Antonio Banderas and he's quite magnetic. It would have been great to have Banderas as the only main lead and dive into his confused maddening mind. Almodóvar is doing some sexually twisted things. It's pushing the edges of the envelop. It simply needs to be clearer and the more Banderas the better.

Matador is one of the strangest, darkest, (and yet compelling) early films from Spanish master filmmaker Pedro Amoldovar.

It is completely nuts.

Pour in equal measures of sadism, masochism, bullfighting, perverted sexuality, and sexual violence. Add in a splash of comedy and soupcon of star-crossed lovers (if, for a moment, you thought pairing Tybalt and Lady McBeth qualified as star-crossed) and you have what passes as characterisation. Mix dark nights with gaudy flamenco colours and you have some striking cinematography. I'll come to the plot in a minute…

Amoldovar was clearly enjoying Spanish cinema's new-found, post-Franco sexual and artistic liberalism. The prudish among his audience might suggest he was positively wallowing in it. Whatever the truth, Matador is a masterpiece of his style, if not, indeed, a whole style in of itself.

The plot – or possibly a better description, the tapestry over which the characters move – is a murder hunt. Very few prizes will be won, however, for guessing the culprit/s. Two people are quickly in the audience's frame because they are shown… er… murdering people on camera. A third person (Banderas, in to my mind his best Amoldovar role) confesses to the murders in a fit of insecurity and remorse over an attempted rape ("some girls get all the luck" comments a female duty officer dryly, proving that feminism wasn't that big in Spain back in the 1980s). Nevertheless, the net soon closes on the crushingly obvious culprits (who in the meantime have developed quite a crush on each other). As previously mentioned, completely nuts.

Matador's strengths are in its characterisation and its sheer bare-facedness. Amoldovar has, as usual, assembled a character list of freaks and proceeded to humanise all of them – to the point where there is a genuine whiff of tragedy in the final act. To mention the great performances is really to rehearse the cast list. Assumpta Serna, Nacho Martinez, Antonio Banderas and Eva Cobo are all excellent. And it really is worth seeing, just for the young Antonio.

There are some interesting points made in the film about outsiders, liberalism, sexual politics and gender politics (as always with Amoldovar). I'll let you pick through them. It is, though, not so much a film as a giant red rag to the raging bull of conservatism, deftly whisked aside to the ragged applause of an admiring, if somewhat perplexed, audience. A positive Jimi Hendrix of a film, unpolished, with some definite dud notes, but undeniably the work of a genius. 8½/ 10

I saw this film a couple of weeks ago, I rented it because I like Almodóvar's films very much, but this film is very strange,and it's difficult to understand it perfectly. A. Banderas plays a guy who has some problems, we don't know if he's gay or not, but it seems like he is very much in love with his bullfighter teacher.

The bullfighter teacher is phsyco who kills womens while they're making love and Banderas tell the police that he comitted those crimes. And then Banderas' lawyer is a very sensual woman who kills men while they are making love and she is in love with banderas' teacher!! FREAKY!!! It's very strange, but you know , it's an Almodovar film. we can expect everything....see it...and make your conclusion.

Every Artist has a reoccurring theme, that he successfully or unsuccessfully explores and tries to capture through out his life time, and that eventually becomes his, what we might call - style. With Ingmar Bergman it's the detachment from life and confronting death, with Woody Allen, the comical absurdity of man-woman relationship, with Filliny it's the nostalgia for the lost, often irreplaceable innocence of childhood. In case of Pedro Almodovar though, to put it lightly, it's unorthodox, sex crazed love stories. (love that guy!)

I had watched three films by him (Bad Education, Law Of Desire, Talk To Her), and all of them were rather twisted, but this one is defiantly the weirdest love fable I had ever seen or read … even by his standards.

The story begins with a young man, (played by heavenly-gorgeous, 18 year old Antonio Banderas) who is studying to be a matador, under a world famous, but retired, due to an injury, Maestro. One night after being suspected of being a homosexual, he decides to prove his masculinity and toughness by attempting to rape Maestro's girlfriend. But being in reality a very innocent and tender soul, he literally faints before anything happens, when she accidentally cuts her finger.

The girls reports him, and while being questioned, the cops hang on him three more murders. Apparently there have been bodies popping up through out the city, with all the victims assaulted in the same strange manner - at the height of their sexual arousal, they are stabbed in the back of their necks, with a hair pin, with the same technique a toreador brings a bull down.

And now, brought together by serendipity, the female lawyer, who had come to defend Antonio, and is investigating the case, is beginning to have a sort of an "affair" with the Maestro. Both of them being obsessed with sex, violence and mostly important death, which they find the most arousing thing in the world. Imagine Romeo and Juliet, only where they both not only desire each other sexually, but also long for each other's death.

I had personally often wondered, why the element of violence is so often present in sex. Even when one makes love, no matter how gentle, there will be some hair pulling, slight choking or biting. To experience pain and dominance, seems to be counterintuitive to receiving pleasure, yet something in our wiring arouses us by that. With books like "Fifty Shades Of Grey' bondage and sadomasochism had become house hold names, and practices. But what I can't wrap my brain around is why do these seemingly, logically unpleasant activities arouse us?

The theme in this film, of the desire to kill the one you love, and to define death and brutal violence as sexy, that is bound to make an indelible imprint on your soul and to stay with you for the rest of your life.

I was just wondering why Almodovar's name doesn't appear in any credits in the movie. He is seen midway through the movie in a role as a fashion designer, he is even interviewed by a reporter in which he gives his view that Spain is divided in two, the intolerant and the envious. He then goes on to say how he is part of both of these. It just doesn't make sense to me the reason why in so many of his films he is seen (although sometimes very briefly), yet he is never referred to. If someone could enlighten me???

Matador is one of favourite Almodovar movies. I found that I could really relate to Banderas' character - My vote 7.5

Of the dozen-or-so Almodovar films I've seen, Matador is the least satisfying and most disturbing. "Disturbing," not as in provocative, but in revealing the director's infantile obsession with Eros and Thanatos--eroticism and death. It's treated merely as something to drag the viewer through, like Mike Leigh or Peter Greenaway would do...or Leos Carax at his most insouciant. Gratuitousness masquerading as something substantive. Stay away, unless you want to ponder the alchemical potentiality of mixing blood and semen. Ugh! Now, that is not to say that there aren't some good performances. But, I'll take Bunuel or Emil Jannings honestly examining how the 'release' and 'rupture in consciousness' in sexual arousal/fulfillment and violent passion are similar and how the confuse us--and the camera. Try Antonioni's "Desert Rose" or Val Lewton.

This 5th feature of Almodovar is one of his best (along with Labyrinth of passion & Kika) as far as I am concerned, and if not his best then for sure his most provocative flms. As usual, Almodovar explores some of the darkest sides of human sexuality, and deals with perversity as dealing with any every-day life subject.

For once more, the notorious film-maker, at great shape, entertains with his trademark raving, hilarious, politically incorrect dialogs, pace and style and while dealing with dark (necrophilia) or serious (religious oppression) subject matters, it manages to be very funny and entertaining. What's great with Almodovar is that you simply CANNOT label his films. Is it comedy? nope. Is a thriller? nope. Is it a crime film? nope. This is Almodovar, so all pretenders go see another million dollar US product . But to all the admirers of unique and original films, this is definitely recommended, if you can tolerate with some weird humour, a bit sexy visuals and nudity and some violence. Matador is ART!

An ex-bullfighter who gets turned on by killing, a lady lawyer with the same fetish and a young man driven insane by his religious upbringing - these are the main characters in this stylish black comedy about dark sides of human nature.

This film is just full of interesting scenes and scenarios: a man excited by Italian horror films, a rapist who turns himself in even though the victim does not care... and the unorthodox attorney who is the bridge between them both. This is definitely "black comedy" that is so very European -- where else can you actually make jokes about "three or four" rape attempts? It shouldn't be humorous, but somehow it happens here.

According to IMDb, someone thinks this film influenced "Nekromantik". I understand why they would think that, but has this been confirmed? I have a hard time believing that this film -- which is boundary-pushing but still artistic -- was a big influence on a movie about a guy who physically loves corpses. But what do I know?

A movie from Pedro Almodóvar is (almost) always entertaining and this one was also, certainly for the first part. The ending was a bit far fetched and disappointing but overal it's worth a watch. It was nice to see a very young Antonio Banderas. The acting was good and that from the entire cast. Personally I preferred Relatos Salvajes, Hablo Con Ella and Volver from Pedro Almodóvar. Matador I would rate the same as Todo Sobre Mi Madre. But again, a movie from Pedro Almodóvar never fails to entertain so just give this early one a shot if you didn't watch it yet.

One of the first Pedro Almóvar films that won Award for best director and best actress: Julieta Serrano in the 1987 Fantasporto, the film focuses on the former bullfighter Diego Montes, who teaches young hopefuls the art of bullfighting and above all the supreme luck: that of killing. Thus, death is Montes' obsession and in his retreat, the girls replace the bulls. It starts with Angel (Antonio Banderas) a shy, confused young man who has to find his way between his stiff-upper-lip mother (Julieta Serrano) , who is a member of Opus Dei, and the bullfighting lessons of the sinister Diego Montes (Nacho Martinez) , who has had to retire because of an injury. One evening Angel, tormented by the need to prove his manhood, tries to rape the pretty neighbor Eva (Eva Cobo), at the same time Diego Montes' girlfriend, in the open street. However, and he faints when he sees the scratch the young woman has sustained in her fall. The next day he reports himself to the police.

After a period of learning that extends during the first half of the Eighties, the screenwriter and director Almodóvar makes one of his first well-known melodramas based on a sufficiently elaborate script, written in collaboration for the first time in his career with the novelist Jesús Ferrero. After a brilliant beginning and some attractive scenes, as is usual in Pedro, there comes a moment when the film becomes overly complicated and trivialized to become too cumbersome, even despite its attractiveness . The script is uneven with a confusing and muddy plot in which a helpless young apprentice in bullfighting: Antonio Banderas is responsible for a crime and in which a series of peculiar characters are involved, highlighting the model: Eva Cobo, a police commissioner: Eusebio Poncela, Julieta Serrano as tyrannical mother, a psychologist: Carmen Maura, a lawyer: Assumpta Serna and a retired bullfighter: Nacho Martinez . The existing tensions during filming and especially in post-production between producer Andrés Vicente Gómez and the director, make Pedro Almodóvar make the wise decision to create with his brother Agustin the production company ¨EL Deseo S. A.¨ to become his own producer and start a dazzling international career.

This Almodovar's fifth film portraying a criminal intrigue, his previous pictures were Pepi, Luci, Bom y otras chicas del montón (1980), Laberinto de pasiones (1982), Entre tinieblas (1983), ¡Qué he hecho yo para merecer esto! (1984), mostly in low budgets, and containing many imperfections so its style and particularities were gradually developed and perfected. Subsequently his style to be compellingly purified. Developing his own trademaks , as he often uses symbolism and metaphorical techniques to portray circular story lines . In in his later films Almodóvar directs throughout with splendid zip and he usually portrays strong female characters and transsexuals . In 1987, he and his brother Agustín Almodóvar established their own production company: El Deseo, S. A. The "Almodóvar phenomenon" has reached all over the world, making his films very popular in many countries. Pedro subsequently made successes such as Labyrinth of passions , Law of desire , Women Women on the verge of a nervous breakdown , Bad education , All about my mother , Talk to her , Broken embraces , The Skin I Live In and many others . Rating Matador (1986) : 6/10 . The film will appeal to Pedro Almódovar enthusiasts.

Matador 1986 This late 80s film is the one which gave Almovodar wide exposure in the USA. The young Antonio Banderas plays a rather a deviant person with violent anti-social behavior issues rather than his usual stud role. As the title implies this is a blood red expose/drama/murder mystery concerning bullfighters & sex in the bedroom. A young ex-bullfighter who is getting turned on by killing & a lady lawyer with same problem then the 3rd character a young man driven insane by over-religious upbringing. These are the main characters in this stylish black comedy about dark sides of human nature. Almvodar is a really romantic & like emotional movies with complex plots. He knows movies are never more sensual or alive than when they venture into the forbidden territory & defy limits of plot set by most other films & screenwriters. The opening is shocking: A man sits in front of his TV masturbating to a montage of repulsive slasher-movie images playing on his VCR. Matador makes a zingy connection between the repressed passion of Catholicism (with its images of ecstatic suffering) & the obsessions of its lovers. Angel's mother, a member of the fanatical right-wing religious group Opus Dei. Matador isn't as complex as Law of Desire, & the characters aren't so much real figures as embodiments of psychological drives & impulses (almost to the point of absurdity). They represent places in the Almodovar's dream world. Still, the director & his screen-writing partner, Jesus Ferrero, paint them with great conviction The male leads of Matador (1986) & Law of Desire (1987) essentially switch places. Nacho Martinez, who plays the title character of Matador, takes the supporting role of Dr. Martin in Law of Desire. & Eusebio Poncela, who has the supporting role of police inspector in Matador, has the lead role of the film director in Law of Desire. Matador becomes in every way Surrealist Sex Comedy. The film gives huge amounts of spirited affronts to convention. 5 stars

The story and it's characters are alive, it cannot be otherwise. The authenticity of each portrait is staggering.

You watch this not as a movie but as a documentary : that's how real and good everyone is in this movie. They all exist in some parallel universe.

I come back to it every 3-4 years and re watch and it never fails to impress me with its comedy, wit and soul and realism of the performance.

Almodovar will make you fall in love with people and their flaws and magic.

One of his early masterpieces and one of my favorite movies.

This is a typical Almodóvar movie from the eighties, as usual a dark comedy filled with extreme characters and absurd situations, but at the same time with a very serious undertow, concerning the traumatic influence of the orthodox catholic church and of a (led by that church) dominating mother on a susceptible youth, and of the resemblance between sexual lust and death. Writing it down like this makes them sound like heavy themes, and they are of course, but Almodóvar skilfully mingles them with the comedy-aspects and thus makes his point even more poignantly.

As ever he is greatly helped by some impressive actresses, in this case Eva Cobo and Assumpta Serbo as the prominent leading ladies. But also a young (and cute as a puppy) Antonio Banderas has an important part and is very convincing as the oppressed and confused youth who brings himself into trouble by confessing murders that he didn't do.

I liked it very much, it is entertaining in its hilarious moments, it's as involving as any other thriller in its chase for the real killer(s) and in the end it leaves you with some serious themes to ponder about, not such a bad score for one movie.

After fifteen minutes or so, I thought that this would be the best Almodóvar film that I had ever seen. Inexplicably, the movie simply falls apart after the terrific opening, and I was left stone-faced until things improved considerably at the end. After setting things up so beautifully at the start, it was very disappointing to see things bog down so quickly. The cast was good, the director is certainly good, and even the basic plot was good. But somehow, once a good plot was in place, the writers forgot to build an interesting story around it, and so the film fell flat.

If you're a fan of Pedro Almodovar, you'll love this one from 1986.. filmed in Madrid, it has all the usual elements: offbeat characters who meet up and get even crazier, like atoms smashing together. when a young matador Angel (Antonio Banderas at 26) thinks his heroes have committed crimes, he confesses to them to take the fall. watch that opening scene.. .pretty rough stuff: (simulated) sex, nudity, and murder, all in one. his lawyer has her own kinky issues, and wants to defend Angel. Look for the usual Almodovar cast, with Carmen Maura and Chus Lampreave. Assumpta Serna is the sexy, flirty, over-sexed Maria. and the gory bullfights, which play a big part in the story. Secrets. everyone has their secret. which ones will come out? Liaisons... more secrets. will the police find the real killer(s)? it's very good. intrigue.

This is an excellent film, and adds to the great collection that Almadovar has created. If you aren't disturbed by gratuitous sex and violence, then you should definitely give this a try. The characters introduced mimic the screenplay and directing perfectly. One of the most creative plot lines ever; includes a matador with some sort of death fetish, a necrophiliac, a matador in training who faints at the sight of blood, and many more great characters which lead to sickly hilarious scenes. The camera work is also mind blowing. The different levels Almadovar reaches with the cinematography will make this a movie to remember. But be warned. If you are disturbed by a Clockwork Orange Don't rent this one.