Los delincuentes

Filmmaker Rodrigo Moreno creates a three-hour long heist drama with some interesting dynamics and concepts explored within the setting of the narrative and while Moreno does provide some strong elements, it isn't strong enough to withhold the entire movie.

Throughout, the camerawork, production and the sound design is pretty good as it helps capture the environment and tone. Many of the performances from the cast members are pretty good with some interesting dialogue and concepts explored. Moreno's direction is pretty solid as well. The narrative is a slow-burn heist drama movie that explores different themes including bank robbery, capitalism, freedom and so forth and the narrative does explore some of these concepts well but at the same time, not so well. Because the structure of the narrative feels uneven as if the narrative is a bit lost on what it is trying to be or wanting to tell.

Due to the uneven structure, it causes the story to feel a bit messy as it the first 1-hour is amazing but the rest feels a little convoluted or a bit lost. Which causes the run-time to feel a little exhausting and unfulfilling. There are some good soundtrack choices, some of the characters are interesting but some could have been explored a bit more.

Overall, Moreno definitely has a vision with this movie and it's a decent achievement from him and Argentinian cinema. But it could be stronger.

I liked the movie more as an existential story than a heist one.

The working question and the what do we really want to do with out lives is what most liked about this movie, as well as the cinematography and the music, both really good. There's not more to add to the plot than the very description of the movie.

On the other hand, a few things I did not like: It's extremely long, excessive, unnecessary. Some sequences were really looong, I don't really need to see a 5 minutes sequence of the character climbing a mountain or crossing a river. I do understand the aesthetic of this but it's counterproductive.

If you need 3 hours to tell your story, you are failing at storytelling in my opinion.

The other thing I wasn't that comfortable is with the acting. They don't act so natural, sometimes seems forced.

Wrapping it up, is a good movie if you like thoughtful olots and good landscapes, but if you cannot handle slow pacing, avoid this movie.

4 stars is a very generous rating from me, I only give such a high rating to such a boring film because the story even tries to discuss some interesting themes, albeit very prosaically.

I also like the cinematography and some of the locations a little, but that's it, the film is tremendously boring and has serious pacing problems, it's over three hours long and could very simply be shortened to around 90 minutes without losing much of the substance. Narrative that isn't much.

In this way, this review acts as a bit of a warning so that you don't waste too much time of your life watching such an insipid narrative. I don't want to use the word pretentious, but I think it's useful here.

The film simply does not respect the viewer's time, it has a very basic and rudimentary script, disguised in such a way as to make the inattentive viewer think they are watching something of substance.

Come to think of it, considering the total lack of respect in taking so much time without having much to say, 4 stars is perhaps too condescending a rating.

In short, the film is tremendously boring because it is unnecessarily long, perhaps if it weren't so long it would expose what is truly true, a film of little substance.

I am a bit sad giving a low rating in this movie, because there were many positives here. There is a great movie inside this movie but unfortunately, it was buried beneath Moreno's overambitiousness. There is a lot of originality and creativity in this movie, i liked both the first and the second part but it should have been AT LEAST one hour shorter.

I love slow paced movies but this was too much to endure. At times, it's unbearable to watch and this is a strong word to describe it, but it's not a hyperbole. It didn't need to be like this. Many scenes were pointless. Even the pace was terrible at times, i don't want to see a man walking for 3 minutes in the city. Bela Tar and other similar directors can pull it off. This movie shouldn't be that slow.

I managed to watch the whole movie because i wanted to give this a fair rating, besides there were many positives as i said and most of the time, i liked it. Great acting, an interesting story, beautifully shot, it's obvious that the creator had an artistic vision and he served it, without caring about the outcome. I respect that and i love overambitious movies even if they failed. But this shouldn't fail. It was too good and unique for a 20's movie.

Sadly, also about 60 minutes longer than it should.

I am smarter than your average bear, really, but I am amazed at how much I truly disliked this very well reviewed film. I think the director is horrendous. The acting was good. The main story had some good elements. It may have played pretty well with a more mainstream style and at about half the runtime, but what weird choices this director made. He loves using awkward split screens that have little to no relevance. "Oh look it is a split screen, both those characters are being reflective and smoking a cigarette in the dark at the same time. How creative!"

I really despised the soundtrack. It never evoked a relevant feeling or enhanced any scenes. It reminded me of the music in a 1970s Western TV show. Boring and forgettable.

I suppose some people are going to get a lot from the long seemingly strange uneventful scenes that make up more than half the runtime. Many critics did at least. I sure did not though.