Opiniones de usuarios

After seemingly wandering a ruined city for years in search of food and shelter, two siblings find their way into one of the last remaining buildings. Inside, they find a man who will make them a dangerous offer to survive the outside world.

For me, this film is all about the rich color of the cinematography (from Yollótl Alvarado), the depth of the sound (from Esteban Aldrete), and the overall atmosphere. I could have used a bit less dizzying camera movement, however, though it does have an underlying purpose. Whether you appreciate the plot and situations or not (and many will not), there is no denying the craft of the camera and sound.

Variety noted that the film was an "extreme Mexican fiesta of incest, cannibalism and explicit sex that should earn detractors and fans in equal measure." Other reviewers have called it simultaneously boring and shocking. It really is all these things... some moments were too much for me to really enjoy the picture, as the shock factor seemed gratuitous -- unlike the extremes of "Visitor Q" or "Salo", which have a clear satirical purpose.

Now, to be fair, "We Are the Flesh" does have its satirical moments. It has digs on "blind patriotism" and attacks the ritualism of religion, specifically Catholicism. As the film progresses, more of this is evident and we realize how much the social conventions and expectations are turned on their head. (Some of the most subtle moments are not even realized until we learn the "names" of the characters from the credits!)

"We Are the Flesh" made quite the impact during 2016 on the festival circuit. I had my first opportunity to see it at Montreal's Fantasia. There was never any doubt that it would be picked up for distribution, though it comes as a surprise that the ones who came along were Arrow Video. Arrow is without question one of the best film distributors in existence, but their focus tends to be classic cult, not contemporary.

Regardless, Arrow pulls all the stops with their Blu-ray. We have new interviews with the director and cast, as well as a highly enlightening visual essay from critic Virginie Sélavy, where she explains easily-overlooked symbolism and draws parallels to the work of Alejandro Jodorowsky. Perhaps best of all ,the disc has two other short films from director Emiliano Rocha Minter: "Dentro" and "Videohome", to really round out the experience.

How can I like and not this film at all. I just don't really know what to say about this. Siblings feed into the depravity of humanity, by some insane man for food. That's the supposed story that can be deduced to. I felt emotionally disconnected to the proceedings after the movie veers off into an incoherent narrative. The insane man, Mariano, had something interesting to him, but, suddenly, we are plunged into supernatural incoherence. Lots of sex and symbolism kinda makes this film look pretentious. I wouldn't even want to say 'pretentious', because the film is pretty solid in its imagery and cinematography. But it's pretty much lacking in emotional resonance. Well, the symbolism could be that of insanity through pleasure, and how one would eat themselves and others while delving into insanity. One thing is that, I was not emotionally moved by the story. It was pretty confusing, and pretty insubstantial to warrant the need for another viewing to fully comprehend the narrative. Only, if there was one.

I read a lot about this film before seeing it, and not many people had anything nice to say about it. It's being regarded as a crime against humanity! With that, I don't agree. I found the beginning to have been very well acted and the theme was setup well.

Then, it just goes off the rails in some surrealist artsy-fartsy direction that loses grip on what it was about in the first place (freedom = exploring the dark corners of your mind and embracing your taboo). It's not nearly as controversial as Serbian Film or Nekromantik, so if that's the hangup, people need to get over themselves. You spend 59 minutes of the 79 minute film not really knowing what is going on. All you can do is take in the pretty camera-work, which I thought was excellent. The musical selection was also really good. Basically, I wanted to hate this, but I'm able to easily find some noteworthy aspects to prevent me from throwing it away altogether.

This film is a bold slap in the face to the big studios who put out the same exercises in banality week after week. When you see the same romantic comedy and superhero movie over and over again, filmmakers tend to try to shock to get attention. Clearly We Are The Flesh accomplished that in spades with a mediocre film.

First, there is no story here. Stuff happens to people. I don't believe there is a narrative where the characters develop in any understandable way. I also don't think it is possible to explain what happens. One thing does not cause another thing. For a moment at the end, I thought this could have been some kind of anthology of interrelated but independent stories. No, it's not.

The lead actor is great as the crazy lead character. The other actors do not bring anything at all to their characters. Ultimately, this movie is not even that disturbing. It is just weird.

This is a strange movie to say the least. I read some choice words from the director after I watched the movie and I'd still say that there is more to it than just the flesh you'll get to see. And you are going to see a lot of flesh and skin. This is very explicit to say the least. The three main characters have a strange relationship to each other and our main older guy is coming off as a creep.

But as I stated before, this was done to shock and also to appall, but also to really mess people up. You probably will have mixed feelings about the movie or just downright hate it. A movie that can create such passion in the viewer might be onto something. It's not about enjoying what you watch (especially the scenes of sexual nature are not really there to arouse, but rather to make one uncomfortable), but being taken someplace you don't want to be. It feels like this tries to convey a state of society that has gone way too far ... or maybe I'm reading too much into it ...

Was there even a script for this film? It feels like a three-year-old's version of "shocking," when it's boring, pretentious, and so on. We're treated to a crazy homeless guy who lets a brother and sister squat with him, but in exchange, they must do whatever he wants. He wants incest, torture, and murder. In the hands of a better filmmaker, this might be something, but it's one of the worst films I've ever seen, and I rather enjoy bad movies --- the so bad they're good kind. It takes a hell of a lot to make me actively hate a film. The most astonishing thing about this movie is why so many film festivals saw it as "art" and choose to screen it.

This film right here, it's by far one of the most surreal, nihilistic, & sexual theatrical experiences i've had. And that's kind of what makes it good? Aside from the confusing story, where this film takes the crown is it's unpredictability and it's cinematography. We Are The Flesh is just as confusing as it is shocking & beautiful. That being said, the plot itself lacks substance and an actual direction. If the ending could clear up how all of this takes place a little more, it'd make this experience a lot more complete.

Wish I could say it wasn't that bad, I like it, or rather parts of it.

When I saw the poster at a local theater I was thinking this was going to be a Si-Fi horror film. Even the synopsis gave me this ideal, and it was horrifying but more in a human way rather than super natural.

So two kids end up in a place were they meet a man whose out of his mind and the three have bizarre sexual encounters with one another.

I did like the crazy dude in the film, he was disturbing in that horrific sort of way.

Plus, I can't give a movie to low of a score considering it had so much awesome nudity and strong sexual content in it (Just being honesty).

But what I was expecting from the small paragraph that help me get interested in seeing the movie was not what I ended up seeing. I felt the ad campaign was met to be a metaphor of something. We Are the Flesh is very similar to M. Night Shyamalan's the Village in that all it's not what it seems, but with far less story (Or no story at all cause I really have no idea what this movie is about or trying to say).

When the movie starts and I realizes that it's a very small indi film in a foreign language I was expecting far more talking, but a lot of what I got was interpretive movement and in your face nudity (Which is where I think the actual name of the film was met to be about).

So I'm into hard core sex in mainstream movies but whatever the filmmakers wanted me to feel by watching this experimental feature I did not feel (Unless they wanted me to feel horny).

Never trust reviews from people who walk out of a movie. Reviews are opinions stressed by people who watched the whole film. When people write reviews of films they walked out of, that's not a review: it's an uninformed comment.

This is as much as a review as it is an honest opinion by someone who watched the film in its entirety. Keeping in mind that great films shouldn't be loved by everyone.

We Are the Flesh is a cinematic version of dark thoughts and ideas most people immediately remove from their train of thought. As long as you are human enough to understand what is right and wrong in reality, there isn't a single thing wrong with examining dark and even grim thoughts that every single human being has from time to time.

This film explores those themes and presents them in ways that are meant to be hard to watch. These are themes that you normally wouldn't bring up in random conversations with random people. These are themes that aren't meant to be visited often but should be explored at least once. Just to see what they look like. Just to see what dark and grim things you otherwise would not have in your life (by choice) but are curious to see the repercussions from the vile acts that go on in dark places.

For me, We Are the Flesh depicts a horrid version of common, hopeless and deprived humanity. It's a brief example of those dark things I never would allow myself to act upon physically or emotionally. But I find those areas of the unknown panning out visually stimulating. Afterward, I can walk away when the film ends satisfied for experiencing a story that made me think of things I don't want to think about. But I can leave those dark questions answered by putting them behind me and leaving them with this film.

Which to me, makes for a wonderful and well made film.

I went into this movie blindly, barely knowing what I was getting myself into. Let me tell you, I was not disappointed. I was taken aback, disgusted, confused, and thrown in for a huge loop. But I was definitely not disappointed. Once I thought I knew what was going, the story would throw a weird curve ball and just keep going. Fascinating but I can't say I recommend it.

B-

This film's main problem is that it doesn't make any sense. He's trying to be David Lynch and failing. I don't mind the "transgressive" routine, it's that it ultimately doesn't really go anywhere. Ambitious, but ultimately... meh.

It is very hard to have an opinion about We are the Flesh: in one way it says nothing at all,, but on the other hand it shows a great apocalyptic vision of people brought together in a situation driven to despair... at least in some way. I didn't like the boredom of the movie,, but I highly cheer for the level of experimenting in this movie.

I'm no prude, and explicit sex and all that is totally fine. But this is a whole diff level of twisted. You cannot unsee some of the psycho junk in here. In the guise of being "artistic", this is an expression of some demented minds and should be avoided like the plague. Yup, with mainstream culture reaching this kind of a low, the world is probably going to end soon.

There are some reviewers here on IMDb that see great depths in this movie, justifying all the craziness and sex and hysteria as an attempt to picture one's deepest drives and fantasies. Maybe that was the genuine ambition of director Emiliano Rocha Minter, but even so, that not necessarily stands for a good movie. In my opinion a movie has to be at least in some way involving, so that it makes you want to watch it (and keep watching it).

For me this was not the case. The movie lacks any (fathomable) narrative; the settings are dark and filthy; the editing is weird, with many scenes or close-ups that are drawn-out way too long; the few characters are extremely annoying and their irrational behavior and screaming almost unbearably tiresome; and the nudity and sex-scenes seem primarily gratuitous (like two long close-ups of a male's and a female's genitals that seem to serve no purpose whatsoever). I've got nothing against nudity and sex, but it should at least be in some way functional, within an understandable context.

It's probably my simple brain that made me miss tons of metaphors, but I couldn't help feeling that the main purpose of the makers was simply to be as provocative as possible. Well, you could argue that they partly succeeded in that, albeit in a very unenjoyable, uninteresting and even tedious way.

I guess we all had this "brain off/flesh on" experience that this movie tries to depict. The experience can be rather arousing at first, and then extremely uncomfortable for quite a while. This is my best guess what this movie is about, but you can read a lot of things into it, starting from drug abuse to magic mushroom sects, and from doomsday caused by falling morals to experimentation of whatever type. Technically it is not a bad movie, the director has a concept, the people involved clearly know their trade, and do their job well, but the whole atmosphere is extremely grim, which makes it a pretty hard watch.

An excellent film. Highly stylized and unflinching. Recommened.

Seemingly for one and only reason : trough shock value to make people discuss the director ... In whose mind , it is better to be famous for absolutely horrible drivel , than not to be famous at all . Only one redeeming thing about this film : at least it is very short )

Rated TV-MA in the version I saw, but certainly not for any television station I could ever think of. Way rougher than that. There is an abundance of flesh, often shown in different color filters, which add impact to the scenes. It is supposed to be set in a ruined city in a decrepit building, where two young people come across a rather disturbed man who seems in charge of the building. He gives them shelter and food, and in return they work to erect structures inside the building. The two are brothers and sisters. It is difficult to say anything more without spoiling the movie. To say the least, it is rather far out. But also intriguing. Certainly not for everyone. Many wold appreciate the creative use of color and shadow in telling the story. I am straddling the rating, as some may rate it higher for the unique approach to film making, and others lower due to the subject matter.