Entre les jambes

When I read the title and a short description in a Budapest program magazine, I prepared for a darkly erotic love story. "Entre las piernas" did have such elements, of course, but still turned out to be something completely different.

As soon as the (beautifully designed) titles started, it became evident for me that this film was going to be a hommage to Hitchcock an his films. The same everyday beginning that entails lots of unexpected turns; the same play with identity and culpability, the same insecure atmosphere where things happen to the characters that destroy their everyday world - even the music was Bernard Herrmann-style! Of course, directing and camerawork were not at all on the same level than in Hitchcock's films, but the perfect screenplay was indeed. The actors were also great and seemed to like their roles. I didn't like Javier Bardem in "Before Night Falls" but here he was really cute... :)

I would absolutely recommend this film to everyone who likes clever psychological thrillers and also to all people who love Hitchcock's films and are familiar with his work.

You never know what you're going to expect when you watch this quirky Spanish flick. There are some obvious moments that are (Pedro) Almodavar and some are (Julio) Medem, which should come as no surprise as the actors in this show have worked with the above directors. Sex, suspense, comedy, drama - it's all here rolled into one. An engaging film that leaves you smiling after you come out of the cinema.

The point that sex can become a dangerous addiction is not made in a very convincing manner in this film. After starting with a session of a class for curing sexual addiction, the movie focuses on a variety of problems faced by most of the characters, none of whom are very interesting people. At two hours or more the film drags along. Attempts at injecting suspense are pitifully weak. The viewer does think of what Hitchcock would have done with this material, beginning with a clean straight story line, but in the end all one can think is "I saw Hitchcock suspense films and this has no Hitchcock suspense, only clumsy attempts at imitation." A final question: when the leading lady boards the plane holding her little dog is that a suggestion that she will continue taking the dog out when she seeks another man? That everything will continue in much the same way?

What I liked about this picture: the cool camera-work (airport lounges have rarely been as attractive, and there are evocative scenes in toilets and bedrooms); the music, always urgent and involving even if it owes much to Bernard Herrman; the identity of the transsexual character is well integrated into the story, not an add-on (I thought of Jaye Davidson in The Crying Game).

What I didn't like: the red herrings in the story line, meant to throw us off the scent but only serving to annoy the viewer; the large number of characters that makes following the plot all the harder.

What kept me watching was Victoria Abril, playing the detective's wife with a panache that made me regret she has not made more films we can see in North America.

The story of this movie, which tries hard to avoid following concepts of other movies related to infidelity in today's modern society, really falls in providing a clear and definitive message to the audience.

The story seems interesting just from the beginning when a group of people -who take assistance in a rehabilitation center for addicted to sex- express their personal feelings about their lives and their situations, just as a psychological and deep profile of every individual. This is interesting since Manuel Pereira (Director) starts to have control of all these situations.

But this is not going so far just when alternative plots "with some psychological twists" began to surface the main story and overcome it. So the story that began from exploring the world of this addicted people turns out to become a confused film with unnecessary plots that makes the movie with no clear interpretations at the end of it.