Intacto

What is perhaps crucial about this movie is that it is shaped for a sophisticated cine-maniac,not so very keen about action and plot,rather willing to focus on the very atmosphere of the movie and the questions it puts in front of the viewer.

Whole idea of the movie is to find the real connection between love and luck,to investigate whether they are two sides of the same story. If one believes love could be a drug much more powerful than heroine , what to tell about luck - especially if one's life is all about taking advantage and satisfaction of luck possessed.

Slow,bit dream-like narration,avoiding obvious solutions,think-forcing movies and great photography makes Intacto my favorites.

To conclude I can quote Jill Scott:"gave me things to think about"

INTACTO (INTACT) is the story of a group of `gamblers' whose ultimate bet is their own life (or others peoples life). Sam (Max Von Sydow) a Jewish only survivor of a concentration camp, runs a high class Hotel / Casino in the in a volcanic island. There; while normal people use money, others come to bet their possessions (which are not money) against Sam's wealth (the casino and other `things' he won over the years). The game, Russian roulette, one empty chamber, the challenger shoots first. Sam's protégé, Federico, concerned that Sam may someday lost, and moved by his own ambition, decides to go against him, but to avoid the confrontation, Sam `de-activate' Federico.

At this point you are probably questioning about what I am writing; well, basically these characters can control LUCK. Yes, they have plenty and are able to steal others people luck and use it for their own profit or as a possession to bet against others.

Federico is no longer able to control luck; so he must find his own protégé to play against Sam, and finds Tomas, a fugitive (only survivor of a plane crash) whose only interest is to run away. Three other characters emerge: a police woman, a bull fighter and Tomas ex-girlfriend; everyone is a part of the destiny of the others.

Harry Potter is nowhere around; there are no WIZARDS or enchantments. If you ever knew a gambler, you probably heard about their eccentricities, like do not touch them, do not take pictures a some other things many people believe and many others are afraid to confront.

The basic principle of atheism is that men control their own destiny; and that is precisely the question here. All these people believe in themselves; they are their own God, but also when their faith is lost, also are their powers. Are there really powers ?. The answer of these questions is absolutely metaphysical because faith in itself has no logical explanation.

Fresnadillo's movie is not for everyone. There are no likable heroes (every character is moved by selfishness or ambition), and the premise is absolutely about religion and nothing about the material world (even when seems the contrary). At about two hours, the pace is more European than American and are not quite clear, but none of these things are faults, is just a matter of taste.

There are also very intense and interesting scenes like the run in the forest, that will take out your breath.

If you are out for something unconventional, give it a try. It is an interesting game.

The more I think about this film, the more I liked it. The script was extremely well-written, with appropriate twists and turns for each of the numerous characters-- not just the antagonist and one other, as usually happens.

It's a great idea. What if Luck were a quantifiable commodity, and certain people had the ability to take it from others? What if such people were only one in a billion? The premise reminded me somewhat of "Unbreakable," but this movie has so many more complex characters and is so much better written-- yes, really.

However, the more I think about this film, the more I realize how much I disliked the cinematography, editing, production design, and lighting. I know they probably didn't have a lot of money to spend, but a good DP isn't hard to find. Making much of the movie literally dark to go with the psychological darkness was a fine idea, but executed poorly. It's unfortunate.

The script would make a great read, though, and I suspect that's why the film was able to be made. Those talking about "Adaptation" as an argument for a screenplay to be a legitimate piece of literature would do well to read "Intacto," and leave it at that.

As a film, though, I'd still recommend it. Good job keeping Max von Sydow away from the other actors... he acts circles around them. But the others do okay too. 8/10.

This film puts you in the middle of a world where luck isn't all luck. In this world some people really *do* have more luck than others, and it can be transferred from one person to another by touch. But this isn't a film that spells things out-you're immersed and have to figure it out on your own.

Very early in the film we see Federico win several rounds of roulette in a row, betting on single numbers. He goes to see the owner of the casino, Sam (Max von Sydow), who hugs Federico (taking his luck) and then throws him out of the casino. Federico wants revenge, so he begins to look for a very lucky person to help him. He finds Tomás, the sole survivor of a plane crash.

To say more about the plot would give away too much, so I won't. The film is visually beautiful and unique, and there are a few scenes that will likely stick with you for weeks (I can say this with certainty since as I write this it's been over two weeks since I watched the film). I'm not normally someone who seeks out thrillers, but I'm very glad I saw this one.

Seen on 11/9/2002 at the 2002 Hawaii International Film Festival.

There is a strange atavistic, primitive even primeval core to this film. I spent part of my childhood in south west Ireland; I can clearly remember that people (men with a winning streak at the races or at cards or anything where luck is involved) would be touched by others to steal some of their luck. Those individuals with the lucky streak would do their best to avoid such contacts, often with threats of violence! This was all over sixty years ago. These primitive superstitions ought not to be easily discounted. Not so long ago man was much closer to the shadows of the forest than we sophisticates. The evil eye was a real force, the green man really existed. Our ancestors knew this. I loved this film I know something of what the film is trying to recapture before it's lost forever. It's not an easy film to sit through first time but stick with it. There's gold here. Technically it's making is first class. The acting is flawless and the directing to die for; it succeeds brilliantly on every front. This film will remain in my collection of great film memories. I recommend it to all and pay homage to those who made it.