Daniel & Ana

The story is good. The fact that it is condemning a real problem makes it even better. For a while, I thought it was going to be a powerful film, but it was not. You will find yourself counting the minutes for the movie to end. The preamble to the peak moment is boring, then less than 20 minutes of a good sequence, perfectible, but good enough, considering the roughness of the situation. That's it. The rest is dull, repetitive, and flat. The plot offered plenty to work with. The story is claimed to be real, thus there were many other things they could have shown, expressed, and exposed to move the audience. However, all the opportunities were wasted with a weak and God-fearing approach to the post-traumatic behavior. They lost it. Toward the end, another dramatic moment is featured as an irrelevant inconvenience solved with Ana giving the cold shoulder to her brother. They took the easy way to solve the conflict. It is fair to say that the photography is flawless. Marimar Vega's performance is the best of the film.

A brother and sister fall victim to an express kidnapping, during which they are hideously violated. (Although several reviews specify what happens, I think it's better not to give it away. Suffice to say the kidnappers borrow a page from the Japanese army's Nanking handbook.) The film follows the aftermath of this abuse, showing how the siblings' character and behaviour are altered. Except for a surprising reprise of the horror, there are few actual events in the balance of the film. Much of what we see on screen is the protagonists acting surly and withdrawn, avoiding people or giving monosyllabic responses. (The clueless parents see both their children begin to behave out of character at the same time but never seem to consider that there might be a common cause.) I believe it would take truly superior actors to infuse this script with the drama befitting the characters' experience and in my opinion, Bernal and Vega are not up to it. This may be a minority opinion, since other viewers have found their performances compelling. Of course, the script doesn't give them a whole lot to work with and bears the lion's share of the responsibility for the tedium of the siblings' goings-on. However, the kidnapping scene could, by all rights, have showcased first class dramatic skills and the leaden acting we see there tells us the actors have a long way to go. (The leads do shine by comparison to their captors, though. It is hard to watch the kidnapper give his spiel and not think of Hannah Arendt's phrase "the banality of evil." Considering the capabilities of these actors, I believe making that scene so detailed showed poor judgment.) One thing worth highlighting is that this film is closer to a vignette than a structured narrative. Despite some indications to the contrary, I believe there is no culminating climax or resolution--it is pretty flat after the kidnapping. The film is supposedly based on a true story and may hew very close to real life, which, of course, is seldom a structured narrative. That may be some viewers' cup of tea; if it isn't yours, think twice about seeing this film. In short, there is a disparity between the film's subject matter and the execution. The premise is not for the faint of heart but its enormous dramatic potential is dissipated in flat, repetitive scenes.

Movie has an amazing first act---sort of drawing you in with its low key matter of factness to a jaw dropping end of the first act---the big thing that happens to the 2 characters happens almost out of nowhere (the only warning you get that the film is even gonna focus on the 2 siblings is at one point the younger brother's friend says to him yo your sister is hot to which he responds the way a normal kid would--something like "nah she's ugly but at least she doesn't look like a piece of s--t like you.") Hell even the abduction when it comes--happens unexpectedly while the two of them are in the car and she's yelling at him to get a haircut for her wedding. That kidnapping of course and the thing that happens there is quite creepy, uncomfortable, spellbinding, and way too real life which makes it all the scarier (no glossy movie star posturing here.) The rest of the movie is dedicated to the emotional damage this event has on the pair of siblings. While seeing the aftermath of such trauma upend both people's lives is interesting to a point---the movie itself starts to feel more than a little repetitive--and even tho the low key tone of the film is very much an asset--the movie starts to feel a little bit dull as you sit there waiting for something else to happen to either one of the two characters. (which is completely ironic given that something major already happened---something that happened when we weren't expecting it and something that should by all means be more than enough story wise.) Just when it seems like the movie is going to break out of its cycle of scene after scene of the 2 characters moping around their house looking vacant and blank---the film more or less ends. (the sister tries to heal herself by getting therapy and trying to confront what happened to her head on--essentially trying to get her life back together---while the brother just goes deeper and deeper into shell shocked madness....which results in several sequences that make up the pretty startling ending of the film.) The last 2 or 3 scenes are interesting enough in that your sense of suspense picks back up enormously. (i had no idea watching the film that those scenes would end up being the end scenes though which make you realize that the ending is just as low key and out of the blue as the abduction at the beginning of the film was.) I won't say what happens--but its not so much that something happens so much as the sustained tone of menace and creepiness that the director successfully punches up in those last few scenes.

Maybe I'm so disappointed cause everyone sells Michel Franco as one of the best directors of his time. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is a bad movie, that's it, the story could've been read from the local newspaper, no need to make a movie just to watch an actress without clothes, it seems that Michel Franco directed this movie only to feed his morbid curiosity of doing a pornographic movie. Bad acting + bad photography = bad director. In the first. The first scenes are super tedious, showing a unrealistic boring life. Mexico City offers much more than what they portray, there's no caos in that city. The incongruous and unreal scenarios, playing with the theory of how people from organized crime use you is near stupidity, it's like filming criminal theories that we would like to happen, but the harsh reality is not like that, reality surpasses fiction, and if you are not willing to project the harsh reality it is better not to announce the story as a real fact. People who have been victims of crimes of this type must be very angry to see this, no one has been as lucky as these characters, this story is unreal, you can ask any kidnapping victim.

DANIEL & ANA is based on a true incident, and reveals a relatively unknown aspect of The Porn Industry. The thesis of the film is that, especially in South and Central America, some individuals engaging in online pornography may not be willing participants. Although the film is darkly bleak and disturbing, it presents an unfortunate aspect of human behavior. If an individual has been subjected to extreme sexual or psychological horror, they might not react in a way that one would ordinarily expect. I think that many people who have commented on this film have failed to recognize this important fact. The behavior that Daniel engages in after the event, although wildly inappropriate, is not in any way out of the realm of possibility. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is not easily 'cured', or even understood, and can cause significant impairment in all aspects of human functioning.