No somos animales

This movie belongs to the "film within a film" genre that opened up half a century ago with Fellini's 8 1/2. It features John Cusack and other American actors summoned to Buenos Aires to make a film that, we are told, experiments with cinematic language. The story is improvised (there is a script but nobody seems to take it seriously) and some scenes (like in Godard's La Chinoise) actually belong to the film within, as the point of view changes and we see the cameras rolling and the booms in place. Sequences are announced with title cards, also in Godard's style. The view of Buenos Aires and its people is that of an average American tourist; there are some comments about Peronism and the 1976-1982 military dictatorship but there is no depth or meaning in them. Everything we see or hear is capricious and at best whimsical, at worst pretentious and at times boring.

Al Pacino plays the mysterious (and somewhat devilish) long distance mastermind of the project, He gets the best lines and makes the most of them; the short time he is on screen is the best part of the movie.

The movie ends up saying nothing significant. Although some ideas may be interesting, it it difficult to gauge the intentions of the director. All in all, an unsatisfactory film.

"No somos animales" is a film you'll either love or hate...and this is obvious when you look at the ratings which either are 9s or 10s...or 1s....with little in between. I can certainly understand this after watching the movie, as it looks like an indie reworking of "8 1/2"...and it's not the sort of movie the average person would rush to see.

Instead of a traditional narrative, this film feels like someone took some home movies and pieced them together. Some folks might recognize what is happening...but most will just feel that the plot is disjoint and confusing. What you DO know is that John Cusack plays a famous actor who is tired of Hollywood and he heads to Argentina to make a film. Other than that...there really isn't a ton of plot.

For me, I'd much rather watch "8 1/2" because it is more coherent and enjoyable. Additionally, the film lacks energy and after a while, I just didn't care about anything and wanted it to end.

Was far much better the version I saw in the BAFICI festival, I miss that music and some scenes that are not there. This is now a kind of "making off" of what had far more sense and story, plus atmosphere. But, anyway, even if is not a real work of Agresti, and the Americans touched it like know all-know nothing typical spoiled, colonialist kids some are over there, I still I enjoy the freedom that exudes from the director's original. Hope Netflix could show us the original!!!

Pacino's character was right in this film. It's lais·sez-faire approach makes it poignant, up close and real and makes modern feel modern all over again. It's nice to see American actors getting to be like in European movies, talking back about American politics like that, without being lazy-cynical or nihilistic, just saying what is, and keeping it playful-real. Friendly, like it's supposed to be, even though all the darkest themes are on the roster. This is the dialogue America needs to be having. I loved all the songs too. They sport classic pop/rock undertones, with some of Hipp's Philly cheese steak grease warps in just the right places. Lyrics! Melody! I feel like I got to hang with the boys on this one, and watch them play at life, however daunting the playground.

Warm little movie. A collage of digressions and partial thoughts, no apt for who is looking to be caught in a melodrama. To see great actors playing with such a freedom, makes me think on the cynical and shallow part of this art form.

As soon we have the chance to liberate our mind, we dream, and snore. As soon we seat front of the TV, we are forced to dream the dreams others, sometimes just money makers…

This movie have much of a dream, but is enough imperfect, rough, and sometimes nonsensical, that you can hear your own mind without feeling being used.