Un mundo maravilloso

When I watched this movie I thought I was going to sit down and enjoy a comedy and while it is very funny it is much more than a comedy. Immideately after every laugh I found myself thinking the same thing, "Wait, that's not supposed to be funny." Laughing at the shacks that thousands of people have to live in. Or, laughing at the fact that system is so mucked up that not even university-educated men and women can get a job as a janitor. These things are not supposed to be funny but Un Dia Maravilloso makes you laugh at them. Not that this film is evil for doing so. On the contrary, great satires make fun at things that are not supposed to be funny. The best example of this is Dr. Strangelove. The fate of the entire world is in the hands of these fools up the screen yet, we laugh at them (our world leaders included).

This movie is more than a black comedy. It is a comedy that makes you regret every laugh. It makes you regret every time you laughed at the dirty hobo up the screen. I watched it while in Mexico City last week and loved it. It's as thought-provoking as it is funny. It truly made me change my outlook towards poor people (truly poor people, people who don't know if they'll survive another day because lack of money). After leaving the movie theatre on my way to the hotel, I gave every beggar I came across fifty pesos. It isn't much, but I'd like to think that I eased their battle in a small way.

Besides highlighting poverty in Mexico it also brings about issues of corruption and social injustice. And which country in the world doesn't have any of those 3 things? Which is why you don't have to be Mexican to enjoy it. Run, don't walk, to Un Dia Maravilloso.

Not bad, but you get a feeling of a missed opportunity. Essentially it is nowhere as good as La Dictadura Perfecta or La Ley de Herodes. The movie just drags on for too long while one of the key subjects, the Panglossian views of the. Minister are hardly explored. Towards the end of the movie we learn a bit by accident that 60 million Mexicans live in abject poverty. The Porfirio Diaz connexion is just mildly suggested, Had Luis Estrada shortened the tramp scenes and developed more the economic "Casi el Paraiso" (after Spota's comic novel), we would have had a stronger story. In any case it is entertaining, and definitely not two hours wasted!

Not the best movie I've seen... not even dark, acid enough. It is to be taken as a farcical look at Mexican social reality.

Some things aren't shown the way they really are in my country, such as the ideal family portrayed in it or even the house or neighborhood they live in.

But the way public officials deal with matters such as those they are confronted to in this movie is close enough. The way super-rich live also pretty close to reality, houses and all (and yes, there really are super-rich people in Mexico... one of them even ranks just below Bill Gates according to Fortune Magazine).

As for the poor... millions of people live like that in my country, way below any concept of dignity or any other ideas or social values we are fortunate to have been taught and live by. They are born and die in misery, without the faintest hope of ever getting out of poverty. To be sure, they are not that articulate or sympathetic, of course, so you need actors and a script to play their roles, and that way it is actually possible to be entertained for two hours by their coming and goings, which in real life are much too harsh and painful to be called tragedy.

But particular features of any given human existence taken out, the movie lets you catch a glimpse of what could be called the results of the World's economic and political organization.

And then, it could also be called tragedy.

No doubt about it, Estrada depicts some Mexico's political and social facts, however I find Herod's Law and A Wonderful World very similar.

I think Luis Estrada directs both movies following the same recipe.

Marginal class appear in both movies pretty good depicted; Mexican politicians as well; then come ridiculous circumstances that surround that lead both, politicians and poor people, beyond they ever dreamed: the politicians is rewarded for his criminal acts while the poor is dragged to his fate.

On Herod's Law the corrupt politician is rewarded becoming a Senator; on a Wonderful World the minister is awarded with Nobel Prize for starving the people. On the first movie the poor has to kill to get whatsoever he deserves (some respect and dignity) on the second movie this marginal family has to kill another family to get one single day of good life.

Herod's Law and A Wonderful World are pretty similar.

A WONDERFUL WORLD (dir. Luis Estrada) A savage political satire that rashly promotes class warfare and advocates the violent redistribution of wealth within the context of an extremely bitter fairytale. A homeless man is trapped on a windowsill at the Mexican World Financial Center building, and although it appears to be a suicide attempt, it's not. The CEO of the WFC offers a bribe to get him to publicly acknowledge that draconian anti-poverty measures played no part in his decision to end it all. And, through a surreal turn of events, this leads the Mexican federal government to declare 'War On The Poor' rather than to continue the pointless and unwinnable 'War On Poverty'. The film is a bold and impetuous attack on fascist global policies, a complacent and corrupt Fourth Estate, and the 'filthy rich' (AKA 'job creators'). Kick Out The Jams Brothers And Sisters!!!