Matador

Matador is one of the strangest, darkest, (and yet compelling) early films from Spanish master filmmaker Pedro Amoldovar.

It is completely nuts.

Pour in equal measures of sadism, masochism, bullfighting, perverted sexuality, and sexual violence. Add in a splash of comedy and soupcon of star-crossed lovers (if, for a moment, you thought pairing Tybalt and Lady McBeth qualified as star-crossed) and you have what passes as characterisation. Mix dark nights with gaudy flamenco colours and you have some striking cinematography. I'll come to the plot in a minute…

Amoldovar was clearly enjoying Spanish cinema's new-found, post-Franco sexual and artistic liberalism. The prudish among his audience might suggest he was positively wallowing in it. Whatever the truth, Matador is a masterpiece of his style, if not, indeed, a whole style in of itself.

The plot – or possibly a better description, the tapestry over which the characters move – is a murder hunt. Very few prizes will be won, however, for guessing the culprit/s. Two people are quickly in the audience's frame because they are shown… er… murdering people on camera. A third person (Banderas, in to my mind his best Amoldovar role) confesses to the murders in a fit of insecurity and remorse over an attempted rape ("some girls get all the luck" comments a female duty officer dryly, proving that feminism wasn't that big in Spain back in the 1980s). Nevertheless, the net soon closes on the crushingly obvious culprits (who in the meantime have developed quite a crush on each other). As previously mentioned, completely nuts.

Matador's strengths are in its characterisation and its sheer bare-facedness. Amoldovar has, as usual, assembled a character list of freaks and proceeded to humanise all of them – to the point where there is a genuine whiff of tragedy in the final act. To mention the great performances is really to rehearse the cast list. Assumpta Serna, Nacho Martinez, Antonio Banderas and Eva Cobo are all excellent. And it really is worth seeing, just for the young Antonio.

There are some interesting points made in the film about outsiders, liberalism, sexual politics and gender politics (as always with Amoldovar). I'll let you pick through them. It is, though, not so much a film as a giant red rag to the raging bull of conservatism, deftly whisked aside to the ragged applause of an admiring, if somewhat perplexed, audience. A positive Jimi Hendrix of a film, unpolished, with some definite dud notes, but undeniably the work of a genius. 8½/ 10

This 5th feature of Almodovar is one of his best (along with Labyrinth of passion & Kika) as far as I am concerned, and if not his best then for sure his most provocative flms. As usual, Almodovar explores some of the darkest sides of human sexuality, and deals with perversity as dealing with any every-day life subject.

For once more, the notorious film-maker, at great shape, entertains with his trademark raving, hilarious, politically incorrect dialogs, pace and style and while dealing with dark (necrophilia) or serious (religious oppression) subject matters, it manages to be very funny and entertaining. What's great with Almodovar is that you simply CANNOT label his films. Is it comedy? nope. Is a thriller? nope. Is it a crime film? nope. This is Almodovar, so all pretenders go see another million dollar US product . But to all the admirers of unique and original films, this is definitely recommended, if you can tolerate with some weird humour, a bit sexy visuals and nudity and some violence. Matador is ART!

If you're a fan of Pedro Almodovar, you'll love this one from 1986.. filmed in Madrid, it has all the usual elements: offbeat characters who meet up and get even crazier, like atoms smashing together. when a young matador Angel (Antonio Banderas at 26) thinks his heroes have committed crimes, he confesses to them to take the fall. watch that opening scene.. .pretty rough stuff: (simulated) sex, nudity, and murder, all in one. his lawyer has her own kinky issues, and wants to defend Angel. Look for the usual Almodovar cast, with Carmen Maura and Chus Lampreave. Assumpta Serna is the sexy, flirty, over-sexed Maria. and the gory bullfights, which play a big part in the story. Secrets. everyone has their secret. which ones will come out? Liaisons... more secrets. will the police find the real killer(s)? it's very good. intrigue.

I am not sure what to expect when the opening scene is a man masturbating to torture porn, a term that was probably not even invented in 1988.

From there we go to alternating clips of Antonio Banderas asking the ex-bullfighter Nacho Martínez about women and he compares getting a woman to bullfighting, while we watch someone do exactly that. We are no, of course, prepared for the necrophilia twist in that encounter.

We find our boy, Antonio, and he is a boy in this film, in a strict Catholic household. I would have to guess that his mother was Opus Dei. He attempts to rape his neighbor and confesses to four murders which we know he did not do. This is just Almodóvar's take on religion and repression. He revisits that subjects again in the film, so it must me a theme for him.

But, then the story shifts to Nacho and Assumpta Serna, with Eva Cobo in a minor role. This is where the story gets interesting with the police trying to solve the four murders and the real murderers trying to lay it on Antonio.

It gets bizarre at the end with Antonio seeing the killers in his mind and leading the police to them. But, they arrive too late as the climax of sex and death occurs simultaneous with an eclipse. How weird is that?

The connection between sex and death is not a novel one. Elizabethan poetry would occasionally use the latter as a metaphor for the former. Pedro Almodóvar's sixth feature is about three people who have erased the line between the two: Nacho Martinez, a matador gored in the ring, who now teaches students on the art; Antonio Banderas, one of his pupils; and Assumpta Serna, a lawyer defending Banderas who is charged with raping and killing two girls.

In other words, it's one of Almodóvar's movies about the weird kinks of the world. This time, however, he is not concerned with the people at the edge of Spanish society, but at the center of the normal world... assuming there is such a thing. We are all weird, we all act outside the norms, and the people we respect can be the most bizarre.

It's rather slow-moving for one of his movies, probably because this is not one of his shock comedies - although there are comic elements. Visually, it is sumptuous, with a focus on colors, particularly bright reds that draw one's eyes. Miss Serna is a sharp dresser, and she wears a cape in several scenes, which she whirls like a bullfighter going in for the kill.

Is Almodóvar decrying bullfighting? Or in favor of consensual activity of whatever sort? Has he simply presented his bizarre story, and left his audience to draw the moral conclusions it chooses? Or is this simply the sort of story he likes to tell? I think the last is true, but there's nothing simple about it.