Intacto

For us "normal" people luck comes in streaks of good and bad, sometimes we have rotten luck, sometimes we fluke something and sometimes miracles happen. However for some people "luck" is a gift that is always with them but can be lost with the touch of another person with the same gift. When Federico is stripped of his gift by Samuel, a survivor of the concentration camps, he sets out to find another gifted as he was and use him as a way back into the series of games they play. He finds Tomas – the only survivor or a massive airplane crash that killed over 230 others. However, when Tomas flees his hospital bed he is pursued by a police officer, haunted by the loss of her husband and son, who also has the gift.

This film opens with a cool sense of atmosphere with people wearing hoods, long corridors, mysterious characters and so on, providing it with a good start but not one it builds on. That it manages to continue with a good visual style and a cool thriller atmosphere is what I will give it credit for but to me these are not enough to make this film work. The plot is very little more than a basic premise, which, although it acted as a very interesting hook, failed to serve anything in the way of substance or narrative up. The plot lacks logic and it relies on a series of reasonably good set pieces (the games) to keep the interest in the film up – I can see why Hollywood has bough the rights to remake it because it does have style and, if it gets a big name and a thriller director, the lack of substance shouldn't worry too many execs. The ending is good but by that point I wasn't feeling all that involved in the film and it had missed its chance to really get me on board.

In many ways the film reminded me of "Lucky Star", which some may remember was an advert pretending to be a trailer for a film about a man with impossible luck (played by Del Toro and directed by Michael Mann) but I thought the advert did it better. The characters are also pretty thin; I expected them to be complex and interesting considering the plot, but they were tools more than people. With this in mind, the cast actually did OK with what they have. Sbaraglia was a good presence with a good range; Poncela was coolly mysterious; Lopez was passionate and held the attention, but von Sydow just seems to be off in his own film somewhere, just filling time with the second unit director until the rest of the cast meet up with him.

Overall this has a concept that will bring many too it, but it doesn't do anything with it and it never really managed to get a good, involving story built up around it nor create characters to be held by. It is not terrible though, just hollow and unsatisfying – a few set pieces and consistently stylish direction and atmosphere all add value but this will be one time when I'm actually looking to a Hollywood remake to be an improvement.

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.

A masterpiece of the new wave of Spanish cinema that is invading the world in this new millennium, this strange, fascinating thriller has one of the greatest ideas of all times used very well till the end of the movie: imagine someone who has the power to steal good luck from other people and using it he may become powerful, but bored in the end. So he uses his wealth to research other people who has the same power or a similar one (people who has survived all sort of terrible accidents) to challenge them in a sort of Russian roulette. Max Von Sydow is the old concentration camp survivor that establish this "game", while other interesting faces of the Spanish scenario are his comrades in this trade over each other destiny that is gripping, tense and full of surprise until the end, when all comes full circle and you exit from the cinema conscious that you have seen a gem, a rare, rare gem.

This Spanish film is a strange one, a hard one to follow story-wise, but visually striking and interesting most of the way. The fact is wasn't always easy to follow will help me want to watch this again to see if I can figure things out better.

The story involves people with th ability to steal "luck" from other people and then taking it away from fellow takers. Make sense? I didn't think so. Despite the difficulty following and understanding everything, I still enjoyed this film.

The DVD transfer is sharp, too, and has good sound. It's an intriguing film and, perhaps, I should have waited for a second viewing when I understood more things about the story. Suffice to say I thought enough of this film to buy it because I knew I'd be watching this multiple times.

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.