Rojo

It's a pretty well-acted movie with a good period context and pretty good photography. But the script is empty, very empty. The end comes to nothing and everything that happens during the movie ends in nothing. This is not good Argentine cinema, it is one of the weakest films I have seen.

This film take me by surprise, original and captivating. Usually I read something about the film before heading to the cinema but in this case I saw the trailer and read the quickly description. I'm mentioning this because affects yours/my mood and expectatives about the film, before even seeing the film, and your opinion of it. This films plays with different styles and the narrative is a metaphorical one. The beginning of the film set the pace and there is some humour there when you least expected. However all this funny bit and pieces that I enjoyed are related to the fact that I speak spanish, and the rhythm of the conversations, the tone of how things are said, can lead to laugh and enjoy the absurd moment or see it as a truly dramatic one. There is a another layer that talk about how we "slowly get used to" corruption and crime as far as we don't get our benefits taken away and our placid lives interrupted... too much. If you wanna see a film about a crime and a mystery, this film may disappoint you... if you go with a good open mood, you may have a great time!

This is not an easy movie to describe. And I think some historians have even more to say about the time this is playing (adding to the flavor of the country and the political backdrop). So there is a lot of baggage from the start, which some may be more aware than others. But even if you begin from zero, you can take a lot from this movie.

To do that, you have to be aware that the movie itself is not meant to excite you every other minute. Some may call it mundane, slow and even boring. Now that is valid depending on what your taste is like. So try not to judge someone who has the complete opposite opinion on this (or any other movie for that matter) than you. Overall I do think that the way this is shot and how it is played (excellent) made me go for the rating I chose. Again, it will not tickle everyone ... but those that will be intrigued by the characters and maybe the period and place it is playing, with everything that was going on back then ... they'll have fun - or the equivalent of it.

Set in the 1970's in Argentina, this psychological thriller maintains an air of suspense throughout. Superb performances by Dario Grandinetti and Alfredo Castro, along with excellent writing and direction from Benjamin Naishtat.

Overall, I wasn't really thrilled with the ending here, but was very much engrossed in the film and interested as to how it was all going to turn out as the drama deepened.

I saw this at MOMA this past January and as I see it is up on video now I thought I'd summarize. The period in question is the nasty Isabel Peron dictatorship and the equally nasty dictatorship that replaced it. Disappearing people had been occurring in Latin America for hundreds of years and this period was no different. That is one of the underlying themes, and one of the few scenes that worked is a scene of local people going to a home and emptying it of anything of any value. It reminded me of a scene in Kazantzakis' Zorba where the moment the ageing widow dies, all of the town turns up to calmly steal everything not nailed down. The film also has some brief moments of great cinematography. It also is clearly influenced by Fargo, True Detective and some aspects of Scandinavian noir, although wihtout the depth, dark humor, or coherence.

Ultimately though. Rojo. is entirely incoherent. it not only fails to tell a meaningful story, it fails to tell an intelligible one. it is a tedious experience to watch it, with no reward at all for the audience.