Director Fellipe Barbosa follows Laura from a film premiere at MoMA to the New York subways at night, and soon becomes a character in his own film, completely enchanted with this fabulous and mysterious woman.
Before entering a prestigious American university, Gabriel Buchmann decided to travel the world for one year, his backpack full of dreams. After ten months on the road, he arrived in Kenya ... See full summary »
João Pedro Zappa,
Great idea for a film, but why would I want to watch a man urinating?!
Rogério and Paulo were friends some time back. Now that Paulo has married, the two have drifted. The film begins with Paulo and his wife coming to Rogério's home for a little vacation. The problem is, Rogério is an over-sexed middle-aged playboy and so he and Paulo's lifestyles are not at all compatible. To make things worse, Rogério sees it as his duty to try to get back the old Paulo--returning to their bachelor ways (nice friend, huh?).
This is a very interesting idea for a film but the execution left much to be desired. While there was some explicit nudity and rough language, this could perhaps be excused because the plot was so sexual in nature. However, at the very end we are treated to a scene of Rogério urinating and for some kooky reason, I don't like seeing films were you get close-up shots of people doing this! Call me a prude, but it just isn't something I want to see on film!! I think this is a case of a film maker trying too hard to be "edgy".
FYI--The subtitles from this film are only fair. Much of what is being said isn't translated well. In some cases, two or more people talk and you only get one person's dialog translated. Or, you get long bits of dialog being summarized instead of directly translated. I hate this, though some others might not be bothered by this.
UPDATE--After posting a mostly negative review, the film maker contacted me and we corresponded a bit about the film. His vision of the urination scene was "the image of a dog marking its territory was central to me before making the film". In this light, the scene, while disgusting, made more sense. I still didn't like it but can at least understand why it's there. I would have shown it from a side or rear profile just because I don't particularly like seeing men or women urinate. Additionally, the film looked much better on second viewing and was technically very well made even though I didn't like this final scene. I especially noticed the other characters--how impassive they were throughout the film--this itself was pretty interesting and gives you something to think about as well. As a result of this second viewing, I am amending my original review. It's worth seeing--just be forewarned so you know what to expect.
3 of 5 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this