MovieChat Forums > Plata quemada (2000) Discussion > The bastardization of Nene (random thoug...

The bastardization of Nene (random thoughts)


I'm rewatching the scene where Nene asks Giselle, the prostitute he encounters in Uruguay, to escape with him.

I'm trying to understand why I personally find this scene unsettling, since nobody else seems to be making a big deal out of it. And probably with good reason, as I often tend to overanalyze. But anyways, here goes..

In the climactic beach scene just prior to the scene in question, just before Angel discovers the truth about his partner's infidelity, he has, for the first time in the movie, actually made an attempt to open up and communicate to Nene about what goes on in his head. He confides his biggest fear; that Nene will leave him for someone else.

And a few hours later, to add insult to injury, this is exactly what Nene intends to do.

I believe the writers at this point are trying to (a) raise some sympathy for the Giselle character, (b) trying to show that Nene, while a thief and a killer, isn't a complete *beep* and does manage to have consideration for the feelings of others (in this case Giselle), and (c) to set the stage for the upcoming 'climax' that leads to the bandits' downfall. Note that I'm talking exclusively about the artistic choices made in the movie here, not the book or how accurately either of these accounts relate the actual incidents that occurred. I know Giselle is basically a convenient construct in the movie rather than an actual character, but indulge me anyway.

Nene's offering to take her away may be an impulse act of pity and consideration in regards to Giselle's sudden meltdown, but simultaneously, in the timeframe context of the movie it is an inconsiderate and uncaring thing for Nene to consider in regards to what we know about ANGEL'S presently very vulnerable state of mind, and especially in light of his recent confession at the beach.

Now I know these characters aren't wholesome, all-around good guys, far from it, but Nene's loyalty towards Angel is one of the constants of the story and somehow portrayed to be his main redeeming quality. For him to deliberately and knowingly express his honest intent to leave for greener pastures with a woman he has known for - what, a week? - and leave a guy he supposedly 'would do anything for' (if we are to believe his touching speech in a previous scene) behind in shambles just doesn't make sense to me at all, in light of Angel's present condition (he OD'd some 24 hours earlier in what may or may not have been a deliberate suicide attempt) and how protective and considerate Nene has been shown to be of him.

Secondly, I have problems with the very way the scene is played. It's simply too over-the-top and melodramatic; Nene is on his way out the door, Giselle holds him back, the ridiculously campy 'hit me'-debacle takes place, Giselle turns on the waterworks, which turns Nene into some weird, alternate universe, instantly lovey-dovey concerned boyfriend. Right. She must have MAGICAL tears, 'cause the tears of the male prostitute (I assume) who made a pass on him in a bathroom earlier certainly didn't seem to have much of an impact on him. I wouldn't have had as much trouble with his big empathy routine if we had actually seen some relationship development between them beyond (1) talking about Angel and (2) having aggressive, detached sex. This overblown, empathetic response (which culminates in his asking her to leave with him) on Nene's side just comes out of the blue, since I honestly don't see where this sudden affection comes from. We're supposed to take it on good authority he just cares enough about her to leave his partner behind?

Why go ahead and do the one thing he knows Angel fears the most? Sticking a pole through his heart would be more merciful, as we know he'll be devastated beyond repair anyways. It doesn't tie in with Nene's earlier actions in the movie, and strikes me as odd and out of character. Nene reasserting his wounded masculine identity by intimidating a young, gay man in a public bathroom, or by screwing a prostitute in animalistic fashion, as a result of his feeling of powerlessness and hurt from being rejected by Angel may be deemed as morally objectionable acts, but they're also perfectly understandable and in character for him. His startled, wide-eyed, sensitive response to Giselle's meltdown simply confuses me. Are we to assume these two have had a whole lot of off-screen development we simply haven't been allowed to watch unfold? Is the scene added for maximum suspense, or is it simply sloppy writing?

This scene made me question Nene's dedication to Angel, even in light of what happened later in the movie, and as such it detracts from what I believe to be the overall theme of the movie. In the unlikely scenario Angel and Nene had somehow found a way to escape from their predicament unscathed, who's to say he wouldn't make similar promises to the next young thing who happened to look at him with big, tearful eyes? A moot point, of course, since we all know how it ended, but interesting to speculate on nonetheless.

I really feel this scene could have been handled differently. It left me cold. And annoyed. And somewhat upset. But never mind me, I'm wasted and probably overreacting.

reply

That’s an interesting question. I always thought there were multiple factors at work in Nene’s invitation.



** CAUTION: OPEN SPOILERS! **



First, Nene had been bothered by Angel’s distant behavior for some time before the events of the robbery. (Remember the scene where he reached out to Angel, only to have him turn away? Nene, the tough guy, had tears in his eyes.) After the robbery, Angel’s mental condition was steadily and rapidly deteriorating. Angel had moved out of their room; he had pointed his gun at Nene with murder in his eyes; and he’d had the overdose. Angel couldn’t or wouldn’t articulate his motivations to Nene.

Although Nene loved Angel, on some level he may have come to a breaking point with all of the drama and histrionics. He may have been feeling pretty unappreciated by then, and unable to cope with any more of Angel’s weirdness. Maybe he had already been fantasizing about running away and, in that moment with Giselle, he just asked her along?

Second, Nene may have come to the realization that Angel was too self-destructive to be saved. Sooner or later, Nene wouldn’t be there in time to take the bullet out, or get him through the overdose. Nene must have felt pretty helpless in the face of Angel’s problems. But Giselle? Nene could save her. He could do for her what he couldn’t do for Angel.

Third, he was usually pretty wasted when he was with Giselle. After her meltdown, he probably just blurted out what he thought she wanted to hear.

However, I don’t think he ever had serious intentions of actually running away with her. After he sobered up, he probably would never have gone back to that apartment had he not been desperate to find a new hideout for himself, Angel, and Cuervo. By the time the three guys burst in on her, even she seemed to have reached the conclusion she was never going to see him again. The minute she tells Nene he has to choose between her or Angel, he runs after Angel.

Man! I love this movie!

reply

Thanks for taking the time to reply. There is so little activity on this board I didn't even bother to check back after my initial rant.

As for your insights, I can see the rationale in all of them. As for your first point, I totally agree - Angel's rejection of Nene is the key to understanding the latter's actions in this movie - it sets up the general conflict. Physical rejection aside, I don't see it as a conflict of sexuality. Sexual orientation and identity isn't primarily what this movie seeks to examine, it is touched upon, but not delved heavily into. These guys don't define themselves by who or what they sleep with. But sex serves a particular function for them, as it is a way of maintaining some sort of individual control in a society they have been cut off from. There is a very distinctive relation between sex and assertion of power being set up in this movie. Angel rejects Nene's sexual advances --> Nene feels powerless and seeks to reassert his power by sleeping around. Conflict resolved, ne? If only it was as clear-cut as that! But Nene's conflict doesn't rest on the physical rejection per se, but rather on how the withdrawal is affecting him on an emotional level - this, I believe, is what appears to throw him into an existential crisis of sorts and threatens his self-image. That is my interpretation anyways. Cue the scene where he describes his relationship with Angel to Giselle (my favorite scene of the movie) and she correctly assesses that he's fallen in love - it's a truth he can't deny but also one he simply doesn't want to hear verbalised. While he cherishes his relation with Angel, putting a name to this connection makes it all too real, and it leaves him feeling vulnerable and emotionally exposed. That kind of emotional vulnerability is a weakness that could turn out lethal in an occupation such as theirs, so it's understandable why Nene would feel compelled to disentangle himself from Angel and take off at some point. And yes, he must feel pretty unappreciated and helpless at this point, with Angel's self-destructive behaviour and lacking ability to communicate his motives. You get the feeling that if Angel just let Nene in on a little of what we learn of his motivations through the voice-overs, so much could have been avoided. But then again, we wouldn't be able to follow Nene's (and Angel's) journey into self-realization throughout the movie, and this is just so compelling to watch.

As for "drama and histrionics" (lol), this movie has its share of both. Frankly, I thought the reactions to Angel taking a bullet was a bit over the top too. Considering the line of work these two are in, it can't be the first time somebody has held them at gunpoint (or even fired at them), so I can't really see the real Brignone and Dorda making such an outright fuss. The yelling doesn't help. The scene makes for good drama, though.

As for your second point, I have pondered this too. And while I don't really understand where Nene's motivations for "saving" Giselle would come from (pity?), it can certainly be argued that he has a "Messiah complex" (for lack of a better term)of sorts. Asking somebody you've just met to move in with you upon hearing they have no place to stay certainly suggests an altruistic streak, since I'm not buying the 'love at first sight' explanation for his making this kind offer. Him extending a similar invitation to Giselle could be viewed in the same fashion, I suppose. However, it comes across differently in light of Angel's state of mind, and it makes Nene's dedication to Angel seem iffy (to me, at least). Which may or may not have been the scriptwriters' intention.

As for your third point, I'd love to subscribe to the idea that he was "wasted". It would help to explain why he acted in such an uncharacteristically maudlin fashion :)

Oh, and as for this:
"However, I don’t think he ever had serious intentions of actually running away with her. After he sobered up, he probably would never have gone back to that apartment had he not been desperate to find a new hideout for himself, Angel, and Cuervo. By the time the three guys burst in on her, even she seemed to have reached the conclusion she was never going to see him again. The minute she tells Nene he has to choose between her or Angel, he runs after Angel."

This was my initial interpretation as well, but then I read somewhere that an early version of this movie featured a scene which showed Nene packing his stuff, preparing to leave Angel; then he gets emotional, has a change of heart and starts unpacking his gear again. I don't know at which point in the movie this scene was supposed to have appeared, but I like to think it might have occurred when he comes back from Giselle's apartment late at night, after the conversation which leads to him letting Fontana go, rather than after the scene in which Giselle asks him to choose. Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part, but he seems to have pretty much made up his mind at this point, and it makes little sense for this scene to occur at a time where his boyfriend is in the next room tearing the wallpapers down. Either way, regardless of where it was supposed to have occurred, I'm glad they decided to cut it as it would have been redundant to the plot.

In summing, to get back to the topic at hand/scene in question; it's not so much about Nene being desperate about wanting to escape from his current predicament (Angel's deteriorating mental state, the pain of the constant rejection, running from the law, hiding out etc) and how these might all have been contributing factors in his making the offer to Giselle. While his motives for doing so are (deliberately?) vague, I agree with all the potential reasons you listed for this. There are other factors as well. But that's not all that bugs me or even what bothers me the most about this scene. It is Nene's overly empathetic, maudlin response to Giselle's breakdown that made me scratch my head and wonder if I'd suddenly tuned into a soap opera (at one point he looks like he's going to burst into tears too, but I guess they decided that would be too much solidarity and empathy for a character who is neither a psychiatrist nor a priest offering pastoral counseling). While I have no problems with him feeling a certain degree of sympathy for her, and offering some sort of consolation when she self-destructs, it just doesn't make much sense for him to look as devastated as he does and react so strongly to her plight unless there is some kind of emotional connection involved - and, like I said, judging from what little development we've seen between these two so far (screwing like bunnies and talking about his boyfriend) this assumption is a little too much to ask the viewers to just take on good authority. Not to mention that his later actions (i.e. throwing her out of her own apartment) negate this assumption and makes the scene in question even more WTF. They've only known each other for a very limited amount of time (as seen on-screen anyway) and as such the intensity of his reaction just comes out of nowhere and is blown out of proportion, pity or no. I like this movie for its gritty, subtle, unsentimental approach to the story and its characters; the claustrophobic tension, the moral ambiguity and the hint of strong feelings lurking under the surface. For the most part this movie doesn't fall victim to over-the-top melodrama and pathos. Then this scene comes along and makes me want to throw something at the screen. Again, the yelling and overacting doesn't help.

I'm having a hard time articulating in precise terms exactly what it is about this scene that gives me such an overall negative feeling (English not being my native language doesn't help), so I should probably just let it go. All I know is that when I first watched this movie and this scene came along my initial reaction was "Hang on, did I just miss something here?", and having watched this movie a handful times since I still get this reaction. And it just goes on seemingly forever when it could easily have been cut shorter and still made the point. Suffice it to say, I can't stand plot holes and poor characterisation. Especially when I get emotionally invested in characters, which I somehow ended up being with Angel and Nene. The implications of this scene (and especially the way it is played) cheapens the impact of the movie for me (for all the reasons mentioned and more), to the point where it almost makes it unbearable for me to go on watching. And like I said already, I doubt this was the scriptwriters' intention, so partly I'll chalk it up to poor writing (and execution). But who am I kidding? I'm probably the only one who makes a big deal out of this one scene, so never mind me. I'm not usually one for overreaction, though, so I'd really like to understand (for my own peace of mind)what it is about this scene that makes me react so badly. Hence the long-winded rants.

And just before I sign off, here's another thing that puzzles me about this scene: why is he comforting her at all? She's the one that insulted him, not the other way around. He doesn't really do anything wrong. What sparked this scene off was how he reacted to her insulting his masculinity by making derogatory remarks about his sexuality. It's not the only time in the movie she resorts to this either. This kind of behaviour is somehow more acceptable from a female? It boggles the mind. She's the one who should be apologizing.

I do love this movie (its flaws aside). However, so few people are aware of it and it frustrates me not having anyone to discuss its finer points with.

reply



** CAUTION: OPEN SPOILERS! **



I can understand your frustration. “Plata Quemada” is on my all time top ten list. While I love it, there are a few things that annoy me. One of which is the over the top reaction to Angel being shot. Taking a bullet is not a good thing, but Angel is still on his feet. As you point out, one would expect professionals to maintain a more calm-under-pressure demeanor. When Nene and Angel begin screaming each other’s name, it was a little too “John-Marsha-John-Marsha.…” I feel it detracted from the “El Hecho” section of the movie.

While there are a few ridiculous scenes, there are also some that are sublime – cinematic poetry. For example, Angel walking through the church juxtaposed with Nene walking through the Men’s Toilet, or Nene’s soliloquy played over Billie Holiday's "Ill Wind” to name just two. Fortunately, the excellent scenes far outnumber and outweigh the embarrassing ones.

The movie’s most ridiculous scene (IMO) comes at the beginning of the sequence that’s bothering you. Giselle is giving Nene a back rub, talking about reading his skin like a book but she can’t see the end of the story yet because it hasn’t been written. Then she makes the overture, “I’ll write on your page if you write on mine.” Nene sensibly takes this as his cue to leave and tries to get up. But she is sitting on his back and pushes him down, “This isn’t good for you? Scared? So? You’re not the only one. Fear has us all like this. And you love someone on top.”

That last bit does trigger annoyance in him. He makes a more serious effort to get up. She rolls off him like a cat and lands standing next to the bed. They’re facing each other and Giselle begins that inexplicable business, “Hit me. You won’t be the first or the last. Hit me. Think I care? Pain wears off. It vanishes.” She starts slapping his shoulders with all the force of a week old kitten. “Now it’s my turn. Let’s play your game. Hit me.” He stands there for a moment and then sits down on the edge of the bed still staring at her. She makes a strangled sound and her lips start to curve. I really thought she was going to burst into gales of laughter at this point, but no…those are sobs. Wait…what?! She was SERIOUS?! Where did THAT come from? The woman is a prostitute and she’s addressing a man that she has known fewer than ten days, apparently angry because he won’t commit to her. So, they both seem way out of character.

Why does he make the offer? He seems to give us two clues.

The first is comes after she says she wants to die. Nene is visibly shaken by that, “Nobody dies here. No one is going to die. Nobody’s going to die.” (Fontana later points out that Nene already knows it's suicide to remain with the others.)

In the second, possibly more important clue, Nene says, “My brother is gone.” (“Mi hermano se fue.”) We know (and Nene knows) that Angel is back in the apartment hideaway so he isn’t gone in the sense of having packed his bags and taken the bus to Colonia. So, what does “gone” mean here? Gone out of my life, as though my brother and I are dead to each other now? (At the same time, in another of those great juxtapositions, Angel is smashing his NYC snow globe. Apparently he feels that his dream of a future with Nene is over now, too.)

How significant is the infidelity revelation at the beach earlier that afternoon? (Frankly, as he stalked off and waded into the sea, I feared Angel was having an Alfonsina Storni moment.) It appears both Nene and Angel consider it to have been a very serious falling out. Only a few hours later Nene is asking Giselle to come away with him, and Angel has smashed the globe that symbolizes his dreams.

It's very interesting about the deleted scene of Nene packing his bag and then unpacking. I think it would certainly have come after the conversation with Fontana. I don't think the timing was possible in the apartment between when the three arrived and when Nene kicked Giselle out.

This is a movie that just cries out for a deluxe DVD treatment with deleted scenes and perhaps a commentary track by Piglia and Piñeyro.

reply

Since I'm a chronic insomniac, I might as well spam online forums some more *sighs*.

The woman is a prostitute and she’s addressing a man that she has known fewer than ten days, apparently angry because he won’t commit to her. So, they both seem way out of character.

In Giselle's case it’s kinda hard to judge whether or not she’s in character, since she is so underdeveloped and we learn so little about her. But for a seasoned prostitute, she certainly acts way out of character. There are people who actually find this scene touching. That must be another gut reaction to her breakdown, because when you look at it objectively her behaviour in this scene is actually quite despicable. If we remove the context frame of the movie for a moment (and forget that Nene is supposed to be the 'bad guy' and Giselle the 'victim' of his actions), and just judge this scene from an isolated point of view, then going by the words and actions alone she really is the main offender. But then of course she cries, which immediately absolves her of all blame and places her in a position where she must become the recipient of pity and comfort. That's what this scene boils down to, and I take some issue with that.

As for Giselle, I’ve seen two distinctive main routes people have gone in terms of describing her character, and neither of them are satisfactory. On the one hand you have the "stupid bitch that gets in the way of gay loving"-crowd, a fraction who are biased since they’d have this attitude no matter how well her character was developed. On the other hand you have the "poor innocent victim" approach mentioned above. Which is just plain inaccurate. Are we to judge her by her actions alone (which we have to, since we're not given any backstory on her), she's anything but. There is also a minority group comprised of people who take the 'femme fatale'-approach to her character. I'd have to count myself among those. The problem is, I don't think she was intended to be a femme fatale (or any one of those petty categorizations), but if the shoe fits...

Here’s what we actually learn about her through observing her actions onscreen: when she doesn't get her way with Nene, she usually (as mentioned already) resorts to one of two tactics:

(1) insult his masculinity by making derogatory remarks about his sexuality, and/or
(2) burst into tears.

As we've already established, this works like a charm in the scene we’ve dissected. So when he kicks her out, she goes for the tears/insult combo again, hoping to spark a similar reaction. In addition, she gets in his face and yells at him a lot, and she physically assaults him thrice; twice by hitting/attempting to hit him (even if she does have the strength of a week old kitten it is still an offensive act) and then she's effecting what seems to be a rape attempt in the hallway (she’s literally JUMPING him, trying to tear his clothes off). Sexual harassment of the reverse kind! When I first saw this scene I thought he'd actually agreed to leave with her, but no, it's a last pathetic attempt on her part to influence his decision and stop him from ditching her. Desperately clingy, much? She asked him to choose, but she's clearly not taking no for an answer. When all of those tactics fail, she decides to go to the police and turn them in, which ultimately gets them killed. Nene stole her apartment (note that he actually offers to leave and find another shelter at one point, but she doesn't accept this either. She wants him to ditch the other two and commit exclusively to her. Never mind that they've had no development at all) and he didn't follow up on his offer to take her away. Not a nice thing to do! Hell hath no fury like a scorned woman. But she certainly gets her revenge, as her decision to snitch on them not only gets the three crooks killed, but also triggers a bloodbath of epic proportions.

Are we supposed to feel for this girl?

Everything she does is motivated by self-interest. It's not as if she gives them up for the 'greater good' because she knows they are criminals. Even the crooks are shown to act selflessly and have compassion for others, but the females in this story are sadly underdeveloped in this respect. This movie doesn't exactly show women in a good light. She comes across as manipulative, emotionally unstable, calculated and vindictive, a femme fatale if I ever saw one. She isn't really revealing any likeable traits, and as such I'm having a hard time sympathizing with her (even if she is being treated poorly in parts, the way her character is written simply doesn't inspire any pity in this viewer - and I do try). God only knows why Nene does, as he doesn't know her much better than the viewers do. It’s naive on his part to assume she won't rat on them. For all this talk of Angel supposedly being the 'slow' one, he has a better grasp of the gravity of the situation than Nene does. He is jittery and wants to take off from Giselle's apartment, as he doesn't trust her to keep quiet about their whereabouts. As it turns out, his suspicions prove right. When he picks up the door phone, only to find a police officer on the other side of the line, he has a look of complete non-surprise on his face. As one reviewer said; "it's hard to feel much sympathy for Giselle when she ends it all screaming "Puto! Puto! Puto!" So much for the innocent victim approach. Even if she is a woman scorned at this point in time, it doesn't justify her actions. She's as antagonistic as they come. What she is victim of is poor characterization. It is hard to judge her motivations accurately when we don't learn anything substantial about her. Here's an interesting tidbit; in the behind-the-scenes documentary Piñeyro and Bredice go on in length about how the character of Giselle would do anything to be an office clerk or have a similar regular 9 to 5-job, rather than being a prostitute. Nice info, but if this little detail is somehow essential to understanding her character you'd think they'd have included something about it in the movie. Really though, it pretty much goes without saying. I'd like to meet the prostitute who regard his/her occupation as their one true calling in life rather than a means to an end. And really, a prostitute character with emotional wounds and self-worth issues is hardly very original, is it :/

I also read an interview with Pineyro where he described her character as mainly being there to tie different parts of the plot together and act as a catalyst for bringing the story to its conclusion. Which kinda confirms my suspicions; her character is merely written to function as a plot device (poor Bredice, she doesn't even get to play a real character). But a plot device who fails to come across as anything but a plot device is simply poorly written. Maybe they should have refrained from composing this catalyst character, ‘cause she surely is the weakest link in this movie. Her characterization is poor and inconsistent. Subsequently her interactions with any other characters are likely to make them act inconsistently in response to her as well. The flawed characterization invested in this character rubs off on Nene's character in the scenes where they interact, and as such it manages to diminish Nene's character as well. Here ends my examination of the Giselle character.

This is supposedly a character drama, but in reality Nene and Angel are the only characters portrayed as somewhat well-rounded and multidimensional. This is mostly due to the acting skills of Sbaraglia and Noriega. Not to undermine the efforts of the supporting cast or the production crew, but in the hands of two lesser actors this movie most probably wouldn't have worked. I've become increasingly fond of Noriega's acting in this movie. Initially, upon first viewing, I was swept away by Sbaraglia's inspired interpretation; he's such a physically expressive actor, and I'm in love with his face. He just seemed to outshine the rest. I like how he infuses his character with little mannerisms. Observe how he licks his lips after kissing Angel on the floor, for instance. I find that little gesture deliciously naughty for some reason. However, over time I have come to value Noriega's understated performance just as much. This was surely an incredibly demanding role for him to get into. When he approaches Nene on the beach in the ‘bite mark’ scene you referred to, Nene backs off, looking a tad scared. The look in Angel’s eyes would make me back off too – he looks menacing. Together, they just sizzle. And their on-screen chemistry seems to have extended beyond the set (there's a wonderful scene in the documentary where Noriega explains how the relationship between Nene and Angel 'rubbed off' on himself and Leonardo), which makes their chemistry even more believable. They should do another movie together. I’d elaborate in length about the many scenes of the movie I actually love, but since this is turning into another doctoral thesis, I’ll save that for another entry.

As for the “Mi hermano se fue”-statement, I didn't take it to mean "we are dead to each other". I personally read it more as "My brother HAS gone", which has a slightly different meaning. Like “I’ve lost him” or “He’s left me” (I think that on the French dvd edition the subtitles actually say "my brother has left" perhaps a more accurate translation than "my brother is gone"?). If Angel has given Nene the silent treatment before, he most surely wouldn’t be willing to open up to him after the confrontation where he learns of his partner's infidelity. I can't imagine any words passed between them in the car on their way home from the beach. In that respect he might feel Angel is well and truly ‘gone’ for him this time, that they’ve lost any chance there might have been to reconcile and work things out between them. After the confrontation Nene probably believes their relationship is no longer salvageable. Furthermore I took it as a possible acknowledgement of what you touched upon in one of your earlier replies, that Angel’s mental condition has deteriorated to the point where Nene has given up all hope of trying to communicate with him. Especially when he follows up his invitation with the words "what do we have to lose?" (hardly the most romantic of phrasings, is it?) It suggests that he feels he's already lost everything that actually holds any value to him.

Actually, after running this sentence through several online translators the translation that comes up most often is actually "my brother went away". Could there be a third possibility, perhaps? Maybe he is simply lying to her to make his invitation seem more sincere? Because she most likely wouldn't feel comfortable about accepting the invitation if she thought his 'twin brother' would tag along as part of the package? Although I wouldn't put it past her to accept it anyway.

I think the significance of the infidelity revelation is that it finally brings things out in the open. The truth is on the table, suspicions have been confirmed, now there are consequences to deal with. And we already know these guys don’t communicate well, so they’re more likely to avoid the issue, turn emo and brood in private (if Angel owned any Linkin Park albums this would be the perfect time to fetch them out) rather than try to talk to each other and voice what they actually want from their relationship (which I suspect is pretty much the same thing). I don’t think Nene has cheated on Angel until this failed heist came to be, even though we’ve learned from the voiceovers that Angel has been rejecting him for months.

I doubt these two have had the traditional ‘are we exclusive to each other’-talk, but you certainly get the impression (at least in Angel’s case) that fidelity is somehow implicitly expected between them. Angel’s reaction certainly suggests as much, as does Nene’s feelings of shame/guilt/fear/inner turmoil upon being found out. He can’t even look Angel in the eye for fear of what might be showing there. Angel clearly sees Nene's infidelity as the ultimate violation of trust, and he is pissed off and heartbroken. Enter the scene where Angel wades into the sea, and Nene shoots out the record playing the Brenda Lee song: “Pretend you’re happy when you’re blue, it isn’t very hard to do.” Nene is tired of pretending. He is most likely also tired of making an effort to understand and coming up short. It isn’t the only time music is used to underscore the characters’ emotions. You mentioned ‘Ill Wind’. There is also the song ‘Vida Mia’, serving as Angel and Nene’s ‘love theme’ in the movie, last heard in the very scene we have been debating (as Nene looks wistfully into space, only to be brought to an abrupt halt when Angel smashes the globe).

But even though their relationship is in shambles at this point, Angel still relies on Nene on some level, if his reaction to entering Giselle’s bedroom and seeing her packed suitcase is any indication. Even after all that’s gone down between them, he still gets devastated upon learning Nene has been planning to leave him. So much for burning bridges. I think his smashing the globe isn’t only about his relationship with Nene coming to an end, it is also an acknowledgment of the fact that his fate is pretty much sealed. Although for Angel these are two sides of the same coin. He can’t survive without Nene. So no future for Angel. He is doomed either way. Nene has a way out – and he knows it. Had he taken up Giselle's offer in their last scene together (the only time she articulates an actual offer), he would have made it out alive. As you said, he is aware that staying with the others under these circumstances is suicide. When he chooses to follow his heart and opts to stay with Angel, he effectively chooses death. In the "physical expiration of the body" -sense, anyway. By the time their final hour finally approaches Nene and Angel have come clean with their feelings, they have reconciled, their troubled souls have found peace. As far as so-called unhappy endings go, this at least is emotionally satisfying. The burning of the money is a final act of catharsis, and there is an uplifting quality to the last shot (which shows them suffused in light). It suggests they've found some sort of redemption.

This is a movie that just cries out for a deluxe DVD treatment with deleted scenes and perhaps a commentary track by Piglia and Piñeyro.

Ain’t that the truth. At least the European editions features some extra material, like the behind-the-scenes documentary I mentioned. I bought the German edition, which has some interesting movie subtitles (it even transcribes some of Nene’s whispered words in the last scene). But the documentary isn’t subtitled and my Spanish leaves a lot to be desired. The French edition features subtitles on the documentary – in French. I tried to get the gist of what they were saying by pausing frame-by-frame and typing the sentences on the screen into online translators (yes, I really am that pathetic).

The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply



** CAUTION: OPEN SPOILERS! **




And just before I sign off, here's another thing that puzzles me about this scene: why is he comforting her at all? She's the one that insulted him, not the other way around. He doesn't really do anything wrong. What sparked this scene off was how he reacted to her insulting his masculinity by making derogatory remarks about his sexuality. It's not the only time in the movie she resorts to this either. This kind of behaviour is somehow more acceptable from a female? It boggles the mind. She's the one who should be apologizing.

OK, yes! What she says and does is actually more insulting and forceful than the dialog I repeated in English. It does make him mad enough to jump up. Which she follows with the ridiculous "hit me, hit me" stuff.

Poor Nene! He starts off apologizing, "I wasn't going to hit you, I swear."

It never even occurred to me that he was going to hit her. Throughout her tirade the look on his face was more amazement than rage.

I've heard there are guys who cannot bear to see a woman cry. Maybe you nailed it in your first post and she really does have "magic tears"!

reply

I've heard there are guys who cannot bear to see a woman cry. Maybe you nailed it in your first post and she really does have "magic tears"!

It is settled, then! I think I've exhausted my 'serious quota' for tonight with the incessant rambling I posted in the reply above a few minutes ago. I’m suddenly getting flashbacks to an old episode of classic Star Trek, Elaan of Troyius. It featured a woman whose tears had a biochemical composition with the ability to overpower any man that came into contact with them. Maybe Giselle is a distant relative.

Wouldn't I just love to get a hold of the part of Sbaraglia's script that details this scene only to discover it featured a description like this;

"Nene, whose reaction to women's tears is similar to that of people allergic to the sight of blood, will, upon seeing Giselle's breakdown, completely abandon his character and turn unrecognizably mushy. Sapfest ensues. That’s the basics. Break a leg!"


Speaking of the scene in which Nene asks Giselle to leave with him, isn’t it funny how the first thing he brings up is the MONEY?

Alternate scene:

Nene: Okay, crazy chick. I've lost my brother, the only family I ever had, and as such I have nothing left in the world to lose. I do, however have lots and lots of DOUGH, so I've come to the decision I should run off to greener pastures and attempt to start a new life. Now I don't want you to get the wrong idea; I have no burning desire to settle down with you; in fact I'm not even sure I like you very much, since all you do is belittle me and act neurotic, but I tend to attract these kind of people, and seeing as how I'm in a generous mood today you can tag along if you want to.

Giselle: COOL

I'd have liked to see this. Completely in character, no?


The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply

Elaan of Troyius

! I remember her well!



** CAUTION: OPEN SPOILERS! **





I agree with you on almost everything. The only thing that I question is whether the audience is meant to feel sorry for Giselle. I never pitied her, or felt that Nene had wronged her in any significant way. (Her apartment was a total loss by the end of the film, but she more or less brought that on herself.)

From the first moment she appears on screen giving Nene the once over, Giselle has that-girl-is-Trouble written all over her. But, a femme fatale? That would be more like Rita Hayworth in “Gilda.” Giselle may want to manipulate men, but she comes across as way too desperate, too needy, and more than a little skanky. If she's a femme fatale, she's the Walmart edition. When she meets Nene for the first time, she grabs his crotch while telling him she’s imagining what their children would look like. It’s not exactly “come hither” behavior, even for a hooker. (You have to wonder how successful she is at her job.) The fact that she has any success with Nene at all is amazing. (Then again, Nene is a special case. He's been isolated for a long time, and he's desperate for some human interaction. Does he even know what "normal" interaction is?) Who knows? Maybe it amazed her, too, and that’s why she feels entitled to pull out the “bitchy girlfriend” tactics?

The only time I thought she was even a bit sympathetic was when she made her offer to Nene about using her as a cover, complete with safe house and knowledge of how to avoid security checks. He warns her she could be killed doing that and she replies she’s willing to take the risk. So, she is not without redeeming qualities in the context of their “relationship.” (What was with all the sniveling in that scene? Is she supposed to be holding back her tears? Or does Bredice suffer from hay fever?) Nene seems genuinely touched by the offer and seriously considering it until Angel shows up and Giselle starts using her “inside knowledge” to wound him. That put Nene off her for good. What would have happened if, instead of revealing Nene’s confidences about Angel, she had simply left the room?

Whoever selected the music for this movie did an outstanding job. In addition to the songs you mentioned, "Cumbia bendita" (Blessed) when Nene tries dancing with Angel, or "Y mi alma lloró" (And my soul wept) as Angel is running away from the carnival, or "Mis noches sin ti" (My nights without you) while Nene is picking up a random guy at the porn cinema. All the songs have significance. It was well done!

You're correct that “Plata Quemada” would have been diminished by lesser actors. Noriega does a lot just with his hands. For instance, near the beginning of the movie when Angel finishes his push ups and comes to bed, his hand is somewhat relaxed on the pillow. As soon as he realizes that Nene is awake you can see the hand start to tense up. Just before he rolls over, it’s a clenched fist. Or in the scene where Nene is holding a sobbing Angel on Giselle’s bed, as Nene comforts him Angel’s hands start to relax and then move over Nene’s hands. Echarri also gives an excellent performance in his smaller role. Watch him over Angel’s shoulder during the beach confrontation scene. He’s certainly not the focus of that scene, but his face speaks volumes. There are so many small details that contribute to the overall excellence of the film.

You make an interesting point about the money being the first thing Nene brings up when he invites Giselle to run away. The money in “Plata Quemada” may also have magical properties. At least Nene seems to believe it does. Later in the film, as he gives some last minute instructions just before the big shoot out, Nene says something like, “Remember, they can’t touch us as long as we’ve got the money.” (Oh yeah?) These guys have already killed three or four people, including policemen, yet Nene seems to believe that the only reason they’re being pursued is because they ran off with the Bs As police commissioner’s share of the proceeds. (It has been years since I read the book, but I seem to remember that the bystanders were pretty neutral until the burning money started flying out the window. Then they were enraged at the criminals, not for all the murders but for destroying “all that innocent money.”)

"Mi hermano se fue" just means "my brother is gone." Either he rode a bus/train/plane/thumb out of there, or he's "gone" in the sense of no longer in the picture. Nene is saying he's no longer in the picture. "Dead to each other" was an ill considered choice of words. I went over the top in reaching for a way to express it. "Dead to each other" would imply some degree of mutual satisfaction in the separation and, while Nene may believe in that moment that they can never reconcile, it's not satisfying to either of them. His inflection when he says it does make me think he's basically resigning himself to that. "My brother is gone. Come with me." Apparently Nene has a real problem with being alone.

The following day it's business as usual between Nene and Angel as they're stealing a getaway car. Their working relationship appears to be fine. When they're approached by the police officer Nene gets out his gun, but he's prepared to talk first and try to avoid trouble. However, Angel is still taking his cues from Nene and looking to him for direction. Had Angel not misinterpreted Nene's intention and killed the cop, there would have been no hot pursuit. Without the urgency of having to find somewhere to hide immediately I doubt Nene and Giselle would have ever seen each other again. (Now I'm back where I started... )




reply

I’ve seen reviewers describing Giselle as some kind of a ‘helpless victim’. Again, I’m telling you, it’s the tears. Not only do they affect any male she comes into contact with on-screen, her tears are so powerful they can reach through the celluloid and work their magic on unsuspecting male viewers assembled in movie theatres as well. It doesn’t matter if they’re brought on by hay fever or emotion, the effect is the same. Nene seems to feel plenty sorry for her in the craptastic (and now thoroughly over-analyzed) Scene-of-all-Evils, and unaware that he’s being manipulated into making promises he won’t keep, but then again he has dopey moments throughout the film which make me question his intelligence, esp considering the fact he’s supposed to be the ‘clever’ one. To put it this way; shooting out a record on a public beach is a great way to get your picture in the newspapers, but publicity is the last thing he should be craving at this moment. Instead of having a go at Angel for being indiscreet, maybe he should have led by example instead. Again, a very nice scene in terms of demonstrating his emotional state, but if you take a step away from that and look at his actions from a plot angle it is simply a really, really dumb thing to do.

You’re probably right that ‘femme fatale’ isn’t the right term. I was looking for an easily recognizable label to distinguish it from the other theories I put across, and ‘femme fatale’ was the first one that conveniently popped into my head. My grasp of the English language isn’t always the best when I’ve gone 72 hours without sleep.

The fact that she has any success with Nene at all is amazing.

Well, Nene is with somebody who at this point in the movie has quite literally closed the door on any kind of communication, so maybe he views the directness of her approach as a welcome break from the routine. He’s desperate for companionship, but beggars can’t be choosers, so why not go along with this lady who practically throws herself at him? After all, it saves him the time and effort of making pointless small talk, especially since “Where do you live? Let’s sleep together.” is pretty much where the conversation would have ended up anyway. Suffice it to say; he didn’t enter the fairground in the hopes of encountering somebody he’d get on with, his primary concern was finding somebody he could get off with. So I’m not too amazed he elected to go home with the more than willing Ms Skanky, no.

You have to wonder how successful she is at her job
Failing as a prostitute can’t do good things for your self-esteem. No wonder she is suicidal.

The only time I thought she was even a bit sympathetic was when she made her offer to Nene about using her as a cover, complete with safe house and knowledge of how to avoid security checks. He warns her she could be killed doing that and she replies she’s willing to take the risk.

I thought about bringing that scene up in my previous post, actually. I’m a cynic, so I get a different vibe from it. It has already been established that she is self-destructive and has a death wish. What exactly does she risk by making this offer if she’s so tired of her life in the first place? She is desperate to get out of her predicament too. If she dies in the process, then so be it. She’ll take the chance anyway. I’m anything but convinced her offer is motivated by altruism rather than self-interest. She’s all too eager for Nene to dump his mates for her benefit, how does that make her more sympathetic? I’m led to believe her concern for his safety doesn’t run particularly deep either when the first thing she does upon having her offer rejected is to run directly to the cops and disclose their location. When his choice isn’t to her liking she yet again resorts to really objectionable behaviour. Maybe I’m being too harsh on her. Or maybe I’m too busy rolling my eyes over the fact that she so specifically points out that “a couple, a man and woman” will be able to make it out safely. To me it just seems like another (albeit very subtle) reference to what she thinks of his preferred choice of bedpartners (she can’t help herself) and how she hopes to get a chance to cure him of this affliction. But on the other hand she’s relaying a fact (a man and a woman would draw less attention). So I may be reading too much into it.

What would have happened if, instead of revealing Nene’s confidences about Angel, she had simply left the room?

What do you mean exactly? What would have gone down between Nene and Angel if Giselle left upon Angel’s arrival or would Nene have taken up the offer if Angel hadn’t interfered?

As for the second scenario: aw, we're going there again? I ‘d kinda settled on the idea that he’d actually made up his mind at this point, but now I'm back to uncertainty. At this rate I'll probably end up convincing myself that Nene and Giselle is actually the central love pair of the story and that I've been watching the movie the wrong way all along, despite all evidence to the contrary. Too much analysis will do that to you. At some point I guess you just have to take some things at face value.

Anyways; to me Nene seems pretty eager to get Giselle out of the apartment, even though he’s going to great lengths to make her leave voluntarily. He even tries to pay her off, which she doesn’t exactly take kindly to. While a certain concern for her safety could be one of the reasons why he wants her gone, another, bigger part of me believes it’s mainly because he’d rather not have her and Angel under the same roof any longer than necessary. But he certainly wants her out, for one reason or another. I’m not at all sure he is considering accepting the offer she comes up with as a last resort, even if it does seem to take him somewhat by surprise. So I kinda reckon he would eventually have thrown her out anyway, regardless of the circumstances leading up to it. Would she really have the power to affect his resolve a second time, just because he’s moved by her offer? Is he really that changeable? Then we’re back to the premises of my original post. Run, Angel, run!

Personally I have a hard time seeing Nene actually leaving. With all of them crammed into the not too spacey apartment I don’t see how he could be taking off without letting Angel know, so he’d actually have to break the news to his face, something I doubt is in his ability to do. Toying with the idea and making loose plans while depressed and under the influence of booze and magic tears, yes, but further than that? As you said earlier, he should have sobered up by now. As strained as his relationship with Angel is, they still manage to seem inexplicably bound together. Angel is dependent on him to the point where being cut off from Nene would be equivalent to being taken off life support. Does he have it in him to survive on his own anymore? How did he even survive on his own before they met? I don’t think Nene’s conscience would be able to bear the burden of knowing he had been given an escape route while his more vulnerable other half was left behind to face an uncertain fate. Unless one believes Nene is untruthful when he tells Angel that Giselle holds no importance to him. She was a safe place he could escape to when the claustrophobia of staying at their current hideout became too suffocating, and she might have been able to offer him a modicum of physical comfort for a short while, but that’s as far as her significance goes. As I've pointed out, asking me to accept she has any importance to him beyond that, based on what we've seen of their "relationship development" so far requires a stretch of imagination I’m not sure is in my ability to make.

There is also the popular theory that he is deliberately using her for shelter all along. While I don’t subscribe to this theory myself, there are some clues that may be interpreted as being indicative of this. For one, upon meeting her he is very interested in learning where she lives. One thing’s for certain, if providing a shelter was his major intention all along, he certainly put up a convincing act in the much debated ‘sob scene’. But then again, we’ve already established he was acting way out of character in that one. It doesn’t take too big a stretch of the imagination to ponder the possibility that he might have been using her at some point, even if it certainly would say some pretty nasty things about Nene’s character.

As for the first scenario, they’d actually have come to blows - finally! They’re guys, after all, they communicate with their fists. No, really. But this one is more interesting to ponder, that’s for sure. Don’t we actually see Angel coming up and standing behind the glass wall before she even makes the offer? I think Nene is aware of his presence already early on, and the fact that he hears their little exchange. And he calls him out on purpose. For better or worse, he is ready to take whatever confrontation comes next, which I suspect is what would have gone down if she had left the room. Only in this case they would have to address the issues themselves rather than have it spelled out for them by a go-between. There are issues between them that need to be addressed. The whole movie is building up to this confrontation, honestly. Running away (physically or metaphorically) will solve nothing. I think they both had come to acknowledge this, so in one way or another they would have been forced to tackle their problems in the aftermath of this scene. Your tip would be as good as mine as to what would actually have been said, though.

I'll address the second half of your post later. Now I desperately need a few hours of shut-eye.


The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply

** CAUTION: OPEN SPOILERS! **




What I was considering was that Nene was having a kind of maudlin night with Giselle after the beach blow up. He said what he said. (Which I don't believe he would have followed through on.)

Then there is a series of rapidly changing circumstances. He goes back to the apartment and has the little chat with Fontana. Nando has been captured by the police and is probably telling them everything he knows.

So, by the following morning Nene, Angel and Cuervo need to find a new place to hide. Apparently, even without Nando and Fontana in the picture, Losardo will continue to help them otherwise why would Tabaré still be with them? Clearly at this point Nene plans to go with Angel and Cuervo. Giselle is not a factor in his plan.

Things seem to be progressing as planned until Angel shoots the cop. Nene is furious with Angel. When they manage to get into Cuervo's car Angel tries to shoot the wounded Tabaré because he misinterprets a little joke Nene made. So, whatever assistance they had in Uruguay jumps out of a moving car. Nene becomes even more enraged and says some ugly things to Angel, questions why he ever trusted him, remarks about Angel's mental health, etc. The look on Angel's face is so pathetic. I'm sure Nene never spoke harshly to him before.

If they had a new hideout destination in mind before, they have to abandon it now. Tabaré is in the hands of the police and has no reason to withhold any information or remain loyal to the trio. The cops are in hot pursuit. Where to go? Where to go? Angel and Cuervo don't have any contacts in Uruguay, but Nene does know one person. He doesn't have any other choices.

When the boys arrive at Giselle's apartment, Nene is still furious with Angel. As soon as Nene gets Giselle out of the apartment (the first time), Angel immediately slams him against the wall and puts a gun in his face and threatens to go psychotic on him. (I'm always struck by how calmly Nene takes that episode, but it probably did nothing to improve his mood.) Giselle returns and makes him a pretty good offer, actually. At least she's giving him a chance to stay alive. Nene's tone of voice is very cold when he calls Angel out from behind the screen. If Giselle had just left the room at that point without taunting Angel it could have gone differently, depending on how angry Nene was with Angel at that moment. (People often do or say things in anger that they would never do or say otherwise.) Instead, what she says to Angel shames Nene back to his senses.

Nene being "the smart one" is certainly debatable. He comes from a prominent family and probably has the best education of the three. He's not hearing voices like Angel, or obsessed with girls and Gassman like Cuervo. Being "the smart one" in that group isn't really saying a lot. He certainly does a lot of stupid things in the movie.

Angel, the Blond Gaucho of the book, is clear cut. The rural kid with the horrific childhood who migrates to the big city and becomes a vicious criminal. Angel in the movie is a different character, and it's interesting to contemplate his back story. For one thing, he's a Spaniard. When, why and how does he end up in Buenos Aires? He mentions Bilbao and also Marseilles as cities he apparently thought were bad, though not as bad as he finds Bs As. When he meets Nene he has no money and no place to stay. How did he live? Was he a criminal before he started doing jobs with Nene? How long have Angel and Nene been together before the events of the movie start? I have lots of questions about Angel.

reply

Don’t really have much time atm, but just a short comment on your last post. If I came across as too stubbornly close-minded and opinionated in regards to this scene, then I apologize. That was not my intention. Certainly there are sefveral angles to it.

Tempers are flaring in this scene, alright. Everything you said is perfectly reasonable. She gives him a chance to stay alive, and considering how stressed out and furious he is with Angel he could very well have opted to take it in the heat of the moment. (I still don’t think Angel would have allowed him to leave without some sort of confrontation, though). But even if he had left, his anger would have dissipated at some point. What would then have happened? Would he have gone back, even if it meant suicide? I honestly don’t see him building any sort of life with Giselle, so I am doubting their association would have lasted in the long run. Or even until they reached their new hideout. For all the reasons mentioned before and more, that’s a relationship headed towards domestic abuse sooner or later. I don't view Nene's decision to stay behind with Angel and Cuervo as important only in regards to his relationship with Angel; but his choice to stay also implies that he is finally taking responsibility for his earlier actions, come what may, rather than taking the easy way out.

I agree with you on Angel (in the movie). His soliloquoy on the boat certainly opens up tp a whole lot of questions that remain unanswered. I can’t decide if the overall lack of a backstory (this pretty much concerns all the characters involved, really) is something I should be grateful for (as it allows me to fill in the blanks myself) or simply frustrated about (as in some cases it could be taken to suggest that the writers simply don’t find these plot details to be of paramount importance in regards to the story they want to tell.) If they don't find these details important enough to expand on, should I make the effort to do so or just assume they were left out for a reason? Usually I have no problems filtering out what details to focus on and whatnot, but I admit to finding this movie confusing in parts. Pineyro isn't Stanley Kubrick, so I'm not sure I should be taking the "2001" approach as far as deeper analysis goes.

In that vein, I suspect we may have put far more thought into the Giselle character than the writers did. In a movie spanning over two hours her total screentime constitutes a grand total of something like 15-20 minutes. So I’m probably doing the movie a disservice by being so stuck on details of lesser importance, such as the motives of this poorly developed character and what she represents in the context of the story. Noriega, Sbaraglia, Pineyro hardly mention her at all whenever discussing the movie in interviews, so I am most likely exaggerating her overall importance to the plot. Rather than opening up the circle, she closes it. Her actions send Nene right back into Angel’s arms. Which I suspect is exactly what this plot device was created for.

[Yes, this really is my idea of a "short comment".]

reply

You're certainly not coming across as opinionated or closed minded, and I hope I'm not either. Frankly, I'm giddy with joy being able to discuss the movie with someone else who loves it. I've shown it to most of my friends but, for some reason, they're not as enthusiastic about it.


** CAUTION: OPEN SPOILERS! **




Anyway, as Angel told Nene on the beach the previous afternoon, the voices have already been saying if he kept on behaving as he was, Nene would leave him and find someone better. So, he was more or less hoping for the best but expecting the worst by then. Soon after came the infidelity revelation, followed by the getaway fiasco. If Nene announced he was leaving with Giselle, I think Angel would have been devastated - but not particularly surprised. If Angel thought Nene was going to leave with this woman, I don't think he would have come to blows with Nene. He probably would have done exactly what he did - go into another room and claw at the wallpaper in despair.

Had Nene actually left with Giselle, she would not have gone to the police; therefore Angel and Cuervo could have remained safely hidden in the apartment for a little while longer. Sooner or later, they would run out of food or get cabin fever go outside and get caught. Or maybe Cuervo would decide to leave Angel, too. Without Nene, Angel wouldn't care what happened to him.

There is no future for Nene and Giselle. Under the best possible circumstances, running away together might have gotten Giselle away from the carnival and Nene could have avoided the police - temporarily. Even if they managed to stay together until his money runs out, eventually they'd have to go back to work and they have limited job skills. Nene would always regret leaving Angel, and he'd blame her. Also, the police will be after him forever for the Buenos Aires heist and murders.

No matter what Nene does, everyone's prospects are pretty bleak.

So, she's a plot device. Would we really want her to be anything else?

reply

Merry Xmas to you, then! Ditto to what you said. This is the first time I’ve actually had an in-depth discussion with anybody about this movie, which is why I’m going overboard in my responses. Imagine being nine years pregnant instead of nine months. That’s an image which should illustrate my feelings of being ‘overdue’. Most of my friends are male, and sci-fi-fans (like myself), so I’m not sure how interested they’d be in a ‘relationship-story-slash-sometimes-hard-boiled-action-movie-detailing-the-life-and-times-of-two-gay- lovers-on-the-lam’. Then again I suppose it wouldn’t be too far-fetched to sell it as a science fiction movie, since we’ve now established it features quite a few items with magical properties.

I'd love to debate PQ 24/7, but unfortunately (or fortunately) real life intrudes ever so often. First my little parrot family was increased - two small new members made their entrance two days ago. They seemed unusually small and sickly, and I was a little worried the little weaklings wouldn't make it (esp. since the mom appeared to take no interest in them), but the tiny little buggers seemed to have some fight in them and miraculously managed to survive the night and a few hours into the next day. That was all the strain these tiny organisms could withstand, however, so by noon yesterday I had to fit them into their two little pre-arranged matchstick box-coffins and go ahead with funeral services. Not much I can do when parents reject their offspring. So I've been mostly offline for the last two days, thus unable to incessantly spam online forums. So I am in mourning and will make this post complaint-lite. Or at least rant-free. OK, enough off-topic chatter.

I like your alternate scenario writeup. Now I'm envisioning this grand finale; juxtaposition of scenes (since Pineyro is so fond of this editing tool) showing the four leads in different locations all typing job application forms. Fade to black. The end. What a great, dramatic ending that would have been.

I feel like we've explored enough aspects in terms of the scene I opened the thread about, no? Some times I paint myself into a corner analysis-wise [if you think this is bad, you should see some of my ravings about ‘A Clockwork Orange’ - I based an entire university assignment paper about moral systems/beliefs off that movie]. So before this thread outlives its usefulness I'd rather take some time at this point to talk about the many things about this movie that make me happy rather than miserable.

First things first, the music (since I am a veritable music addict). Do you own the soundtrack, then? I don’t, but I’m planning to audiorip the movie from the dvd and have the dialogue removed. I need to search online for the lyrics of the songs you mentioned. In addition to the titles you listed, they should have included Frank Zappa's "Oral Sex at Gunpoint" as musical accompaniment. Now let's see if you can guess which scene I'm thinking about. Never mind that this little 80's electronic synclavier piece would have been a complete mismatch with the rest of the score (not to mention the time period), it would just have been so interesting to see them try and sneak that one past the censors.

And now for something completely different; fappage (if you'll pardon my French).

Let's start with some of the supporting cast. As for the aforementioned Bredice, I haven't seen her in anything apart from PQ. I was unimpressed with her performance in this movie, but I understand she's a popular comedy actress in Argentina.

Some time back I accidentally tuned in to a movie named ‘El Aura’ on the movie channel Silver. It stars Ricardo Darin and Dolores Fonzi. Dolores isn't on the screen long enough to leave much of an impression in PQ; but she was quite good in this one. It was a pretty good movie too.

Now let’s move on to the leads. I agree with you re: Echarri - he really makes the best out of his part considering he has so much less to work with than the other two. I must admit I haven't seen any of his other work, even though "El Metodo" was actually shown in several movie theatres here in Oslo. Maybe "Las viudas de los jueves" will be too. There is currently an interest/demand for non-Hollywood movies up here (which I couldn't be happier for), so I wouldn't rule it out. I think "El Metodo" did quite well, actually. It did manage to get some press, as I recall. It seems as though all the actors (quite a few of them, at least) from PQ have been reunited in different constellations in various other movies. Except for Sbaraglia and Noriega, that is.

Additionally re: Echarri - I didn’t think it was fully well explained why he went on to become a loyal ally/friend to Angel/Nene and deciding to stick around when initially he was so sceptical, even hostile towards them. He seems to have developed a great deal of affection for both Nene and Angel (and their relationship) by the time the beach scene in question comes around. But I agree, it's a very good scene in regards to adding some more layers to the Cuervo character, who up to this point mostly had been portrayed as the hyperactive, fun-loving sex fiend/comic relief (don't have to bring up his dancing, do I? Priceless). Much as I enjoyed his histrionics, it was nice to see some additional (emotional) depth added to him. I like how he followed Angel when he walked off and (with a great deal of compassion) managed to calm him down enough to make him lower the gun, to prevent him from making a scene.

There is also the scene of Angel, Nene and Cuervo in the car shortly before the heist is to take place, when Angel offers Nene his hand to snort cocaine off. Cuervo's little double take upon observing this little exchange unfold is simply delightful. “Hey, is something going on between these two?” He totally steals that scene for me. But I also quite like the little cocaine-sharing moment itself. As ‘wrong’ as it is on so many levels, it’s a little gesture that speaks of intimacy and familiarity and I like how it’s played as though this is an automatic, everyday thing for them to be doing (since they seem blissfully unaware of how this act may come across to others). And notice how Nene holds on to Angel’s hand a little bit longer than he strictly needs to. If at any point in the movie they act like a ‘couple’ it would be this scene (how crazy and twisted doesn’t that sound). It’s hardly as domestic as, say, picking out china or wallpaper, but for these two individuals it’s probably as close as you can get.

[Re: re: re: Echarri: upon searching for info about him some time back, a news item about him posing for a gay magazine came up, complete with photos. I can't seem to find it now.]


As for Sbaraglia, I just found a nice, comprehensive interview with him where he talks about several aspects about the movie, including briefly getting into some of the things we have debated (plus other non-PQ-related things). http://www.lanacion.com.ar/nota.asp?nota_id=213396. He seems to pretty much agree with my interpretation of the movie. You may have seen it already, but take a look (if you want) and see if there's anything that stands out for you. There are things I don't understand (online translators can only help you so far), but I think I get the overall gist of it. I found it interesting, because he sometimes comes across as somewhat guarded, almost scripted in his interviews. Deeply serious about his work and very, very correct. Even so I always got the impression that he's a sensitive person who doesn't compartmentalize too well, and here he comes flat out and says it.

Nene was initially my gateway character into the movie. Even though I realize I come across as pretty critical of him (don’t we always chastise the ones we love?). It frustrates me that Sbaraglia apparently hasn’t been offered any parts that truly showcases his talent since. He clearly considers PQ his crowning achievement acting-wise. He should get more attention.

Noriega is actually pretty well-known up here. Not saying he’s a household name or anything, but his name certainly sparks recognition even among less educated film buffs I socialize with. I did notice his ‘hand acting’. It’s also interesting considering Nene’s little soliloquoy about Angel’s hands. Those who deem his performance too ‘flat’ should take a look at his body language. I love the scene where Angel rests his hand on Nene's pillow. In addition to what you pointed out, to me it also signifies that while the voices in his head are telling him to ‘keep away, he’s off limits’ he still can’t help but reach out on some small level. Nene notices. When he turns around to face him, he has the most vulnerable, hopeful look on his face. ‘Will he allow me to be be close to him tonight?’ The way he approaches Angel in this scene is so cautious and gentle, so afraid of overstepping the boundaries. Then the door is shut on him again.

Short recap of other scenes I like: the tango scene you mentioned. At first I thought this was another ‘rejection’ since Angel pushes him off, but then I realized they were both grinning like crazy throughout the whole thing. When Angel turns away from him, he’s still smiling. Just a little moment of levity among all the tension.

The depiction of their first meeting could easily have come across as somewhat sleazy, considering the circumstances, but it somehow managed not to. Angel placing his liquor bottle inside Nene's jacket (and removing his cig, but this deserves a separate entry) just strikes me as such an oddly proprietary thing to do. As for your speculation as to how long they've been together at the start of the movie, this is something I've been wondering about too. If Angel has been rejecting him for months already, they certainly must have been together for quite some time (considering how devoted they are to each other), because surely Angel hasn't been pushing him away for the entire duration of their relationship. A year, at least? Possibly more? For the duration of the movie the relationship is presented as fairly lopsided, and while Nene probably always held the 'prime caregiver' position in their relationship, at one point it was clearly more balanced and mutual. We occasionally see Angel be the instigator and initiate contact. I would have loved to see some of what their relationship was like in the beginning, before the troubles set in for real and Angel's mental condition rapidly worsened. I'm not talking nausea-inducing, excessive cuddling, or cooking each other dinner or any of the sort. Just a throwaway scene or two which would help to explain why they are so dedicated to each other. Because frankly, this is something we are simply being asked to accept and take for granted.

You mentioned juxtapositions. Pineyro really likes to use juxtapositions doesn't he? In addition to these you mentioned, there is also the scene where Nene describes Angel to Giselle, juxtaposed with a scene showing Angel lying in bed playing with his, umm, tool (caressing a gun in bed? Paging Dr. Freud) directly followed by Nene/Giselle's animalistic copulation routine, intercut with Angel cutting the love line/life line/both inside the palm of his hand and taking a drug overdose.

I shouldn’t have to mention the scenes where Angel removes the cigarette from Nene’s lips. It manages to somehow come across as far more intimate and erotically charged than any of the movie’s graphic sex scenes. Whenever straight actors play gay characters on film, I am embarrassingly aware of the fact that I’m watching straight actors play gay characters, but not so with these two. Very sensual.

The last scene; after Nene has been shot, and Angel is cradling him. Nene says he is hearing voices (we hear them too). Before Angel shoots blindly into the air he covers Nene's ear. For some reason that little detail gets to me.

The fragility and tenderness of their relationship is shown to be such a strict contrast to the lives they’re leading. Unlike, for instance, the Beecher/Keller relationship in the prison series Oz (if you ever watched that show), where the violence of their everyday lives heavily impacted on and became a central ingredient of their love affair as well.

I sometimes get stuck on weird details too. I can't watch the “John-Marsha” –scene without thinking that Angel needs a haircut. And - lo and behold - later in the movie he appears to have had one! So at some point, between hiding out and learning the contents of his little Spanish-English dictionary/phrase book by rote memorization, he at least managed to squeeze in the time to see a hairdresser .

Also, there is the scene in which Nene uses checking up on Angel's wound as an excuse to have physical contact with him. In this scene Angel chides Nene for not studying English because they'll need it to get by in New York. In his little "monologue" he utilizes some English words to put his point across; "Angel? What Angel? Wrong! Wrong!" So he's reached the letter 'W' by now. He was only at 'A' in the car before the heist. So at least Angel has been good at his studies.

I take it you speak Spanish? I always get the feeling some crucial details might have been lost in translation (talking about the US dvd transfer here). Omitted subtitles that miss out on parts of the dialogue or glaring errors that you can think of, off the top of your head? The subtitles on the German dvd are a little more detailed and even differ a bit from the US one.

I’m thinking about your initial request for a deluxe version with deleted scenes and audio commentary by Pineyro and Piglia. I think I’d trade Piglia for Figueras (or add him to the mix), since he’s the scriptwriter, and since the movie script departs quite a bit from the book in regards to which details are emphasized. And as for deleted scenes, I’ve always wondered about this pic:

http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/9816/plataquemada2.jpg

It is, obviously, an extension to the overdose scene (only Angel is awake and conscious), since they're at the hideout. Most likely it’s a publicity still or an in-between-takes shot rather than from a deleted scene, though.

Is there such a thing as a 'maximum character limit' as far as IMDB entries go? If there is, I must be rapidly getting there. I need to impose restrictions on myself and cut down on the monster posts. Again, I sincerely apologize.

reply

I’m sorry to hear your hatchlings didn’t make it. It’s sad, especially after you worked so hard to save the little guys.



** CAUTION: OPEN SPOILERS! ** (I guess it’s about time to go back and put that in my previous posts, too!)



Thanks for that interview with Sbaraglia! I had not seen it before, and it is very interesting. He even makes one point about Nene’s relationship with Giselle that we didn’t discuss, but I suppose we should leave it. We’ve already beaten that one with a club!

Cuervo's change of heart is interesting. He never really struck me as overly hostile to them; he's always half zoned out on tranquilizers for one thing. But, in the beginning at least, he certainly doesn't trust them (he doesn't know them). He's also like the kid who brown noses the teacher at school; always looking for ways to display his superiority / reliability to boss Fontana, whom he has known for a long time.

During the Heist sequence Cuervo is upset because he thinks Nene is going to forget about picking up the money, and he's angry because Nene pulls a gun on him. But when they get back to the apartment, it is Cuervo to tries to diffuse Fontana's anger by telling him they came up the back way through the garage and no one saw them. So, at least that early, he's willing to work with with Nene to save Angel. But he's playing both sides. He also tries to throw Nene under the bus with Fontana when he talks about how unreasonable Nene was being about bring Angel back. In the heat of the moment Cuervo's excuses are forgivable; Nene also has a big story for Fontana about how the guys in the armored car were expecting them, and Angel saved everything.

Anyway, once they all arrive in Uruguay it feels like Cuervo is trying to "test" them as he's taunting Angel on the beach. He seems to develop some respect for them after Angel decks him, followed up by the fact that both Angel and Nene are willing to turn it into a laugh. Then there's their relaxed, joking demeanor in the car on the way to the hide out - Nene's teasing about the little black book; Angel's little "joke" at Cuervo's expense followed by a kind of adolescent attempt at pummeling. I thought he appreciated the fact that The Twins don't hold a grudge. Also, Cuervo bears some guilt and responsibility for making the Uruguay sojourn worse As Fontana points out, the cops know where they are because Vive gave them information that Fontana had ordered Cuervo not to give her. So much for his superiority / reliability. (Did you notice how Angel's eyes slant over to Nene at that moment? He is watching Nene for a clue on how to handle that revelation. But Nene just accepts it, and so does Angel.)

Finally, Cuervo's conversion seems complete when he inadvertently lets slip about Nene's infidelity. He admits he screwed up big time on that one and tries, unsuccessfully, to turn it into a joke. As you watch his face over Angel's shoulder you can see he really regrets his indiscreet words. Later when Angel and Nene are sharing a kiss, you see Cuervo avert his eyes either to give them some privacy or because the intimacy is too strong for him. (Poor Cuervo! The love of his life is the flighty, undependable Vive. And I think he senses the difference.)

So, although, when they come together for the job they don't know each other, I think Cuervo learns to respect The Twins (they're tough, strong, and they'll shoot you as soon as look at you), and he also admires them for their loyalty and devotion to each other.

There are so many sweet, tender moments between Angel and Nene. It’s so well handled; they don’t overdo it to the point of sappiness. For instance, in the scene where Nene is removing the bullet, he makes an effort to keep Angel’s focus on him instead of the pain. He maintains eye contact and manages to keep up a line of chatter about NYC and how he will have to depend on Angel for everything when they’re there. (Overall, Nene doesn’t show too much interest in the NYC plan, although he's aware it's an obsession with Angel.) But he also slaps Angel a couple of times in that scene to get Angel to quiet down so he can get the bullet. Or, after Angel’s OD, Nene is shaken as he wraps him in the blanket and makes all the soothing sounds, “There...there…there. I’m here. I’m here.” But the next day, they’re on their way to the beach as though nothing happened.

It’s funny, and sad, and sweet the way Angel is trying to teach himself English by reading that tiny dictionary. (Considering what he has to work with, he does an amazing job!) I suppose, he’s working on it so diligently because Nene isn’t bothering with it at all. Angel seems to be preparing himself to take on responsibility for their welfare when they get to NYC. According to the soliloquy on the boat to Uruguay, Angel dreams of “saving” Nene. He’s sure he can do it, too, if he can only get Nene out of Buenos Aires. But, poor guy! Angel always seems to be the one who needs to be rescued.

The scene you referenced near the end where the police are coming up the stairs and Nene makes his little joke about “hearing voices” is kind of funny. Angel fires a machine gun right next to Nene’s head and screams, “SHUT UP!” Then, with great concern, asks Nene, “There…is that better?” It was a sad moment but that made me laugh.

English is my first language; I’m a garden variety American. But I did study Spanish is school from about the age of seven through university, and I’ve spent some time in Argentina. I think the English subtitles on the Region 1 DVD are pretty good. There are a few places where they vary, but I’ll have to watch it again to see where those are. (Usually in Argentine films, they change the content in subtitles by eliminating the cultural references. For example, the characters will have a five minute conversation about preparing their kettles, mate, and bombillas – and the subtitle will say, “Let’s make tea.” But I don’t think they did that in PQ.)

A lot of attention was paid to the music in “Plata Quemada.” Every song fits in perfectly with the story. It’s a shame that the CD is out of print. I haven't had any luck finding it in the US or on line. I visit Argentina on a regular basis and have checked record stores from Buenos Aires to Bariloche with no luck. They tell me it’s out of print there, too. I still have hope that a used copy will turn up one of these days though. I’ve found about 15 of the songs and/or incidental music on line, but not the complete soundtrack. I’d love to have the Adriana Varela version of “Vida Mia” but haven’t been able to track down her version, even on her other tango collection CDs.

Sbaraglia’s first movie, “La noche de los lápices”, is one I watched again recently. It’s a tough one about an incident that happened during the Dirty War when some secondary school students were protesting about an increase in bus fare and arrested as subversives. He’s about 15 years old, and his character doesn’t have a lot of screen time. I almost didn’t recognize him – he’s a baby! Some of his more recent films that I’ve enjoyed are, “El rey de la montaña” a pretty straightforward thriller; “Intacto” a surreal story about a man who is able to “steal” luck from other people; and “La puta y la ballena” which is also a strange story about a photographer who falls in love with a prostitute circa 1930’s – a visually stunning film. He also did one called “En la ciudad sin límites” about a guy trying to unravel a family mystery based on the ravings of his dying father, who is suffering from dementia. The role of his girlfriend in that one is played by Bredice, but it’s a small role.

I’ve only seen Bredice in dramatic roles, so I can't speak to her comedic talents. Soon after PQ, she had a supporting role as Ricardo Darin’s sister in “Nueve reinas” which was a very successful and entertaining film about some con men performing an elaborate “sting.” In “El día que me amen” she had a principle part as a very selfish girl who runs off to Europe to become an actress, leaving behind her emotionally fragile best friend/neighbor/lover. She’s definitely supposed to be a femme fatale in that one. IMO, she suffers by being cast with leading men who are usually more talented and more beautiful than she. During and following PQ, she and Noriega had a pretty well documented, though short-lived, relationship.

Echarri is surprisingly versatile. I’ve seen him in light romantic comedy (“Apasionados”), or all buff and bulked up in a Hollywood-style Argentine action movie (“Peligrosa obsesión”), or cunning and Machiavellian (“El método”). The man has range!

Noriega probably has the most extensive resume, and is the most internationally known member of the cast. (I suppose they made Angel a Spaniard in the PQ movie to explain away Noriega's accent?) He has even done a few Hollywood films, but I wouldn’t say he’s well known in the US. Before he started making films, he was studying music. In “Cha Cha Cha” he sings and plays the guitar on a version of Serrat’s, “Lucia.” He mentions in a few interviews that he’d like to do a musical; and, I see in the Sbaraglia interview that he’s interested in musicals, too. Wouldn’t it be something if they team up again for something like that?!

Anyway, there are many, many good films from Argentina. “Taxi, un encuentro” with Diego Peretti is an excellent film. He’s a criminal who steals cars at gunpoint. It has a sweet story with a bit of a gritty edge. Another one you might enjoy, though it is a completely different style, is “El lado oscuro del corazón” with Darío Grandinetti. It’s more magical-reality meets theater-of-the-absurd and filled with poetry, most notably by the late Mario Benedetti. One more, to bring the discussion back around to PQ, "El Polaquito" is the story of some very poor kids who are being “run” by the local Mafia as petty criminals working out of the Constitución train station. (Since Constitución is where Angel and Nene meet, I have in mind that had Nene not come along when he did, these Mafia bosses would have been Angel’s eventual fate.)

Gosh! These posts are so long! Maybe we should break them up into smaller points?

reply

Thanks for that interview with Sbaraglia! I had not seen it before, and it is very interesting. He even makes one point about Nene’s relationship with Giselle that we didn’t discuss, but I suppose we should leave it. We’ve already beaten that one with a club!

You mean the comment about her being a possibility to an earlier life for him? A life that ended for him when he was imprisoned? I took that to mean that it's an opportunity for him to lead a semblance of a 'normal' life that he has long been shut off from and neglected, since she (while not exactly being the most wholesome and conventional of creatures) is at least outside the 'crime circuit' he has been involved in for the last few years (especially since he follows it up by making a point of when Nene was incarcerated). I didn't think of it as anything that would merit too much discussion (as to me it's pretty obvious why he'd want to escape a life of crime seeing as how he was, as he puts it, from a 'middle class background' and had some outside reference).That was my interpretation, but if you read something entirely different into it, feel free to let me know. No matter what, calling it a "relationship" is a bit of a stretch

I’d love to have the Adriana Varela version of “Vida Mia” but haven’t been able to track down her version, even on her other tango collection CDs.

Psst, piazzollachick:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/gyedvk

I don't know whether or not you're into the whole online download thing (I'm shameless about it, but I know there are people out there who like to steer away from that kind of thing). I appear to have found the entire soundtrack, and I am currently in the process of downloading it. I've inquired as to the authenticity, but the person responsible for the upload has yet to reply, so I'll reserve my judgment util I've heard the whole thing. I'll reply to the rest of your post later. Right now I have to be sociable and prepare to attend a family function, no matter how much it pains me.

reply

Psst, piazzollachick:

OMG! OMG! It's Christmas in August!!!! Thank you!!!

reply

Glad you liked the sample. I even managed to find a version of the song with better sound quality.

In the absence of a cd - I have found the full soundtrack, and uploaded it here if you’re interested:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/gcpi4v

I compressed it for convenience, so it needs to be unzipped. I actually found two separate uploads of the soundtrack (its authenticity has been confirmed, the persons responsible for the uploads contacted me). Furthermore, I found higher quality versions of some of the more commercially available tracks, arranged them in the right order, and the whole thing turned out pretty well. I’ll still be on the lookout for a copy of the cd, but for now this will have to do. They incorporated some of the movie dialogue (such as my favorite scene), but not too painfully much (some soundtracks go overboard in this regard). Steel yourself for the last song, if you haven't already heard it. That one actually really IS schmaltzy. It is finished, IT IS FINISHED! And it sounds like a boyband-song . Too much.

The OST contains 24 tracks. I also found the third version of ‘Vida Mia’ (included in the movie, but not the soundtrack). I’ve been searching online for info in regards to where to buy the soundtrack cd, and so far I get two hits, at least:

http://articulo.mercadolibre.com.ar/MLA-52199382-_JM Used, but apparently in good condition. The price isn’t terrible either.

http://www.volumenbrutal.com/catgen.html I don’t really know what this is, or if it’s even a retailer, but the title is featured in their cd catalog (the listing is terribly confusing, but you’ll find it near the end under the title “Varios OST Plata Quemada” if you look hard.

I just thought you might be interested. I’ll get back to your other message, but right now I’m a little pressed for time .

reply

This is tremendous! I can't thank you enough!!

reply

I see you've spoiler tagged your posts. I guess I should make the effort too. Then again, the very headline should give people some inkling as to the content (or at least to the idea that it might contain spoilery content), so if they want to remain unspoiled, they simply shouldn't click it. I'm not a very magnanimous person.

He's also like the kid who brown noses the teacher at school

That was the expression I was looking for, yes (my vocabulary expands by the hour).

During the Heist sequence Cuervo is upset because he thinks Nene is going to forget about picking up the money, and he's angry because Nene pulls a gun on him.


He most probably would have forgotten. He seems to forget all about the mission (and the precious money) the moment Angel gets shot. Nene screws up more badly than Angel in this scene. He should have been the one to maintain focus and remain calm, but he loses his cool and freaks out too. The logical thing to do for somebody in their position would be to leave a wounded man behind. Cuervo is right in pointing this out. Nene’s putting them all in danger by insisting to bring him along. It also goes without saying that he should have remembered to pick up Angel’s gun. But this is not the only time Nene’s prone to panic whenever Angel is in the line of fire. Take the scene that occurred during the shootout near the end of the movie, for instance. Angel and Cuervo are separated from Nene, and Cuervo gets shot. When Nene hears the gunfire in the next room, he panics and frantically yells for Angel to come back. Angel reassures him he’s okay, but from the tone of Nene’s voice it sounds like he’s on the brink of losing whatever sanity he has left.

As Fontana points out, the cops know where they are because Vive gave them information that Fontana had ordered Cuervo not to give her. So much for his superiority / reliability. (Did you notice how Angel's eyes slant over to Nene at that moment? He is watching Nene for a clue on how to handle that revelation. But Nene just accepts it, and so does Angel.)


I did, and in retrospect it is hard to watch this scene without getting a sense of foreboding. After all, Nene will be guilty of a similar thing later in the movie, and the consequences of his indiscretion will be far more severe.

Later when Angel and Nene are sharing a kiss, you see Cuervo avert his eyes either to give them some privacy or because the intimacy is too strong for him. (Poor Cuervo! The love of his life is the flighty, undependable Vive. And I think he senses the difference.)


His eyes drift briefly over to them during their little ‘moment’ on the floor too. I always took it as a look of amusement, curiosity and maybe a hint of envy. So, my reading of it isn’t too different from yours.

There are so many sweet, tender moments between Angel and Nene. It’s so well handled; they don’t overdo it to the point of sappiness.


Indeed. The lack of sentimentality in the depiction of their relationship is what appeals to me the most. One can demonstrate strong emotion without resorting to sentimentality and cheap emotionalism. These two have no need for over-the-top love declarations (even though we get one at the end, you need headphones to hear it). People complaining about the lack of 'explicit' romance need look no longer than to the soundtrack, though. They appear to have gone out of their way to find songs that communicate in exact and unambiguous terms what the characters themselves do not. It's a nice way of saying things without stating them explicitly. [Nene and Angel have probably had their share of 'sappy moments'. I found Nene’s ‘he says I look after him’ comment to be sweet. Angel must have had a soft moment when he let that one slip out, and clearly Nene was moved by it since he brings it up. That’s the closest to ‘sappiness’ we get, and it’s tolerable ]

“There...there…there. I’m here. I’m here.” But the next day, they’re on their way to the beach as though nothing happened.


Indeed. I'm pretty sure Nene didn't leave his bedside that night, but there really was no point for them to show that. It was self-explanatory. He did try to address the incident on the beach, but we all know how that conversation turned out.

He maintains eye contact and manages to keep up a line of chatter about NYC and how he will have to depend on Angel for everything when they’re there.


I'll admit that the line "I can't even go to the toilet without you" made me scratch my head the first time around (shouldn't he be old enough to do that by himself by now?), but then I got it . You have to wonder how they're planning to get by in NY. Where will they live? What will they do for a living? How is Nene planning to get by if he doesn't know the language? Lean on Angel for everything, like he said? Learn it when they get there? While he isn't as big on the idea as Angel is, he's clearly planning to go along. So many questions. I like to ponder what their life in NY would have been like. Would it have been possible for them to stay out of the hands of the police? Would they have wanted to? I can see them wanting to start anew, from scratch, but God only knows how they’re planning to go about it.

Nene may be dual-natured (as referred to in Sbaraglia's interview), but this is certainly no less true of Angel. He is equal parts frightening and endearing. Nene may or may not have gotten him 'into' a life of crime (the movie is very vague on this), but Angel certainly strikes me as the more volatile and bloodthirsty of the two. He appears to have no qualms about killing, while Nene on his part seems to view this as a last resort, and something he’d rather avoid.

Conversely, Angel also has some truly wonderful traits. While 'quiet and brooding', he has some of the best lines/dialogue bits in the movie. He occasionally exhibits a droll sense of humour, and apparently also has great capacity for affection and loyalty. I think the ‘helpless Angel’ angle is a bit exaggerated, even if he does come across as dependent and suspicious for the majority of the movie. He’s clearly managed on his own for some time before meeting Nene. He’s apparently also been around quite a bit before ending up in Argentina in the first place. I resent the writers for throwing out suggestive info (like references to him spending time in Marseilles and Bilbao) and never addressing it again. Angel must have been born either during the Spanish Civil War or during WWII. Growing up in postwar Europe in the 50's and 60's was no picnic, and quite a few people emigrated to America. So Angel leaving Europe isn't a concept I have any problems with. So he’s Spanish, has spent some time in France (does he speak French, I wonder?), somehow managed to emigrate to South America, and now he wants to go to the US of A to build a future there. NYC is probably what he’s had his sights on all along since he left Spain. Then he runs out of money (no wonder, since he’s been around half the world already), ends up meeting a kind stranger in the toilets of the Constitución one fateful night, and the rest (as they say) is history. And thus, the movie starts..

Some people are making Angel out to have the mental makeup of a 5-year old. While he has obviously experienced things that have made him retreat into himself, I don’t necessarily get the impression he’s mentally slow. He is very sensitive in regards to his mental issues (he didn’t lash out on Cuervo for the implications about him being gay). I don't know whether his apparent schizophrenia is primarily caused by external factors (PTSD, childhood neglect, the effects of growing up in postwar Europe, whatever) or internal (genetical makeup/neurological wiring, hereditary traits, psychological issues) or a combination of both, but I do know these (and other factors) usually work in tandem and have a self reinforcing effect. Some genetical factors (like neural pathways in the brain) are also susceptible to permanent change as a result of exposure to environmental stimuli. I know this from personal experience. The whole cause-and-effect train works in a circular fashion, exerting mutual influence, and it is sometimes impossible to distinguish what causes what and which factors to emphasize. In that respect, psychology hasn't really come very far since being recognized as a science. To get back to the movie; if Angel started displaying these symptoms early on, he has most likely experienced a great deal of negative feedback and reactions from his immediate environment, which in turn has contributed to the gradual worsening of his condition. Mental illness is still being viewed upon with a great deal of prejudice and ignorance; one can only imagine what kind of grief one had to put up with growing up in the 50’s and 60’s. [And if this isn’t enough, he is gay as well. Doubly stigmatized. A potentially combustible combo. No wonder he ended up a criminal. Had he stayed in Europe, his fate most probably wouldn't have turned out any differently].

While Angel is clearly sensitive in regards to his mental issues, he seems to have some insight, both concerning himself and others. When Nene offers him refuge, Angel warns him, knowing that this could potentially turn out to be a cause of conflict at some point, but Nene is willing to take the chance anyway. Judging from Angel’s response, this amount of consideration and respect is not something he’s used to, so it’s understandable (and logical) why he’d develop strong, even possessive feelings about this guy, attraction set aside (that's merely an added bonus!).

So, as you can see I'm not too fond of designating the parent/child roles to the Nene/Angel-relationship, which I’ve actually seen some do . I think their relationship is too complex to allow for classifications like that. Actually it puts me off. It would be unthinkable for me to imagine Nene being attracted to Angel in a non-platonic fashion (which he so clearly is) if their dynamic was as lopsided as that. [One could make a case for Nene 'needing to be needed', but there's clearly more dimensions to their relationship than that]. Their union must be beneficial to both, otherwise why would Nene be so desperate to reconnect with Angel and resume their relationship? Yes, Nene is protective of Angel in regards to his mental issues, and Angel looks to Nene for cues on how to behave (on a work-related level, anyway), but they must be on equal standing in some aspects. Nene is so clearly smitten with him, so obviously he has found something in Angel that he relates to and likes (besides his nice exterior, that is).

And now, for the other movies you mentioned. As for Sbaraglia, I own ‘Intacto’ and ‘Concursante’. I know he won a Goya for his part in ‘Intacto’ (didn’t Noriega actually help him land this role?), but IMO he’s ten times better in PQ. I’ve heard quite a lot of good things about “En la ciudad sin límites”(I found it online, and am in the process of downloading it). Same goes for ‘Nueve Reinas’. The latter is being reworked into a TV-series these days called ‘Farsantes’. Guess who’s starring in it. Sbaraglia seems to have returned to TV work for the time being, but I hope he isn’t giving up on the ‘silver screen’ just yet. I have also found and downloaded “La noche de los lápices” (with optional english and spanish subs, hooray), and torrents for “El lado oscuro del corazón” and "El Polaquito". The latter has no seeds (only leechers), so the download will probably be slow (if it starts at all). I'm looking forward to seeing Baby Leo. Time will only tell if I recognize him!

I have also downloaded unsubbed versions of ‘El Metodo’ and ‘Nueve Reinas’. But I managed to find separate subtitle files (the World Wide Web is a wonderful invention. Thank you, Mr. Tim Berners-Lee), and both load in my VLC player without problems. This is my lucky day. When I get my dvd-r drive fixed, I’ll have all of these burned to discs. Thanks for the tips!

I suppose they made Angel a Spaniard in the PQ movie to explain away Noriega's accent?


Bingo. I believe this actually came up at one point during the PQ documentary I’ve referred to. As I recall, Noriega was perfectly prepared to learn an Argentine accent, but had no objections to not having to make the effort.

He mentions in a few interviews that he’d like to do a musical; and, I see in the Sbaraglia interview that he’s interested in musicals, too. Wouldn’t it be something if they team up again for something like that?!


They should include Echarri as well, and have a musical written specifically for them. They should be portraying a death metal group and their name should obviously be ‘Chaos, Destruction and Death’ (I’m Norwegian, and death metal is a huge and important part of our rich cultural heritage. We occasionally burn churches and sacrifice chicken too). A death metal musical! Wouldn’t you just have killed to see something like that?!

Seriously though, I must admit to being very prejudiced towards musicals. I can tolerate them in a live setting (I saw Ragtime in NY, and almost liked it), but not on film. Movie musicals usually have no plotlines, and the movie setting only functions as a vehicle for the coordinated song and dance-routines. I usually fast-forward through those routines. [My sister dragged me to see ‘Mamma Mia’ last year, and I still have nightmares about Pierce Brosnan’s rendition of ‘S.O.S’. The fact that I can’t stomach ABBA’s music didn’t ].

However, I would probably find it in me to momentarily overcome my prejudices and make an exception for Sbaraglia and Noriega, were they to star in a musical together.

I am aware of Noriega’s musical background, but I’d rather see him interpret the character of a musician on film rather than star in a musical. He’d be great in a biopic a la ‘Shine’, or something of the sort. That movie received some mixed reviews in its time, but it is one of my favourite movies of all time. I think Eduardo would be great in a part like that.

reply

** CAUTION: OPEN SPOILERS! **





The logical thing to do for somebody in their position would be to leave a wounded man behind.

Fontana says something along those lines to Cuervo, "You knew what to do, Nene knew what to do. Even Angel knew what to do." I'm always confused by this. Yes, it's hard to drag a wounded man around, and they can't go to a doctor / hospital either. I suppose if they left Angel behind the cops would have eventually tired of kicking and beating him, and gotten some medical attention for the bullet wound. But if leaving a gun behind can give away their identities, how much more would the cops learn through a wounded man? Even if Angel doesn't talk, his fingerprints are probably on file somewhere. If Nando knew about The Twins professional resume, surely it wouldn't be hard for the cops to find out either. There's a direct link to Nene, and probably someone else knows something about their associates on this job, too.

I suppose because Bilbao, Marseilles, Bs As and NYC are all port cities I've assumed Angel does his international travel via freighter - signing up as a crew member and then jumping ship at the first interesting port. (Probably before he gets paid which would account for him being out of money.) I'm not sure how extensive the background checks were in the mid-60's, but I could see The Twins getting to NYC that way. Then they'd get a nice little apartment in Queens, close to the Argentine bakeries because Nene is going to need facturas and coffee. They'd probably live pretty well until the money runs out. Then they'd move to Jersey and apply for work with Corleone Family Enterprises, LTD.

In Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid , Butch and Sundance go to Argentina with the idea of owning a ranch. Eventually they fail at ranching and end up going back to bank robbery. They even had a little crib sheet of bad Spanish phrases for work..."Manos arriba!" Can't you envision Angel staying up late one night writing out things in English like, "Hands up!" so that Nene knows what to say at Chase Manhattan in the morning? (It makes a perfect international cultural exchange.)

Or maybe they would have had a last minute change of plans and decided to go to Mexico or Cuba instead. At least in another Spanish speaking country Nene could find the toilet on his own.

I agree with you that Nene is either the first person, or the first person in a long time, who has treated Angel decently. The scene you mentioned, when Angel has revealed to Nene that he hears voices and Nene's response is simply to ask whether or not he's coming along, is clearly when Angel starts to adore him. If Angel is hungry for respect and kindness, then Nene is absolutely starving for companionship and intimacy. So, each finds his most basic needs met in the other. In the beginning, when things were more relaxed and before Angel withdrew, they probably had a lot of fun and just enjoyed each other. Through their working partnership they knew they could trust each other with their lives. (For instance, the smart and logical thing might be to leave a wounded man behind, but Angel knows Nene will get him through it. Apparently this isn't the first close call they've had. Maybe Angel has rescued Nene a time or two?)

Angel and Nene discuss the voices. Nene tells Giselle about them when he's confiding about Angel. But do you think Cuervo and Fontana are aware of the voices or the extent of Angel's problem? I can't imagine Fontana hiring them for that job if he suspected Angel heard voices. When Angel makes his "I'm chaos" comment, Cuervo's expression is priceless. But Angel's just been shot, for all Cuervo knows he may just be delirious. It's possible the remark on the beach that sets Angel off when they arrive in Uruguay could have been a shot in the dark. There's a lot of the 13 year old in Cuervo.

Sometimes we see Angel making a visible effort to pay attention to what's going on around him or what people are saying, but then it's as if someone turns off a switch; he completely zones out. The "blank" look probably comes when he is being distracted by the voices. It's hard paying attention to more than one simultaneous conversation. He says he hears them all the time. Under the circumstances, Angel's doing a good job to maintain the level of functionality he has.


As far as I'm concerned, PQ is the best work any of the cast has done. I'm looking forward to "Las viudas de los jueves" to see if they can make magic happen again with Piñeyro. Too bad Noriega's won't be in it. (BTW, I hope I didn't mislead you; “El lado oscuro del corazón” and "El Polaquito" are Argentine films, but don't share any PQ cast members.)

In the Noriega interview I believe he said he watched movies about pianists with great longing for a similar role. So Shine is much closer to the mark than "Oklahoma" or "Evita." But, if Echarri has any musical talent at all, they should definitely look into ‘Chaos, Destruction and Death’! I love it! These guys should hire you as their manager! You're brilliant!



reply

First of all - a warning. I’m half-drunk. Anything I say in this post should be viewed in light of this. Not an excuse per se, but a piece of information. It could be worse; I could be full on drunk. I’m working on it with diligence, and hopefully I’m getting there before going to bed. It’s the only way I ever get some sleep (I have a sleep disorder, and yes, it really is that bad).

"You knew what to do, Nene knew what to do. Even Angel knew what to do."


My take on this is a tad more sinister than yours. You know what they do to wounded horses, don’t you? The crime circuit isn’t known for its respect for human life. I took this to mean: “you should have finished the job, then gotten rid of all traces”. That includes the gun. In other words; they should have killed off Angel and dumped him in the nearest lake. Most preferably Nene should have been the one to do this, to prove his aptness for the job and his loyalty for the mission. Angel really isn't crucial to their cause, even if Nene thinks so (for personal reasons). He's expendable, and he should have been done away with.

I agree, Angel probably travelled by freighter. The port city reference wasn’t lost on me either. I’m just curious as to why he left Spain in the first place, thus the ramblings about his possible mental condition. And being an ex-psychology student (and client) I do find it interesting to speculate about his medical history and how it might serve to explain his ‘voices’.

Can't you envision Angel staying up late one night writing out things in English like, "Hands up!" so that Nene knows what to say at Chase Manhattan in the morning? (It makes a perfect international cultural exchange.)


Aw, that’s a nice image. I knew the ’Butch and Sundance’ reference would come up sooner or later. I need to watch that movie again. Here’s another movie PQ reminds me of; ‘Dog Day Afternoon’. I really need to watch that one again too.

Or maybe they would have had a last minute change of plans and decided to go to Mexico or Cuba instead. At least in another Spanish speaking country Nene could find the toilet on his own.


I’ve been thinking about Ecuador. It’s mountain country. The could herd sheep, and then…(or am I in the wrong movie now?)

For instance, the smart and logical thing might be to leave a wounded man behind, but Angel knows Nene will get him through it. Apparently this isn't the first close call they've had. Maybe Angel has rescued Nene a time or two?


Well, people aren’t logical (even if they like to think they are). People in love even less so (in fact, the human race at large is a rather ridiculous one, and one that'll most likely end up destroying itself, sooner rather than later). This is why I question whether Nene and Angel are really cut out for the crime lifestyle in the long run. They will always choose each other over the mission. If news of this particular weakness got out, who in their right mind would hire them? Certainly not Corleone Family Enterprises, LTD . In this business, you must be prepared to kill off your closest family. Nene most assuredly would not. He’s too soft. Angel I’m less sure about. So maybe they should go into sheep herding?


Angel and Nene discuss the voices. Nene tells Giselle about them when he's confiding about Angel.


I suppose one could view his telling Giselle as a betrayal of confidence, but I don’t see it that way. I’m willing to cut him some slack on this one. First, he probably has no intention at this point of seeing her a second time. She’s a prostitute, she must hear confessions like those from frustrated husbands/boyfriends all the time. It reminds me of some conversations I had with my brother in law (now ex-brother in law) at the time when he and my sister went through their separation (minus the sex part). I'm not close to my sister, so I was 'safe territory', not too emotionally involved with either of them. What does he risk by telling her about Angel? Apparently nothing. Now if he had let slip any details about the robbery, or being wanted by the police, it would have been a different matter altogether, but he doesn’t. In fact, he never does. She finds out from the newspapers (although him rushing in, accomplices in tow, blood all splattered across his collar should be a pretty blatant hint that something just might be amiss with this guy).

Secondly, the situation with Angel is at the forefront of his mind. One of the most sad and pathetic scenes in the movie shows Nene desperately trying to communicate with Angel through a closed door ("tell me what I need to do. Please SAY something!"), and that scene takes place just prior to this one. It is fair to assume that when he prowls the carnival seeking for companionship, he’s in a vulnerable state. So when she won’t let the matter rest (he initially tries to sell her a story about being married with kids, but she won’t have any of it), he opts for honesty. “Are you alone?” clearly hits a nerve. It’s all the prompt he needs, the proverbial 'last drop'.

Besides, I don’t think he has actually tried to put his connection with Angel into words before, do you? So spelling it out is as important for his own understanding of the matter as well as anybody else’s. I’d say this is the only one time in the movie Giselle comes across as remotely sympathetic (more so than the scene you pointed out earlier). She hears him out, and she doesn’t come across as judgmental. It is only later she turns pathetic, whiny, bitter, out of character and tries to use his confidences against him.

Thirdly, his state of consciousness is chemically altered. Again, this is no excuse, but an explanation . Highly emotional state + chemical alterations = poor combination. It is a wonder he didn’t let any more delicate information slip.

Fontana and Cuervo aren’ t in the know as far as Angel’s mental state goes. That much I’m sure of. Cuervo’s little episode at the beach was played for laughs, I believe, and to set up the relationship between the twins + Cuervo. What’s interesting about this scene is why Cuervo felt it necessary to point out that ‘it shrinks under cold conditions’. Surely Angel would know as much, no? He seems offended than Angel is less than impressed with what he sees. Boys will act like that when they feel their ‘manhood’ is threatened. So yes, there is a lot of the 13-year old in Cuervo. Nothing more should be read into it, I think.

Fontana is critical of their participation in the first place; he doesn’t take kindly to Nene and Cuervo bringing Angel back, he is anything but impressed by Nene’s attempts to save Angel’s life (“what are you two, husband and wife?”) and he encourages Nene to leave while he still has a chance to get out alive. He clearly isn’t too moved by the display of commitment and loyalty he witnesses between them. So he's sceptical of them, but not on account of Angel's voices. He observes that Angel is withdrawn and somewhat 'incommunicative' (he waits for Nene before leaving because he doesn't trust in Angel or Cuervo's abilities to be reasonable), but then a lot of people are.

As for Cuervo, had they all survived, they might have clued him in at some point in regards to Angel’s condition. Angel (in particular) seems to decide Cuervo is okay after their initial incident on the beach. Nene remains sceptical of him throughout.

Under the circumstances, Angel's doing a good job to maintain the level of functionality he has.


Too good a job, actually. Logically he shouldn’t even be functional without medication. And how about the voices finally ‘deserting’ him? While a nice plot point, it isn’t entirely believable.

And as for Angel’s voices, there are at least another two angles we might be taking considering how they first came to be and evolved if we wanted to, but I’m not sure we should be getting into it. I’m in an evil mood tonight, so I’ll keep you guessing as to what I’m thinking about. Here’s a hint as to one of them: p-h-e-n-o-m-e-n-o-l-o-g-y.

As far as I'm concerned, PQ is the best work any of the cast has done. I'm looking forward to "Las viudas de los jueves" to see if they can make magic happen again with Piñeyro. Too bad Noriega's won't be in it.


Strangely enough, according to some of the early reports I read (lanacion among others), Noriega was supposed to be involved in this production. I’m not sure what happened; either the news media got ahead of themselves (most probable explanation), or he was originally supposed to participate and elected to drop out due to whatever reason.

I hope I didn't mislead you; “El lado oscuro del corazón” and "El Polaquito" are Argentine films, but don't share any PQ cast members.


Don’t worry, I wasn’t misled, I figured as much.

"Evita."

I’m trying to wrap my brain around this one. Which of them would play the part of Evita?

But, if Echarri has any musical talent at all, they should definitely look into ‘Chaos, Destruction and Death’! I love it! These guys should hire you as their manager! You're brilliant!


I'm not sure if musical ability is a requirement when it comes to death metal, but yeah! Thank you. I’m working on several scripts. One of them features two seal hunters, an undisclosed number of shamans and religious activists, and a rubber doll named Rita. It takes place in the Antarctic. Do you think I could interest them with something like that if ‘Chaos, Destruction and Death’ doesn’t strike their fancy? Didn't think so, no . I should probably become more 'conventional'.

On a completely unrelated note, I don't understand how anyone could leave music for another career, no matter how prosperous. Music is just something you don't turn your back to. But then again, judging from Noriega's statements, he hasn't really been able to do this. So for his sake, I hope he'll be able to juggle both passions.

We're on page 3! How did that happen? . When I opened this thread, I didn't think anybody would respond!

'Wild thing, I think I love you' .

But then again, that could just be the booze talking .

The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply

You make a lot of interesting points in your post, and I'd like to address them all. Unfortunately, I'm exhausted tonight and can only post some quick thoughts before I collapse.


It did occur to me the first time I saw the movie that Fontana's remark could have that interpretation. I suppose I dismissed it because I couldn't see any good reason to kill Angel over something minor (as bullet wounds go, the shoulder isn't too bad). And Nene seemed to have been correct in his assessment to Fontana that it was "only a scratch" - it doesn't seems to bother Angel once the slug is removed or slow him down. Nene continues to want to tend the wound (or whatever...) but Angel himself never seems to give it a second thought.

However, I read something earlier today that strongly implied the entire tragedy of the film hinges on Nene not obeying the criminal code and issuing the coup de grace (sorry, no diacritical marks on here) to Angel. The argument was that during those critical seconds at the scene Nene stops the getaway car to rescue Angel; then they are delayed for some unspecified "recovery period" in Bs As instead of making an immediate international getaway. (Though I didn't get all that from the film.) The point being that had Angel not been there to slow them down, the surviving gang members would never have had the final confrontation with the police.

Guess I'll have to chew on that for a while. Either way...Angel doesn't come out too well.




Yes, Nene's "confession" to Giselle should have been kept confidential. Aren't there codes governing professional behavior? You would expect confidences passed along to a priest, lawyer, doctor, or hooker to remain sacrosanct. Giselle should have her credentials revoked.



And as for Angel’s voices, there are at least another two angles we might be taking considering how they first came to be and evolved if we wanted to, but I’m not sure we should be getting into it. I’m in an evil mood tonight, so I’ll keep you guessing as to what I’m thinking about.

Well, don't keep me in suspense! I'm interested to hear what you're thinking about the voices.


I have a couple of questions:

1) On the night Nene came home late, saw the blood under the door, and rescued Angel (yet again), do you think Angel's intent had been suicide? Originally I thought that he was just fixated on something about his life line that bothered him (it kept coming up at various points). That night, between the voices and whatever other mental issues he was going through, cutting it out just "seemed like a good idea at the time." I imagined he took the injection because he wanted to dull the pain. On the other hand, he did seem to have enough experience with drugs to be able to judge the amount it would take to kill the pain of the cut and what could be a lethal dose.

2) What do you suppose motivated Fontana to wait up half the night for Nene to get home before he left? It's not as though Fontana and Nene were ever fond of each other and needed to say good-bye. If Fontana wanted to avoid talking about his plans with Angel and Cuervo, he could have taken off immediately after they went to bed. Had he wanted to be extra caring and considerate he could have left Nene a brief note, but instead he waits to tell him in person. (Or is this just "any excuse for exposition" on the part of the writers?)

reply

First - a warning and a guarantee. I have contracted pneumonia (that's Norwegian summers for you!), and I'm in a generally miserable condition, so this post is nowhere as eloquent and inspired as I'd wish for it to be. Blame it on the antiobiotics and the painkillers, they make me drowsy (I probably shouldn't have swallowed them down with wine). And lately I also have (don’t laugh) a writer’s block, and can’t seem to express myself proficiently. I guarantee I'll come back with a vengeance later.

On the plus side, I have a lot of time to kill.

You make a lot of interesting points in your post, and I'd like to address them all.


Feel no obligation to indulge me at all. I have an inclination towards incoherent rambling, and I have it on good authority my overly substantial posts (usually written in less than stellar English) can be a test of anybody’s patience. You’ve been an angel not to tell me to shut my cakehole so far.

I read something earlier today that strongly implied the entire tragedy of the film hinges on Nene not obeying the criminal code and issuing the coup de grace (sorry, no diacritical marks on here) to Angel.


That’s an interesting take. I can see the justification for an interpretation like that. There are (at least) two paths you can go by (channelling Led Zeppelin here) as far as overall approach to the movie goes. Sure, had Nene acted with professionalism and not allowed personal feelings to enter into it, the gang may very well have made it out alive instead of facing a final showdown with the police. But the key to enjoying this movie is to recognize that we are dealing with human beings (even if they are criminals), and human beings have a propensity for screwing up royally (you could say failure is the only type of proficiency we as a race have ever come remotely close to perfecting), especially when there are feelings involved.

So from a plot perspective, Nene’s lack of professionalism = epic fail. But for a director approaching the story with the character angle in focus (which is what Pineyro did), Nene’s conduct in this early scene represents an ideal leaping-off point for delving into and exploring his deeper feelings/motivations/priorities and interests throughout the rest of the movie. So it works as an initial set-up for a character-based drama. The movie is far more preoccupied with examining its central characters and their interpersonal relationships than it is with relaying the actual plot. The crime story (in this movie treatment) is a mere backdrop that enables these character studies to take place. So whether one views this crucial moment as the “tragedy of the film” or its “saving grace” all comes down the individual, I suppose. I can understand both camps.

I suppose that the movie-viewing audience who entered the theatres in the hopes of seeing a rather clear-cut action/crime thriller in all probability found it to be slow-moving, unorganized and somewhat disappointing. I further suppose that any movie-viewing audience who entered the theatres in the hopes of seeing an unambiguous, black/white distinction between villains and heroes was even more dismayed. I think I read somewhere that the national board of movie censors (or something like that) in Argentina condemned the movie for not being ‘judgmental’enough of the protagonists’ activities and proclivities.

Yes, Nene's "confession" to Giselle should have been kept confidential. Aren't there codes governing professional behavior? You would expect confidences passed along to a priest, lawyer, doctor, or hooker to remain sacrosanct.


Add “bartenders” to the list of professions that should sign a confidentiality clause. They have a lot to answer for as well.

You know what? I’ve watched the movie again, and I’m revisiting the premises of my original post. I think I may initially have been guilty of exaggerating. I don’t think Nene and Giselle have known each other for a week. There is actually plenty to suggest they’ve known each other for a grand total of two days. But I’m not going there. Not again.

Now as to your questions. I don't think I can give you very good answers to any of them.

1) As for Angel’s “suicide attempt”, I’m not entirely sure what to make of this scene. We see him tracing the lines of his palm from a very early point on in the movie (contemplating his final fate/his lovelife/whatever). It seems like a compulsive act of sorts. Angel clearly has a bad feeling about the mission from the very start, and he might (subconsciously) harbour suspicions/fears they won’t make it out alive. We also know that he is highly superstitious; he sees bad omens everywhere. So when a palm reader/fortune teller approaches him at the carnival and offers to spell his final fate/lovelife/whatever out for him, it is another bad omen, and all of his hidden paranoia rushes to the surface and threatens to overwhelm him. People cut their veins open for so many reasons; externalizing inner pain is one of the more popular ones. Bloodletting rites also occasionally have religious connotations, so Angel’s actions could be viewed as some cleansing/self-punishment ritual of sorts (in his drug-riddled mind, that is). I am no authority on Catholicism, but there is apparently plenty of religious imagery/symbolism presented in the movie (that I’d love to dive into, were I only more knowledgeable about the matter). There is also the issue with Angel's voices. But an actual suicide attempt? Not deliberately, I think. Am I making sense? Didn’t think so, no.

2) “Any excuse for exposition”, most probably. I think Pineyro had some sort of “character depth check list” that he went through systematically. One of the things I believe was of importance for him was to give even the most unsympathetic and unwholesome of his (lead) characters at least oneopportunity to do or say something that remotely resembles an honourable act. Fontana waiting around to deliver the news of his departure directly to Nene’s face may not have been the smartest thing to do (from a plot perspective), since Nene easily could have elected to blow his brains off, had he wanted to (and as you said, he could very well have taken off without a word of notice when Cuervo and Angel went to sleep), but it seems to suggest that Fontana has at least developed a modicum of respect for his cohorts and possibly a hint of remorse for taking off on his own. It’s so hard to tell with Bartis, since he is such a wooden actor. That flat expression could very well constitute ‘wild emoting’ in his book.

Re: voices. It would take a separate post to get into this in detail . But the movie doesn’t treat the origin of Angel’s voices as a matter of great importance, so I’m not sure if I should be either. In fact, since we don’t know the first thing about how these voices came about, any theory/speculation is valid. But for starters, there is the phenomenological approach which I briefly mentioned in my previous post. The term “phenomenology” has a wide range of meanings, but I’m specifically talking about it within the academic discipline of cognitive psychology. I’d love to get into it (as it’s interesting), but it is far too complex material to render in just a few paragraphs or less, so I’ll spare you the details for now (if you really wanna know about it, there are several good articles I could point you to). There is also (again) the issue of religion. Considering the stance the Catholic church has traditionally taken in regards these kinds of phenomena, Angel may very well identify his voices as being ‘spirits’ with either good or evil (mostly evil) qualities. Maybe all he needed was an exorcism. But my brain hurts too much to enter too deeply into this intangible territory at this late hour, so I shan’t.


Once again, I apologize profusely for my lack of coherence. Now I'll go watch 'Woyzeck', then wash my brain out with bleach before going to bed.

The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply

Pneumonia?! That's awful! I hope you're getting plenty of rest and that you're feeling better soon! Be careful not to overdo it while you're recuperating - you don't want to end up in hospital.

Had Nene been more professional it certainly would have been a shorter film; a much less satisfying one, too. I have to say that PQ is one of (if not the) best screen romance I've ever seen. Sbaraglia and Noriega did such a great job with that! I do hope they make another movie together in the not too distant future. It doesn't have to be another romance, but something so that all that great chemistry doesn't go to waste!

I just noticed that Nene and Angel do allude to the events of the previous night when they're on the beach the next day, right after Nene gives Angel the sunglasses. Angel wants to say something, but stops himself then he starts again, "Last night...." Nene asks, "Was it tough?" Angel says, "No. The usual." Nene says, "Your voices." Then Angel starts to open up.

Well, I'm Catholic, but I didn't notice a lot of Catholic symbolism in the movie - at least, not in the sense that James Joyce or Flannery O'Connor liked to use it. I noticed Angel had a fondness for the external trappings of Catholicism, but that's not surprising for someone who grew up pre-Vatican II, especially in Franco's Spain. Of course, before the robbery we see the miraculous medals (did they both have them, or was it just Angel?); Angel's visit to the Church (I've never seen anyone empty their pockets like that IRL); and the business at the end when Angel was reciting the Hail Mary and putting the medal around Nene's neck in lieu of Extreme Unction. Any more subtle symbolism just sailed over my head - I may be inured to it.

I don't believe I've ever seen Ricardo Bartis in anything else, so I don't know if he's always wooden. (I was thinking "hatchet faced".) But if that's all he's got in his repertoire, it was a good match for the character. The scene where they are introducing Fontana has him standing in front of the Congress building, photographed from a low angle, looking around furtively. (The narration at that point is saying he was once accidentally put in jail with the political prisoners, which is where he met Nando the lawyer.) That scene makes me laugh out loud sometimes, he looks like a cartoon villain!

Please take care of yourself! When you're feeling better we can wring a few more pages out of PQ!


reply

Thanks for your well-wishes!
Being bed-bound is boring, especially when you live alone. I'm not online too much these days, as you can understand, but I found an interesting piece of info online and thought I'd share before going back to bed:

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=1354880823&search url=an%3Dmarcelo%2Bpineyro%26sts%3Dt%26x%3D0%26y%3D0

Have you seen this? So there's a book written by the two Marcelos. I don't know if this is merely just a transcript of the screenplay or if it features any editorial notes detailing how the script came to be. It appears to be out of print in most places. Now I really wish I knew Spanish better.

The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply

Wow! That's an interesting find. I just sent the link to a friend in Bs As, to see if it can be found locally. That would make a nice Christmas present.

reply

However, I read something earlier today that strongly implied the entire tragedy of the film hinges on Nene not obeying the criminal code and issuing the coup de grace (sorry, no diacritical marks on here) to Angel.


I'm really slow. This has been bothering me as it seems strangely familiar. I have a nagging suspicion as to what article you're talking about. Does this article end up as a rant about underwear, of all things - and the director's choice of choosing boxers over briefs (or better still: being in the buff), and how this (along with other things) suggests a 'heterosexist' agenda on the part of the filmmakers?

You don't have to go into detail about this. In fact, I'd prefer if you didn't (but you say what you will, of course). A simple 'yes' or 'no' will do. But you should know that if this concerns the article I'm thinking about, I already have half a post ready . And I'm really eager about posting it when it's finished. While I don't agree with this guy in all respects, he has surely put some effort into his theories, and I do respect that.

The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply

Why, yes, that's the one!

What struck me about his underwear rant was that I need to watch that part of the movie again (gee! life can be so hard...) to see if he is correct. According to the article, when the boys begin burning their clothes Nene is wearing underwear style A and Angel is wearing underwear style B. However, by the final scenes Angel is wearing A and Nene is wearing B. So, somewhere between burning the money and the hand grenade they managed to work in a quickie but, in their haste to get dressed, grabbed the wrong underwear.

Had I noticed that at all, I would have assumed it was a continuity error. This guy's interpretation is better.

reply

Hi there, my sole interested co-debater person. Are you still around? (ETA 8/28: at this point I guess not). I’m feeling a bit better (I can sit up without falling over), so hopefully my days of complete inactivity will soon be coming to an end.

But you should know that if this concerns the article I'm thinking about, I already have half a post ready. And I'm really eager about posting it when it's finished.


Now it’s come to the point where I’m quoting myself. Next thing you know I’ll start bringing up some of my earlier posts and counterargue them by taking the opposite POV. That way me, myself and I will all have a chance to participate in this discussion. (Can you tell I’m going off on a tangent again?)

Anyways, I have several thoughts about the essay in question, and am in the process of putting some of them down on paper (metaphorically speaking), since I believe this writer (while more than a little hung up on one isolated aspect of the movie and seeing conspiratorial patterns in regards to the ‘sexual ideology’ he seems to believe it is deliberately pushing) brings up some thought-provoking issues in relation to his understanding of the movie, the characterizations and some of the events that unfold. But seeing as how it is about to turn into a monster entry of epic proportions, and brings up some less than pleasant talking points, I’m debating whether or not I should post it upon completion or just keep those thoughts to myself. While I take some time to think about it, I’ll just be silly for the time being and address some of the more light-hearted issues that have been brought up instead.

What struck me about his underwear rant was that I need to watch that part of the movie again (gee! life can be so hard...) to see if he is correct.


The things we do in the name of research. ‘Cause that’s why you’d be doing it, right? Right?

According to the article, when the boys begin burning their clothes Nene is wearing underwear style A and Angel is wearing underwear style B. However, by the final scenes Angel is wearing A and Nene is wearing B. So, somewhere between burning the money and the hand grenade they managed to work in a quickie but, in their haste to get dressed, grabbed the wrong underwear.


This could have happened, you know. I think there are a few seconds that are unaccounted for in this scene. I can just envision them now; naked on the floor, surrounded by burning money, armed police forces ready to barge in on them at any given moment, locked in a passionate embrace. Such a death-defying, life-affirming act considering the circumstances! I’m convinced this scene was shot. There must be video footage of it stacked away in a vault someplace (or maybe in Pineyro’s personal collection, har har). It may show up on YouTube at some point. If nothing else it’ll most certainly be included on “Plata Quemada: The SUPAH-SEKRIT Edition”, due to release in 2048.

Are there any other evident examples of bloopers/continuity errors that come to mind? I always wonder if there are any ad-libs/improvisations included, since all of the principal actors seem to share some key characteristics in common with the character they play, esp Echarri.

I don’t know if this is a blooper. But one minor detail that has always amused me is that just after Nene and Angel have shared a kiss on the floor, when Angel proceeds to grope Nene, he actually butts him in the nose with his gun (accident or scripted? You be the judge). Of course, Nene is in such a state of blissful haze, apparently even this feels good (or Sbaraglia is actually close to cracking up. The guy is a giggler of the highest order. I know, I’ve watched the behind-the-scenes footage). For some odd reason, this always strikes me as funny.

I do hope they make another movie together in the not too distant future. It doesn't have to be another romance, but something so that all that great chemistry doesn't go to waste!


No, it doesn’t have to be another romance . If they for some reason were cast as lovers in another movie, I’d frankly be rather surprised (though not necessarily in a negative way). I can envision them in the roles of the seal hunters in the Antarctica script I’m working on. There is no romance in it so far, if you discount the seals (I don’t usually care for romance movies, PQ being the exception from the rule), but I’m sure I could work it in. I’m absolutely sure at least one crazy, starry-eyed fangirl (or boy) must have approached them about doing another project together (in fact, I think I saw Noriega address the issue in a Q&A-session on his website a while back).

Interestingly enough, Sbaraglia again brings up his desire to star in a musical (with comedic elements, no less) in one of his most recent interviews. Apparently, he wants to sing now (movie career at a standstill, Leonardo?). I guess he wasn’t lying in the interview from nine years ago that I linked to. Maybe the suggestion of them doing a musical together isn’t so far-fetched after all? They both seem eager to do one. They must have talked about it at some point. They've been seen hanging out together at the Teatro Tarambana in Madrid, so clearly they both share a love for live theatre/music. A comedy musical! Now I’m picturing them in a Marx brothers scenario. Add Echarri to the mix, since we need three people for this image to work. Which of them would be Groucho? At first I thought it’d have to be Noriega, but then again I believe Chico was the one who had some musical proficiency on the piano. God, the possibilities!

But if every other option to get them back together fails, there is always the chance that we’ll eventually see ”Plata Quemada 2: The Resurrection”. They could go the ‘Search for Spock’ route. When Nene whispers into Angel’s ear in the final scene he is really actually transferring his katra to him. And Angel doesn’t get killed when the police enter the hallway and start firing. In the split second before the bullets enter Angel’s body, he gets beamed up (his dead lover still cradled in his arms) by a mysteriously appearing alien spaceship that has been hovering nearby, searching for humanoid lifeforms to sample. This conveniently sets the stage for a successful sequel. You know it happened that way, in one of the alternate endings that were shot (why are you looking at me like that?)

Of course, before the robbery we see the miraculous medals (did they both have them, or was it just Angel?)


I think they both have them. Nene keeps his in his pocket (he fetches it out during the heist, remember? Or are they just passing Angel’s medal back and forth between them?), while Angel keeps his around his neck. I guess Nene is a lapsed catholic of sorts who still at some level clings to the illusion of protection that this religious token symbolizes.

The reason I brought up religion (and targeted the Catholic faith in particular) is the pieta reference (art renditions of Mary mourning Jesus) in relation to the last image, which shows Angel cradling Nene. For convenience I’ll just copy and paste something I read on another board:

“Their last embrace, as the camera backs away to reveal the door and hallway forming the image of a church. Angel (how apt) holding his dead loved one as Mary held Jesus (the pieta?). The church so cruel and condemning while still Angel turns to his medal and his God and prays for forgiveness.”

I’ve seen the “pieta” reference come up in at least three different reviews/commentaries of the movie, so I just wonder if there are also scenes other than this one that are sculpted/staged to visually resemble examples of Catholic imagery (ex. other pietas), or point to existing (famous) artistic renditions of such imagery. While I am fairly knowledgeable in several matters pertaining to Christianity (I’m not religious, but my mother is a Methodist minister, and both my older sisters are also actively Christian, so I’ve been subjected to my share of indoctrination over the years), I am no expert as to how it has been represented in art through the ages, although I am familiar with some of the more famous and referenced works (by Michelangelo et al). Either way, it’s an interesting subject.

Add to this the mention I made of the last shot, which shows Angel and Nene suffused in light, and how this could be taken to mean that these two lost souls have found redemption.

The emotions I was left with when the end credits finally rolled were similar to ones that the final scene of “Breaking the Waves” evoked in me back in the day (seen that one?) Although there are several people out there who downright despise that scene (and the movie), it just floored me the first time around. While it is more subtly implied, I find there is a similar feeling of transcendence (in both a theosophical and/or a wider philosophical sense) to the final scene of PQ. At least “transcendence” is the word that popped into my head after seeing the movie the first time.

OK, so I’m closing on a metaphysical note. I think that’s my cue to stop writing for now.

(ETA 8/28: And for good, obviously, since this thread now officially seems to have outlived its purpose . This forum is essentially dead, but maybe I'll still check in occasionally. Who knows?).

The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply

Well, I didn't actually fall off the face of the earth, but I have been unable to log on for a couple of weeks. I hope you're feeling much better by now!

In fact, I've only had the opportunity to do my "research" today, and I can report that the author of that article was wrong about the underwear swapping. It never happened. I suppose even if the prop and wardrobe people weren't paying attention, surely the actors would have noticed and said something.

If the thread isn't officially closed yet, what were you going to say about that article? It seemed as though it had definitely triggered something for you.

And by the way, did we ever determine whether Nene is, in fact, a bastard?

reply

Being unable to log on is falling off the face of the earth . Real life is overrated.

I don't have the authority to officially close threads. It's my impression that mods here don't do so without ample reason either. IMDb doesn't seem too heavily moderated, which is a bit of a relief as I always land in hot water with moderators (with poor sarcasm detection skills) whenever I post to online forums. It does however have an inbuilt auto-censorship function that gets activated when you try to type out words like *beep*, *beep*, *beep*, *beep*, *beep* and MOTHER*beep*.

So, technically the thread is still open for people to participate in. No need for me to officially 'reopen' it.

Now for something infinitely important: underwear. Yes, I figured this guy had it wrong. He either saw a different version of the movie, or he smoked pot while watching, since I swear this isn't the only factual error/fabrication he's guilty of in his article. Nonetheless, I believe there actually might be an underwear situation that requires further investigation (although not the one he makes a claim about). What I'm thinking of actually ties in with one of his complaints in the boxers vs briefs rant. They're undeniably wearing boxers in those last few scenes, yes? But earlier, when Angel initially takes his pants off and puts them on the fire (when Cuervo tells him he's like the Last of the Mohicans) I could have sworn he wore briefs. You know, the same briefs we see him wearing in the early scene where he's working out, then getting into bed with Nene (I hope he's washed them in the meantime ).

The article triggered some thoughts, yes. I'll dig out my notes on the essay if you want me to, I just have to figure out which hard drive I stored them on (additionally, I'm a grammar nazi, so they'll require some heavy editing before I'm comfortable about putting them online). I might get some of that done in between catching up on work/watching 4th round matches of the US Open(they come out almost equal, importance-wise). I find it interesting that this guy pretty much comes out and labels the movie as being homophobic (he uses a more politically correct wording, but the implicit accusation is as clear as day), because I've seen other reviewers do the same. And it does seem odd that a gay-themed movie would be targeted as being homophobic because of some of the creative choices made by the filmmakers.

What always struck me about several of the negative reviews I've read of this movie is that they usually have one distinction in common; the critics have in some way become personally offended/angered/provoked by their perceptions of some aspects of the movie (in fact, I've read some rather aggressive reviews of this movie). I am personally irked/provoked by some aspects of the movie too, and while I'm not as harsh on the movie as a whole, and more willing to cut the filmmakers some slack for some of the decisions they've made, I can read these reviews and understand where the feelings come from. So revisiting this article made the revisit some of the nagging doubts I obviously harbor about the movie myself, and sent me spiralling into deep thought. And somewhere in the process of doing so, my affection for the movie has cooled down a bit. That's always the risk when you examine things too closely. When I take a step away from the movie, and observe the picture as a whole rather than obsess over details, I may be able to accept its flaws a little more readily. Or I may not. Some things shouldn't be overlooked.

So before I post any thoughts on the article in question, I just thought it should come with a health warning. You may not care for what I write.

And by the way, did we ever determine whether Nene is, in fact, a bastard?


Depends on which definition of the word we'd be using. Is Nene an illegitimate child, born of unmarried parents? Let's not go there. As for the other definition, let's put it this way. The writers spend a lot of time constructing his character throughout the movie only to butcher him completely in the space of two minutes by having him turn completely unrecognizable (they're trying to salvage his character later, but the damage is already done).

So I guess the writers are the real bastards here.





Hopp, Roger! Vamos, Feña in the US Open.

reply

Real life is overrated.


Especially when it interferes in one of the few opportunities I've found to discuss PQ!


They're undeniably wearing boxers in those last few scenes, yes?


No! Strictly in the name of research, I've just watched the last scene again, focusing intently on the underwear. The last time we actually see Angel's underwear is when he lunges across the room to catch Nene and drag him away from the window. Angel is still wearing briefs and Nene is still wearing boxers. The confusion about an underwear change probably stems from the fact that, as the ordeal in the apartment goes on, the underwear becomes quite filthy and discolored. Angel's briefs are also getting more than a bit stretched out and baggy, but they are undeniably still briefs.

You know, the same briefs we see him wearing in the early scene....


Not to worry. They sell those things in packages of three. And Angel did have some luggage with him when they arrived in Uruguay. I'm guessing they packed a toothbrush and a change of undies , along with plenty of spare ammunition.

....my affection for the movie has cooled down a bit.


I felt like my affection had cooled when I stopped watching it at least once a day, but I still think it's a wonderful movie.

I understand that the person who wrote the article wanted to concentrate on one aspect of the movie, and was disappointed with it. But PQ isn't a film about gay issues; it's an action/gangster/heist/romance. This romance happens to be between men. The problems Angel and Nene have arise from being armed robbers and murderers, not because they're lovers. As screen romances go, I believe this is one of the better ones; they really are convincing in their devotion to each other.

Okay, hit me...what have you been contemplating?





reply

Strictly in the name of research, I've just watched the last scene again, focusing intently on the underwear.


I bow to your insights (where's the worship emoticon?). Your investigative efforts are much appreciated, believe me. I guess we've settled the important, all-encompassing issue of the underwear then. I must admit to not paying overly close attention to their crotches. I'm a very poor excuse for a specimen of the female persuasion. Shall chastise myself properly now.

Not to worry. They sell those things in packages of three.

Nowadays, yes. But in the 60's?

I understand that the person who wrote the article wanted to concentrate on one aspect of the movie, and was disappointed with it. But PQ isn't a film about gay issues; it's an action/gangster/heist/romance. This romance happens to be between men. The problems Angel and Nene have arise from being armed robbers and murderers, not because they're lovers. As screen romances go, I believe this is one of the better ones; they really are convincing in their devotion to each other.


I agree. Althought I'd arrange it in a different order: (underwear retail)/romance/action/heist/gangster/(sci-fi). The sexuality isn't the be-all, end-all of the characters, or even particularly emphasized. Which is why I like the way their relationship is depicted. Even so, some of the points this writer makes are valid and understandable. And even if I don't necessarily agree with his opinions in all respects, he is right in pointing them out. No matter how much I love this or any other movie, it does have its flaws, and I don't think it's above criticism. I always hate on the things I love.

I felt like my affection had cooled when I stopped watching it at least once a day...

Fangirl . You're more of an authority on the movie than I am, then. I can make no such claim. I've "only" watched it a grand total of approx. 15-20 times myself. Why you even bother to reply to a novice like myself without resorting to arrogance is beyond my comprehension. Were our positions reversed, I'd probably be insufferable. I'm not really a nice person, you see.

Okay, hit me...what have you been contemplating?


Oh no, don't you start emulating movie dialogue like that . Unlike Nene, I just might take you up on the offer. Okay. I shall. A bit later.

While reading my thoughts on the subject, you'd probably be wise to remind yourself that the speculation I'm indulging in, and the views I'm expressing aren't necessarily representative of my own opinions on the subject. I just happen to like constructive debate, and occasionally I like to take up a different perspective and consider an issue from a variety of angles, just for the sake of the argument. In that vein I found this article quite refreshing, even if he is a little bit hung up on one particular aspect. I'll edit and post later. Right now I have a very, very important tennis match to attend to. I'll probably find some time to do the necessary adjustments to my disassembled ramblings when this match is over, just before 'Hedgehog Boy' Novak Djokovic takes the courts at Flushing Meadows...

Hopp, Roger! Vamos, Feña in the US Open.

reply

Nowadays, yes. But in the 60's?

I just phoned a friend, who is of an age to know about these things, and he assures me that indeed underwear was available in packages of three in the 60's...briefs, boxers and t-shirts! (Yeah...I know. You don't have to say anything.)

Even so, some of the points this writer makes are valid and understandable.

I'll try to reserve judgment. At minimum we've established he made one projection based on an underwear swap that didn't happen. How much credence can we give an author who gets simple, basic and verifiable information wrong? I'd probably be willing to cut him more slack if I didn't already know he's willing to posit theories based on inaccurate "facts". It's sloppy work.

Unlike Nene, I just might take you up on the offer.

You won’t be the first or the last. Hit me. Think I care? Pain wears off. It vanishes.

remind yourself that the speculation I'm indulging in, and the views I'm expressing aren't necessarily representative of my own opinions on the subject.

Okay - devil's advocate. Got it!

reply

Okay, so I'll make good on my promise and address some issues pertaining to the aforementioned article. First of all, the way this essay is written makes me question my language comprehension skills. The guy elaborates his opinions in such a detailed and roundabout way it gives me a headache. There are parts of it I find downright confusing. And some of his interpretations (of certain scenes/characters) make me wonder if he’s actually watched an alternate version of this movie, different from the one I have seen.

So inspired by this essay I thought I’d bring up another talking point or two. Don’t be defensive, these are thoughts I’ve entertained myself while watching the movie, not ones magically planted in my brain upon reading this guy’s biased rants. I agree with you, he doesn’t do himself a lot of favours considering the factual errors and the overall lack of research he's guilty of. He’d also benefit from watching the movie without his "heterosexist" goggles on (word count: heterosexist/-ism: 22. Fixation, much?). I’m using this article as a leaping-off point/convenient excuse for opening a can of worms (consider yourself forewarned), since I am EBIL.

I don’t know if the person who wrote this essay is a gay male, or just offended on behalf of the gay community, but he appears to have a bone to pick with Marcelo Piñeyro, more specifically the way the movie presents (or doesn’t present) the issue of "gay sexuality" (sexuality being the operative word here, he actually commends the movie for how it deals with love as an agape concept). But the treatment of said gay sexuality clearly doesn’t meet with this guy’s specifications. His main beef is with the implication that Nene “turned queer” in jail (not an inaccurate fact, but an actual quote, unless the translators really f__ed up). This is the mention that obviously irks him, and probably what sparked him to write this essay in the first place.

So for the sake of the argument; were we to apply this particular interpretation of Nene’s sexuality to the movie, Nene could basically be described as a heterosexual male who turns homosexual in jail, as an act of necessity and for lack of better options (no female company), someone who might or will at some point (temporarily or permanently) revert to his "original state" of heterosexuality upon no longer being deprived of multiple options. This at least appears to be this particular author’s interpretation of how Nene’s sexuality is presented in this movie. And this implication doesn’t sit well with him.

Personally I’m more than willing to accept the idea that Nene most probably hasn’t had anything but heterosexual experiences (or even entertained any thoughts of it) before going to jail (as he was only 15, 16 years old upon first being incarcerated). Whatever his sexual proclivities (voluntarily or otherwise) during imprisonment, he clearly must have taken some satisfaction from them, since he continues to seek out male company after being released - in which case those latent leanings would likely have surfaced at some point anyway, regardless of circumstance. Using "exposure to circumstance" as an exclusive explanation model for certain types of behaviour is almost as ridiculous as the widespread "rock music causes violence/moral degradation"-claims/debates that took place in the US during the mid-80’s. As if being exposed to a certain type of stimuli can magically alter your preferences, or make you compelled to think or act in a way you don’t necessarily want to. Outside influences can lead you in a particular direction, but only if you have these predilections to start with. So if Mark David Chapman hadn’t been inspired by “Catcher in the Rye” when he plotted the murder of John Lennon, he would have taken his cue from a remark he overheard near the watercooler, or something he saw on the news or read in some other book (maybe even the book that has inspired more evil and wrongdoings than any other – THE BIBLE) and found ample justification for committing the deed anyway (Salinger isn’t to blame!). Point being, outside influences won’t really change how you feel and think, it will only accentuate tendencies and inclinations which are already there. In other words, if you read this and agree with me it’s only because you already agree with me.

So to return to the topic, I can see where this guy’s frustration is coming from. This particular sequence/monologue from the movie doesn’t sit right with me either. One doesn’t turn queer. There is no scientific evidence to support this hypothesis. I know people who are gay, and they certainly don’t feel as though they had any choice in the matter. The idea of sexuality as something arbitrary, something that is dictated but circumstance is exactly the kind of ignorant crapola the gay community has been fighting for years. Because the notion that one can be “made gay” isn’t too far removed from the idea that one can be seduced or conditioned into becoming gay (with the right kind of influence), a claim still very much perpetuated by certain fractions of society. Furthermore, if you want to carry it to extremes, it also opens up to the interpretation that this is a condition one can be cured of (again with the right kind of influence), case in point being specialized behaviour modification programs (governed by f.i. religious communities or other ‘special interest’ groups) dedicated to "de-gaying" people who suffer from this unfortunate, abnormal affliction, either with the aid of prayers, or through extensive therapy sessions. Now we’re entering into really scary territory.

So putting forth the idea of Nene somehow “turning queer” in jail is a very problematic one, for a multitude of reasons. In that respect I can see where this writer is coming from. Where my opinion differs from his is in his assumption that this is meant to be representative of the filmmakers’ own take on how Nene’s sexuality came to be, presented for us to just accept on face value. Somehow I want to believe that Piñeyro (et al) has a more nuanced understanding of human sexuality than that. If I am wrong, and if this guy is right in assuming that the filmmakers would have us believe that Nene’s homosexuality was a character trait that was miraculously born and constructed solely on account of his experiences in jail, then I’d be very disappointed in the writers. It would be ignorance of the highest order. My own preferred reading of Nene’s choice of words would be the following; it is intended as nothing more than a factual, informational statement about when he first started sleeping with men (as up to this point his sexual frame of reference would be encounters he has had with women). He refers to sexuality in terms of being a form of "behaviour" or a "function" he performs rather than being indicative of his "identity" or "self-perception".

As this writer likes to point out, there are traditionally several connotations to the word "queer". Among other things there are some very specific ideas about active/passive, weak/strong, feminine/masculine roles built into and attributed to the idea of the male homosexual. At some level Nene may be confused and at a loss about how to correctly identify his preferences. But this probably isn’t a problem for him until he meets Angel. His relationship with Angel defies those preconceived stereotypes which puts him at a loss. What label to put on it? Which category to file it under? "Twins" doesn’t exactly do the trick either. Angel at no point in the movie refers to Nene as his "twin brother" (the nickname isn’t even their creation in the first place), but Nene uses this designation several times. So Nene clearly needs to assign some kind of a title to whatever connection he thinks they have.

I’m surprised the writer made no specific mention of the scene we debated earlier in the thread. While perhaps not specifically "heterosexist" (I hate the word by now) the scene perfectly represents my own personal beef with the movie, and something I personally feel the scriptwriters are guilty of; reversed sexism. I'm beating a dead horse, but I feel that having Nene comfort Giselle in this scene is the scriptwriters’ way of sanctioning her earlier behaviour. If the writers find her behaviour condonable and no big deal, it tells me more about them than I’d like to know. After all, in my own case, when somebody insults me, my immediate instinct isn’t to apologize to them. Were I on the receiving end of a tantrum such as hers, I’d be pissed off. While I’m not saying Nene should have taken her up on her offer and hit her, it wouldn’t be out of character for him to just get up, get dressed and leave her behind to sob in a corner while feeling sorry for herself. But the moral of this scene seems to be: “a crying woman must always be tenderly comforted, no matter how vile and obnoxious her behaviour is otherwise shown to be.” (were I to compile a list of Things I’ve Learned From Watching Plata Quemada, this one would rank damn near the top of the list). That, to me, is more provoking than some of the examples this author brings up. Some may call it chivalry, I call it reverse sexism.

In the same vein, here’s another complaint. The movie makes no excuses for the criminals, they all eventually face the consequences of their actions. Even Vivi, Cuervo’s girlfriend, is seen to suffer some hardships. The reason I bring her up is that like Giselle, she gives up the thieves’ whereabouts to the police, but we’re led to believe she has been brutalized before doing so (there’s a closeup of her face, all beaten up and swollen). So they roughened her up in order to obtain the information they needed from her. It makes her betrayal a tad more understandable, even if it in no way provides full justification for her actions. Giselle? The movie does make excuses for her. She faces no actual consequences of her actions, but escapes from the movie relatively unscathed (her apartment is in shambles, but I’m sure she'll be rewarded some compensation from the state in return for giving up the villains), although probably even more emotionally messed up than she was in the first place. And free to roam the fairgrounds once more. How so? Because she is a woman that can turn on tears at will, like children when denied sweets at the candy store? It boggles the mind. This writer cuts her some slack too, which strengthens my supicions that we’re actually dealing with a male. He even presents his own brand of the “innocent victim” approach as far as the Giselle character goes (there was no way I could leave this unaddressed). In his version of the events she is “the hooker with a heart of gold” She may have a heart of gold. Hidden in a jar someplace. She certainly isn’t that “pure of heart” when we get to meet her. I ‘ll resist the temptation to make any further comments on this, as I’ve already elaborated in detail on my interpretation of her character. So I’m guessing Giselle is actually the Saint Mary of the story, which is why she merits this special treatment. Everything she does is apparently justifiable.

I’m saving the best for last. I’ll just quote my “favourite” part of the essay:

"The man begins to sob, certainly fearing impending incident of gay-bashing murder. But it is as though El Nene's sexual arousal depended on the other man's acute fear and humiliation, because we then see him proceed to kneel before the other man and reach for his pants; the jumps to El Nene washing his mouth with drink, suggesting it is he who has performed oral sex on the other man. Thus, there is a threatening intersection of homophobic violence and the preamble of murder, followed by an act of passive sex on El Nene's part. This sequence seems less an assertion of El Nene's sexual confusion or even of internalized homophobia, but rather a form of sexual drama that represents his anger over Angel's unavailability as a sexual partner, something that is confirmed by the cross-cut sequence of Angel seeking some sort of expiation of his demons by emptying his pockets at the feet of Jesus. The second instance involves the simple fact that the only physical sex that takes place during the film satisfies amply the conventions of heterosexist coupling, with all of the full frontal nudity allowed in post-dictatorship Argentina: the film received the most restrictive rating, but not for either the display of El Nene's and Giselle's sexual acts, nor those of El Cuervo and his lover, but for the intimation, limited to some mouth-to-mouth kissing, of sexual acts between El Nene and Angel. In this way, the only time we really see El Nene naked and the only time in which we see his genitals is when he is making love to Giselle, but never with Angel; El Nene seems to have no problem functioning as an active male, but, as I have asserted, less because Piñeyro understands that there is no necessary disjunction (although one is often created, as much by gay men as by the heterosexist paradigm) between being sexually active with either another man or with a woman, but because El Nene has, somehow, reverted to heterosexual preferences."


Nasty. This, to me, is the single most provoking segment in the entire article. I’m not fond of the “Nene as recovering heterosexual” theory, as you can understand, but I’ll play devil’s advocate again.

There is an imbalance shown in regards to Nene’s interactions with men and women in the movie, which to some degree can justify an interpretation such as this. Nene enjoys sex with both men and women. But with the notable exception of Angel, Nene’s interactions with males generally seems to suggest he regards sex with them as a recreational activity, containing no danger of possible emotional entanglement (it’s not as if the sobbing male prostitute’s tears sparked anything resembling empathy in Nene, unlike in the later case with Giselle). But his interaction with one female suggests there could be a potential for a deeper connection. It opens up to the following possible interpretation: men (with one exception) = to be viewed as mere f__ktoys for male protagonist, no strings attached. Women = could leave possible indentation in male protagonist’s psyche, and potentially lead to emotional involvement. See what I’m getting at here? We were treated to the whole “I’m not gay, it’s just him”-angle in another popular movie of its time, Brokeback Mountain. And while the reasons for presenting a romance in this way could be noble, in that it holds the suggestion that love exists in a realm removed from these petty distinctions (gay/straight/bisexual/omnisexual/whatever), I always at some level regard it as a way of chickening out of dealing with a subject.

I’ll be controversial a bit longer, shall I? I also believe that one of the reasons for giving the fling between Nene and Giselle more air time and “development” (as in her actually being crucial to the outcome of the movie) than f.i. detailing his sexual encounters with other males could, in a way, be the writers’ attempt to appease “The Powers That Be” (in regards to the “gay” issue), and cater to a mainstream moviegoing audience, in that it enables them to include scenes of a graphic sexual nature (as well as gratuitous nudity of the non-gay kind) without causing too much of an uproar. I’m not prudish (far from it), but there is absolutely no reason why the second scene between Nene and Giselle couldn’t be done with clothes on. Yes, I know this scene is supposed to take place post-sex, but the main reason it was done this way, imho, was because the writers wanted to “show some skin” (a requirement for most movies with an “R” rating these days, it seems). The women in this movie spend as much time out of their clothes than in them. I don’t mind nudity at all, when done well, but I fail to see what purpose it serves in this particular context, and as such it seems gratuitous.

You probably know how the movie got its 'R' (or was it 'X')-rating upon its original showing in Argentina. Not because of the violence, or the scenes depicting drug abuse, or even the graphic (hetero)sex scenes, but because of the scene which showed Nene and Angel spooned together naked in bed, sleeping (literally sleeping) together. This is a fact. Pineyro and Sbaraglia have both commented on it. As far as movie labeling goes, I assume that the the ratings system in Argentina is similar to that of the U.S (and other countries) in that it requires voluntary compliance. Which basically means that the people responsible for the movie don’t have to give in to distributors’/theatre owners’ demands even though neglecting to do so might have consequences distribution-wise. So Pineyro can complain about the injustice of the ratings as much as he wants to (which I’ve seen him do), the fact is he most probably went along with it when he possibly could have opted not to. Although I could be wrong about this.

So – in summing; is the movie guilty of "heterosexism"? The jury is still out on that one. I can speak no more for the intentions of the scriptwriters’ than this guy can, so it’s all more or less educated speculation. And I agree that sexuality isn’t the main issue here. But it certainly is guilty of certain instances of "sexism". Do I think this writer brings up some valid points? There is certainly room for some of his interpretations. Having said that, his research leaves a lot to be desired, he has a chip on his shoulder, and he does lose a lot of credibility points with me when he gets into the aforementioned "boxers vs briefs"- rant near the end. Whatever else, I have a hard time picturing Piñeyro and the other filmmakers sitting around a table going; "hmm, now what can we do to address the gay sexuality issue in an even less explicit way.. I know, we’ll give them boxers instead of briefs, so when the allusions to hard-ons are uttered, at least the viewers won’t be able to see it with their own eyes!" And, you know, according to your latest research this isn’t even the case, so that kills his argument right there.

In the end he uses a lot of flowery language to express his disdain over the lack of male-on-male action in the movie (I feel your pain, dude. If the brief kiss through the mouth covering had been the only one we’d been allowed to see, I’d feel cheated too), but I’m not sure what a sex scene would have added to the movie (even though I wouldn’t have protested profusely, had one been included). Then again, it probably wouldn’t have taken anything away from the movie either. Lack of raunch aside, I think the movie more than demonstrates that the characters in question are very much sexually attracted to each other. The scene on the boat immediately comes to mind. I always get the impression they’re only seconds away from literally jumping each other in that one. Perhaps too subtle for some people to detect? But very sensual.

I maintain this is the finest depiction of a love story I have ever witnessed on film. Sexuality doesn’t enter into it. Sbaraglia and Noriega do a fine job in conveying the characters’ dedication to each other. Even so, the movie is ambiguous and does raise some difficult questions, imho. But I blame that on the scriptwriters, not the actors. I’d love to see/read some interviews with Piñeyro/scriptwriters which would put my mind to rest on a few things. Figueras has a blog, but it’s in Spanish, otherwise I’d ask him.

So these are some thoughts concerning the movie that have churned around in my head lately. I'd love to pester you some more, but IMDb just truncated the rest of my message. I guess that answers my question as to whether or not there is a maximum character limit

reply

First of all, the way this essay is written makes me question my language comprehension skills. The guy elaborates his opinions in such a detailed and roundabout way it gives me a headache. There are parts of it I find downright confusing.

There is nothing wrong with your language comprehension skills. The author suffers from an acute case of “publish or perish.” (I didn’t realize they were paid for their verbiage by the pound!) Clear communication is not his goal; at least not communication with the hoi polloi on IMDB. His audience may be other academics, or this may be part of a text he uses in his classes. In preparation for our discussion, I reread the article last night. I believe the word you are looking for is – obfuscation.


…he appears to have a bone to pick with Marcelo Piñeyro….

Piñeyro is in good company. The author has a bone to pick with all of Argentine society, going back at least as far as the 19th century. (I must express admiration for his rant about the first Peron regime though, particularly his reference to Evita as “the paradigmatic fag hag.” Nice touch!)

To return to the movie, I don't really have any disagreements with you, so I hope my response doesn't come across as overly defensive.


His main beef is with the implication that Nene “turned queer” in jail (not an inaccurate fact, but an actual quote, unless the translators really f__ed up). This is the mention that obviously irks him, and probably what sparked him to write this essay in the first place.

Well, Nene does say that. During the “Ill Wind” soliloquy, he says prison made him a drug addict, a homosexual, and a Peronist. (Maybe not in that order.) Those are Nene’s words, but is Nene a reliable witness?

As you point out, he went to prison when he was 15 or 16 years old. (How old are the characters supposed to be at the time of the heist? I have the impression they’re pushing 30, but that may be wrong.) Let’s say in 1965 Nene is 30, which would mean he was arrested for the first time as a 15 year old around 1950. Whether he was interested in girls, boys, or still questioning, it’s more than likely he was a virgin when he went to prison. He may have been a smart kid, but more than half his secondary education was whatever you learn in prison. After he was released, he never went back to school. Nene is neither an intellectual nor a philosopher. His understanding of how these things work is based on prison lore, old wives tales, and the prevailing street wisdom, circa 1965. In that context, those words coming from that character are believable – because he believes it. That’s not to say it’s scientific or that the movie audience is meant to believe that is factually what happened, only that the character believes that is what happened. (And this is another point of irritation I have with that author, he’s also touted as having a particular interest in literature and theater. The “unreliable narrator” is a standard device. Why would the author castigate the writers? The line is completely in character for Nene.)

Nene loves Angel. But Nene is also a shameless flirt. The reason Angel leaves the carnival is because he saw Nene flirting with a woman outside the bar. Later, as Nene is strolling around the carnival grounds on his own, he is flirting equally with men and women. (And, of course there’s Giselle.) Nene is bisexual; and Angel is his soul mate – the love of his life.


His relationship with Angel defies those preconceived stereotypes which puts him at a loss. What label to put on it? Which category to file it under? "Twins" doesn’t exactly do the trick either. Angel at no point in the movie refers to Nene as his "twin brother" (the nickname isn’t even their creation in the first place), but Nene uses this designation several times. So Nene clearly needs to assign some kind of a title to whatever connection he thinks they have.

Yes, other people do refer to them as The Twins. Nene uses the expression himself. While he’s trying to distract Angel as he removes the bullet from his shoulder, Nene asks him how to say “mellizos” in English. So, obviously Angel, although he doesn’t use it during the course of the movie, is aware they are referred as twins. I believe you were right in thinking Nene never really tried to express his feelings for Angel to someone else before. Twins seems as good a way as any to let her know that this is someone with whom he is close / inseparable; they share a bond other people can't fathom; they love each other. Frankly, I didn’t see this “what do I call my significant other” as causing Nene any more angst than that of woman over 30 who feels uncomfortable saying boyfriend…everybody’s got problems.


… were I to compile a list of Things I’ve Learned From Watching Plata Quemada, this one would rank damn near the top of the list). That, to me, is more provoking than some of the examples this author brings up. Some may call it chivalry, I call it reverse sexism.

Nene’s upper-middle-class mama and papa raised him that way. Chalk it up to time, place and culture. It was more common 45 years ago than it is today. Even now it’s more common today in Argentina than it is the US or Europe.

Even Vivi, Cuervo’s girlfriend, is seen to suffer some hardships....they roughened her up in order to obtain the information they needed from her. It makes her betrayal a tad more understandable, even if it in no way provides full justification for her actions.

Well, Vivi is flawed but, when these events took place, she was only 16 years old. It’s understandable that a good police beating would loosen the tongue of a 16 year old schoolgirl. (In fact, as the sole survivor, all the characterizations in the book are based on her 30+ year old recollection of the week she spent around these guys.) In any case, I have to agree with Vivi and Fontana on this point; it’s all Cuervo’s fault for giving her the information.


The man begins to sob, certainly fearing impending incident of gay-bashing murder.

Back to the original title and subject of this thread - it is this that makes Nene a bastard. That he comforts Giselle, or even asks her to run away with him, can be explained away. But, no matter how frustrated or angry Nene felt because of Angel, nothing justifies this incident.


There is an imbalance shown in regards to Nene’s interactions with men and women in the movie, which to some degree can justify an interpretation such as this. Nene enjoys sex with both men and women. But with the notable exception of Angel, Nene’s interactions with males generally seems to suggest he regards sex with them as a recreational activity, containing no danger of possible emotional entanglement (it’s not as if the sobbing male prostitute’s tears sparked anything resembling empathy in Nene, unlike in the later case with Giselle). But his interaction with one female suggests there could be a potential for a deeper connection. It opens up to the following possible interpretation: men (with one exception) = to be viewed as mere f__ktoys for male protagonist, no strings attached. Women = could leave possible indentation in male protagonist’s psyche, and potentially lead to emotional involvement. See what I’m getting at here?

It’s not either/or with Nene. If he can't have Angel then he'll take whoever he can get. The guy in the bathroom (is he really a prostitute?) was a random/nameless target...never seen before and never to be seen again. Nene had at least had a few previous encounters with Giselle. In fact, he felt comfortable enough with her to share confidences about Angel. So, Giselle’s tears sway him, but Random Guy’s tears don’t.


I also believe that one of the reasons for giving the fling between Nene and Giselle more air time and “development” (as in her actually being crucial to the outcome of the movie) than f.i. detailing his sexual encounters with other males could, in a way, be the writers’ attempt to appease “The Powers That Be” (in regards to the “gay” issue), and cater to a mainstream moviegoing audience…

Absolutely correct! PQ was a pretty big budget movie for the Argentine film industry, which does not generally have deep pockets. Pop quiz: What’s the first rule of marketing? Answer: Sex sells. (And I’ll tell you it sells extremely well in Argentina!) PQ isn’t a Gay Film per se; it’s a film intended to be popular with the general public. They wanted to sell as many tickets as possible. (The Sbaraglia/Bredice nude/sex scenes may be gratuitous by some standards, but compared to Hollywood – this is pure Art House.) However, if they compromised some artistic vision in order to increase revenue, it didn’t seem to work too well. Witness the never-ending popularity of the PQ board on IMDB – it’s like a cult film with a cult of two. (Who knows? This may be one of those films that takes 15 years to catch on and then becomes an all time classic.)


The scene on the boat immediately comes to mind. I always get the impression they’re only seconds away from literally jumping each other in that one. Perhaps too subtle for some people to detect? But very sensual.

There were many scenes between Nene and Angel that were incredibly romantic and sensual. Generally, in films or books, I find that kind of interaction much more satisfying than a lot of “humping and pumping”. Yet, the film industry seems resolute on substituting h&p for romance. Hooray for Piñeyro!


I maintain this is the finest depiction of a love story I have ever witnessed on film. Sexuality doesn’t enter into it.

You’re preaching to the choir, sister! I love these guys because they love each other.


…. IMDb just truncated the rest of my message. I guess that answers my question as to whether or not there is a maximum character limit

The bastardization of IMDB…!

reply

High on euphoria after the men’s semis at the USO (the last one which also featured the shot of the century), there’s no way I can sleep until my adrenaline levels decrease, so since I'm awake anyway I’ll finally put down a reply. Sorry for the lateness. I've been busy (and, yet again, not healthy). Thankfully I have tomorrow off, as it is Election Day (and coincidentally, also my birthday, but we don’t talk about that. No geriatric jokes, please)

obfuscation


Good word. Well, I am guilty of indulging in excessive obfuscation myself from time to time. It's probably what we would refer to as "tåketale" (fog speech) in Norwegian. As my high school teacher would often tell me; “in der Begrenzung der Meister liegt”.

His audience may be other academics, or this may be part of a text he uses in his classes.


He’s a teacher? In what, sexual politics? I dabble in academics, but were I ever to take a term like “heterosexist paradigm” into my mouth, the people I interact with would hit me over the head for being too pretentious.

How old are the characters supposed to be at the time of the heist? I have the impression they’re pushing 30, but that may be wrong


My impression was that they were younger; early to mid-twenties (weren’t the real Brignone and Dorda 21-22 around the time of the incident?). I agree that their movie counterparts come across as older, but this could be owing to the fact that Noriega and Sbaraglia themselves were pushing 30 when they did the movie.

His understanding of how these things work is based on prison lore, old wives tales, and the prevailing street wisdom, circa 1965.


Interestingly, Nene’s naivety and lack of an education/a clear and unbiased reference in terms of how to correctly identify and describe his sexuality was a point I’d originally included in my post, but decided to edit out when it became too long. You phrased it better anyway. Oh yes, the narrator can be unreliable, biased and deceptive (“And would you believe it, o my brothers and only friends. There was your faithful narrator being held helpless, like a babe in arms, and suddenly realizing where he was and why home on the gate had looked so familiar..”)

The reason Angel leaves the carnival is because he saw Nene flirting with a woman outside the bar.


This scene always puzzled me. He knows Angel is nearby and can see him, and he knows this kind of behaviour is likely to upset him, so I can't see him doing it deliberately. Clearly Nene forgot to put his invisibility cloak on.

Frankly, I didn’t see this “what do I call my significant other” as causing Nene any more angst than that of woman over 30 who feels uncomfortable saying boyfriend.


I guess. Luckily I ‘m a woman over 30 who doesn’t have that problem. But this dilemma set aside, answer me truthfully: how often have you heard anyone refer to their "significant other" as their "brother" or "sister"? I don't see any reason why anybody would, unless (a) they're into incest (which I don't think applies to our dear Nene) or (b) they're in denial (which I think does).

Back to the original title and subject of this thread - it is this that makes Nene a bastard. That he comforts Giselle, or even asks her to run away with him, can be explained away. But, no matter how frustrated or angry Nene felt because of Angel, nothing justifies this incident.


Well, I already conceded that this was a morally objectionable act in one of my previous posts. For sure, there is no excuse for Nene's behaviour in this scene, but in the context of the movie I don't find it to be out of character for him (which is my biggest complaint about the scene I opened the thread on). He's feeling powerless due to Angel's constant rejections, and he reasserts his feelings of power and control by taking his frustrations out on a young gay man in a public toilet. This fellow is an easy target, and seems to be a convenient outlet for several reasons. Whether Nene regards himself as gay, bisexual, whatever, the sissy variety (for lack of a better description) of said sexuality is not a character trait he identifies with (neither he nor Angel is effeminate), but rather one that he resents, finds threatening to both his self-image and his overall idea of masculinity, and probably feels above (but not above ridiculing). For this reason, I'd say being a man who is effeminate is probably equivalent in Nene's mind to being "less than a man", and that's how he is able to justify his actions to himself. This doesn't excuse his behaviour or makes it any less reprehensible, but I'd rather have him be a bastard and stay in character than be a swell guy and abandon it.

Nene had at least had a few previous encounters with Giselle. In fact, he felt comfortable enough with her to share confidences about Angel. So, Giselle’s tears sway him, but Random Guy’s tears don’t.


He tells her about Angel practically upon meeting her. You’re not going to tell me that “sharing of confidences” was born out of trust and friendship, are you? Because I always thought it took more than an hour or three for such feelings to blossom, even in movies. The sex scene was all about escapism and channeling rather than attraction, imo. It wasn't about her at all. Anyways, we see them interact twice. I know the timeline is a bit iffy, but I'm under the impression that the scene in her apartment when he asks her to leave with him takes place later on the same day as the blowup on the beach (Angel asking if he'll be going out that night, his state of mind in the later scene etc). Somehow I can't envision Angel brooding for four or five days, THEN smashing the globe in anger and hurt. The elevated state of emotion suggests to me that the pain is still very fresh, so I have the impression that these two scenes happen in short succession, probably within only hours of each other. But this is open for debate. We do, however, know for a fact that the scene on the beach happens the day after Nene found Angel lifeless on the floor ("About last night.."), which was the first time Nene and Giselle met. So tell me, have they actually had any more encounters than the two that we get to see? Or anything that would actually set her radically apart from “Random Guy”? I’d say he doesn’t know this chick any better than we – the viewers – do. Her character doesn’t even have a name until she introduces herself to Angel, although I suppose Nene must at least know that much (or maybe it just never came up until then. After all, you don't need to know the name of the person you screw. Sometimes anonymity helps. Do you think she knows his name?).

Furthermore - regardless of whether they've known each other for 2, 4, 6 or 8 days, neither Giselle's little self-destruct routine nor Nene's ridiculously over-empathetic, mopey-faced "OMG, this woman I just met is crying. Man, this is so awful, what am I to do?"-response is even remotely believable to me. We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.

Nene’s upper-middle-class mama and papa raised him that way. Chalk it up to time, place and culture. It was more common 45 years ago than it is today. Even now it’s more common today in Argentina than it is the US or Europe.


Okay, my interpretation of this scene may be marred by my overly progressive (as far as gender expectations go) upbringing, but I’m still not entirely buying this explanation. And while I’ll accept these as contributing factors, I ‘m not inclined to chalk everything that happens in this scene entirely up to “time, place and culture” just to provide a convenient excuse for sloppy writing (not saying you do, btw). While Giselle's breakdown may bring out a chivalrous part of Nene’s nature that has been instilled and cultivated in his mind through his childhood upbringing, that doesn’t change the fact that the reactions in this scene are way too melodramatic and over the top. Unless you're going to tell me that turning overly emotional, to the point of complete embarrassment, over someone you just met is a typical Argentine trait. There are cultural differences, but I refuse to believe Scandinavians and South Americans are that radically different as far as basic human interaction goes. If a practical stranger gave me that kind of treatment I’d probably be somewhat annoyed with him/her for placing me in a difficult and uncomfortable situation. Furthermore, I think this probably would be the most plausible and natural reaction. Regardless of time, place and culture.

All the chivalry in the world doesn’t change the fact that Nene simply isn't responsible for this woman’s emotional well-being. And while it may be harsh, if this is how Giselle usually acts around men, I can see why she has been abused/taken advantage of by some of them, something she alludes to (btw, how manipulative is that? "I've been victimized in the past. Now be a gentleman and pity me"). At one point I wanted to physically reach into the screen and bitchslap her into her senses too. Not all guys are being taught to give women "special treatment", regardless of where in the world they were brought up. But at least Nene catches on eventually, and sees her for what she really is. Sadly though, it turns out to be too late.

Angel is his soul mate – the love of his life.


Those are illusions created by romantics. These myths are perpetuated in movies and literature, but they have no basis in real life. There are species who mate for life, but human beings aren't one of them. It isn't in our nature to commit for life. It is in our nature to wish to, however, and some manage to succeed, but faithfulness isn't a natural state for us. But, for the sake of the argument, even if it was, it would be the other way around. Nene would be the love of Angel's life. Nene, on his side, apparently "loves" anybody who looks at him a certain way. I feel sorry for Angel. Unlike Nene he doesn't have any other options. Noone other than Nene will ever look at him, were the secrets of his mental condition to be disclosed. And Nene will never, ever be faithful to him, neither physically nor emotionally (look how preciously little it takes for his loyalties to be swayed by someone else, someone he doesn't even know. Doesn't bode well for Angel, even in the unlikely case they got out of their unfortunate predicament). I'd like to say Angel could do better, but judging from what we know about him, he probably can't. So I feel bad for him. He's stuck with the undependable Nene, who would always be cheating on him, since it probably isn't in his nature to stay faithful, one way or another. This is not a problem when the parties involved agree on an "open" relationship, but something tells me Angel would be constantly unsatisfied with an arrangement like that. Nene, knowing this, would keep his infidelities hidden from Angel, and Angel would suspect and suffer in silence. He wouldn't leave Nene, because he can't cope on his own. No happy endings. Even if they survived, at least one of them would probably be constantly miserable. I always thought Angel forgave Nene too easily. He'd probably do the same a second, third, fourth, fifth and hundredth time, had they managed to survive and escape, because he has no one else in his life to look to. I guess them dying together in relative happiness, rather than finding a way to survive together in almost certain unhappiness, is the closest we get to a happy ending .

However, if they compromised some artistic vision in order to increase revenue, it didn’t seem to work too well.


Hmm. Wasn’t it the highest grossing movie in Argentina at the time of its release, even outcompeting some Hollywood blockbusters? I believe I read somewhere that it more than earned its ticket price, at least initially. It may not be widely known in the US or Europa, but I do believe it has an audience in some Spanish-speaking countries. I think I even read somewhere that PQ was regarded as a “gay reference” movie of sorts in Spain. It certainly earned a following in Spain upon being released there, winning a Goya even. This, I believe, was part of the reason why Sbaraglia left Argentina, to seek his fortune in Madrid. So it does have an audience, albeit hard to track down and not too big in numbers.

Witness the never-ending popularity of the PQ board on IMDB – it’s like a cult film with a cult of two.


We’re...we're a cult? I have a better idea, why don’t we have it legally established as a religion instead:
“The Church of PQ – coming to a chapel near you" (hey, it even rhymes). That way we could possibly get government funding, not to mention tax deductions (depending on where in the world we’d set up our main headquarters). You can be the high priestess and I can be the whatever-it-is-called who round up and punish the infidels. A fair division of labor, I should think.

Hooray for Piñeyro!

Here, grab a pair: http://www.getpoms.com/

The bastardization of IMDB…!


Oh, I get it. This is “make fun of Kinski day”, is it? Okay, I admit it – I was looking for a catchy title that would make people curious enough to check out the thread (well, it worked on you..). After all, “The Bastardization of Nene” is a little bit more inventive than “[no subject]” or “OMGWTFthismovieroxmysox!!!11!eleven11!!”, innit?

*************************************************************************************************************

In other news: by this time tomorrow Argentina could have its first male US Open winner since Guillermo Vilas won the title in 1977 (I’m sure Mr. Combover himself will be there), the only Argentine to ever hold this honor. Granted, I’ll be rooting for his opponent, but I wouldn’t be adverse to seeing the young man from Tandil lift the trophy, as he’s a lovely, sympathetic fellow with a nicely developed hardcourt game, incredible movement for someone his height, and to top it all (literally) he has a rather good head on his shoulders. I expect him to crack the top 3 in the foreseeable future (maybe as soon as 2010), and quite possibly go on to become a future #1 at some point if he remains healthy and injury-free. I know tennis isn't as big as football in Argentina, but considering all the great, great players (including a handful of my own favorites) who actually hail from there, I'm sure it gets a mention or two in the respective sports sections of the biggest national newspapers.

EDIT: And he DID - in his first ever final he beats the world number one in five epic sets. What an achievement by the young Argentinian, and very well deserved! Congrats to the Argentinians, and the city of Tandil, for raising yet another tennis champion (there must be something extraordinary in the water in Tandil). Having said that, shame on you, Roger, shame shame shame! That nonchalance is very unbecoming of a champion such as you.

Boy, was that off-topic.

Shot of the century: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVQhIEPbM0g

reply

He’s a teacher? In what, sexual politics?

Apparently. Among other things, he’s a university professor of Spanish and Women’s/Gender Studies. The article we’re discussing is one chapter in a book that analyzes “queer issues” in 14 Latin American films. (BTW, there is at least one review of his book where the reviewer uses the word “antiheterosexist.”)

Yes, it is confusing why Nene is flirting with the woman outside the bar. I have the impression that casual flirting is just part of his personality. (He certainly does it at every opportunity throughout the movie.) So, in that moment when Nene and Angel appear to be getting along better than they have in weeks or months, Nene can’t resist stopping at that table. He probably thought that even if Angel did see him, he wouldn’t take it seriously. Surely this can’t be the first time Angel has witnessed Nene flirting with strangers? But since Angel does take it so seriously, why does he simply leave instead of calling out to Nene to join him? I suppose for the same reason he later claws at the wallpaper instead of shooting Nene and/or Giselle? As he says on the beach, the voices have been telling him he is going to lose Nene; in fact, he expects it because he realizes his behavior has driven a wedge in the relationship.

He tells her about Angel practically upon meeting her. You’re not going to tell me that “sharing of confidences” was born out of trust and friendship, are you? Because I always thought it took more than an hour or three for such feelings to blossom, even in movies.

No, in this case I think it’s the opposite. His feelings, emotions, and confusion about Angel have been bottled up inside for a long time. Sometimes a person has to talk about what’s bothering them – even if it’s to a stranger. He opens up to Giselle in the way people often open up to a priest, psychologist or bartender. He doesn’t have a relationship/friendship with her; she has the role of confessor. Sharing these intimate details with her is what leads him to the feeling of trust and friendship. While it is true that Nene barely knows Giselle, based solely on their first meeting, she became someone in whom he has confided his deepest feelings; someone he has laughed and joked with, gotten high with, had sex with. So, I’m still inclined to think her tears would mean more to him than Random Guy’s.

Incidentally, yes, we know her name before she introduces herself to Angel. When Nene picks her up at the carnival bar he asks her name. She introduces herself to him by saying something like, “I’m called Giselle here, but you can call me any name you like.” Apparently Nene doesn’t care enough to rechristen her. It’s unclear whether Giselle is her real name or her professional name. We never hear either of them call the other by name. (I wonder if he introduces himself as Nene or Franco?)

I don’t want to be an apologist for Giselle. Her scenes are among my least favorite in the movie, although I can see why they were included to move the plot along. You’ve obviously given this a lot of thought. Do you have an alternate version screenplay in mind to progress the story to its inevitable conclusion?

Those are illusions created by romantics. These myths are perpetuated in movies and literature, but they have no basis in real life.

Perhaps. But since we are discussing a movie, it’s valid to use the concepts of movie convention. We’ve already decided that PQ is one of the best movie romances ever. The way the story is written it is the love story that redeems the characters to the extent that the audience ceases to care about their character flaws. The film writers romanticized the characters far and away beyond what was in the book. In turn, the characters in the book were presented in a way that made them somewhat more sympathetic than what was known of them in real life. It is the myth created by the movie that makes Angel and Nene attractive to the audience and causes a collective sigh at the ending; whereas the general public probably felt some measure of relief and satisfaction at the demise of the real life Brignone and Dorda.

But, for the sake of the argument, even if it was, it would be the other way around. Nene would be the love of Angel's life.

OK, I can see the basis for this argument and the conclusions you make. What we see in the movie is that, despite Angel’s behaviors, Nene returns to him again and again. Certainly if Angel allowed Nene to be physically and emotionally close, then Nene would not have had the encounters with Giselle or the man in the theater or the man in the toilet. However, Angel is incapable of controlling his behavior, and Nene cannot control his responses either. It adds to the pathos of the ending that Angel experiences a spontaneous recovery from schizophrenia in his final hours. If Angel is “better” then the principle obstacle to their romantic happiness is gone. (No need to remind me about reality here. It’s a fairy tale ending.)

(look how preciously little it takes for his loyalties to be swayed by someone else, someone he doesn't even know.

I’m going to stand by my arguments made earlier in our discussion that Nene would never have run off with Giselle. He had a few moments of weakness during which he allowed himself to entertain the idea, but his loyalties were always with Angel. His only redeeming character trait is his loyalty to Angel. It’s hard to argue Nene’s case because everything else about Nene screams “bastard.”

Imagine an alternate reality Nene that isn’t a bastard in every way. Suppose Nene and Angel weren’t murderers, thieves and drug addicts, but a couple with more normal circumstances. Um…let’s say Angel still hears voices and cannot hold a steady job but, instead of the occasional robbery, he finds some talent that brings him sporadic income. Imagine Nene with a respectable middle class job with a steady paycheck that allows him to support them both. Nene would still feel frustrated and tempted to chuck it all and run away from a partner that doesn’t allow him to be close. He could even have a similar encounter with Giselle and make her the same offer. I still don’t think he’d follow through. Being tempted and saying things he doesn’t really mean wouldn’t make him a bastard; it just makes him a flawed human being.

I guess them dying together in relative happiness, rather than finding a way to survive together in almost certain unhappiness, is the closest we get to a happy ending

I agree with this, but I think the issue of faithfulness is just the tip of the iceberg with these two. No matter what happens, they simply cannot have a “happily ever after” ending.



reply

Well, I finally did it. Since I am too tired to edit heavily, I'll just split my latest ramblings into two separate parts. So here goes:

(part 1/2)

First of all, I apologize for the general snarkiness of my previous post (and probably this one as well). It is as difficult for me to keep my innate sarcasm under wraps as it is for a zebra to hide its stripes. And sometimes, usually when I’m too sober, posts like the last one happen, which is why I try my utmost to avoid being in that state too often.

I have the impression that casual flirting is just part of his personality.


If he was so casual about his flirtatiousness, why would he go to such lengths about keeping his activities hidden from Angel? "You left me. I ended up in a cinema." "- When you go out, do you meet people? - I told you, I went to the movies!" While flirting is innocent and in no way automatically leads to infidelity or even thoughts thereof, I believe Nene is aware of the fact that his behaviour is making Angel uncomfortable. Observe his body language at the beach, just before the truth of his infidelity is revealed. The woman standing at the bar is making goo goo eyes at Nene while Angel is watching him, and this makes Nene uncomfortable. Now all Angel at this point has done is to ask Nene whether he meets people during his nightly excursions, followed by expressing his worries over losing him to someone else. Angel has suspicions, and Nene is scared of being found out, but no incriminating evidence of any sort has been disclosed at this point. Nene is ashamed of himself, but if random flirtation is a character norm for Nene, a form of behaviour he naturally reverts to in any given situation, I don't see why he'd be so nervous and jittery because a woman rather innocently happens to be looking suggestively in his direction. Since Angel must have witnessed exchanges like that many times, right? So while Nene may be a flirt, I don't see him being overt about it in Angel's presence. At the fairground I don't think he's aware that he's been caught flirting. Maybe he really did have that drink of "pure alcohol" he alluded to (never mind the additional match Angel asked for. He's such a dear boy, isn't he? Likes to play with explosives and see things blow up. Aw, the reckless abandon of youth), and it burnt away his perceptive and cognitive skills along with most of his larynx (maybe that's why he leans so close to the woman's ear; "Mi cuerda vocal se fue.” ).

But seriously, I don't think he's aware of the fact that Angel can see him. I guess he's convinced himself that Angel would be so engrossed with demonstrating his skills at the shooting range (I half expected him to win a teddy bear. Somehow I can envision Angel walking away carrying a fluffy stuffed animal. He's a big baby in some ways. A baby with a gun), and therefore Nene assumed he’d be off his radar. Or he simply had a brainfart moment. Hey, we all have them. I'm sticking with my "forgot his invisibility cloak" explanation. He seems to really crave for it in the bitemark scene too.

[I tend to go off on a tangent quite often. Tell you what; whenever I feel an off-topic rant coming on, for your convenience I’ll just wrap the text inside the appropriate tags [][/]. That way you’ll easily see which parts to skip, if you so desire. How’s that sound?]

His feelings, emotions, and confusion about Angel have been bottled up inside for a long time. Sometimes a person has to talk about what’s bothering them – even if it’s to a stranger. He opens up to Giselle in the way people often open up to a priest, psychologist or bartender. He doesn’t have a relationship/friendship with her; she has the role of confessor.


Quite right. As if I’d have said it myself. In fact, I think I did. I guess we're coming full circle here. Does mean we should terminate the debate, or change the subject? Anyways, I misunderstood you. From the phrasing you used, I thought you were trying to make a point about his confession being born out of confidence. Which it quite clearly isn't. Glad to hear this isn't the case. You apparently see far more substance in their *beep* (explanation: I accidentally mistyped the word 'relationship' by substituting the letter 'p' for a 't' . Apparently s_h_i_t is a swear word in English, according to the IMDB auto-censorship system anyway) than I am capable of doing, though (for one I can't recall where all this laughing and joking among friends is supposed to have taken place, so I guess I need to watch the movie again). But that's okay; we're both entitled to our differing opinions.

She introduces herself to him by saying something like, “I’m called Giselle here, but you can call me any name you like.”


I stand corrected. I'd forgotten about that. Guess I should be watching the movie again, before I start stating other false claims and make a complete fool of myself.

Do you have an alternate version screenplay in mind to progress the story to its inevitable conclusion?


Should I? No, I haven’t. Must I do that to be entitled to make critical observations about it? (j/k) That'd be highly impractical, since I have similar complaints about all my favorite movies, and I have neither the literary skills nor any great desire to rewrite any of them. But I won't shy away from having an opinion. Besides, were I to do such a thing it’d be fan fiction, which really isn’t my cup of tea. I did accidentally come across a few instances of PQ fan fiction online once, while searching for something else. Some writer had built an alternate universe around the characters from the movie. Didn't read or even bookmark it, and I wouldn't dream of writing any such thing myself, but the fact that these stories exist at least means we're not the only ones who have seen and been inspired by this movie.

Anyways, if I were to come up with an alternate scenario, I'd either leave the Giselle character out completely or develop her into a more well-rounded and credible character. I think the Giselle sidestory could be skipped altogether without taking anything away from the movie. After all, she doesn’t add much to it in the first place, besides possibly providing a welcome opportunity for hand relief for a particular viewer group who like watching movies with one hand down their trousers. Like I said already, I believe there were specific reasons why this character was included, reasons that had nothing to do with telling a good or believable story, and even though I understand these decisions from a marketing point of view ("sex/nudity sells" etc etc), I don't have to agree or be forbearing in regards to them. I do think Pineyro et al made their share of "compromises" in order to sell their movie, and from a business standpoint alone I can very well see and understand the rationale behind some of the choices they made. There were financial interests at stake. Most people in the performing arts business do at some point adapt to audience expectations and "give the people what they want". Only a very, very small handful of artists are talented enough to allow themselves the luxury of not having to make such compromises (and thus jeopardize their independence and integrity) in order to make money, since they are so extraordinarily talented and unique that their work will always generate interest and find a sizeable audience anyway, just because of the sheer quality and uniqueness of their material. Honestly, I can't think of a single living person that fits that description nowadays, though. There are talented, enterprising and crafty people out there, no doubt, but no one that I'd label a genius. They are such an elite few to begin with, and now "the playground of geniuses" appears to be deserted, left for dead or at least temporarily dormant, as far as people in the performing arts go. Like I said, there are plenty of talented people around, but nobody I find to be truly unique.

But getting back on topic; even if they did feel the inclusion of this character was necessary (beyond adding sex, nudity and melodrama for the courtesy of a mainstream audience who crave these things, to a movie that up to this point had done a fairly decent job of steering away from too obvious cliches), she simply isn't written or executed well, imo. If she has to be there, give her a few more minutes of air time, some character development and a little more screen time with Nene, something that would make his reactions to her at least slightly believable. But they don't. Apparently her presence in the movie is required for some plot reasons, but she isn't important enough to merit believable characterization. She gets introduced, she gets naked, she weeps, she leaves. Describing Giselle in four easy steps. There isn't a whole lot more to her than that, really. It just seems to me that since this character is responsible for wreaking so much havoc, like getting all the three main characters as well as an undisclosed number of policemen killed, we should in retrospect be able to tell more about her than how her breasts bounce when she is being screwed in various positions, or how she apparently earns a living by spreading her legs for strangers, then for some mysterious reason expects to cash in more than just money from them afterwards. But like I said, from reviews I've read I know there are people out there who get off on seeing her in various stages of undress, so at least the sex scene holds a certain function.

If her participation in the movie had ended there, I would have no complaints as to how her development was handled, and this thread would not have existed. But then we see her with Nene a second time, and this time around they start reenacting a scene from Twilight Zone. Or maybe it's an early draft of Twilight (I heard the "romance" in Twatlight is pretty clichéd and unbelievable too. What kind of influence do the kids of today grow up with?)

If she was nothing but a filler character, this neglect would be of no particular importance to me. But she is central to the outcome, and as such I don't understand why they couldn't have taken some time to flesh out her character a little more. I'd like to see what it is about her (besides the pathetic deluge of tears she is able to turn on at will) that inspires sympathy in Nene, because based on her behaviour he should be disgusted and angered by her, were he to be in character. Crying isn't emotional development, Pineyro! Why do so many (predominantly male) directors seem to believe this is the case? The first thing any of us do, often while still connected to our moms via umbilical cord, is to cry. It doesn't necessarily speak of any emotional depth or sensation, but rather of functional tear ducts. I'm sure it was at least somewhat more satisfying (from an acting p.o.v ) for Bredice to exercise her “emoting” skills, rather than just be a f_u_c_k_toy for the more developed male protagonist, or a wallflower. She's not the one to blame here. Considering how small her part actually is, I can't really fault her for trying to make the most of what little there is. Problem is, the overacting makes her even less credible and cheapens the movie as a whole. Which is why I'm bothering to get so worked up about it. The movie went from being a drama to becoming a melodrama in five minutes. And I was enjoying it so much up until this point. Additionally, on top of everything else that happens in this scene it is just so clichéd.

Again, here we are at the nerve center: the OOC-ness (beating a dead horse here. Feel free to skip this section). More specifically, my main beef with her is that she makes Nene act out of character. We don't know Giselle enough to care about her, but I was kinda put off by how her grand emoting skills affected our antihero's emotional composure with so little provocation. Nene (as we know him) apparently left the room, only to be replaced by his sappy, mentally slow twin brother (not the one he sleeps with). Hey, maybe this is what happened? Nene does have family, after all. After learning of his untimely demise they apparently reclaimed his body and had it shipped back to Argentina. So he wasn't buried with his partner (this makes me a little sad. Does this mean I'm a romantic after all? That's a disturbing thought. Don't tell anyone, I'm not sure I could live it down). This is what I find inexcusable, not whether or not the characters act like “saints” or “bastards”.

In fact, I quite enjoy their “bastardness”. I have no interest in the non-dimensional “classic Hollywood hero”. In a crime drama based on actual events I'm not expecting to see a bunch of characters who are devoid of human flaws. If that's how I've come across, I've done a really poor job in arguing my views. In short, my complaints aren't primarily about whether or not Nene is a "bastard", in the traditionally understood definition of the word. He's a criminal, so I'm not expecting to see a goody two-shoes with guilt issues over the thought of swatting a fly. I'm a expecting to see a character who, due to some ill-chosen actions and a following set of circumstances, finds himself in a position where he has become violent, suspicious, hostile, narcissistic, hot headed, self-obsessed, trigger happy, selfish, greedy, what have you - hardened by circumstance in order to survive. I also expect to be able to see the flipside of this; the other, more desirable human qualities, since even the most hard-boiled criminals that ever lived still have some redeemable characteristics.

[digression]Heck, even calculated serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer appears to have had his softer moments. This is a guy who preferred the dead to the living. Even as a child he showed signs of beginning necrophilia; he'd have his parents buy him pets, then secretly kill them, only to dig them up later and keep the cadavers around. When he grew up, he'd repeat this practice, only with people as test subjects. Well, we all need a hobby. And for him, this was a recreational activity. Some of us go to the gym, or grow mushrooms, or fold origami swans, others again like to enter power drills directly into people's skulls, have sex with their dead bodies before cutting them to pieces, have some of them for lunch, then keep the remaining bodyparts stored in styrofoam tanks.

Ol’ Jeff had no respect for life. People's lives only gained importance to him in retrospect. But he still tried to preserve his victims' memories in his own, peculiar way. After he had the flesh removed from their bones with acidic solutions, and their skeletons carefully arranged in their designated spots in his underground exhibition facility, "the shrine", he'd assign them plaques and quietly contemplate their existence. According to his own twisted logic, he felt that by doing so he was paying them respect (you'd think it'd be more respectful not to bereave them of their lives in the first place, but I digress). In death his victims became alive to him (better late than never, I suppose). He was indifferent, rationally sane, emotionally stable, he had no highs and lows. He did what he did, not to exorcise demons or get back at someone who had wronged him, but to escape boredom and in the hopes that his actions would produce some feeling of excitement. Unlike most criminals, whose actions are characterized by a lack of self-control in regards to keeping their temper in check, this guy was doing what he did because he couldn't get emotionally aroused. Dahmer was the embodiment of the serial murderer; emotionally flat, seemingly incapable of human empathy. In psychology the name for this condition is APD (Antisocial Personality Disorder). But interestingly, one planned victim was able to say or do something that got under his exterior. As a result he was able to gain an identity whilst still being alive. This in turn made it impossible for even Dahmer, this most despicable of beings, to go through with his carefully though out murder. The intended victim got off, no harm done to his person. Dahmer referred to this episode in retrospect. He never could understand why he suddenly found himself unable to do the routine deed. [/digression]

A bad deed is a bad deed, regardless of motivation. So if you commit a murder, it is a morally reprehensible act regardless of whatever your motivation might have been. But being dictated by fear, anger or hatred at least is understandable, as these are emotions we can easily recognize in ourselves. The idea that one would have an urge to commit murder not on the basis of hatred or anger, but as a way of escaping boredom, is far more alien and thought-provoking.


In that light, Nene and Angel, their behaviour and their actions, aren't particularly mysterious at all. Even though they find it hard to control and express their feelings in a socially acceptable manner, at least they have them. That alone makes them infinitely relatable.

[to be cont’d in part 2]


reply

[part 2/2]

I'm not sure I'll agree with your assessment that Nene's love for Angel is his only redeeming quality and that he’s otherwise a “bastard in every way”. He appears to have a big brother complex of sorts, and he occasionally comes across as quite thoughtful and introspective, even though he is naive and lacking in education. His narration is sometimes quite poetically worded, so he appears to be a sensitive soul, and I suspect he's a romantic. He may be otherwise artistic too. I'm sure the paper figures he made in jail were lovely. Nobody is one-dimensional or black/white, all out “evil” or “good”. Even my ex-brother in law, who was a drug user, ex-inmate and occasional wife-beater, had his share of truly loveable qualities that I can still think of with fondness. These people come from somewhere, and at one point have plans, hopes and dreams like the rest of us. I'm sure many prison inmates occasionally cry during nights when the full moon is on, wishing they'd made other choices in life. They may occupy their minds by clinging to books, thinking of their past, burying themselves in religion, exaggerating the importance of tiny, insignificant details in their minds to pass the time and survive emotionally, what do I know? I've never been in jail, even though I've tweaked the law on occasions and done things that could have landed me there. While they are criminals, they never cease to be human beings, with human needs and weaknesses.

As far as criminals go, Nene is far from the worst I've seen. While he is a killer, he would probably have qualms about killing innocents. The police is different, set apart, they're the Enemy with a capital E, an oppressive force, the root of all Evil. But Nene wouldn't think of himself as a person who simply kills at random. He discriminates; he likes to think he's in control of himself (even when he isn't). That's another angle to the sap scene: Nene's self image. I think self-image and appearances are of great importance to Nene.You could even say he's a bit vain. He may be a criminal, but he puts effort into his appearance; he always wears a suit and tie, and he is usually impeccably spruced up. Replay, if you will, the scene when he and Angel first enter the carneval. Nene's is so well-groomed, I can't help but burst out laughing at how slick and greasy his hair looks. And his demeanor is that of a high school senior taking a girl to the Prom, eager to impress. "What do you think?", he asks Angel upon arriving at the site, a look of nervous anticipation written across his face (you have to wonder how he persuaded Angel into going with him. Angel would probably rather have stayed at home with his dictionary. Did he promise him "dinner and dancing?" ) Then Angel turns deadpan and it really ruins the mood. Guess Angel isn't a romantic. There go my Nene/Angel courtship fantasies.

After brutalizing the poor guy in the toilet Nene takes time to check out his appearance in the mirror (very symbolic) and straightens his hair before leaving. And while he may not know exactly what he is, he has some very specific ideas about what he isn't. For one, he doesn't identify himself with the 'sissy', He isn't weak or limp-wristed. He may be sleeping with guys, but he isn't a woman. And so on, and so forth. How is this relevant to said sap scene? Well, if he's as 'old school' as has been suggested, and brought up according to traditional rules of etiquette pertaining to ‘how to correctly treat the opposite sex’ and be chivalrous, then the very suggestion that he'd be even thinking about hitting a 'poor, defenseless woman’ (let's ignore for now whether this applies to Giselle) would not sit well with him, and potentially threaten his carefully constructed self image, as well as how he thinks he might come across to others. His immediate reaction to her words could be to lash out - if not physically, then at least to tell her off verbally (which is what he should have done), and upon this realization old ideas imprinted on his mind during his conservative upbringing automatically resurface, and he becomes shocked and appalled at his own less-than-chivalrous thoughts and intentions. [Nene dear, you have plenty to be ashamed about, but standing up to this woman's unfounded mockery would not be one of them. In fact, it'd be quite admirable. ]

[off-topic] That's what things like old fashioned gender expectations and silly chivalrous ideas and practices do to you.(I guess this is as good a time as any to inform you that I never let a guy buy me dinner? Thought so. I always insist we split. It never fails to puzzle me how offended some guys get over this simple suggestion; from their behaviour you'd think I threatened to castrate them rather than offer to pay for my own food. They should be grateful about not having to spend any more money than necessary). These outdated roles are so important to some people's feeling of gender identity, men and women alike. For every guy who thinks he has to woo and cuddle a woman in order to win her approval and feel like a real man, there is a woman who thinks she needs to be wooed and cuddled by a man to be perceived as a real woman. So people still buy into outdated existing behavioral stereotypes because they never learnt how to question them, and said stereotypes find ways to persist, to be passed on from generation to generation, no questions asked. We haven't progressed at all. We’re still cavemen and –women, only equipped with more sophisticated tools than in the Stone Age. [/off-topic]

So Nene is free to be as much of a bastard/flawed human being as he wants (within the rules of libel, of course). I’d take the antihero over the bland “Hollywood action hero” any day. But I will never miss an opportunity to comment on poor characterization. So I guess maybe "bastardization" was a poor and confusing choice of words. "The character assassination of Nene" would probably have been a more concise title. Oh well, at this point they're not allowing me to change it :(. So the misleading title stands.

…since we are discussing a movie, it’s valid to use the concepts of movie convention.


I edited in the segment you’re commenting on in the last hour, at a time I was feeling low in myself, and by the time I realized my mistake and logged on to edit it back out, you had already read it. The phrasing and the conventional ideas it refers to is fine and common. And while I don’t agree with these overly romanticized notions, it’s valid to bring them up in the context of the movie (as you said), and I shouldn’t have sunk so low as to having a go at you for utilizing them for the sake of the discussion. I stand by my opinions, and I may be an incorrigible cynic, but I usually know better than to try and poison other people’s minds with my vitriolic claptrap. So think nothing of it. It was irrelevant to the discussion and unnecessary for me to bring it up and make a deal about. I watch movies to escape from, not to be reminded of, my everyday life too. So I can appreciate your thoughts about movie conventions; how and why certain details, characters and situations are exaggerated, and how some filmmakers occasionally forsake or tweak realism for storytelling purposes. Movie directors aren’t documentary reporters. Well, some of them are. (Don’t get me started on Werner Herzog. His “documentaries” always end up telling far more about the director himself than the various subjects he tries to present. He’s tremendously biased. His feature films actually come across as far more authentic and honest). For the most part I can tolerate conventionalism, in movies as well as life, just fine (from a distance), but every now and again we’re at odds with each other.

[too off-topic for words] In spite of this, I’m actually an unagitated and relaxed person (believe it or not), but there are certain fractions of society that can literally get my blood boiling. As you might have guessed, the gender traditionalists is one of these fractions. But my main beef is with the arbitrars of taste: among them the censorship authorities, and all the people who are in a position to decide what type of information the general public should or shouldn’t be exposed to. For a person, or a group of persons, to be appointed by law or tradition to act or speak on behalf of mankind (or specific groups of mankind) as to what constitutes correct conduct and good taste, as if they have come by a particular insight by divine providence, is such a dated concept and doesn’t correspond to most people’s idea of democracy. Norway is a very liberal and progressive country in many respects, but it is also a monarchy. Our head of state hasn’t earned his position, neither was he elected by a representative majority, he inherited it from his father. And the members of the royal family are universally revered across the nation; we tune in to watch the King’s New Years’ speech on TV, we raise flags on their birthdays, people invest in them, literally and figuratively. We pay *beep* taxes to make sure they can maintain their luxurious lifestyles, because they have no regular job skills and can't make a living for themselves. They enjoy a massive amount of respect despite the fact that they fulfil no useful, practical function in a modern society. The power of the monarch is comparable to that of the Pope; the actual political influence is limited, but their symbolic value and how highly they are held in people’s esteem is beyond measure. Monarchy is "tradition for the sake of tradition", because people are afraid of change. What a weird, contradictary bunch we are. On the one hand, we’re obsessed with everything hi-tech and modern, we like to think of ourselves as progressive and liberal as far as politics go, and at the same time we cling to this outdated hierarchical system that is monarchy. This system has outlived its purpose and usefulness to society, and should have been overthrown ages ago.

Another group I dislike are the militant feminists. They’re as narrow-minded and prejudiced, or even more so, than the male chauvinists they like to call out, and their tactics and methods are equally dodgy. Like the aforementioned censors', these people also have the audacity to claim to speak on behalf of a large group, namely womanhood. Now, being a member of said group, I can agree or disagree with their views, but they have no right to make generalized assumptions as to how I feel, think and act as a woman, based solely on the fact that that we happen to share the same gender. It is not their prerogative to speak on my behalf. I am perfectly capable of doing so myself. I’ve had several run-ins with them, both online and in real life. To mention one example, I participated in a heated debate with a few of them on an online forum once. What sparked this particular controversy off was a rather innocent (imo) joke, incidentally posted by a French girl. I can’t remember the joke itself, I only remember the aftermath. So this person cracked a joke, and the feminist junta immediately came down on the poor thing like a pack of wolves. They’re entitled to their opinions, but what ticked me off and got me involved was how these people put these opinions across. For example, they’d spew out the word “misogyny” with a higher frequency rate than our dear university professor does with his pet phrase. And the reactions of these protesters were very unanimous, as if they were all wired to the same circuit, with no independent will of their own. Apparently her joke was, in addition to being “misogynistic”, also “perpetuating stereotypes that are offensive, dangerous and demeaning to women in general.” Not to these ladies individually, but to all women (nobody asked me if I took offense). Thanks to their collective efforts, this group eventually succeeded in having the girl remove her joke. Which begs the question: if I read the joke or others similar to it and don’t feel offended, what does that make me? Something other than a woman? A lesser woman? Should I then be ashamed of calling myself a woman? I wish some people would put a little more thought into how they put themselves across. They’re not the standard bearers of taste. I’d like to make up my own mind about whether to feel offended or not, thank you very much. One can’t just make blanket statements about whole segments of the population. What rattles the sensitivities of one person may come across as a trifle to another. This monopoly of opinion that certain groups of people feel entitled to claim never fails to piss me off, especially when they so often seem to think their opinions should be law, and opposing views is therefore to be regarded as a violation of law, and any dissent should be shut down, or at least discouraged and heavily frowned upon. You speak for yourself, no one else. I have my opinions on many things, but I never expect anybody to agree with them. Diversity of opinion should always be encouraged. This doesn’t just apply to the militant feminists, I’m just using them as an example. Actually, this board in question is the only place where I’ve ever received a permaban. That’s free speech for you.

A third group that constantly gets on my nerves are the patriots. This occasionally gets me into trouble, since Norwegians in general are very patriotic and proud of their national heritage. I won’t go into more detail than that, I’ll just say that sometimes I’m happy to live in an immigrant-heavy neighbourhood. [/too off-topic for words]

Well, once again I apologize for going off-topic, but at least I made sure to place it last. .

It’s getting late, so I shall sign off, but tonight I won’t have to get dead drunk in order to get some sleep. My mother gave me 50 sleeping pills for my birthday. Isn't that a nice present? It hits me right where I live. Either she wants me dead, or she’s taking my problems seriously.



The End (honestly)

reply

Hmmm…I have a different take on the flirting. My view was that Nene was going to go inside the bar, buy drinks and take them over to the shooting gallery. When the guys parted, Nene headed to the bar and Angel stood there watching him walk away. (“Don’t take too long.”) I thought Nene was so casual in his flirting that, regardless of whether he thought or knew Angel was watching him, he felt compelled to stop at that woman’s table and chat her up. He wasn’t carrying any drinks, so it looks like he never got as far as the bar. He had been talking with this woman for the length of time it had taken Angel to walk over there, buy the tokens, and impress the barker with his marksmanship. Angel might have stayed in the spot where Nene left him, or he could have walked over to the shooting gallery – both locations were within plain view of the bar. Nene simply didn’t think it was important, which leads me to think this is standard operating procedure for him. At some point (and maybe often) Angel has seen Nene do this before; this time he reacts because he is more disturbed than he has been before (voices getting more insistent, whatever). (I had to laugh at your description of Angel winning the teddy bear. I can envision it perfectly! What the heck, that pantry he lives in could use a touch of cheerfulness.)

You’re right that Nene likes to preen. He tries to be as dapper as possible under the circumstances, and fancies himself irresistible to both men and women. Although how irresistible can he be wearing the same suit night and day for at least two weeks? (I cringed when I saw Angel lying in the sand in his suit. Wading into the ocean probably didn’t improve it either.)

In a later scene at the carnival Nene is walking down a path and making determined eye contact with both men and women. Several of these people stop, turn around and wait for him to acknowledge that they’re interested, but he keeps walking. There is one woman he’s trying to make eye contact with, but she seems determined to ignore him. He steps directly into her path and they do a little two step shuffle to avoid colliding. He’s laughing. He thinks it’s great fun – but he doesn’t seem serious about it. That’s what I meant by casual flirting. It looks like something he does often and probably not something he’d bother to hide from Angel.

When Nene goes to the cinema he’s making all sorts of eye contact with lots of the single guys as he walks down the aisle to his seat. He even stops and stares directly at one man before he takes his own seat. The fellow he stared at is the one who gets up and changes seats so he can sit two seats away from Nene. Then Nene makes that incredibly smooth move where he pretends to yawn and stretch so he can put his hand on the other man’s shoulder. It’s much less casual, and certainly the sort of thing he wouldn’t want Angel to see.

The night that Angel spotted Nene flirting with the woman at the bar, Nene does go to the cinema. He lies by omission because he wouldn’t dream of telling Angel about the encounter he had there. He lies outright when he implies that he goes to the cinema every night because he’s certainly not going to tell Angel about Giselle. Both of those instances go beyond “casual” flirting. I had the impression that, even though they had not been intimate for some time, Nene hadn’t been with anyone else since he met Angel – until this trip to Uruguay. Even if he doesn’t admit to himself that his relationship with Angel is a love affair, it’s obvious he knows it at some level.

I also have a different view of the girl at the beach bar. Prior to the twins' arrival, Cuervo has crashed the teenagers' party. He’s dancing away, mostly by himself but he occasionally positions himself between a girl and her date so he can “sort of” dance with her. The kids are focused on their dance partners and some are focused on their own feet. Whenever they do take notice of Cuervo they are rolling their eyes or shooting him disgusted looks. (Who is this inappropriately dressed, old guy who dances like a maniac?!) They don’t want anything to do with him. They don’t say anything to or about him. Some may assume one of their party actually invited him. Overall they are trying to politely ignore him. When Nene shows up, Cuervo and Angel are already standing next to the bar. Nene says they need to go; Cuervo starts his rant. The girl bounces up with her boyfriend. She’s smiling and laughing with the boy, not paying any attention to our trio. Nene glances over at the girl briefly. She notices him and her face changes completely. She goes from laughter to an expression that looks like she’s just bitten into a lemon. No flirting. No goo goo eyes. She looks at Nene as though he’s dirt on her shoe. He seems embarrassed as he quickly looks away. These are kids from polite society and wealthy families (did you notice their cars?). Nene was one of these kids until he made his Big Mistake. He’s never going to fit in with people like this again; he knows exactly what this girl thinks of him and, I think, it gives him a twinge. Of course he doesn’t have time to dwell on any of that because Cuervo is about to get to the really interesting part of his story.

You know, Kinski, I’m starting to get the feeling that you may dislike Giselle. (I don’t know what could be giving me that impression.) Movies being what they are, they went for the easy approach of creating a moll lite for Nene. If they’d developed the character the movie would have been closer to three hours, which is thin ice with audiences. There was a more dispassionate presentation in the book; she must have figured into the actual event since her place becomes the OK Corral. The writers could have left the Giselle section of the movie closer to the book. I have a vague recollection that she shared that flat with other roommates and Nene had some interaction with them, too. (I’ve misplaced the book, so maybe I’m hallucinating.)

reply

I just discovered this movie on youtube. Unfortunetely I am on part 6 with english subtitles and can't find the rest of the parts.

Just wanted to say this is the most intelligent conversation on a movie I've ever seen on IMDB. Have been totally enjoying your back and forth.

reply

I just discovered this movie on youtube.

I probably don't have to tell you this, but watching movies on YouTube is a very bad idea. Additionally, the person responsible for uploading the subtitled clips of PQ has confessed to not really caring for the plot of the movie. Consequentially she has edited out/modified parts that aren't to her liking. You don't want to watch a version of the movie that has been butchered/edited with chainsaw by someone who doesn't even understand the trade of filmmaking.

If you really want to see the movie (without having to buy it), you should download a full version instead. It is available online. There are several ways to go about this. Let me direct you to some instructions I described in another thread:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0227277/board/thread/128953363?d=129228448 #129228448

I'd recommend the first alternative. VLC player is your friend, and loading external subtitles is a far less complicated process than you'd think. Even so, if you'd find it confusing, I'd be more than happy to explain the finer details, step-by-step. But no matter what, don't watch the movie on YT. You're bound to end up frustrated to the point of wanting to pull your hair out :)

Just wanted to say this is the most intelligent conversation on a movie I've ever seen on IMDB. Have been totally enjoying your back and forth.

That's very kind of you. It was fun while it lasted. This place is fairly deserted, and as such it offers limited interaction possibilities. The realization that there was at least one other person out there (besides myself) who took an interest in this unappreciated little gem of a movie sparked a back-and-forth exchange of opinions that quickly took on a life of its own. Neglect sparks a kind of inspiration that contentment never will, hence the long-winded posts. Unfortunately, you can only keep up that elevated level of interest for so long before running out of things to say, so for the time being this place has, yet again, seemingly returned to its normal state of inactivity. Which is a bit of a shame, since this movie should generate a whole lot more interest. People simply aren't aware of its existence. I blame this on poor marketing and distribution.

I kinda feel sorry for you now, not having seen the entire movie, because if you've read this thread all the way through you must consider yourself thoroughly spoiled in regards to what goes down. Hopefully that won't spoil your enjoyment of the movie, if you ever finish watching it.

The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own.

reply

Thank you so much, first for replying, and then for the link to instructions. It's a great movie.

reply

Staceyrule, I know you're replying to Kinski there, but I wanted to say "hi".

Glad to hear you like the movie! Please join in and tell us your thoughts.

reply

Glad to hear you liked it :) I echo all of piazzollachick's sentiments. Please join in the discussion if you see it fit. We won't bite, I promise! At least piazzollachick won't, she's the civilized and well-behaved one. I am the rude, angry, opinionated one. I am also the resident drunkard. Cheers.

reply

Kinski, I would have pegged you for the extremely well informed and helpful one.

reply

If by "well informed" you mean "proficient at tracking things down online", then by all means, you may be onto something. As for "helpful", well that depends on a) whether I find the person I'm dealing with worth the effort, and b) circumstance. As ambivalent as I am about this movie (it switches between downright contempt and disgust, mild to moderate annoyance, reluctant acceptance and genuine warm fuzzies, depending on my overall mood when I watch it), I'd really love to see some more discussion about it (presenting good AND bad angles, as I can relate strongly to both opposing camps), which is why I'm doing my best to advertise for it in any way possible.

I'll post something more substantial later, but I'm battling some personal demons at the moment, and my interactions with other people (even online acquaintances) suffers from this. So until they pass, I'm keeping my mouth wisely shut.

And what's up with the emoticon, piazzollachick? Are you trying to rile me? I think I made it clear how I feel about royalty .









On the subject of artistic expression in the music business:

Q: Where do you see today the state of rock music, where do you feel it's at today and where is it headed?

A: Well, it's pretty bleak because no matter what the artist creates; in order for the public to hear it, he's gotta go through this peculiar kind of filtration system that the media has set up. First of all, you won't get a record contract unless one of these junior exec's, who is afraid for his job, gives you the contract. And they're only gonna give contracts to groups that they think are totally safe. Then after you get the contract, the record company will only invest a certain amount of money in your project if they think it's totally safe. Then they will only release your record if they think it's totally safe. Then it goes to a radio station programmer, who will only program your record if it's totally safe. It will then go to a radio station who will only play it if they think it's totally safe. And when you're totally safe, and contain no content, or no ideas that are disturbing to the ideas that the government and The Powers That Be want to have broadcasted to the public at large, when you're saying nothing, then you will get on the radio. And then you can make millions of dollars.

Q: This is why you don't have, or have never had, a top 40 record?

A: It's one reason.

reply

This is some discussion!! Just watched this film yesterday...its a gem albeit a few flaws yet the relation between Nene and Angel (the characters written on papaer and also the two actors who brought them to life) makes the movie truly special. Truly.

So much for the Gizelle angle. Read through most of your points till in the end I seriously lost mine somewhere along the route....:(
Such a character never thot wud warrant such a rippin apart character study...SHe actions reminded me of Vivi's....Nene yellin at Vivi - can he stand any intrusion - physical or otherwise - bet him and Angel? HE can keep a woman in her place (yes he does address her as kid but yet..) And the turn around with Giselle - i thought that scene when Angel runs towards the sea and Nene shoots at the record player - he's got it up to his limit.....he can pretend no more....

His confiding in Giselle - she verbalizes what is in his mind - he loves Angel - that look (0at her once she admits it freely) and his moving towards her - its kind of a relief for him ..n she needs him - physically...it seems sorted out for that moment..

Really liked that moment when these two are in the act, cut across to Angel taking the drug and cutting his hand with a knife - its that that moment that the doors of doom are opened. Their fates are sealed...For Nene its through Giselle. For Angel its the shooting the police officer and then throwing Tiare off the van (the short fat guy and Angel instigated his runaway right?..)

Loved these juxtapositions....may be for once it fell into place immed for me :).....

Seriously really liked the way u two have ripped apart the characters of Nene and Angel....This is such a movie...

And did ul find Cuervo funny or was I the odd one slightly laughing at his unintentional repartees.. The scenes of the trio at the beach were amazing...

reply

Kinski, piazzollachick, are you still around? Four years later I read your observations with amazement and gratitude. Four years later there's still nobody to talk about this movie, and "I'm giddy with joy" I've found your thread. I love this movie, and have been watching it every day ( segment or two) for a while, and think I may have some additional points.
I've never contributed to a forum, and English is not my native tongue so please bear with me in case we connect. I realize I may be too late.

reply

I just discovered this movie on youtube. Unfortunetely I am on part 6 with english subtitles and can't find the rest of the parts.


It's available on Netflix for direct streaming... if you have a Netflix account (which is well worth it for anyone that watches movies on a fairly regular basis).


Proud member of SHREWS (Society for the Honor Required of Eyes Wide Shut)

reply

[deleted]