MovieChat Forums > Cumbia callera (2008) Discussion > Didn't Care for this movie at all

Didn't Care for this movie at all


Wow... for the first fifteen minutes of the movie, there is no dialog. You're just watching this guy on the streets videotaping street activity (and women's asses). This movie is verrrry drawwwwnnn ouuuttt, as if they're trying to fit the movie into a neat 94 minute package. When there's no dialog, there's always music to fill in the void, even cumbia music coming from a boombox as the batteries are fading. The song drones on as the song gets slower and slower until the batteries wear down. This feels like forever.

The main character is nothing short of a stalker/voyeur. That's pretty much the first hour as he follows her around with his video camera, hiding behind bushes and buildings. What I thought would be an interesting movie turned out to be a waste of 94 minutes.

Just my opinion...anybody else?

reply

I'm going to disagree with you, I really liked the movie, and I don't think that the fact that there's little dialogue makes the movie drawn out or anything of that sort.
The music is not there to fill in the void, as you put it, it's actually there to tell the story along with the images, if you listen to the lyrics it all makes sense. It actually explains what's happening so dialogue is not required for you to understand the movie.
The cumbia music coming from a boom-box as the batteries are fading is not really music coming from a boom-box as the batteries are fading (the idea was born from this event, cassette boom-boxes running out of battery), it called "cumbia rebajada" (pitched down cumbia) it's a cumbia style in which the pitch is slowed down to get that effect, the subgenre was born a while ago (I don't know how many years ago, but no less than 7); you can search youtube for "cumbia rebajada".
The main character is the girl, as everything revolves around her. It's the story about a girl who ends up liking two guys and what happens between the three of them. It's not about the guy with the camera, and there's more to the movie than just the "guy with his camera", for example, they end up making cumbia videos in which the girl dances, these kind of videos happen to be very common "cumbia plays, people dance" you can buy them in markets as the one portrayed in the movie; etc, etc, etc.
I think the main thing here is that we are used to watching movies with a lot of dialogue, fast, fast, fast, cut, cut, cut, basically action not contemplation, big Hollywood movies, and all those called "commercial movies", are filled with dialogue and hold this structure in general (I'd never ever dare say they are all like that) and they are everywhere, I think that's why some people don't feel comfortable with the idea of very little or no dialogue, and less action more contemplation.
I also think that we are not used to liking/enjoying/understanding movies in which the words don't come out of the characters' mouths, but just think of it as a musical in which the characters don't move their mouths or use their voices to sing.
In my opinion it's a very fun and joyful movie and if you can take in the images and the music as a whole, and not focus on the fact that "there is no dialogue"(because I think there is, the music is the dialogue) it can be really enjoyable, not a waste of time, and a great movie.

Peace!

reply

Well I have to agree with the first post. The problem is not preciselly the lack of dialogue, but the lack of a story. This film could easilly be a shotfilm, of 15 or 20 minutes, but the filmmaker gives us an hour or more of nothing.

Yes the music is interesting, but its the same song over and over and over, I know it has to be authentic, but couldnt there be a little of developent at least? And above all, the sound-mix in this movie is so terrible that I could not enjoy the music. In a movie that attempts to speack thought music it was vital to have a good sound mix, but this a cacophony of the lowdest sound efects you can imagine.

The acting is good thats true, but the camera set-up is so anoying that I had problems concentriting in the actors or story, thos jumps over the line, made it difficult to understand the continuity of each scene. It was really a big problem to me, being in a film where I have to be constructing the time in my head because the camera was trashing it.

I live in Monterrey, the city where this story takes place. I think is very interesting a film tthat portrays this subculture of the Vallenato, a subculture that I dont belong to but I know is very rich. So the context for the film is something unexplored and very interesting, thats a big point to the movie. But well I think it needed more depth and deserved a better movie. Lets wait for the next one

reply

Terrible film,not because of the annoying music with no dialogue but chasing & filming someone in the streets for awhile until she gets with someone in bed.Then after the sex scene,another pointless moment of the guy chasing this girl.It was a waste of time.

reply

The kind of movie I enjoy most, not everyone gets it.
No gun battles, no car chases, 3/4 of the budget wasn't CGI.
You were either drawn in by the music and these three characters, or you weren't, it's that simple.

If you didn't get it......move on, there's a typical Hollywood movie, made for the masses, pumped out every 5 minutes.

reply

I vote with the original post. A movie really about nothing. The girl character isn't all that likeable, she says nothing of substance and the "drama" in this movie is about a false pregnancy...

Not much more than an extended MTV video with accordion music. Forgettable lead characters without much redeeming values.

reply

Well what I had to say about the movie, its already said. Im just right now a little puzzled by this comment about points nobody has brought in here.

If you dindt get it? Nobody here has said anything about not getting the movie (Mainlly because there is nothing to get). The Hollywood tipe? CGI? I dont think that anybody in this forum os the Hollywood type of audience. And no body is complaining about the lack of those elements, the people is complaining about the lack o f a story or characters or even filmmaking in a movie.

I really hate the pretension in people and the kind of pompous comments the make in that base. Not all in Hollywood is crap and not everything out of hollywood is a jewel. There is bad and good narrative, and artistry, everywhere in its own idiosincratic therms.

In this forum we all have spoken in those therms, so before comming here to tell us what we get or dont get. Analize a film, and discuse it for its own values.

Try to not be a Hollywood critic, thats speaks but says nothing. And mainlly read what the other people says before, trying to bash people.

reply

Well I really like typical and mainstream Hollywood type movies, but you know what, I did find this movie offbeat and very interesting. I liked the unique style in which it was done, the lack of dialogue and various forms of expressionism within the film, and most of all the great shots of the Monterrey scenery interspersed throughout the film.

My only critique of the film is the clothing the girl wore throughout this movie, and particularly the style of the pants she wore. They were so unflattering and unsexy. I found it odd they were trying to make sultry videos of her dancing at the end, and she wore such ridiculous and stupid looking baggy outfits. It would seem to me to be counterproductive, if you're going to make alluring videos, for goodness sakes, get some hot outfits on her.

reply

I think the movie was good, because of the brilliant way of telling the story using songs, the great scenery, good music (accordion! who would have guessed?), and overall luminous, happy atmosphere.

I didn't like:
1/ the quasi-violent parts where the girl argues, quite strongly with her first boyfriend, these scenes seemed too heavy, maybe because the author didn't take the time to build the tension, and decided to use violence instead. There were a few instances were the actor's play was artificial, pompous, which was a bad contrast with their age and the overall sunny, happy atmosphere of the movie.

2/ the graphical sex scenes - closer to soft porn than to an artsy movie; I agree with somebody's comment that the girl could have played these scenes better - she seemed too detached, sex was a mere mechanical exercise. Unfortunately, I think that more aspiring artists will follow the path of more explicit sex scenes in the future, as porn is going mainstream in society. The movie would have been much better if the sex scenes would have been cut earlier - or less descriptive - remember the shot where the camera moves along the couple's legs - cut the scene there before the full nudity scene and you have a winner.

Despite all the above, I would recommend the movie, it's fresh, and the music is awesome. Probably an R rated version, would be ideal...

reply

I didnt have an opinion until watching her do that little dance. Simple, sweet, cute and kind of funny

reply

I view it as soft porn with an absolutely gorgeous [model] lady and superb cumbia music. That is all...

garyrbeck
San Francisco,CA.

reply

I have to say the movie was awful, the main characters had no substance, Cori was just a low class ,trashy broad who could not dance to save her life!

The music was awful and yes I can offer my opinion because I have been to this particular part of Mex & I am a cumbia lover. The music could have been so much better , I know it was put in place to tell a story but it just seemed so sloppy.

The "Cholita" story was just as sloppy and hard to watch. I held on hoping it would get better . The only thing that kept me beleiveing it was going to get better was the shot of the Amorres Perros poster in Netos joint.

Bottom line good concept, bad movie!

reply

I don't know what anyone here is tripping about.

The music was refreshing, because the story was told through Cumbia Music, and they picked a perfect selection of songs.

On top of that the Lead actress is beautiful and I am loving her style!

reply