Once in a while I see some really good movies...movies that stay in my mind days even weeks after I see them. The last time I was this taken aback by a movie was when I first saw Guru Dutt's Pyaasa. It also helped that I saw it in its original cinemascope in a very large screen in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art's Latin American Cinema retrospective.
Done in a Rashomon-like telling and retelling of a story taking different angles from different characters, I think Rosaura a las 10 tops Kurosawa's tale by not only telling the same story multiple times, but having each perspective actually tell a literally different story. In addition, whereas Rashomon became a little redundant to me, Soficci kept the story interesting by keeping the reality of the situation--that what we see is not all what it is--as evident in all the stories, thus destabilizing even the "subjective truth" of each perspective, questioning each view and emphasizing the objectivity of the camera. See for example the maid, who lurks about in all of the stories. No one sees her lurk around, but the camera records it nonetheless.
All of these allow the characters be, showing them as they are and as human as possible. The movie ends the same way as it begins, and the way it does this is nothing short of genius.
As you can tell, I'm still trying to wrap my head around this movie. It's incredibly multi-layered, and the form (especially the night scenes after the painter and Rosaura's wedding) incredibly reflects the themes of the movie. This movie for me ranks very high, certainly alongside the likes of Milestone's All Quiet on the Western Front, Welles' Magnificent Ambersons, Dutt's Pyaasa, Davies' Distant Voices Still Lives, Bernal's Himala, and Anderson's Royal Tenenbaums. It's a pleasure to encounter such a rewarding movie.
Done in a Rashomon-like telling and retelling of a story taking different angles from different characters, I think Rosaura a las 10 tops Kurosawa's tale by not only telling the same story multiple times, but having each perspective actually tell a literally different story. In addition, whereas Rashomon became a little redundant to me, Soficci kept the story interesting by keeping the reality of the situation--that what we see is not all what it is--as evident in all the stories, thus destabilizing even the "subjective truth" of each perspective, questioning each view and emphasizing the objectivity of the camera. See for example the maid, who lurks about in all of the stories. No one sees her lurk around, but the camera records it nonetheless.
All of these allow the characters be, showing them as they are and as human as possible. The movie ends the same way as it begins, and the way it does this is nothing short of genius.
As you can tell, I'm still trying to wrap my head around this movie. It's incredibly multi-layered, and the form (especially the night scenes after the painter and Rosaura's wedding) incredibly reflects the themes of the movie. This movie for me ranks very high, certainly alongside the likes of Milestone's All Quiet on the Western Front, Welles' Magnificent Ambersons, Dutt's Pyaasa, Davies' Distant Voices Still Lives, Bernal's Himala, and Anderson's Royal Tenenbaums. It's a pleasure to encounter such a rewarding movie.