User Reviews

Love this film. The lead is a star as is his friend's father José. I gotta complain though about the plot conceit to add drama. Child abuse in Madrid is a crime; this is confirmed at the end of the film. The obvious solution should start with the police. The boy is going to have broken healed bones everywhere, including his nose, no matter what he's willing to admit. Why deal with all-night legal discussions, an emergency room, and driving the streets of Madrid looking for El Bola. Their friend giving them legal advice failed to take this child directly to La Policia, required by law, as was the physician's and nurse's duty. The writer could have included the legal facts and safest help for Pablo by going straight to the police. And, there's no need to notify Pablo's parents that you've got their son; it's the middle of the night and everything can be faced four hours later in the morning without any fear of a kidnapping charge (ridiculous, because the number of witnesses involved, no one could not pin this on anyone but the father - with his bruised hands. I don't mean to quibble; I just hate when a terrific story is marred by incredulity.

I saw this film on my monitor,

so this is not a review of the technical aspects, I will get the DVD from Netflix in a few weeks & have a fuller review of it.

This is a simple but yet complex story of two 12 year old students in Madrid Spain,and their respective families. One of the lads is abused by his father. Thankfully we do not see the full extent of this abuse till the end part of the movie.

The acting throughout is excellent.

I will see this again. It is the type of movie I would normally see a second time

Due to the fact I saw this on a 14 inch monitor, many scenes were dark & I could not catch everything, I will rate it more fully when I see it on my DVD. the sub-titles were quite clear though.

It will definitely be at least an 8 IMDb rating.

SECOND REVIEW

Seeing this a second time on my DVD, I was even more impressed & thusly changed my rating .This was a much clearer print than what I viewed on my small monitor.

I can see why it won so many awards. IT should have been released in Los Angeles in 2000 or 2001 & been eligible for Oscars.

Revised ratings

***1/2 (out of 4) 96 points (out of 100) IMDb 9 (out of 10)

At a deposition, the son stares into the whites of the camera and informs on his father. When we first meet Pablo(Juan Jose Ballesta), he's playing a daredevil game by the track with some other boys. The possibility of a miscalculation with the oncoming train and their mad dash across the railway is what concerns us. That's what we fear may kill the boy, not his father. In the hardware store, Jose(Alberto Jiminez) talks to his blood employee with a terseness that puts a damper on the moment, but the boy seems to have grown accustomed to these severe exchanges. Pablo walks and talks around the store freely enough, without a quiver or hitch in his voice, or an eggshell in sight. Pablo doesn't act like a child who's been burned with cigarettes and forced to drink his own urine. In the deposition, he lies about his brother; the son that dad loved the best, the ghost that Pablo competes against. He tells the camera "that I should have died, and not my brother," which suggests the father's golden boy didn't perish before Pablo was born, contrary to what he told his schoolmate Alfredo(Pablo Gallan).

In essence, Pablo is talking directly to the audience, his witnesses to the brutal beating that Jose dispenses after the boy lies about his whereabouts for a second time. Playing on our sympathy, Pablo makes claims against his father that "El Bola" fails to support, as evidenced by the boy's relative ease around his father. With great subtlety, when the fourth wall is broken, "El Bola" transforms Pablo into a narrator, a fallible one, because the father seems more like a taskmaster than an incorrigible child abuser.

Perhaps "El Bola" was too overly concerned with presenting the father as a flawed man, a man still grieving over the death of his first-born, rather than an irredeemable monster like the Robert DeNiro character in "This Boy's Life". If he purportedly tortured his son with lit cigarettes and ridiculed him with names such as "idiot" and "f*****", however, Pablo wouldn't think twice about challenging the authority of such an unpredictable parent with a tendency to shoot first and ask questions later. At the dinner table, Pablo's reaction time is somewhat slow when he's asked to refrain from playing with a ball; and at the front door, his conversation with a friend continues long after he's told to either come inside, or continue gabbing out in the hallway. This show of defiance suggests that a stern lecture, not horrifically violent retribution is the more likely end result for such insubordination. Even the film itself, on a subconscious level, knows that Pablo's father is hardly the man that Pablo describes to the off-camera interviewer. When Jose approaches Alfredo's family to help him search for his runaway son, there's no accusatory outburst about the bruises on Pablo's face and body. If somebody felt that their son's friend was a battered child, the father wouldn't be accord him any cordiality or unconditional respect as they patrol the streets at night in the tattoo artist's car(Alfredo's father).

But "El Bola" wants to end on a stirring note, so out from the mouth of a babe, pours out all this stored-up vitriol towards the man who always treated him like a consolation prize. If the film truly believes that Pablo's testimony is factual, then it misses the mark, because there's not enough supporting evidence to back up the boy's claims. The cynic who understands that children lie to get what they want(Pablo probably wants to live with Alfredo's family) will find "El Bola" more rewarding than the viewer with a bleeding heart(like the person who cries out "but what about the children?" as a response to any social ill). Be a cynic: be aware that "El Bola" switches from third-to-first-person narration when it matters the most.

***SPOILER ALERT ***

This film is well acted (particularly by its child actors) with a heart-wrenching story of child abuse and the loyalty of children to each other. It also portrays an alternative to the abusive dysfunctional family of the abused boy, by delving into the dynamics of the family of the abused boy's friend. One very original touch is the way a child who is essentially wise and responsible and mature beyond his years (the well-adjusted best friend) is misunderstood by his 'hip' parent who assumes that the child is deceiving him and behaving in the irresponsible and foolish way that the father did as a child. Unfortunately, the film completely collapses when the adults behave in a way that is absolutely unbelievable. Is there something about Spanish society that I'm not aware of? A child is brutally beaten by his father, runs for help to the family of his best friend where he shows up bloody and bruised, is taken to the hospital by this caring family AND THERE IS NO INTERVENTION BY THE POLICE???? Are not hospitals required to report child abuse when it is so blatant and when the child is forthcoming about the perpetrator? How could a caring adult not report the boy's father to the police? And how could he insist that the child return to his own home where he is certainly in danger of being further injured or even killed? It was at this point that I left the theatre. Whatever the outcome, the film had become a pointless narrative with no relationship to reality.

The first 20 or so minutes of this film didn't engage me very much. Other than think that many of the kids were idiots (as they played a game like Chicken with oncoming trains) and cursed too much, I really didn't think much one way of the other. However, as the film continued, the plot took an unexpected twist as you learn that the title character (a kid who looks to be about 11 years-old) is being seriously abused by his god-awful father. The violence he inflicts is amazingly realistic in one scene and so this film is provisionally recommended. While it was very well made, children and people who were victims of child abuse probably should not watch it--and I could see the film instigating flashbacks of abuse. However, aside from this warning, the film is well constructed, extremely well acted and engaging. You really can't stop watching after a while because it really hooks you. See this film--just think twice about who you ask to watch it with you.

Domestic violence has never been an easy topic to get into when telling a story due to the fact it's just too sensitive an issue to see depicted on screen and there's the danger of exploitation. Achero Mañas 2000 film EL BOLA, one of the big winners of the 2001 Goya Awards, explores the issue of child abuse through the culture's very machismo -- one that perpetuates that it's okay if the father imposes his will over his family, because he's the breadwinner and he's always right. It's a system that has the essence of repetition and even today continues to live on. (A similar issue would be explored on a very veiled level in 2002's VALENTIN, and more explicitly in 2003's TE DOY MIS OJOS.)

In this story, Pedro, a.k.a. El Bola due to a small malleable pellet he constantly holds, is a lonely boy going to school who has few to no friends. At home, his father Mariano is everything but loving: he's a tyrant who forces his will and his anger almost constantly at Pedro who lives in total fear of him. However, a new boy in school, Alberto, prompts Pedro to come out of his shell and both become friends. Pedro becomes accepted in Alberto's family, particularly Jose, Alberto's father, who treats his son as a friend more than a son. On the other hand, Mariano doesn't see this friendship as something his son needs and progressively tries to keep him away from them until Alberto becomes aware of some telling marks on Pedro's body and takes matter into his own hands, having Jose alert the help of a social worker. However, things aren't that easy and her very intervention could backfire. That is, until one night, the violence in Pedro's home escalates to a point where actions must be taken.

Achero Mañas has created a movie that should be seen no matter how difficult some of the scenes between Pedro and Mariano may be. The only way to understand the horror of family abuse in the name of obedience and respect -- Mariano sees Jose as a pervert because he makes his living as a tattoo artist. Indeed, many of our parents would have reacted the same way if our friend's parents lived a "different" lifestyle. In many ways, Mariano and Jose represent Spain's past and future -- Mariano being the extreme conservative, Jose being the man of the future. Both actors are well cast in their roles. Manuel Moron has the physicality that suggests a brutal man, while Alberto Gimenez, despite his skinhead appearance which suggests counterculture, is a gentle man who unless pushed does not show aggression.

It's because of these two vastly different fathers that their son's personalities come through the way they do: Alberto is quietly confident. He has no issues other than the ones appropriate for his age -- typical growing pains. Pedro, however, has been raised in a house full of violence. His mother can't do much, though she would like to. It's not hard to see that in his closing confession, Pedro pours his feelings out for the very first time, and it's a barrage of emotion: the problem is, it's all negative, sheer hatred, all directed towards this man who has beat him for no other reason that he was an easy target. EL BOLA offers even at this most extreme moment a semblance of hope -- it does seem Pedro is under some form of therapy -- so in this way, Pedro's final outburst is not just his, but goes for every boy and girl who suffered under the hurtful hand of a parent. In this way, EL BOLA has a powerful message and conveys it beautifully.

El Bola is a dramatic film directed by Acero Mañas, that tells the story of a twelve year old boy named El Bola, who is raised in a violent and unforgiving environment. This movie was released in New York City, on December 13, 2002 and is considered one of Acero Mañas' best films to date. As a result of Mañas' success, his movie won four Goya Awards that includes best film, best emerging director, best original screenplay, and best emerging actor. After watching this amazing film, there is no question as to why this film received so many awards and has become a favorite for many viewers. Pablo a.k.a. "El Bola" is a twelve-year-old boy who suffers abuse from his father. The reason he is called El Bola is because he carries a gold ball-bearing in his pocket for luck. However, due to his unfortunate circumstances it is possible that his ball-bearing actually represents stability and some protection given that he lives in a very vicious household. His violent family situation prevents him from having friends at school until the a new kid, Alfredo, arrives at his school. The warm, caring atmosphere in Alfredo's family juxtaposes Pablo's oppressive situation under his father. With the help of Alfredo, Pablo finds a different reality in his new friend's family who teaches him to confront with courage his worst fears.One of the key themes that this movie expresses is the breaking of the traditional family stereotypes. Many people believe that maintaining a traditional family is the correct way to live. However, I think that this movie opposes this idea. For example, in the movie there are two different families that live two completely different lifestyles. Pablo's family, although on the outside appears very traditional and normal, is actually filled with violence and hostility. Technically, Pablo's family does fit within the typical roles of a traditional family, that atmosphere and the relationships are very dysfunctional, but mostly violent. This family contrasts Alfredo's family, who most people would believe is more of the problematic family due to their carefree lifestyle and more rebellious appearance. Alfredo's father, José, is a tattoo artist and has many tattoos himself, along with his wife and Alfredo. The family is not religious and is very accepting with homosexuality, considering many of their friends are gay. However, as the film continues many family scenes show that they are more healthy, educational and possess a better family relationship than Pablo's family.

One of the criticisms lodged against this moving film is that towards its end the actions of the adults are not believable. I actually found it very believable. The best friends' parents are advised that if they do not either return the abused boy to his parents or go to the police they could be accused of kidnapping, or even worse, the father could say that when his son left the house he was fine, and it was they who inflicted the marks on his childs' body. shocking and unjust as this may seem, the reality is - and, as a victim of child abuse, i feel quite qualified in saying this - that even though the law states otherwise, children are often powerless to fight abuse. For instance: once when I was beaten by my stepfather I ran to the police station and told them what had happened. The police called my parents, asked them if what I was saying was true, my staepdad told them i was making up stories, that i had fallen off my bike and was lying because I was angry about having to do my homework. The police took me home and I was promptly beaten for almost getting him into trouble. So... in Pellet, the best friends fathers fears of legal repercussions for intervening were actually, in my opinion, justified.

There is a gaping flaw in the plot of this otherwise fine movie. The abused boy, Pablo, is taken to a hospital emergency room and his injured eyes stitched up by a doctor. In the real world, the examination of this beaten boy would immediately trigger an investigation of "trauma X". The hospital and the doctor are legally (and ethically) required to report all cases of potential child abuse.

Perhaps Alberto's family may fear that they will be accused. X-rays can reveal prior healed fractures, and the pattern of healed scars and of the present injuries would reliably point to abuse predating Pablo's acquaintance with Alfredo and his family.

It is very strange to watch a movie that unfolds with realistic portraits of the two families and their social milieus and then jump to a completely implausible ethical dilemma of whether or not Pablo should be returned to his abusive father.