Six American women have traveled to a South American country in order to adopt a baby. They are housed at a hotel for several months as the process takes some time. One of the them is a health nut who lost three babies of her own. Two wealthy ones are determined to adopt for their husbands' sakes and three single women long for the chance to become parents. Intermingled with their stories are tales of the mostly hapless natives of the country. There is a pregnant teen who is a shame to her mother, a young housekeeper who had to give her own baby up for adoption in order to support her family, and a young man with a dream to go to the United States and become wealthy. In other words, the story is tantalizing. Who, if any, will benefit from the situation? The story here is first rate. Human nature is shown at its best and at its absolute worst (Marcia Gay Harden's character is certainly one of the most despicable persons ever put on screen). Countries must make difficult choices for economic reasons and children are thus reduced, to some extent, to being commodities. The last scene of the movie is a stunner, summarizing the film in a heart-wrenching conclusion. Although the pace is slow, those who stick with this film will be both rewarded by it's scope and distraught over it's contents. Movie viewers who love films with merit and bite will find this one a top choice.
31 Reviews
fascinating social drama with a dribble away ending
Buddy-512 February 2005
John Sayles, always an intriguing filmmaker, has come up with yet another conversation-starting film in "Casa de los Babys," a subtle exploration of the great divide that separates the haves from the have-nots in this maddeningly imbalanced world of ours. Sayles sets his story at a "hotel" in South America, one designed to cater specifically to American women who are waiting to adopt children to take back with them to the States. Due to bureaucratic red tape, many of the ladies Sayles introduces us to have been holed up in the hotel for months. Except for contact with the resort staff and the occasional foray into the local neighborhood, the women are essentially sealed off from the cultural and socioeconomic realities of the world around them.
The thing that separates Sayles' work from that of so many other socially conscious filmmakers is that he is scrupulously fair in his approach, refusing to pigeonhole any one group of people while allowing us to see the imperfections and humanity inherent in those on both sides of the divide. It would have been so easy for him to have portrayed the women as merely spoiled Americans, exploiting the poor of the world for their own selfish benefit. Indeed, one of the men who helps run the hotel decries the ladies as gringo "imperialists," looking to buy Hispanic babies as if they were strolling through the local market. Yet, his mother, who manages the resort and who also resents the imperialistic tone of some of the women, is pragmatic enough to know that this is a "business" like any other, and that the alternative for many of these orphans would be far grimmer if they were forced to fend for themselves out on the streets. In fact, the children in the facility, who are well cared for and who have some hope for the future, are in direct counterpoint to all the youngsters we see who are living in cardboard boxes, forced to wash windshields, beg from tourists, or steal to survive.
Of the American women, the most interesting is Nan (beautifully played by Marcia Gay Harden), who is the most obnoxiously pushy and least culturally sensitive of the group. We get the feeling that the moment she gets her hands on her new child, she will go to work draining every ounce of ethnicity from his or her soul and spirit. The other women are all far more open and tolerant than she is, being mainly concerned with filling that childless void located deep within themselves. The film is, in large part, a series of revealing conversations, in which the women voice their fears, concerns, visions and hopes about life as a parent.
The movie does an interesting job conveying the universality of motherhood, for despite the economic and language barriers that separate them, both the women yearning for babies and the women being forced to give their babies up for adoption are able to meet on the common ground of maternity.
In addition to Harden, there are excellent performances from Mary Steenbergen, Lili Taylor, Daryl Hannah, Maggie Gyllenhall and Susan Lynch as the American women, and Rita Moreno as the hotel manager who understands how the world works even if she doesn't fully approve of it. Each actress manages to create an interesting, fully realized character out of only a limited amount of screen time.
If there's a criticism to be leveled against the film, it is that Sayles leaves a few too many loose ends hanging at the end. As a storyteller, he has never been all that interested in conventional narrative, so this shouldn't surprise us, but we do sense that he could have gone a bit further with his characters here. As it is, "Casa de los Babys" feels somewhat incomplete, more like an exercise - albeit a fascinating one - than a full-fledged drama. Still, for its clear-eyed, three-dimensional and nonjudgmental take on a tricky subject, "Casa de los Babys" is a film well worth seeing.
The thing that separates Sayles' work from that of so many other socially conscious filmmakers is that he is scrupulously fair in his approach, refusing to pigeonhole any one group of people while allowing us to see the imperfections and humanity inherent in those on both sides of the divide. It would have been so easy for him to have portrayed the women as merely spoiled Americans, exploiting the poor of the world for their own selfish benefit. Indeed, one of the men who helps run the hotel decries the ladies as gringo "imperialists," looking to buy Hispanic babies as if they were strolling through the local market. Yet, his mother, who manages the resort and who also resents the imperialistic tone of some of the women, is pragmatic enough to know that this is a "business" like any other, and that the alternative for many of these orphans would be far grimmer if they were forced to fend for themselves out on the streets. In fact, the children in the facility, who are well cared for and who have some hope for the future, are in direct counterpoint to all the youngsters we see who are living in cardboard boxes, forced to wash windshields, beg from tourists, or steal to survive.
Of the American women, the most interesting is Nan (beautifully played by Marcia Gay Harden), who is the most obnoxiously pushy and least culturally sensitive of the group. We get the feeling that the moment she gets her hands on her new child, she will go to work draining every ounce of ethnicity from his or her soul and spirit. The other women are all far more open and tolerant than she is, being mainly concerned with filling that childless void located deep within themselves. The film is, in large part, a series of revealing conversations, in which the women voice their fears, concerns, visions and hopes about life as a parent.
The movie does an interesting job conveying the universality of motherhood, for despite the economic and language barriers that separate them, both the women yearning for babies and the women being forced to give their babies up for adoption are able to meet on the common ground of maternity.
In addition to Harden, there are excellent performances from Mary Steenbergen, Lili Taylor, Daryl Hannah, Maggie Gyllenhall and Susan Lynch as the American women, and Rita Moreno as the hotel manager who understands how the world works even if she doesn't fully approve of it. Each actress manages to create an interesting, fully realized character out of only a limited amount of screen time.
If there's a criticism to be leveled against the film, it is that Sayles leaves a few too many loose ends hanging at the end. As a storyteller, he has never been all that interested in conventional narrative, so this shouldn't surprise us, but we do sense that he could have gone a bit further with his characters here. As it is, "Casa de los Babys" feels somewhat incomplete, more like an exercise - albeit a fascinating one - than a full-fledged drama. Still, for its clear-eyed, three-dimensional and nonjudgmental take on a tricky subject, "Casa de los Babys" is a film well worth seeing.
A quiet film, about an economic and cultural divide
deastman_uk23 October 2003
A great start to the London Film Festival.
You would have to be fairly desperate to go to Mexico from the States to adopt a child. And maybe a similar desperation is needed to put a baby up for adoption, knowing it could go to another country and culture.
John Sayles film covers all sides to this cultural and economic problem. While much of the film is understated and not overly impressive, the central female ensemble is very good. It was fascinating seeing Daryll Hannah after all these years; and after The Secretary, I'm a big fan of Maggie Gyllenhall. Mary Steenburgen plays.. well, Mary Steenburgen. All the women are very watchable, and are given space to get emotional without reverting to sentimental melodrama.
The film is no cinematic treat, and has little in the way of a full resolution for the characters but its one of the better ensemble pieces I've seen in some time.
You would have to be fairly desperate to go to Mexico from the States to adopt a child. And maybe a similar desperation is needed to put a baby up for adoption, knowing it could go to another country and culture.
John Sayles film covers all sides to this cultural and economic problem. While much of the film is understated and not overly impressive, the central female ensemble is very good. It was fascinating seeing Daryll Hannah after all these years; and after The Secretary, I'm a big fan of Maggie Gyllenhall. Mary Steenburgen plays.. well, Mary Steenburgen. All the women are very watchable, and are given space to get emotional without reverting to sentimental melodrama.
The film is no cinematic treat, and has little in the way of a full resolution for the characters but its one of the better ensemble pieces I've seen in some time.
Classic Sayles - character/culture as relevant as space/time
annienomad1 October 2003
Once again John Sayles reveals that people and the land are one. That issues that face a region are inseparable from their culture. Or in this case, a clash of cultures. Sayles weaves a tale of co-dependence between rich and poor, love and need, power and abuse. He lets you feel and think but reminds you that life isn't comfortable. That choice is involved and that responsibility and compassion, or the lack of either, carries life-altering consequences.
Desperate housewives adopting babies
jotix10014 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Adopting children should be a labor of love. After all, if a woman finds herself unable to conceive, it would probably be a good idea to let her go anywhere where orphans and children that have been given up for adoption to be reunited with an infant. Well, in most cases, as we see in this film, there are people that profit from this process. It has turned to be a commercial enterprise for many people. We know a few cases where overseas adoptions have cost upwards of $100,000.00, when all is taken into account.
We meet six American women who have come to Mexico in the hope of adopting children. For one reason, or another, they haven't been able to have their own babies. The connection is clear, in this case, the lawyer in charge of the adoption recommend their clients to stay at Posada Santa Marta, where the owner, Senora Munoz is working with the unscrupulous man. Since the law requires to have a local lawyer, most would be mothers have to rely on this intermediary in order to adopt.
The six women in the story are so different from one another that it is hard to imagine them socializing, had they not been thrown together in the hotel to await for their newly adopted babies. Although we don't get to know them in intimate details, we can see their desire to be mothers. The quiet Skipper turns out to be the one who has suffered three dreadful pregnancies in which all three infants had died. Nan, a pushy woman, is an unhappy camper. Everything irritates her and she lets anyone know about what she thinks about the country and the adoption procedures. Eileen, coming from a large Irish family has not been able to conceive. Leslie and Gayle seem to be the best adjusted of the women. Jennifer, is the youngest of them all.
There are also a couple of stories running parallel to the American women. The most touching story comes from Asuncion, one of the maids in the hotel. When Eileen tries to communicate with her, the maid, not understanding her, tells her in Spanish about the way she had to give up her own baby girl for adoption. Also, we see what appears to be an upscale woman with her pregnant daughter, Celia, as the mother weighs her options and how the girl will not have an adoption. Celia, who is only fifteen years old, evidently had relations with Reynaldo, the young stud that roams the beach in search of easy conquests.
John Sayles never cease to amaze us with his stories. In this film he tackles the commerce that goes on in the adoption process. At the same time, he makes a case for how complicated the whole thing is and how these would be mothers have to face as these young infants grow in an environment that stands in sharp contrast with the street children he brings into the movie. Those children are desperately in need for adoption, yet their own society, or would be parents, will bypass them in favor of the ones that can only be obtained in a legal manner.
The ensemble cast does wonders under Mr. Sayles direction. Best of all is Marcia Gay Harden, as the pathetic Nan, a prototype of the "ugly American" abroad. Daryl Hannah has some excellent moments as Skipper. Lili Taylor, Mary Steenburgen, Maggie Gyllenhaal are fine. Susan Lynch has a great moment as she tries to talk with the maid. Vanessa Martinez gives a good rendition of her character Asuncion. Rita Moreno is also seen as the owner of the hotel.
"Casa de los Babys" takes an excellent view at the thorny issue of adoptions.
We meet six American women who have come to Mexico in the hope of adopting children. For one reason, or another, they haven't been able to have their own babies. The connection is clear, in this case, the lawyer in charge of the adoption recommend their clients to stay at Posada Santa Marta, where the owner, Senora Munoz is working with the unscrupulous man. Since the law requires to have a local lawyer, most would be mothers have to rely on this intermediary in order to adopt.
The six women in the story are so different from one another that it is hard to imagine them socializing, had they not been thrown together in the hotel to await for their newly adopted babies. Although we don't get to know them in intimate details, we can see their desire to be mothers. The quiet Skipper turns out to be the one who has suffered three dreadful pregnancies in which all three infants had died. Nan, a pushy woman, is an unhappy camper. Everything irritates her and she lets anyone know about what she thinks about the country and the adoption procedures. Eileen, coming from a large Irish family has not been able to conceive. Leslie and Gayle seem to be the best adjusted of the women. Jennifer, is the youngest of them all.
There are also a couple of stories running parallel to the American women. The most touching story comes from Asuncion, one of the maids in the hotel. When Eileen tries to communicate with her, the maid, not understanding her, tells her in Spanish about the way she had to give up her own baby girl for adoption. Also, we see what appears to be an upscale woman with her pregnant daughter, Celia, as the mother weighs her options and how the girl will not have an adoption. Celia, who is only fifteen years old, evidently had relations with Reynaldo, the young stud that roams the beach in search of easy conquests.
John Sayles never cease to amaze us with his stories. In this film he tackles the commerce that goes on in the adoption process. At the same time, he makes a case for how complicated the whole thing is and how these would be mothers have to face as these young infants grow in an environment that stands in sharp contrast with the street children he brings into the movie. Those children are desperately in need for adoption, yet their own society, or would be parents, will bypass them in favor of the ones that can only be obtained in a legal manner.
The ensemble cast does wonders under Mr. Sayles direction. Best of all is Marcia Gay Harden, as the pathetic Nan, a prototype of the "ugly American" abroad. Daryl Hannah has some excellent moments as Skipper. Lili Taylor, Mary Steenburgen, Maggie Gyllenhaal are fine. Susan Lynch has a great moment as she tries to talk with the maid. Vanessa Martinez gives a good rendition of her character Asuncion. Rita Moreno is also seen as the owner of the hotel.
"Casa de los Babys" takes an excellent view at the thorny issue of adoptions.
Pretentious and disappointing
karinan2226 April 2005
The Director jumps into deep waters to intentionally choice avoiding the diving. The result, of course, could not be other than a pretentious work, characterized by the lack of research as well as the simplicity used to solve a plot full of ridiculous stereotypes. Even when the intentions may have been noble, what this complex story brings to the surface is only enormous ignorance and the effort to sell such ignorance as intellectual thought. Pretentious. Poor. Ridiculously embarrassing. It could be considered a small prove that the American stereotype may not be so wrong after all when reflecting the American society as arrogant and proud of its ignorance
It definitely proves that about John Sayles.
As complex and unresolved as the underlying issue(s)
DLC9527 June 2004
The genius of this film is exactly the characteristic that many here have criticized it for: it contradicts itself all over the place and ends abruptly with no resolution. What possible resolution could you expect? Adoption is an inherently troubling phenomenon. It always involves awkward intersections of race and class, opportunity and the lack thereof, sex and sexism, law and morals. I found this film to be deeply troubling in all the ways it should be, due to the topic.
I think Sayles did a brilliant job bringing together a number of very believable characters and just showing them to us for 90-some odd minutes. All have their contradictions, and none clearly speaks some unambiguous authorial opinion. The son of the hotel owner mouths his leftist analysis with his buddies, but is really a drunken loser. Rita Moreno, through her frustration with her husband's politics, voices the frustration of so many women: politics is one thing, but who'll take care of the kids? And of course, the reverse is implied as well: kids are one thing, but who'll take care of the politics? You can go through each of the characters and seem some inherent pull in opposite directions.
I loved that none of the characters is entirely sympathetic, except perhaps the three homeless boys. They are all complicated and corrupted by a complicated and corrupt world that places a premium on babies and motherhood, but only under the "right" circumstances for the right women and the right kids.
I was very grateful that there was no real closure at the end, and that all Sayles had to say was that, despite all, both the least sympathetic and the most sympathetic of the potential moms were about to leave with babies.
Anyone who cares about kids and women should see this movie. And certainly anyone who is considering adoption (domestic or international -- either way, it's all the same issues) should see it. In sum, a very thought-provoking movie.
P.S. -- Did I mention the incredible soundtrack?
I think Sayles did a brilliant job bringing together a number of very believable characters and just showing them to us for 90-some odd minutes. All have their contradictions, and none clearly speaks some unambiguous authorial opinion. The son of the hotel owner mouths his leftist analysis with his buddies, but is really a drunken loser. Rita Moreno, through her frustration with her husband's politics, voices the frustration of so many women: politics is one thing, but who'll take care of the kids? And of course, the reverse is implied as well: kids are one thing, but who'll take care of the politics? You can go through each of the characters and seem some inherent pull in opposite directions.
I loved that none of the characters is entirely sympathetic, except perhaps the three homeless boys. They are all complicated and corrupted by a complicated and corrupt world that places a premium on babies and motherhood, but only under the "right" circumstances for the right women and the right kids.
I was very grateful that there was no real closure at the end, and that all Sayles had to say was that, despite all, both the least sympathetic and the most sympathetic of the potential moms were about to leave with babies.
Anyone who cares about kids and women should see this movie. And certainly anyone who is considering adoption (domestic or international -- either way, it's all the same issues) should see it. In sum, a very thought-provoking movie.
P.S. -- Did I mention the incredible soundtrack?
Very negative one-sided view of international adoption
guyb23 April 2004
I have been a huge fan of John Sayes for a number of years. I think of him as one of the very best directors. I've managed to track down every single movie he's done. I anxiously await each new one he does every two years. This time I was very angry and disappointed. On the Special Features on the DVD, Sayes tells us how he has spent so much time in South America and really "knows" the people. Yet his political perspective on the international adoption process is extremely one sided and very anti-adoption. Seems like he just met the "Che Guevera" segment of South America (the gringos are stealing our babies). This is a uniquely bad experience for me from all his movies. I always felt that I had a total experience from each one of them; not just one extreme point of view. From a cinematography and acting point of view, the movie was good, but not quite up to Sayes greatness.
don't call me baby
simonrosenbaum24 October 2003
Six women go to Mexico in order to adopt a child. Their ages range from early twenties to mid-forties and they all have very different ideas on how to bring up the child. John Sayles comedy-drama perhaps tries too hard to cover all the bases but he does it in such a warm and gentle way that he gets away with it. Occasionally it feels like your watching a play with each woman getting their big moment to shine with an extended piece of dialogue but the performances by all the women are excellent so you don't really mind too much. Though it could be Rita Moreno who almost steals the film as the head of the adoption centre which might get rewarded on oscar night. 'Casa de Los Babys' is an enjoyable touching film that may just make you broody! (8/10)
Sad but compelling story
kal-174 August 2004
Desperate American women, unable to bear children, wait for months at a hotel in Mexico, in order to adopt babies.
Meanwhile, homeless and apparently parent less or unwanted children sleep in cardboard shelters and roam the streets, stealing and washing windows for survival, while one young woman reminisces about the baby she gave up, and another, pregnant and 15 years old, is on the path to giving up her baby.
This is a very affecting movie. It presents the situation, prompts us to ask the questions, but there are no answers.
The characters were interesting, and the performances are compelling. Rita Moreno, especially, was wonderful as the hotel owner.
Meanwhile, homeless and apparently parent less or unwanted children sleep in cardboard shelters and roam the streets, stealing and washing windows for survival, while one young woman reminisces about the baby she gave up, and another, pregnant and 15 years old, is on the path to giving up her baby.
This is a very affecting movie. It presents the situation, prompts us to ask the questions, but there are no answers.
The characters were interesting, and the performances are compelling. Rita Moreno, especially, was wonderful as the hotel owner.
turkey
brainyidiot12 October 2005
As a fan of John Sayles and many of the people in this tedious production, I wonder why Sayles would write a story involving a bunch of annoying yacking women I wouldn't want to spent 5 minutes with let alone the length of a movie. It's just a waste of good talent. You know you're in trouble when the most entertaining part of the movie is the brief glimpses of the beautiful locations. If I had a mother like anyone of these women, I would have ran away from home. Daryl Hannah, though lovely was so much better in Kill Bill. Marcia Gay Hardin was excellent in Pollack, but I hated her here. Mary Steenburgan hasn't really done anything good since Time After Time, and Lily Taylor was probably the most interesting of the bunch here, but why bother? It stinks.
Soul-diving...and the best female cast in years.
rainking_es22 August 2004
Casa De Los Babys deals with so many issues... so many that John Sayles would need a 100 hours long movie to go deeply into all of them. And since that's not possible he manages to do it in +/-90 minutes.
Let's see: 4 north-american women (plus one from Ireland) stay in some hotel in México waiting to adopt a child. 5 different personalities, 5 different ways of facing life, 5 different existences. We have the reactionary-arrogant-and-proud-northamerican one (Marcia Gay H.), the rebel and nonconformist one (Lily Taylor), the catholic-alcoholic (Steenburgen), the misterious and reserved one (Hannah), and the dreamer (Susan Lynch). In 90 minutes we find out what do they expect from life, what are their fears, their desires; we find out about their personal dramas and their social status; what they've been through (Sayles manages to do that with only a dialogue line in many of the cases) and so... Also we have the fact that those women from the first world, have come to a third world country in order to adopt a child. With 4 or 5 sequences Sayles perfectly explains WHY México is a country where people comes to adopt children to, and why thousands of mexican women have to get rid of their babys. We see children of the street (7 or 8 years old homeless kids robbing and taking drugs),young girls getting pregnant and being forced to give their babys away (in a Catholic country just like México, abortion ain't an option), men that cannot find a job, and the corruption that hides in third world countries' bureaucracy. Well, so many things to thing about. We need more movies just like this one. Social cinema (Ken Loach, Frears, León de Aranoa) is frowned upon by some people, maybe because it makes them fell guilty.
And what to say about the cast? The five starring actresses may not be the most handsome, nor the most famous, may not have the best bodies... But let me tell you something: this is the best female cast in years. If the Oscar's were for real they should give a goddamn golden little naked man to each and every one of the women that appear in Casa De Los Babys. Not only to the anglo-saxon ones, but also to the mexican cast. If you don't care about third world's penuries, nor about people's personal dramas, you should go and watch Casa De Los Babys just to know what it means to be an ACTRESS.
My rate: 8/10
Let's see: 4 north-american women (plus one from Ireland) stay in some hotel in México waiting to adopt a child. 5 different personalities, 5 different ways of facing life, 5 different existences. We have the reactionary-arrogant-and-proud-northamerican one (Marcia Gay H.), the rebel and nonconformist one (Lily Taylor), the catholic-alcoholic (Steenburgen), the misterious and reserved one (Hannah), and the dreamer (Susan Lynch). In 90 minutes we find out what do they expect from life, what are their fears, their desires; we find out about their personal dramas and their social status; what they've been through (Sayles manages to do that with only a dialogue line in many of the cases) and so... Also we have the fact that those women from the first world, have come to a third world country in order to adopt a child. With 4 or 5 sequences Sayles perfectly explains WHY México is a country where people comes to adopt children to, and why thousands of mexican women have to get rid of their babys. We see children of the street (7 or 8 years old homeless kids robbing and taking drugs),young girls getting pregnant and being forced to give their babys away (in a Catholic country just like México, abortion ain't an option), men that cannot find a job, and the corruption that hides in third world countries' bureaucracy. Well, so many things to thing about. We need more movies just like this one. Social cinema (Ken Loach, Frears, León de Aranoa) is frowned upon by some people, maybe because it makes them fell guilty.
And what to say about the cast? The five starring actresses may not be the most handsome, nor the most famous, may not have the best bodies... But let me tell you something: this is the best female cast in years. If the Oscar's were for real they should give a goddamn golden little naked man to each and every one of the women that appear in Casa De Los Babys. Not only to the anglo-saxon ones, but also to the mexican cast. If you don't care about third world's penuries, nor about people's personal dramas, you should go and watch Casa De Los Babys just to know what it means to be an ACTRESS.
My rate: 8/10
Made by a community college teacher with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome
elicash336314 January 2005
Apparently I'm the only person to have seen this movie applied any kind of critical thinking skills. This movie was incredibly bad; the story was muddled, the acting was vapid, and I've seen aborted second trimester fetuses better developed than the characters. What a bunch of touchy-feely mindless vaginal trite. To all you fools with your threads who claim this is a "tapestry" or "commentary on Mexican-American relations", you must be easily baffled and find hidden meanings in your alphabet soup as well. This movie should shoveled steaming into a rocket and sent into space where it can live out its half life with the smoking remains of Lenard Part 6.
Maybe folks should watch the extras before the film?
cliff-1921 September 2004
Warning: Spoilers
Not only did I like this film, but I gave it 9/10. It is on a par with "Limbo" or "Men With Guns." What pushed me to write this was watching all three of the documentary extras on the DVD. It made so much fall into place that I wanted to say something to the critics here on IMDb.
In one scene, John Sayles says that, of all the ways people can be divided (class, race, religion, etc.), one of the crucial ways is language. People can spend hours with each other, but if they don't understand each others' language, they don't know each other. This is in direct contradiction to the comments of many viewers (including Roger Ebert!) that emotions can connect people.
So I want to apply that to the most-discussed scene in the film, the monologues between Eileen and Asuncion.
SPOILERS RIGHT HERE!
Eileen rhapsodizes about finally having a child and being able to be the good mother she always has dreamed about. Asuncion, understanding nothing, listens with great empathy. Empathy, it seems, because she too had to give up a baby not long ago. So she hears the earnestness in Eileen and imagines that her child is with a mother like Eileen, without understanding whether Eileen is really going to be a good mother. But Asuncion is grieving, and Eileen knows nothing of this. What good is it to feel empathy for tears if you don't know what provokes the tears?
If I were to change anything in this film, I would have added more sympathetic qualities to Nan. Otherwise, one of Sayles' best!
In one scene, John Sayles says that, of all the ways people can be divided (class, race, religion, etc.), one of the crucial ways is language. People can spend hours with each other, but if they don't understand each others' language, they don't know each other. This is in direct contradiction to the comments of many viewers (including Roger Ebert!) that emotions can connect people.
So I want to apply that to the most-discussed scene in the film, the monologues between Eileen and Asuncion.
SPOILERS RIGHT HERE!
Eileen rhapsodizes about finally having a child and being able to be the good mother she always has dreamed about. Asuncion, understanding nothing, listens with great empathy. Empathy, it seems, because she too had to give up a baby not long ago. So she hears the earnestness in Eileen and imagines that her child is with a mother like Eileen, without understanding whether Eileen is really going to be a good mother. But Asuncion is grieving, and Eileen knows nothing of this. What good is it to feel empathy for tears if you don't know what provokes the tears?
If I were to change anything in this film, I would have added more sympathetic qualities to Nan. Otherwise, one of Sayles' best!
Pregnant with preguntas
ThurstonHunger16 May 2004
I remain a Sayles fan, and this film for me shows a step up from "The Sunshine State" albeit with some strong parallels. Here we get another slice-of-life film, centered around a modern phenomenon that is rife with controversy. While Sayles displays some leanings, I disagree with others here that "Casa" is a strident PC harangue. Instead, it seems to me that Sayles is intentionally striving to steer clear of any easy answers, as frustrating as that might be for some of his audience.
At least part of the film is looking at borders between people, classes and nations. Additionally there is the border between right and wrong, which may be as permeable as the others. He's working with a tremendous cast, Marcia Gay Harden is mighty talented, but unlike the others I don't think she ever finds her way to the heart of her character. But then her character is the most duplicitous of the bunch.
But it is indeed a bunch of characters. Each of the six mothers-in-waiting has her own tale. Additionally toss in some less lucky, abandoned children as huffing street urchins, an adult looking to illegally adopt Philadephia as his home, and a complicated mother-son relationship with Rita Moreno and........como se dice "phew" en espanol?
This slice-of-life is perhaps a bit too large to fit on the plate that is serving it.
It does help that the six women are at least united in a common quest. But like with "The Sunshine State" I feel this could be an outstanding part of a trilogy. Another shared positive similarity, that monologues here deliver the most memorable parts of the film. Albeit here, the "monologues" are cleverly presented with both Susan Lynch and Vanessa Martinez in the same room at the same time...still separated by a border of language.
I respect Sayles appreciation of complexity, especially as he favors a film that is pregnant with questions rather than delivering a simple answer. However it's his predilection towards a complex ensemble cast that I think may undermine his films as of late. His success as a writer/editor/juggler is something to watch, but as a viewer I would like to have had less characters up in the air, and more in hand for longer periods.
One last comment, I could enjoy Sayles films with my eyes closed...not just for those aforementioned monologues and in general his ear, but his skill in selecting music is noteworthy.
6/10
At least part of the film is looking at borders between people, classes and nations. Additionally there is the border between right and wrong, which may be as permeable as the others. He's working with a tremendous cast, Marcia Gay Harden is mighty talented, but unlike the others I don't think she ever finds her way to the heart of her character. But then her character is the most duplicitous of the bunch.
But it is indeed a bunch of characters. Each of the six mothers-in-waiting has her own tale. Additionally toss in some less lucky, abandoned children as huffing street urchins, an adult looking to illegally adopt Philadephia as his home, and a complicated mother-son relationship with Rita Moreno and........como se dice "phew" en espanol?
This slice-of-life is perhaps a bit too large to fit on the plate that is serving it.
It does help that the six women are at least united in a common quest. But like with "The Sunshine State" I feel this could be an outstanding part of a trilogy. Another shared positive similarity, that monologues here deliver the most memorable parts of the film. Albeit here, the "monologues" are cleverly presented with both Susan Lynch and Vanessa Martinez in the same room at the same time...still separated by a border of language.
I respect Sayles appreciation of complexity, especially as he favors a film that is pregnant with questions rather than delivering a simple answer. However it's his predilection towards a complex ensemble cast that I think may undermine his films as of late. His success as a writer/editor/juggler is something to watch, but as a viewer I would like to have had less characters up in the air, and more in hand for longer periods.
One last comment, I could enjoy Sayles films with my eyes closed...not just for those aforementioned monologues and in general his ear, but his skill in selecting music is noteworthy.
6/10
With a name like "Casa de los babys" it's got to be bad.
jaded_viewer27 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I must say I am a minor fan of Sayles, having enjoyed several of his movies (Lone Star in particular). And when it comes to creative endeavors, I'm all for people wearing multiple of hats - singer / songwriters have my deep respect, as do writer / directors. But the editing of this film should have been left to another person, as Sayles was most likely too close to see it objectively by the end of filming, and consequently the film suffers. Case in point: watching the DVD extra features, I was introduced to the background motivation for the various characters via the interviews with the actors. Too bad that background didn't actually MAKE IT INTO THE MOVIE! Is it on the cutting room floor somewhere? Who knows.
This film is a mish-mash of characters, situations, and locales - NONE of which are developed in a satisfactory manner. As a result we are left to watch a variety of bland scenarios involving people we don't really know doing things we don't fully understand or really care about in a country somewhere in South America. The side plots, not being fleshed out, are more of a distraction than anything, which is a shame. The intersection of adoption, first vs. third world economics, capitalism, etc. would seem to be a fertile one, but the movie for some reason doesn't employ this to anywhere near full advantage. If being boring is the cardinal sin of movie making, this film will probably pass purgatory altogether and go straight to hell.
As for the acting, It was a real treat seeing Rita Moreno after all these years. Marcia Gay Harden was terrific as the ugly American (I really hated her). Daryl Hannah was so-so as the new age health nut suffering in silence (though not quite enough silence for me - I started to wonder when she would whip out the chicken gizzard in the "psychic surgery" scene - can Hollywood please stop validating new age BS please?). Mary Steenburgen is always welcome, though she played a rather low-key role here. Lili Taylor seems doomed to play Lili Taylor for the rest of her life: outspoken, brash, self-assured to a fault, and a bit too quick on the snappy reply, though she did have some of the best lines. I had the feeling Susan Lynch was cast in order to relieve some of the white breaded nature of the US cast - she was generally fine, but her scene with the maid struck me as insensitive and self-indulgent (not what Sayles intended, I'm pretty sure). But the real sore thumb here was Maggie Gyllenhaal who played a weak, weepy, superstitious, infantile character that seriously grated on my nerves. The movie would be 10% better if her character were just somehow cut out.
I just about fell off the sofa when the character played by Susan Lynch was relating her fertility surgery - paraphrasing: "they did a tubal ligation or something on me along with other things I can't even begin to understand". Earth to Susan's character: no wonder you are having fertility problems, you were freaking sterilized! Here's a tip: you might want to spend two minutes Googling your medical issues before someone starts carving you up like a thanksgiving turkey. Why the hell didn't one the actresses pick up on this and have Sayles fix it? I was struck dumb by this glaring technical idiocy, and it took me a while to come to my senses and get back into the movie (such as I was able to) after that.
And when did it become OK again for movies to portray women as total flitty morons? Haven't we as a people progressed beyond this point over the last couple of decades or so? Some of the dialog was embarrassing close to "I don't know nothing about birthing no babies" - and these are supposedly women with fertility issues, who I would expect to have at least a passing knowledge on the subject. I'm aware that people like this do exist in real life, but can they not be rubbed in our noses as some kind of example of normalcy by Hollywood quite so much? Am I asking for too much here? My rating: 4/10
This film is a mish-mash of characters, situations, and locales - NONE of which are developed in a satisfactory manner. As a result we are left to watch a variety of bland scenarios involving people we don't really know doing things we don't fully understand or really care about in a country somewhere in South America. The side plots, not being fleshed out, are more of a distraction than anything, which is a shame. The intersection of adoption, first vs. third world economics, capitalism, etc. would seem to be a fertile one, but the movie for some reason doesn't employ this to anywhere near full advantage. If being boring is the cardinal sin of movie making, this film will probably pass purgatory altogether and go straight to hell.
As for the acting, It was a real treat seeing Rita Moreno after all these years. Marcia Gay Harden was terrific as the ugly American (I really hated her). Daryl Hannah was so-so as the new age health nut suffering in silence (though not quite enough silence for me - I started to wonder when she would whip out the chicken gizzard in the "psychic surgery" scene - can Hollywood please stop validating new age BS please?). Mary Steenburgen is always welcome, though she played a rather low-key role here. Lili Taylor seems doomed to play Lili Taylor for the rest of her life: outspoken, brash, self-assured to a fault, and a bit too quick on the snappy reply, though she did have some of the best lines. I had the feeling Susan Lynch was cast in order to relieve some of the white breaded nature of the US cast - she was generally fine, but her scene with the maid struck me as insensitive and self-indulgent (not what Sayles intended, I'm pretty sure). But the real sore thumb here was Maggie Gyllenhaal who played a weak, weepy, superstitious, infantile character that seriously grated on my nerves. The movie would be 10% better if her character were just somehow cut out.
I just about fell off the sofa when the character played by Susan Lynch was relating her fertility surgery - paraphrasing: "they did a tubal ligation or something on me along with other things I can't even begin to understand". Earth to Susan's character: no wonder you are having fertility problems, you were freaking sterilized! Here's a tip: you might want to spend two minutes Googling your medical issues before someone starts carving you up like a thanksgiving turkey. Why the hell didn't one the actresses pick up on this and have Sayles fix it? I was struck dumb by this glaring technical idiocy, and it took me a while to come to my senses and get back into the movie (such as I was able to) after that.
And when did it become OK again for movies to portray women as total flitty morons? Haven't we as a people progressed beyond this point over the last couple of decades or so? Some of the dialog was embarrassing close to "I don't know nothing about birthing no babies" - and these are supposedly women with fertility issues, who I would expect to have at least a passing knowledge on the subject. I'm aware that people like this do exist in real life, but can they not be rubbed in our noses as some kind of example of normalcy by Hollywood quite so much? Am I asking for too much here? My rating: 4/10
Exceptional film. Don't miss it!
Red-1254 November 2003
Casa de Los Babys (2003) is another exceptional film from writer/director John Sayles. Seven extraordinary actors interact in a natural and realistic fashion: Daryl Hannah,
Lili Taylor, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Marcia Gay Harden, Mary
Steenburgen, Susan Lynch, and Rita Moreno. The first six are mothers waiting in a Latin American country for children
they plan to adopt. Ms. Moreno plays the owner of the hotel
at which the women live. Vanessa Martinez--an extremely
talented young actor--plays a maid at the hotel who is trying to support two younger siblings on her meager salary.
Not only does the movie provide a picture of the lives
of these women, but we also are shown local people whose
lives are more desperate than the North Americans--three
homeless boys, the hotel owner's revolutionary--but lazy-- son, and an educated man who is looking for work--any work
that will allow him to support his family.
Sayles is a genius, and he is able to make the life of every character dramatically and emotionally meaningful. This movie has neither violent action nor a melodramatic ending. Instead, the film is so finely crafted that every scene proves an emotional climax in its own way.
Casa de Los Babys will surely be considered one of the finest independent films of 2003. Don't miss it!
Lili Taylor, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Marcia Gay Harden, Mary
Steenburgen, Susan Lynch, and Rita Moreno. The first six are mothers waiting in a Latin American country for children
they plan to adopt. Ms. Moreno plays the owner of the hotel
at which the women live. Vanessa Martinez--an extremely
talented young actor--plays a maid at the hotel who is trying to support two younger siblings on her meager salary.
Not only does the movie provide a picture of the lives
of these women, but we also are shown local people whose
lives are more desperate than the North Americans--three
homeless boys, the hotel owner's revolutionary--but lazy-- son, and an educated man who is looking for work--any work
that will allow him to support his family.
Sayles is a genius, and he is able to make the life of every character dramatically and emotionally meaningful. This movie has neither violent action nor a melodramatic ending. Instead, the film is so finely crafted that every scene proves an emotional climax in its own way.
Casa de Los Babys will surely be considered one of the finest independent films of 2003. Don't miss it!
Poorly Done
AngelHonesty19 February 2020
The message of the film is an excellent one that could have made a great movie, but instead this film was done so poorly that it became difficult to view.
The filming is terrible! extremely low budget quality. Most of the movie is in subtitles as they speak Spanish, making it exhausting to follow along. The scenes with the woman are very simple and way to long as they basically gossip or talk about themselves. You get to learn about the hardships of the people in the country; woman who have to give up their child, a woman who has given up their child, a child without parents and even the men's point of view. But in showing these things, it's basically all summed up in a couple of poorly written conversations, instead of actually filming and showing this to a full extant. The abrupt ending to the film did not leave you with a satisfied feeling. Especially after learning how messed up the American woman who are adopting these baby's, the majority of them should not be allowed to adopt.
The filming is terrible! extremely low budget quality. Most of the movie is in subtitles as they speak Spanish, making it exhausting to follow along. The scenes with the woman are very simple and way to long as they basically gossip or talk about themselves. You get to learn about the hardships of the people in the country; woman who have to give up their child, a woman who has given up their child, a child without parents and even the men's point of view. But in showing these things, it's basically all summed up in a couple of poorly written conversations, instead of actually filming and showing this to a full extant. The abrupt ending to the film did not leave you with a satisfied feeling. Especially after learning how messed up the American woman who are adopting these baby's, the majority of them should not be allowed to adopt.
compelling ensemble piece
TRWDAL6 October 2003
This is a wonderfully compelling film that seemingly covers all perspectives of Americans adopting children in Latin and South America. You won't soon forget the stories and the characters: the street children, the American women, the maids at the hotel -- so many good actors, such a moving story. The little boy who plays the principal street child warrants an Oscar. There was a collective sigh from the audience when it ended because I think we all wanted to see more.
another superb "slice-of-life" by Sayles
k_barra27 April 2004
I enjoy Sayles because he always gives you more than you expect. This film is about 6 women trying to adopt children from Mexico, but it is also a commentary on many aspects of a life we, as Americans, may never understand. One plot line is that of the young maid at the hotel who is raising her 2 younger siblings, and has given her own child up for adoption. Another plot details the lives of 3 brothers who talk about their mother, but appear to live alone on the streets, huffing spray paint and sleeping on the beach. Still another plot involves the son of the hotel owner, who is convinced that the adoption of Mexican babies by Americans is imperialism at its peak. His mother, who owns the hotel, reveals her feelings when she talks about how easily men get caught up in politics; her own husband is banned from the state and has taken up with a young Spanish girl, leaving her to run the hotel and adoption service by herself. Meanwhile, the viewer finds out the motivation of each woman who is seeking to adopt. The women are somewhat catty and mean, but are under a lot of stress as they have been in Mexico for 2 months already. All in all, a wonderful film. Sayles offers a true, if not depressing, view of life in Mexico, especially for women. This life is in sharp contrast with the woes of the American women, and it really makes you think about our lives here.
Complex and entertaining film
Sheila_Beers9 November 2005
I found "Casa De Los Babys" complex and entertaining, and I believe the "loose ends" serve a purpose as the viewer is to form his own conclusion about the characters, their motives and conflicts, and the possible outcomes. The six women who want to adopt are so wrapped up in their own frustrations and needs that they are blind to the destitute and desperate lives of the hotel workers and the Latin American community around them. The hotel manager and her con artist lawyer-brother, who run the adoption agency, play heartless "bait and switch" games with the childless women, and the women fail to see the operators are taking advantage of them. As a result, the women hand exorbitant amounts of money over to the operators when they more wisely could use the money to help the native people around them.
There is opportunity for a relationship between the single woman of the group, who has given up hope for a husband and family, and the handsome, young, and educated Latin man who dreams of going to the U.S. The possibilities never enter their minds, with the woman focusing on single-parent adoption and the young man pinning false hopes on a lottery ticket.
"Casa De Los Babys" is a film I would recommend to socially conscious people and prospective parents alike.
There is opportunity for a relationship between the single woman of the group, who has given up hope for a husband and family, and the handsome, young, and educated Latin man who dreams of going to the U.S. The possibilities never enter their minds, with the woman focusing on single-parent adoption and the young man pinning false hopes on a lottery ticket.
"Casa De Los Babys" is a film I would recommend to socially conscious people and prospective parents alike.
Tackling a difficult theme
wisewebwoman19 March 2007
And John Sayles does it extremely well. I had avoided this movie as many critics had trashed it and for no good reason that I could ascertain.
The story features six very different American women who have come to Mexico in the hope of adopting children due to their own inability (and in one case lack of desire)to conceive. The lawyer in charge of these adoptions and the owner of the resort where they stay are brother and sister and in it for the money, of course. Rita Moreno, whom I haven't seen in years and years plays the sister running the hotel.
The movie is not so much about the stories of the women but about the layering of multiple stories in Mexico. Mexico is never specified but the town portrayed is Acapulco. The homeless beggar children of the street are shown, the maids of the resort coming to work from the mountains every day, a fifteen year old on the verge of giving up her child for adoption, an educated engineer who can't seem to find work anywhere and dreams of Philadelphia.
Over the few months or so that the women have to stay in the resort they begin to bond with one another. John Sayles gets amazing performances out of the actresses, Mary Steenbergen, Darryl Hannah, Susan Lynch, Marca Gay Harden, Maggie Gyllenhall and Lili Taylor. He throws a compassionate eye over the whole process of the adopting of children from one country who sometimes have to abandon their genetic, tribal and cultural origins in their new home.
It begs the question of how a country such as Canada or the U.S. would react if Mexicans came here to adopt our unwanted children.
"Casa de los Babys" is a refreshing take on a very difficult subject and brings honesty and compassion to a heartbreaking topic. 8 out of 10.
The story features six very different American women who have come to Mexico in the hope of adopting children due to their own inability (and in one case lack of desire)to conceive. The lawyer in charge of these adoptions and the owner of the resort where they stay are brother and sister and in it for the money, of course. Rita Moreno, whom I haven't seen in years and years plays the sister running the hotel.
The movie is not so much about the stories of the women but about the layering of multiple stories in Mexico. Mexico is never specified but the town portrayed is Acapulco. The homeless beggar children of the street are shown, the maids of the resort coming to work from the mountains every day, a fifteen year old on the verge of giving up her child for adoption, an educated engineer who can't seem to find work anywhere and dreams of Philadelphia.
Over the few months or so that the women have to stay in the resort they begin to bond with one another. John Sayles gets amazing performances out of the actresses, Mary Steenbergen, Darryl Hannah, Susan Lynch, Marca Gay Harden, Maggie Gyllenhall and Lili Taylor. He throws a compassionate eye over the whole process of the adopting of children from one country who sometimes have to abandon their genetic, tribal and cultural origins in their new home.
It begs the question of how a country such as Canada or the U.S. would react if Mexicans came here to adopt our unwanted children.
"Casa de los Babys" is a refreshing take on a very difficult subject and brings honesty and compassion to a heartbreaking topic. 8 out of 10.
Another Sayles film that provokes deep thoughts
ronchow19 May 2010
This is perhaps the 3rd of 4th film I have seen by Sayles. As in the others, it was a slow one and demanded my patience.
The choice of actors was great, and the use of local talent equally so. While I don't know about the accuracy of the adoption process in Mexico as depicted in the film, I find the story line and the backgrounds of the six adopting mothers creditable.
This film can never be a big box office hit for the very narrow subject matter it deals with. There was no violence, no sex, no twisted plot in it. However, it is the kind that takes the viewers to different worlds - the worlds of the would-be mothers, of the poor in Mexico, of foreign adoption, and of government bureaucracy.
We need more films of this nature - films that give you a new experience, films that explore human emotions, films that educate, and films that dig deep to explore. CDLB is definitely another worthwhile film by the master.
The choice of actors was great, and the use of local talent equally so. While I don't know about the accuracy of the adoption process in Mexico as depicted in the film, I find the story line and the backgrounds of the six adopting mothers creditable.
This film can never be a big box office hit for the very narrow subject matter it deals with. There was no violence, no sex, no twisted plot in it. However, it is the kind that takes the viewers to different worlds - the worlds of the would-be mothers, of the poor in Mexico, of foreign adoption, and of government bureaucracy.
We need more films of this nature - films that give you a new experience, films that explore human emotions, films that educate, and films that dig deep to explore. CDLB is definitely another worthwhile film by the master.
Sayles in da "casa" ! One of the year's best films.
george.schmidt22 September 2003
CASA DE LOS BABYS (2003) **** Daryl Hannah, Marcia Gay Harden, mary Steenburgen, Lili Taylor, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Susan Lynch, Rita Moreno, Pedro Armendariz Jr., Bruno Bichir, Angelina Pelaez, Vanessa Martinez, Juan Carlos Vives, Miguel Rodarte, David Hevia, Martha Higareda, Tony Marcin, Lourdes Echevarria, Blanca Loaria, Guillermo Ivan Duenas. John Sayles continues to be one of Americas' best and original independent filmmakers in this warm, funny and at times poignant look at the adoption process at a South American clinic attended by six disparate women - all eager and emotionally at odds - awaiting their turn to return home with their new infant. Sayles - who, as always, wrote, directed & edited - skillfully weaves a complicated tapestry of social, political and humane themes concurrent and enables his fine crop of acting talent each a moment to shine (in particular Hannah, Lynch and Martinez) of the heartbreaking stories they each share in the one ultimate goal: happiness. One of the year's best films.
Excellent
Cosmoeticadotcom9 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
There's a moment in Johns Sayles' latest film, Casa De Los Babys, that is among the most poignant ever filmed. A young maid in an unnamed Latin American country's main baby mill is engaged in a conversation with an Irish woman down to adopt. The Irish woman, Eileen (Susan Lynch, from Sayles' The Secret of Roan Inish), does not speak Spanish and gives a poignant tale about her life and desire for a child, and then the Spanish girl, Asuncion (Vanessa Martinez, from Sayles' 'Lone Star'), tells of giving a baby of hers up for adoption four years earlier, and both women touch each other, with the quiver of their voices and the emotion of their eyes. Eileen rhapsodizes about getting a child and her desires to be a good mother, as she always dreamt of, while Asuncion, understands nothing of what is said, but empathically 'gets it', because she gave up her child. She imagines the earnestness in Eileen and imagines her child is with a mother like Eileen. It's a terrific moment that uses words to show how superfluous words can be.
This is why Sayles is not only the premier independent filmmaker, but flat-out one of the best around, if not in film history . It is not the best film that John Sayles has ever made, and that may be simply that it was too short, at barely over an hour and a half- the first film since the Gwyneth Paltrow film Great Expectations, that probably could have used an extra 30-40 minutes, but it is a good one. Unfortunately there is only one Sayles around that makes these sorts of films on a consistent basis.
This is why Sayles is not only the premier independent filmmaker, but flat-out one of the best around, if not in film history . It is not the best film that John Sayles has ever made, and that may be simply that it was too short, at barely over an hour and a half- the first film since the Gwyneth Paltrow film Great Expectations, that probably could have used an extra 30-40 minutes, but it is a good one. Unfortunately there is only one Sayles around that makes these sorts of films on a consistent basis.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
