Alfonso Cuarón's new film: "Roma"

Cuaron's new film is starting to win some awards. Can't wait.

 

I loved it. It's a bit of a tone poem sort of film that's very rich in the details and really beautiful in it's characters. Some parts nearly had me in tears in the theater.

 

This Netfllix exclusive crap should never have happened. This director had me at Y Tu Mama Tambien. His work has got such quality.

 

It was named best picture of 2018 by the NY and LA critics’ groups.

 

Oh hell it’s on Netflix? I just bought a ticket!

 

Saw it this morning...

Probably the most immaculate piece of filmmaking I've seen since "Schindler's List" which, incidentally, was playing at the same theater today for it's 25th anniversary showing. Looking through the usual movieola suspects on current marquees, I considered for a moment going to see "Schindler's" in the theater again, but having watched it at least a dozen times to savor what magic black and white movies can be, I thought I'd skip it. Or, perhaps in the back on my mind, having to relegated to living in a motel and watching "Taken" for the first time, I couldn't bear the thought of watching Liam Neeson so soon, after seeing how the mighty have fallen - from the poignancy of "Schindler's" to the junk violence-peddling of "Taken" (rescued from a harem, indeed. Barf.) - would have only added to the depressing aura of "Schinder's." So I went to see "Roma."

Roma?

A masterpiece. Immaculate filmmaking. Perfect filmmaking. I was expecting a lot after 'Gravity" but I wasn't expecting a lot from a Netflix production, sorry to say. This is the first Netflix FILM I've seen, I'll say. Okay, the Ballad of Buster Scruggs" beat it by a mere week or two, but there's not a trace of bowing to popular entertainment (plotting, devices, neatly packaged stereptypes), this is a director's film, a singular vision, and not a production-line entertainment. We are definitely seeing a turnabout on the Hollywood cut and dice school of filmmaking from these great new Spanish directors. Our slam-bam action boys, assisted by drawboards CGI'd into existence like magic, aren't half the artists Cuarón and Iñárritu are. Our cinema Avenger have comic book frames POWS and BAMs in their heads, not reality. Cuarón and Iñárritu are masters of mis-en-scene:

mise en scène
/ˌmēz ˌän ˈsen/
noun

1. the arrangement of scenery and stage properties in a play.
   • the setting or surroundings of an event or action.

Cuarón and Iñárritu work on the fabric of reality, it's neo-realism's rebirth in the age of reality cams, and the way they work their mise en scene, with the classic framing of Andre Bazin's choice, action WITHIN the frame, Cuarón and Iñárritu stand in stark contrast to the kinetic trickery of modern Hollywood films. But in "Roma" Cuarón dials back on the steadicam flow of life, and uses a liesurely Antonio-like lens, forever moving in grace pans that reveal the stunning tableux that Cuarón paints into his frame. It's a more traditional photographic technique, and he uses these 180-degree pans with such regularity that at first it seems almost forces and, perhaps, indulgent. But as the film unfolds, the magic of Cuarón's mise en scene expands and grows more brilliant -- at times on the scale and complexity of the most audacious Kurosawa moments. Set somewhere in 1969 (although a period piece, it's barely discernable as such), the re-creation of a student riot is jaw-droppingly good, as are other huge outdoor set peices, which are simply masterfully staged. If there was anyone to pick up Kubrick's "Napoleon" script and do it justice, it would be Cuarón.

"Roma" is about a young girl, a Mexican servant, whose devotion to the children she cares for and how they survive the decaying shelter of a wealthy Mexican household is a study in beautitude of selflessness. Saints come in many forms, and Cleo (Yalitza Aparicio) is of that gentle flock long promised better things to come, but with of little hope of seeing them in this world. From a poor village of indigenous peoples of Mexico, a flat row of corrugated house, on streets of lumber-bridged mud puddle, Cleo and her sister are the au pairs and housekeeper to a distracted doctor and his stressed-but caring-wife. Her hands ever full of dishes, with always stairs to climb with wash, Cleo's existence is a humble but contented one for she has nothing but the purest love for her young wards. While their admired father has acquired the barred windows of Mexico's wealthy to shelter them, it's Cleo who kisses their heads to wake them and the one who they tell they love. Hardly more than a child herself, Cleo's love for the children is tragically unreturned in her own life, and she weathers her own tragedy with humble grace, Cuaron also knows saints come in many forms, and his character study of Cleo is indeed just that.

There is very little story to be told, so little that to reveal even the barest turns of fate would be to ruin artfully revealed disasters, so it should suffice to say, the wheel of life both ascends and descends for the family, with Cleo's love helping the center hold. Yalitza's quiet performance coupled with Cuarón's intense, yet, invisible hand transforms her performance into one of those incredibly natural bits of portraiture that will forever make "Roma" shine as one of cinema's bridge to great art.

A wonderful, perfect film, immaculately made. Cuarón takes his place among the greats with "Roma" (and Netflix as a bonfided studio). Cuarón's direction of "Roma" has all the beauty, insight, and authenticity of Ingmar Bergman's best works, the icongraphic imagery of Fellini, and directorial mise-en-scene of the great masters. But there are so many brilliants moments that are Cuaron's alone, it's would be to detract to simply make fey comparisons.





on a personally.

I officially declare here I will throw up the hat I ate for "The Shape of Water" winning if "A Star is Born" wins best picture over :Roma.

 

You mean at the Oscars? In all likelihood Roma will be up for—and win—best foreign film, but will not be included in the best-film category. Cuarón probably will be up for best director, though.

 

There's enough acclaim and prestige behind it to give it a legit shot at a best picture nom as well as best foreign film. The last film to do it might have been Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon so there is precedent.

This year has been really fantastic for movies, we were gifted all year round with great films of every kind and genre. I can't think of another movie with the combination of artistry, acclaim, director recognition, and emotional impact than Roma. All the qualities that the Academy loves to give Best Picture to. We'll have to see how awards season shapes up and who wins what, but I think it's currently the front runner.

 

Even though I haven’t seen it, I hope you’re right about Roma. As far as the pictures I’ve seen, though, it’s been a dismal year for movies, IMO...

 

I honestly think Alfonso will win Best Director, unless they decide to go with Bradley which is possible since they love to give Oscars to actors-turned-directors (ie. Redford, Beatty, Costner, Gibson).

 

But Netflix produced? I wouldn't call it a foreign film, but I don';t know all the production facts.

 

This will lighten your day.

 

Nice review for a black and white movie...
is it worth going to see at the silver screen or not then? playing at the tiff lightbox for a bit longer...

 

If it's really really worth going to see I might buy a ticket for tomorrow. This is quite spontaneous of me... last time I did this was to see Phantom Thread, which I regretted. I wound up showing up and having my time wasted because one of the bulbs for the 70mm projector blew. Wound up going to a different theater just down the street and saw Annhilation. So the evening wasn't a total loss. Anyway I came back the next day and the picture was all fudged up. Did not look very good. Dissapointing movie overall too.

 

It’s up for best foreign film at the Golden Globes.

But, the more I think about it, there’s a decent chance Oscar will nominate it for both best picture and best foreign film. As mikeyt said, there’s precedent for it. And, with the expansion of best-pic nominees from 5 to up to 10 and the sad state of movies this year, I can see it happening here.

 

Great write-up.

As for his hand at CGI if you haven't seen Children of Men do so immediately.

It sounds like it is the bridge to this film and if you are like me...you crave more after you have seen a fine film.

Thank you for this review. I hate Netflix exclusive bull...but financing great work is not the part of it I disagree with. I have to support that part and see it. Glad you did your part and saw it where it belonged on first run.

 

I think the category is actually "foreign language film" so the production company is not the issue.

 

It’s funny that yo

You might want to wait. It’s probably even less plot driven then the phantom thread. If you like Bergman however…

 

I guess you’re right in the strict reading of it “language” is key. So apparently it’s only being distributed by Netflix so they had nothing to do with production costs. Total budget = $15 million. You got to be kidding me.

 

"Foreign" is relative and is as useless as race on a job application.

Eliminate the "foreign" awards and pit them all against each other. Good film comes from anywhere.

 

A Star is Born is not nearly in the same league as Ordinary People, Reds, Dances with Wolves, or Braveheart. It's a solid popcorn movie that will get it's nominations and maybe bring ratings, but I don't think will actually win much beyond maybe the music categories.

 

This sounds really good. I want to see this.

 

It's beautiful and touching, but there are also moments that make your hair stand on end.

 

Sounds great; I’m in.

 

AND some good laughs! I was the only one laughing in the theater, however. I was depressed sitting in my motel, so I decided to go to the movies. It was a 12:15 AM show at the local three-screen art house, a tiny thing in a California semi-arid mall. Everybody, like me, was old. But they looked grim old. I'm not quite there, yet. I keep myself lubricated. But I definitely got the feeling this was the trot-out-to-see-new-film-set-because-we're-retired crowd. But come on, was it an audience or an oil painting? Nothing from the audience the whole film, except for some early caramel corn! I clapped for approx. 2.2 seconds at the end into a sea of utter silence, then gave up embarassed. A silent beat in the theater; and then I heard it uttered: "Is that it?" Yes, that's it, knucklehead. I don't know why, but was I expecting that reaction for some strange, grim reason. It doesn't tie up with a SHOOT OUT, no Bad Man carted off, no treasure found, no victory march, not even a glorious ride into the sunset (well, I disagree with that) but Cuaron, who steers you to insanity with tension in some scenes (a hospital scene veers into expressionism) just lets it end as it ends. Honestly, it ends with simple shot, but I held my breath every SECOND of that shot just because he had me so completely under his control. I was expect another WHAM to the head from Cuaron. I was AFRAID of the power of his filmmaking. I was afraid of the LIFE he had put on the screen! So the zombies in the damn audience should have been GLAD that "was it!"

And I was the only one laughing!
What?!!!
If you don't laugh during the "rehearsal" scene don't speak to me again.