The Beach of the Greyhounds (2002) User Reviews (4)

Hard work maintaining concentration - or interest

[khatcher-2 · 6/10 · 11 October 2004]

Mario Camus, one of the best known Spanish cinematographers, has over the years, especially in the last twenty-five years, been able to offer the spectator some truly wonderful works. 'Los Santos Inocentes' (1984) (qv) remains to this day as one of the two or three greatest masterpieces ever made for the screen in this country, inspired by Miguel Delibe's novel of the same name. For television Camus has given us 'Fortunata y Jacinta' (1980) (mini), one of the greatest TV series ever made (and I do not add 'in this country'). Ten years later he directed 'La Forja de un Rebelde' (1990) (mini), based on Arturo Barea's novel, also a truly remarkable series. 'Beltenebros' is of course also among his best films. Worthy of mention is Camus' version of Lorca's stage-play 'La Casa de Bernarda Alba' (1987). 'El Color de las Nubes' (1997) is also worth mentioning.

Such that one begins to expect much from this Spanish director. However, with 'La Playa de los Galgos' one feels that the film does not reach expectations; the story itself and Camus' inimicable style just did not come off as a satisfying fusion, but more as an irritating confusion. I largely suspect that too much was made of technique, rather than telling the story per se. One bravely fights off sleepiness so as to reach the end credits, but by then one has decided that the film is somewhat a let-down, following on as it does from the above-mentioned great cinematographic works. As in 'El Color de las Nubes', Peracaula's photography is very good.

Carmelo Gómez heads a cast which carry out their roles pretty well, though I could not help feeling I might have replaced the Italian actress Claudia Gerini (who had to be dubbed into Spanish, anyway!).

Disappointing, and unnecessarily long. Barely above 6 out of 10

An interesting film, well acted and well done, but...

[gabriela-12 · 7/10 · 1 March 2008]

Mario Camus is a very interesting filmmaker, but he tends not to edit well, as in the magnificent portrait of Antonio López, in this film he tells a story with too many branches (some of them suddenly forgotten like the one than deals with Dubini's daughter, Ana). The movie has three parts. The first and the second explain enough where do we are and where we'll get: this a story of vengeance in a two way trip:from terrorist to victim, from victim to terrorist. The story of the terrorist is in a certain way, more humane than the other: the victim, when turns to the murderer of her husband, feels no remorse. This is when the whole story begins to tell us things that we all know: no matter if you have reason (s) or not: violence always destroys. The film is beautifully made in the northern part of Spain and in Dinamark. The cast does perfectly except for Bertha: for me, she does never gives her character a soul. And she most had one, somewhere... Finally: I think is a good, interesting film with some capital errors of (lack) of edition.

The beach of the greyhounds

[davidcarbajales · 3/10 · 9 October 2004]

A greyhound is a thin dog with long legs that can run very fast, often in races. But when a greyhound is getting older its destiny it'll be to die hanged because it'll has no use in racing.

This is a metaphor that director Mario Camus uses to tell us about violence and those who use it for a cause, in this case terrorists of Basque separatists E.T.A. and the army in Argentina during the dictatorship of General Videla.

In fact the movie is beautifully shot, specially that traveling when twelve old greyhounds come running through a beach towards the sea in slow motion...but one could say that one is the only moment that worths in the movie.

Two hours and a quarter is too much for this plot and it becomes very very slow and its interesting premise decays whilst the movie goes through.

It's a story about terrorism and violence, about betrayal and loyalty, about love and death..... but in my modest opinion it doesn't worth it.

Booooring!

[exatrax · 3/10 · 25 July 2005]

So, this is how "intelligent" movies are made?

You get some good characters: a terrorist on the run, his always-so-nice brother, and his girlfriend without past.

Your get a story that's clearly a THRILLER. It has a good guy who, while having an affair with a mysterious woman, looks for his brother all through Europe; suddenly, when he succeeds, his girlfriend kills the terrorist in cold blood! Shock!! We find put she only was with the good guy to seek revenge on the terrorist! But she will pay her crime, too. There you are, the moral of it all: terrorism and violence don't pay.

With that, any other director would have made your average action movie. With a nice story twist at the end, a hero, a gorgeous actress, and definitely good action scenes.

BUT. Mario Camus makes "intelligent" movies, as was "proved" in boring long movies as "El pájaro de la felicidad". So he gets the thriller, adds LONG pointless dialogs, adds some LONG scenes with no dialogs, adds some LONG useless by-stories to the idea, adds badly dubbed actors, adds music that's terribly mimed and then adds more LONG scenes and LONG dialogs. And in case the result is not long enough, he manages to get the film duration to 2 hours 7 minutes!! One feels both BORED and UPSET. Come on, he is the director who signed such a MASTERPIECE as "Los santos inocentes", he certainly knows how to make a good one! So why does he feel the urge, every now or then, to punish us with movies like this?