We Are Not Animals

I watched this largely because I love Argentina. What a waste of 90 minutes. I stuck it out and watched the entire thing because I wanted it to be a decent movie. It wasn't. To say this movie is dull and dry is really being generous. There's no plot. Nothing of any significance happens. It's not even funny. This seems like a movie where someone was trying way too hard to be sophisticated and ended up producing garbage as a result.

I love Argentina, finally a film from that beautiful country discusses sad historical topics in a relaxed, humorous way, without making a pamphlet, or using so much suffering in a commercial way.

In a time when cinema is violence, rape, drugs or narcissistic pose, to see people like Cusack and Pacino so close to us and themselves, talking politics and art, with no fear of being disconcert by our times, makes of this movie something very special.

This movie belongs to the "film within a film" genre that opened up half a century ago with Fellini's 8 1/2. It features John Cusack and other American actors summoned to Buenos Aires to make a film that, we are told, experiments with cinematic language. The story is improvised (there is a script but nobody seems to take it seriously) and some scenes (like in Godard's La Chinoise) actually belong to the film within, as the point of view changes and we see the cameras rolling and the booms in place. Sequences are announced with title cards, also in Godard's style. The view of Buenos Aires and its people is that of an average American tourist; there are some comments about Peronism and the 1976-1982 military dictatorship but there is no depth or meaning in them. Everything we see or hear is capricious and at best whimsical, at worst pretentious and at times boring.

Al Pacino plays the mysterious (and somewhat devilish) long distance mastermind of the project, He gets the best lines and makes the most of them; the short time he is on screen is the best part of the movie.

The movie ends up saying nothing significant. Although some ideas may be interesting, it it difficult to gauge the intentions of the director. All in all, an unsatisfactory film.

Warm little movie. A collage of digressions and partial thoughts, no apt for who is looking to be caught in a melodrama. To see great actors playing with such a freedom, makes me think on the cynical and shallow part of this art form.

As soon we have the chance to liberate our mind, we dream, and snore. As soon we seat front of the TV, we are forced to dream the dreams others, sometimes just money makers…

This movie have much of a dream, but is enough imperfect, rough, and sometimes nonsensical, that you can hear your own mind without feeling being used.

"No somos animales" is a film you'll either love or hate...and this is obvious when you look at the ratings which either are 9s or 10s...or 1s....with little in between. I can certainly understand this after watching the movie, as it looks like an indie reworking of "8 1/2"...and it's not the sort of movie the average person would rush to see.

Instead of a traditional narrative, this film feels like someone took some home movies and pieced them together. Some folks might recognize what is happening...but most will just feel that the plot is disjoint and confusing. What you DO know is that John Cusack plays a famous actor who is tired of Hollywood and he heads to Argentina to make a film. Other than that...there really isn't a ton of plot.

For me, I'd much rather watch "8 1/2" because it is more coherent and enjoyable. Additionally, the film lacks energy and after a while, I just didn't care about anything and wanted it to end.