Can someone explain this comment from Ebert's review?
-
tampaMr — 17 years ago(April 09, 2008 01:55 PM)
-
mm389907 — 17 years ago(September 27, 2008 03:22 PM)
yeah that julio thing is pretty interesting.
If it has to do with Luisa, then the two scenes are
(1) The doctor's office
(2) When she is sitting on the beach holding the baby and talking to the baby's mother (forget her name Chuey's wife..). The woman says something about how Luisa would make a great mother, and that she's the perfect age too. Just look at Luisa's face during this scene, and you'll know what I'm talking about. -
blacklives4ever — 17 years ago(December 04, 2008 05:36 PM)
What's great about the scene with the children is that when you see the look on her face you think it's because she's thinking of Jano and how they probably won't stay together and have children.
"The success of the horror genre has led to its downfall."
-Dario Argento -
Krustallos — 13 years ago(July 18, 2012 10:20 AM)
I think the gayness is a fourth level. The Luisa dying storyline is quite a big thing after all, I don't think Ebert would completely ignore it in his review. In fact having seen the film for a third time, there's a strong case for reading the whole thing as Luisa's story, with Julio and Tenoch as supporting characters. There are references to death in almost every frame.
I used to want to change the world. Now I just want to leave the room with a little dignity. -
neonfreak52 — 13 years ago(July 23, 2012 06:47 PM)
I've seen the movie several times but never once noticed tears in julios eyes at the end? I guess I'll have to go back and check for that.
does anyone else agree about this? It could be an option, but I still think ebert is mainly refering to Luisa's storyline b/c I - for one- was definitely shellshocked after seeing the film the first time and learning of her cancer. I was completely stunned and couldn't get the movie out of my head. -
GuyOnTheLeft — 13 years ago(November 04, 2012 01:51 AM)
Yeah, this revelation at the end definitely gave the movie a little extra something in retrospect. I thought it started well, really flagged throughout the middle, and thendue to that revelationended very strongly. But the flaccid middle section still drags it down enough that it only rates a 7/10 for me.
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc -
PamBaby — 13 years ago(February 06, 2013 07:03 AM)
People are saying the hidden level was Luisa's illness, but I never thought of that as a hidden element. I thought it was open and obvious, considering that she was at the doctor's office one minute, waiting for test results, and in the next frame she is sitting shell-shocked. And throughout the film, she is seen grieving, completely different from how she was at the beginning.
Also, the levels Ebert refers to are themes, not actual plot points. So I suppose, if Ebert was referring to anything about Luisa, it might be Death in general, instead of the specific death of the character. That would incorporate all the random references to death throughout the movie that another poster pointed out.
Death and endings, perhaps. The end of Luisa, the end of Tenoche and Julio's friendship, the end of adolescence (coming of age would signal the end of one stage and beginning of another), end of a marriage, end of relationships, end of a way of life for the fishermen, on and on. -
pontifikator — 12 years ago(February 03, 2014 01:19 PM)
there are only two shots in the entire movie that reflect the inner reality of one of the characters.
It's not possible to know exactly what he meant since he doesn't say. My guess on it, though, is
that since he refers to only one of the characters, he refers to Luisa. The two boys are a pair. There are no scenes which show us the inner reality of only one of them.
If the inner reality is a reference to the boys' feelings towards each other, we have a view of the inner life of both. Tenoch and Julio are a pair.
Because Ebert never says, eL137's comments concerning the two scenes he proposes can't be disproved, though, even though I disagree. I can't say he/she is wrong. However, as Luisa says to them, it's just chance that she had sex with one first, and not the other. I'm not sure I want to take chance as the determiner of a key scene. However, I still may be wrong. -
yajji — 9 years ago(June 22, 2016 05:20 PM)
I re-watched the film again last night for the first time in a few years. It was even better this time and I think it's because I could fully absorb things that I missed on my initial viewing. For example, the doctor's scene earlier in the film. It just becomes all the more powerful because you know what that meant, and you know that it was the catalyst for Luisa taking that journey. Brilliant.
-
bigevil45 — 9 years ago(November 24, 2016 03:56 PM)
I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned the scene in which all three of them are sitting on the beach and Luisa asks something to the effect of, "Don't you wish you could live forever"? Ebert specifically said "two shots" so if he was referring to Luisa, the one I just mentioned, along with the scene in the doctor's office would make most sense to me.
That being said, when I've read that, I too was thinking of the possibility of Julio having been bisexual all along. Remember, near the end of the movie, they mention a friend by the name of Daniel, who turned out to be gay, and got kicked out of his home as a result. Upon hearing this from Julio, Tenoch says something along the lines of, "That's messed up", to which Julio responds, "No, he's happy. Got a boyfriend and everythin'". Further, if you look carefully at the scene in which Luisa goes down on both of them, it's Julio who makes a reluctant effort to bring his face closer to Tenoch's. Also, unlike Tenoch, Julio doesn't puke when he realizes what he had done the night before. None of these might mean anything in and of themselves, but couple them with the points raised by previous posters, like how Julio tears up after Tenoch leaves at the the end, and they might allude to Julio being bisexual, which I believe he was. -
Dreamers_x_Disease — 9 years ago(January 16, 2017 04:16 PM)
Just stumbled upon this thread and I'll sayreading that Ebert quote my mind did go to Julio first before Luisa. I think Luisa is too obvious to be the answer here. We get more of her inner life than we do of the boys. Not that we go without some, but I don't think her illness and impending death was all that subtle. Maybe the viewer wouldn't assume she'll be dead that soon, but with the Doctor's visit they would at least know something is wrong. I don't think it requires all that much searching and close examination of her story to see what's bubbling underneath, in my opinion.
But this case can be better made for a character like Julio. We don't get as much insight into him as we do with Luisa and we are forced to make more inferences with him and Tenoch. I think this is all up to whomever is watching it though as we aren't really given enough to be definitive. Having tears in his eyes or a distressed expression doesn't necessarily mean he was gay/bi the whole time or whateverhe could be mourning Luisa or in shock about it, sad about losing his best friend, unsure of the future, feeling like he's compromised himself for that future. Any or all of those things could have been troubling him or going on in his head. His sexuality certainly could have been a factor or the main contributor, but we'll just never know. It's all how you read it or what you happen to take away from it.
That said, I think Julio was much more open to the idea of him and Tenoch being a couple or wasn't as horrified as to what happened between them. So, I get the arguments for this being what Ebert was referring to, clearly it is a theme of the movie, and damnit if it doesn't make it just a little more tragic. Them not being friends anymore was sad enough, but to think Julio could be harboring some secret, unrequited love for Tenoch takes it up a notch.
Movies like this drive me crazy, in the best way, because they give you just enough hints to let you leap off into the deep end of what this or that could mean, but hold back on ever being declarative about anything. It forces you to think, and wonder, reflect, and invest in what's happening more and I'd say that's a pretty good sign of an awesome movie
Pardon the rant, haha, I just love this film a whole lot.