Lust ohne Grenzen

We are introduced to Laura and her sad life. She is a contributor to a business magazine, but spends most of her time in her apartment, wearing pjs. Apparently she took at face value a man to be named businessman of the year for the magazine, wrote the article and it turned out he was a total fraud, but the magazine was already on the stands. She didn't do a background check, since she didn't think it was necessary. So she loses her job, or at least suspended for a time. On her calendar, she marks off the days of the month for February, with filled in red for February 29th. That day has a special meaning which we find out later. She lives in a somewhat seedy apartment (ants, cockroaches) and lives through watching neighbors. It is comfortable for her being there. Other than a brother, she seems isolated, and has numerous one night stands, not wanting to even know their names. One man gets into a rather violent and degrading relationship with her, and it borders on being very dangerous. But she encourages it. As the days count down to the end of the month, just what does she have in mind? She seems to accept the life that she has made for herself, and it is rather dreary and depressing.

A bleak study of loneliness set in a claustrophobic apartment in Mexico City featuring a fearless performance, or a masochistic one, take your pick, by Monica Del Carmen as Laura. Laura spends most of her days and nights in her joyless apartment spying on her neighbors and inventing relationships with them in her mind. She occasionally goes out to clubs and brings home men for unrewarding sex. They invariably leave her lonelier than before. She meets Arturo (Armando Hernandez) who brings a sado-masochistic satisfaction to her sexual life. Meanwhile she ominously checks off the dates of her calendar toward the end of the month marked in red. This film is as explicit as it needs to be and Laura's world is not easy to view. Director Michael Rowe has achieved the film he sat out to make, I'm sure, and the totality of the realism can be uncomfortable as it should be. By setting the movie entirely in the small apartment and by the astonishingly natural performance of Ms. Del Carmen, you feel, smell, and know this movie like it was a fever dream. You want to give Laura a big hug at the end. Not for the squeamish or near squeamish.

Watched this last night with my wife and we both agreed it is perhaps the most accurate depiction of modern life of young adulthood that either of us have ever seen. This film is to that lonely time of self discovery in the mid to late 20's that Apocaplyse Now is to the Vietnam War. Not only is the depiction of sex graphic and frank but it isn't sexy. And there is about the best explanation for U.S. Mexico relations -and the Mexican gov. in general (or lack thereof)- in this film that I have ever heard: i.e. the monetization of security. If you have seen and liked the films of Carlos Reygadas, Fernando Eimbcke and Arturo Ripstein then you will understand the type of aesthetic at work here. If on the other hand your idea of Mexican cinema is Vicente Fernandez or the Santos lucha libre films you are in for a rude awakening.

This is a frustrating film to watch because it is extremely claustrophobic. After the opening scene, the entire film takes place inside a small apartment. There is little by way of plot. There are many scenes of the young woman talking on the phone with her mother and brother. She also gets visits from her brother. Mostly, however, she gets visited by a man who started as a one night pickup, but the pair starts developing a sado-masochistic relationship that becomes increasingly disturbing. This is an impressive film debut for writer-director Rowe, who favors long takes and a stationary camera, an approach that is effective in conveying the loneliness of the protagonist.

"Leap Year" is simple, albeit brilliant filmmaking. There is very little, if any, "coverage" for each and every shot. No close-ups, no pans, no dolly shots, no cranes, no over-the-shoulder, and no reaction shots. The camera remains still and static throughout - time and time again simply letting the drama unfold before our eyes. We are nothing more than a voyeur. It's a bold choice - perhaps born out of budget necessity - but it nonetheless works. What's makes every shot absolutely fascinating is called "life." Human behavior. The success of this film is a tribute to the director, his belief in the story, and most of all, the trust he was able to get from his actors. Although the camera rarely moves, it tells the story better than most Hollywood directors with a much bigger budget ever could.