Los delincuentes

"Morán" (Daniel Elías) concludes that his dreary drudge at the bank over the next 25 years is only going to earn him $325k so rather than slug it out, he decides to pinch double that then ask his unwitting colleague "Román" (Esteban Bigliardi) to hide the cash whilst he does his prison sentence. That way, they can both enjoy a pleasant early retirement. The theft all goes remarkably easily and before he turns himself in, our thief goes for a bit of a road trip then goes to the police to confess all and receive the anticipated jail term. After a bit of a rocky start, and the transfer of some "protection" money, his incarceration settles down into something fairly uneventful for "Morán". The same can't be said for his friend on the outside. Though he had a cast iron alibi for the time of the robbery, his bank bosses gradually begin to think he is in some way involved - and they start to make his life a bit miserable. Despondent, he travels to a remote town to hide the loot under a boulder - and that's where he meets "Norma" (Margarita Molfino). With things not going too well at home with wife, children and his anxiety, well you can guess what happens... Now we have an interval - a rather pace-sapping exercise before part two fills us in on just what happened when "Morán" went on his journey. Small world? I wondered if there might be a clue here in the names all being anagrams of each other? We have a "Morna" too! Otherwise, this is a rather nondescript drama that takes far, far too long to get anywhere - and even when it does, it sees to have no desire to conclude with anything meaningful. Right from the beginning, it takes a swipe at all things routine and regimented, and seems be offering both men an opportunity for (eventual) freedom, but the substance to the plot is just really lacking as we rather meander through an observational and not really very interesting story that just never catches fire.

4 stars is a very generous rating from me, I only give such a high rating to such a boring film because the story even tries to discuss some interesting themes, albeit very prosaically.

I also like the cinematography and some of the locations a little, but that's it, the film is tremendously boring and has serious pacing problems, it's over three hours long and could very simply be shortened to around 90 minutes without losing much of the substance. Narrative that isn't much.

In this way, this review acts as a bit of a warning so that you don't waste too much time of your life watching such an insipid narrative. I don't want to use the word pretentious, but I think it's useful here.

The film simply does not respect the viewer's time, it has a very basic and rudimentary script, disguised in such a way as to make the inattentive viewer think they are watching something of substance.

Come to think of it, considering the total lack of respect in taking so much time without having much to say, 4 stars is perhaps too condescending a rating.

In short, the film is tremendously boring because it is unnecessarily long, perhaps if it weren't so long it would expose what is truly true, a film of little substance.

I liked the movie more as an existential story than a heist one.

The working question and the what do we really want to do with out lives is what most liked about this movie, as well as the cinematography and the music, both really good. There's not more to add to the plot than the very description of the movie.

On the other hand, a few things I did not like: It's extremely long, excessive, unnecessary. Some sequences were really looong, I don't really need to see a 5 minutes sequence of the character climbing a mountain or crossing a river. I do understand the aesthetic of this but it's counterproductive.

If you need 3 hours to tell your story, you are failing at storytelling in my opinion.

The other thing I wasn't that comfortable is with the acting. They don't act so natural, sometimes seems forced.

Wrapping it up, is a good movie if you like thoughtful olots and good landscapes, but if you cannot handle slow pacing, avoid this movie.

I am smarter than your average bear, really, but I am amazed at how much I truly disliked this very well reviewed film. I think the director is horrendous. The acting was good. The main story had some good elements. It may have played pretty well with a more mainstream style and at about half the runtime, but what weird choices this director made. He loves using awkward split screens that have little to no relevance. "Oh look it is a split screen, both those characters are being reflective and smoking a cigarette in the dark at the same time. How creative!"

I really despised the soundtrack. It never evoked a relevant feeling or enhanced any scenes. It reminded me of the music in a 1970s Western TV show. Boring and forgettable.

I suppose some people are going to get a lot from the long seemingly strange uneventful scenes that make up more than half the runtime. Many critics did at least. I sure did not though.

This movie is so good, just a long, sweet mediation. The actors are great, the scenery is lovely, the story has a neat twist - I just can't say enough about what refreshing change of pace it was, a very 70's-late hippie sensibility to the film, like Easy Rider, say, laid back but with meaningful social commentary with a very respectful portrayal bordering on documentary of a sweet, simple land and life, none of which had to be explained or described or tediously walked through in a simplistic narrative fashion as is the case with most movies. It was a very satisfying aesthetic experience. The poem of the Great Salt Flats was new to me and I look forward to reading it again, I hope sales go through the roof thanks to the movie.