I delinquenti

"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.

I am a bit sad giving a low rating in this movie, because there were many positives here. There is a great movie inside this movie but unfortunately, it was buried beneath Moreno's overambitiousness. There is a lot of originality and creativity in this movie, i liked both the first and the second part but it should have been AT LEAST one hour shorter.

I love slow paced movies but this was too much to endure. At times, it's unbearable to watch and this is a strong word to describe it, but it's not a hyperbole. It didn't need to be like this. Many scenes were pointless. Even the pace was terrible at times, i don't want to see a man walking for 3 minutes in the city. Bela Tar and other similar directors can pull it off. This movie shouldn't be that slow.

I managed to watch the whole movie because i wanted to give this a fair rating, besides there were many positives as i said and most of the time, i liked it. Great acting, an interesting story, beautifully shot, it's obvious that the creator had an artistic vision and he served it, without caring about the outcome. I respect that and i love overambitious movies even if they failed. But this shouldn't fail. It was too good and unique for a 20's movie.

Sadly, also about 60 minutes longer than it should.

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.

This is an incredibly original piece of cinema. It mixes philosophical tale with a bank heist which really is not the centre part of this movie. The centre part of this movie is a reflection on modern living and the insanity of the race to do things faster the pointlessness of the modern lifestyle, or something akin

The slow deliberate rhythm of this film seems to be a stumbling block for many personally I wish it carried on for a couple more hours ; it leaves us at the end with a lot of unfinished business a lot of untied loose ends

And maybe that is exactly what is needed but it could've gone so many other ways

The director and the scriptwriter (one and the same) made some choices here and they will please some and leave others guessing

It can take a while to see that something is happening that is worth watching if you stick at it you will be rewarded with a very unusual tale .... touch of Rohmer (the highest accolade possible) touch of Antonioni (also the highest accolade possible) 🙂🙃😉

A movie for thinkers romantics and dreamers ...... others will not like this i would surmise ....

For me a solid nine. Oh yes and this is definitely a comedy not hahaha but subtle and simmering ....

PS and then the penny dropped the face of Esteban Bigliardi kept reminding me of another actor and it was French-Italian Yves Montand ... so an Italian face then.

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.