353 Sólo con tu pareja

I could definitely see Criterion pimping a Hou sometime soon, either The Puppetmaster via Wellspring or some of his '80s work through NO ONE HAS RELEASED THEM IN THE U.S. I'd love to see A City of Sadness. This post has nothing to do with Solo Con Tu Pareja.

#32 Post by **cdnchris** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:30 am

Just a friendly little reminder:

Random Speculation!

sskeats · #33 Post by **sskeats** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:29 pm

I watched this last night on the basis it was a Criterion release. The film is poor...no it's bad and why Crit put their name is beyond me. A shameful fall from grace in my book.

Anthony · #34 Post by **Anthony** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:08 pm

I agree. I watched this film the other night also, and it's horrible. I had to turn it off half way through (and I rarely do that to a film). It reminded me of a student film where the director is just trying to showoff his/her talents and abilities.

I'm so glad I didn't buy this.

thethirdman · #35 Post by **thethirdman** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:23 pm

Thanks for posting comments about this release. I have been leery about this and all of the other October and December releases. They be the only two months that I have not bought any of the new Criterion releases. I liked the other Cuaron films I have seen. Does this title share any sort of visual style with his later films?

Michael · #36 Post by **Michael** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:21 pm

A very disappointing film. Too much of it is "Almodovar-lite". Wish Criterion released Y Tu Mama Tambien instead.

Cinesimilitude · #37 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 8:33 pm

Criterion just put this up on their front page.

Under the essay section, there are now profiles, very in-depth ones at that, of at least 3 characters from the film.

They appear to be an online exclusive, can anyone who has the release already confirm whether they were included or not?

EDIT: ha, just answered my question by actually READING the front page.

Now available online are three more of this humorous profiles: for Mateo, Teresa , and Clarisa. You can read the Tomás Tomás profile in the booklet accompanying the release.

Dylan · #38 Post by **Dylan** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:35 am

Just finished watching "Sólo con tu pareja." What a sexy, hilarious, romantic film; a masterpiece of its kind, and perfect in every way I can think of. Wonderfully silly, and frequently very beautiful. The screenplay cleverly places many lovely surprises so that we are never able to be sure of what's coming. Furthermore, it's just a blast all the way through, and the ending is perfect.

Thanks for posting comments about this release. I have been leery about this and all of the other October and December releases. They be the only two months that I have not bought any of the new Criterion releases. I liked the other Cuaron films I have seen. Does this title share any sort of visual style with his later films?

Don't let the negative comments discourage you, particularly if you liked his other films. Just because some here were disappointed doesn't mean you'll be. Netflix it or check it out from the video store and judge for yourself. And yes, Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography is gorgeous, as always.

Note: Don't read the IMDB summary for this. It gives away a hell of a lot! Not quite as much as the DVD Beaver review of "Fat Girl," (which nobody should read if they are planning to see that Breillat film...it gives away the ending in the first sentence) but pretty close.

Ishmael · #39 Post by **Ishmael** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:49 am

This is film struck me as a cute divertissement but nothing more. Cuaron is pretty much able to disguise how tired the story is with his nice visual flair and good sense of pacing. The biggest problem I had was that the woman playing the great love of Tomas's life is a complete blank--she projects nothing at all and just stands around looking vapid. She and Tomas have no chemistry together. This may be the reason that Cuaron's cross-cutting attempts to build suspense at the end of the film just don't even begin to work. I couldn't care less what happens with this relationship, and truthfully there's no sense at all that they're really going to go through with what they're planning. There's not even any sense that this will be a turning point in Tomas's life. I suppose I'm meant to think that the AIDS scare and his implausible love will make him into a monogamous man, but what he goes through doesn't have the weight that it would need to convince me of this. Most of the film was fun, though. It's one of those films that you enjoy enough that you don't bother to turn it off, but when it ends you feel like you've pretty much wasted your time. In other words, I can see why Cuaron quickly went on to direct Hollywood films--Solo has that slick disposability that's a Hollywood cornerstone.

colinr0380 · #40 Post by **colinr0380** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:53 am

Ishmael wrote:The biggest problem I had was that the woman playing the great love of Tomas's life is a complete blank--she projects nothing at all and just stands around looking vapid.

Don't some men prefer these types of women?

Although I get your point - I'd probably expect the character to have developed somewhat by the end of the film. Having said that, the characters don't change much in Y Tu Mama Tambien either. I've wondered whether the narration throughout that film (and which adds the extra dimension to the sex antics) was from one of the two boys looking back on the events, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence for this. Rather it seems to be showing the wider picture that the characters are missing around them, the political and social upheavals from the major to something as personal as pointing out the spot of a fatal car accident. In some ways that the characters in Y Tu Mama Tambien don't change is perhaps the point - while we are obsessing over sex or relationships the world is going on its own way.

I haven't seen Solo Con Tu Pareja yet, but to what extent could we see these characters as being prototypes for those in Y Tu Mama Tambien? That the characters don't particularly advance in their understanding, but the audience is presented with them in order to highlight their flaws? Perhaps that might lead to the narration in Y Tu Mama Tambien that makes the wider implications explicit for the audience? Those character profiles up on the Criterion website sound very like the narration in Y Tu Mama Tambien.

However I could be trying to defend the film too much (especially since I haven't seen it yet) and it could just be a romantic comedy that forgets to make its characters likeable! At least it shows a development in the later films. I'm not sure Cuaron ever made disposable films later in Hollywood - A Little Princess was excellent and the Harry Potter he did is probably the best in the series so far.

Ishmael · #41 Post by **Ishmael** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:01 am

colinr0380 wrote:Don't some men prefer these types of women?

I know I do.

Michael · #42 Post by **Michael** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:05 am

Throughout the film, my mind couldn't help wandering to Almodovar's 80s/early90s films. One of the examples is the color palette - way too obvious. But like I said earlier, it's "Almodovar-lite" which shouldn't be taken as a negative comment. I was not blown away by this film as much as I was by Y Tu Mama Tambien which I think is a complete masterpiece. I prefer the look and feeling of this film. The cinematography in Mama Tambien is just perfect and it has a look that's so original that I haven't seen anything like it in other films. Even though Mama Tambien was marketed as a raunchy sex comedy, I see it more as a lushly nostalgic film with quiet melancholy whispering through. Like for instance, midway through the road trip, they drive through Tenoch's maid's hometown with the glistening silver dome of a church in the background and Tenoch's instant acknowlege of that - extremely subtle but it moves me tremendously. That little stroke is so much more effective than all of Solo's scenes put together and there are thousands of strokes like that in Mama Tambien.

In some ways that the characters in Y Tu Mama Tambien don't change is perhaps the point - while we are obsessing over sex or relationships the world is going on its own way.

So the last scene shows that the Bernal Garcia character hasn't changed much?

toiletduck! · #43 Post by **toiletduck!** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:57 am

Michael wrote:So the last scene shows that the Bernal Garcia character hasn't changed much?

I don't think it necessarily shows a change -- or it doesn't give us enough time to discern whether or not there has been a change. The relationship is different, but I don't believe that it's because the characters are any different.

It's a bittersweet denouement to lock in what I consider the theme of the film -- "This too will pass."

-Toilet Dcuk

Ishmael · #44 Post by **Ishmael** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:21 am

colinr0380 wrote:[T]o what extent could we see these characters as being prototypes for those in Y Tu Mama Tambien? That the characters don't particularly advance in their understanding, but the audience is presented with them in order to highlight their flaws? Perhaps that might lead to the narration in Y Tu Mama Tambien that makes the wider implications explicit for the audience?

The Cuarons seem to be trying to create a social context in Solo, but it came across to me as pretty shallow. The stuff in Y Tu Mama was brilliant because it did provide a deeper context, distancing us momentarily from this frivolous adventure and making us realize the tragedy that nests inside happy events. It also creates a sense of mystery--the things the narrator discusses don't really have any relation to the plot. Much of the narration talks about mortality, however, which sets up the ending of the film when we find out the woman has died. Also, the characters were complex, and the class criticism inherent in their respective behavior strikes me as profound. There's none of that in Solo--those characters are just straightforward and one-dimensional. The wider social context that the Cuarons seem to be trying to create just seems like a gloss, although maybe during the AIDS epidemic in Mexico in 1991 this material would have seemed deeper.

colinr0380 wrote:t could just be a romantic comedy that forgets to make its characters likeable!"

No, the characters are likeable to the extent they seem intended to be. They just don't have a lot of depth. Saying that it "forgets" to make them likeable makes the film sound like a failure. It's not, it just doesn't amount to much. The characters are just typical plot puppets--they fufill their function well and nothing more. The film succeeds as superficial entertainment, but that made it disappointing to me.

colinr0380 wrote:I'm not sure Cuaron ever made disposable films later in Hollywood

I was making more of a generalized comment about how Solo fits in with Hollywood cinema much better than it does with something like Y Tu Mama. If Cuaron brought some quality to Hollywood material that could have been fluff, then I tip my hat to him, but he didn't do that here.

Michael · #45 Post by **Michael** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:53 am

Ishmael, I exactly agree with everything you said. You really captured the spirit of Mama Tambien in words so amazingly well.

Anthony · #46 Post by **Anthony** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:51 pm

Ishmael wrote:The biggest problem I had was that the woman playing the great love of Tomas's life is a complete blank--she projects nothing at all and just stands around looking vapid.

Hmmm, I tend to think this whole movie can be summed up by the word, vapid. Anyone who finds any artistic value in this film probably also finds it in any student film ever produced as well. There is a reason this film was never picked up for distribution in the country... IT'S JUST PLAIN BAD! (And I don't mean bad as in good. We're talking bad as in... garbage)

Y Tu Mama Tambien was a very good film. This film, however, is not even close to good. But hey, I guess every director has to start somewhere.

sskeats · #47 Post by **sskeats** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:14 pm

My question is why Criterion launched this film. What was in it for them? I would have certainly researched this film more if it didn't have the Crit logo on it. Crit wears down its credibility and the authority of its brand name when it bothers with something this inferior.

They'll never nab me that way again. For sure. And despite the dollars they succeeded in getting, they come out the loser with this one.

Cinesimilitude · #48 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:19 pm

Dylan wrote:Just finished watching "Sólo con tu pareja." What a sexy, hilarious, romantic film; a masterpiece of its kind, and perfect in every way I can think of. Wonderfully silly, and frequently very beautiful. The screenplay cleverly places many lovely surprises so that we are never able to be sure of what's coming. Furthermore, it's just a blast all the way through, and the ending is perfect.

I was getting worried with the comments. It's a good thing I agree with you on a lot of films. I'm excited for this release again. I have definitely been disappointed by a few films in the collection, Mona Lisa and Schizopolis stand out as such. I'm never going to own the entire collection, I will be picking up every italian and spanish release, since I plan on becoming fluent in both languages.

Dylan · #49 Post by **Dylan** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:13 pm

I would love to defend this film, but it'd be pretty much useless. My opinion is so dichotomous that it doesn't even sound like we're talking about the same film. Hell, it sounds like some of you are talking about "Underworld 2," or the average teen comedy. But I'll try to respond to a few comments.

was getting worried with the comments. It's a good thing I agree with you on a lot of films. I'm excited for this release again.

These are great guys, but I never lose my excitement over a release when they don't like something. Don't forget that "Le Notti Bianche" wasn't a hit on this board either. Not an apt comparison, but it's the example that first came to mind.

I don't know about a blind buy, but I strongly recommened you, and others, rent it (or check it out from the library, since it sounds like you have a good one).

They'll never nab me that way again. For sure. And despite the dollars they succeeded in getting, they come out the loser with this one.

Considering how many people are hating this movie, at least I'll be able to score a copy for trade fairly easily. If anybody is interested in trading with me for this, PM me. It sounds like you'll take anything for it!

The film succeeds as superficial entertainment, but that made it disappointing to me.

I found it to be insanely successful as a highly energetic, sexually-charged comedy, with much of its humor founded on pain or tragedy, like many of the greatest French or Italian comedies.

my mind couldn't help wandering to Almodovar's 80s/early90s films.

If we must compare to two, nothing Cuaron has done comes close to "Talk to Her," but (for me) early Almodovar doesn't hold a candle to "Sólo con tu pareja," which is funnier and more sound, with much better writing and plot. "Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down!" had that lazy, dramatically baffling conclusion, and with a few exceptions I didn't find "Women..." all that funny (and the ending seemed kind of obvious). Maybe I'd like his other early ones a bit more.

With that said, I understand that to some extent it also has a lot to do with how funny you think a film is. A lot of us are liking "Tristam Shandy" and I laughed maybe three or four times during it, so I didn't like it, but had I laughed half as much as I did during this, I would've.

The biggest problem I had was that the woman playing the great love of Tomas's life is a complete blank--she projects nothing at all and just stands around looking vapid.

I fell in love with her just from the DVD menu, before the film started, so I totally empathized with the guy!

I just have to flatly disagree with the majority on this, it's one of my favorite releases of the year.

Michael · #50 Post by **Michael** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:34 pm

If we must compare to two, nothing Cuaron has done comes close to "Talk to Her," but (for me) early Almodovar doesn't hold a candle to "Sólo con tu pareja," which is funnier and more sound, with much better writing and plot. "Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down!" had that lazy, dramatically baffling conclusion, and with a few exceptions I didn't find "Women..." all that funny (and the ending seemed kind of obvious). Maybe I'd like his other early ones a bit more.

Oh, Tie Me Up is simply awful but it's still pretty to look at. Women, despite its wild popularity, is among my least favorite Almodovar films. I'm thinking of Law of Desire and Matador - both are awesome for Almodovar's early efforts. What I was trying to say that Solo's use of color palette reminded me so much of Almodovar's early films (good or bad). Or is that typical of Spanish-language films of that time?

I might give the film another shot before returning it to Netflix. My partner Pedro wants to watch it tonight. Maybe come back with more thoughts tomorrow.

I fell in love with her just from the DVD menu, before the film started, so I totally empathized with the guy!

She's very beautiful!

I have no idea how to respond to the Latin American Tower sequence. How those two people give to each other before jumping. I thought that was a little too much. What is your take on all this, Dylan?