One of the most consistently great directors I've come across continues to amaze me with his wonderful blend of surreal and artistic beauty within a narrative you'd expect from a soap opera or trashy romance novel.
Brilliant storytelling interweaving back and forth between past and present and a masterful way of bringing the truth to light.
Gael García Bernal gives a world class performance and the rest of the cast follows suit.
A truly fantastic and terrifyingly mesmerising film.
172 Reviews
A Bitter and Darker Almodóvar
claudio_carvalho21 July 2005
In "La Mala Educación", Almodóvar is very serious and too dark and tragic, when comparing to his previous movies. There are many usual elements, such as the attack to the Catholic Church, gays, travesties, homosexual intercourse, child abuse etc., but not in his common ironical, colorful and funny way; instead, the story is developed in a very bitter context. The screenplay magnificently discloses the plot, with a story inside another story, mixing "reality" with fiction; the direction of Pedro Almodóvar is excellent as usual; and Gael Garcia Bernal proves his versatility as an outstanding actor. Although being a great film, I do not dare to recommend "La Mala Educación" for any audiences. However, fans like me of this great Spanish director will certainly like it a lot. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Má Educação" ("Bad Education")
Title (Brazil): "Má Educação" ("Bad Education")
Almodóvar retuns to black movies on his best film.
futurama-310 March 2004
I have just seen one of the first passes of the new Pedro Almodóvar movie. I think I've got to see it again, but the first adjective that comes to my mind is "excellent". Soon people and critics will start to compare this one to "Hable con ella" and "Todo sobre mi madre", and if I have to do it myself I will say this is the best. But, speaking about this film...there are millions of things to admire, starting with Almodóvar's writing and directing. This is the most complex and original film of the Spanish filmmaker, a black story about catholic (mis)education in the sixties' Spain, murder and revenge in the seventies...and a filmmaker who, in the eighties, makes a movie about all that. The surprises will appear on the three decades, making the movie even more interesting. With this premise Almodóvar treats his favorite topics, especially movies inside the movies. There are lots of excellent things on this film, as the performances of the main characters by Gael García Bernal, Fele Martínez, Daniel Giménez-Cacho...Javier Cámara, the star of "Hable con ella", also plays a supporting role that, I think, will report him many film awards.
One of the great virtues of the film is the cinematography by José Luis Alcaine, giving the movie the colours and light of earlier Almodóvar films as "Mujeres al borde de un ataque de nervios" and "¡Átame!". Also, the Alberto Iglesias' score, making the tragedy bigger, is also very good.
One of the best Spanish films of this early 2004, and with no doubt the most international of the year...at least until Alejandro Amenábar releases his new movie.
One of the great virtues of the film is the cinematography by José Luis Alcaine, giving the movie the colours and light of earlier Almodóvar films as "Mujeres al borde de un ataque de nervios" and "¡Átame!". Also, the Alberto Iglesias' score, making the tragedy bigger, is also very good.
One of the best Spanish films of this early 2004, and with no doubt the most international of the year...at least until Alejandro Amenábar releases his new movie.
A movie lover's dream come true.
Fledermaus3410 October 2004
This is a difficult film to write about. For one thing, to describe the plot would be to give away the twists and thus spoil its surprises; but for another, it's impossible to take a great work of art and put it into words. That said, here goes:
Truth be told, it was the promise of Gael Garcia Bernal (whom I've loved since "Y Tu Mama Tambien") in drag that piqued my interest in seeing "Bad Education." The only other Almodovar movie I'd seen before this was "Talk to Her," which I was on the fence about, but if Gael Garcia Bernal was involved, I was happy to give Almodovar another shot. (Interestingly, "Bad Education" has given me a new appreciation of "Talk to Her." The two films share a lot of themes -- false identity and self-creation, the willful self-deception and fantasy of falling in love, the spiritualization of aesthetic beauty -- not to mention a hypnotic use of music, an indifferent attitude towards women, and a few actors I recognized.)
Almodovar's genius in both "Bad Education" and "Talk to Her" is his ability to set the scene, stringing the audience along, lulling it into a sense of comprehension and security, and then suddenly turning the tables with a twist of such dizzying magnitude that the mind, reeling, forced to give up on trying to understand, must just relax and allow the movie to take over -- miraculously, all without leaving the audience feeling manipulated. In "Bad Education," he takes this device to breathless, upper-atmospherical levels, for with each twist, the film takes on a new genre.
It begins as a tender coming-of-age story, interspersed with boarding-school flashbacks reminiscent of such French fare as Louis Malle's "Au revoir, les enfants" and François Truffaut's "L'argent de pôche," although I sensed a lot of Fellini in the mod outfits, feathery hairstyles, and picturesque bicycle-strewn streets. Probably the most romantic segment of the film, it alludes even to "Breakfast at Tiffany's" (Henry Mancini's "Moon River" hasn't been employed so creatively since last year's "Angels in America"). Indeed, the performances are so endearing, the cinematography so warm and luminous, that this segment of "Bad Education" could easily exist as its own self-contained movie. I was fully prepared to embrace it and love it as a sincere period romance.
But without warning, the film turns itself upside down and becomes an exhilarating meta-commentary in the vein of Charlie Kaufman's "Adaptation" (complete with crocodiles). Romance turns to farce and tragedy to comedy as the self-consciously cinematic style gives way to the silliness of a movie-within-a-movie.
Unlike "Adaptation," though, "Bad Education" goes on, and in this way it retains its heart and soul. Further twists are introduced, and the movie metamorphoses into a mystery, a thriller, a dark rain-soaked noir -- by the end, I felt as though I had just lived through a hundred years of cinema history, all condensed into less than two rich, glorious hours.
So what holds it all together? The answer is Gael Garcia Bernal. He is a true movie star -- divinely beautiful, dazzlingly charismatic, with that all-important aura of mystery -- and though he virtually plays five characters as his character transforms along with the film, his strikingly calm blue-green eyes and sensual mouth provide a steady center for the madness around him. Despite the rumors of his abusive treatment on set at the hands of Almodovar, Garcia Bernal has a dignity (without which "Bad Education" would collapse under the weight of its own intelligence) that no amount of makeup, wigs, dresses, induced anorexia, or fake Spanish lisping can mask.
"Bad Education" was one of the most intense movie-going experiences I've ever had, and if its future doesn't hold critical acclaim and recognition as a classic, then there's no justice in the world.
Truth be told, it was the promise of Gael Garcia Bernal (whom I've loved since "Y Tu Mama Tambien") in drag that piqued my interest in seeing "Bad Education." The only other Almodovar movie I'd seen before this was "Talk to Her," which I was on the fence about, but if Gael Garcia Bernal was involved, I was happy to give Almodovar another shot. (Interestingly, "Bad Education" has given me a new appreciation of "Talk to Her." The two films share a lot of themes -- false identity and self-creation, the willful self-deception and fantasy of falling in love, the spiritualization of aesthetic beauty -- not to mention a hypnotic use of music, an indifferent attitude towards women, and a few actors I recognized.)
Almodovar's genius in both "Bad Education" and "Talk to Her" is his ability to set the scene, stringing the audience along, lulling it into a sense of comprehension and security, and then suddenly turning the tables with a twist of such dizzying magnitude that the mind, reeling, forced to give up on trying to understand, must just relax and allow the movie to take over -- miraculously, all without leaving the audience feeling manipulated. In "Bad Education," he takes this device to breathless, upper-atmospherical levels, for with each twist, the film takes on a new genre.
It begins as a tender coming-of-age story, interspersed with boarding-school flashbacks reminiscent of such French fare as Louis Malle's "Au revoir, les enfants" and François Truffaut's "L'argent de pôche," although I sensed a lot of Fellini in the mod outfits, feathery hairstyles, and picturesque bicycle-strewn streets. Probably the most romantic segment of the film, it alludes even to "Breakfast at Tiffany's" (Henry Mancini's "Moon River" hasn't been employed so creatively since last year's "Angels in America"). Indeed, the performances are so endearing, the cinematography so warm and luminous, that this segment of "Bad Education" could easily exist as its own self-contained movie. I was fully prepared to embrace it and love it as a sincere period romance.
But without warning, the film turns itself upside down and becomes an exhilarating meta-commentary in the vein of Charlie Kaufman's "Adaptation" (complete with crocodiles). Romance turns to farce and tragedy to comedy as the self-consciously cinematic style gives way to the silliness of a movie-within-a-movie.
Unlike "Adaptation," though, "Bad Education" goes on, and in this way it retains its heart and soul. Further twists are introduced, and the movie metamorphoses into a mystery, a thriller, a dark rain-soaked noir -- by the end, I felt as though I had just lived through a hundred years of cinema history, all condensed into less than two rich, glorious hours.
So what holds it all together? The answer is Gael Garcia Bernal. He is a true movie star -- divinely beautiful, dazzlingly charismatic, with that all-important aura of mystery -- and though he virtually plays five characters as his character transforms along with the film, his strikingly calm blue-green eyes and sensual mouth provide a steady center for the madness around him. Despite the rumors of his abusive treatment on set at the hands of Almodovar, Garcia Bernal has a dignity (without which "Bad Education" would collapse under the weight of its own intelligence) that no amount of makeup, wigs, dresses, induced anorexia, or fake Spanish lisping can mask.
"Bad Education" was one of the most intense movie-going experiences I've ever had, and if its future doesn't hold critical acclaim and recognition as a classic, then there's no justice in the world.
All About My Father
MOscarbradley21 November 2004
The title "Bad Education" only hints at what Almodovar's magnificent new film is all about. While certainly the sexual abuse the boy Ignacio suffers at the hands of Father Monolo is largely the contributing factor in the way his life turns out, (the film's most telling line occurs when the boy, on realising the priest's betrayal, says that at that moment he lost his faith and his belief in God and hell, that he was no longer afraid and without fear was capable of anything), it is not, essentially, what the film is about.
Indeed, a much better, if perhaps a more blase title might have been "All About My Father", for like Almodovar's earlier masterpiece "All About My Mother" it is a film about artifice, role-play and deception. The opening credits, (a pastiche of Saul Bass with a Herrmanesque score) deliberately evokes late Hitchcock and the film recalls "Vertigo", stylistically as well as thematically, another film about someone loving someone who is not whom they appear to be, each revelation building inexorably to a denouement as layers are quite literally stripped away. In a film which. in a sense, is 'about' acting, the performances are uniformly excellent, though to be fair, Gael Garcia Bernal, (certainly the best actor of his generation), stands head and shoulders above the rest playing a variation of roles, or rather a variation of the same role. All in all this is exquisite, pertinent all-encompassing film-making that only confirms Almodovar's position in the front rank of world class directors.
Indeed, a much better, if perhaps a more blase title might have been "All About My Father", for like Almodovar's earlier masterpiece "All About My Mother" it is a film about artifice, role-play and deception. The opening credits, (a pastiche of Saul Bass with a Herrmanesque score) deliberately evokes late Hitchcock and the film recalls "Vertigo", stylistically as well as thematically, another film about someone loving someone who is not whom they appear to be, each revelation building inexorably to a denouement as layers are quite literally stripped away. In a film which. in a sense, is 'about' acting, the performances are uniformly excellent, though to be fair, Gael Garcia Bernal, (certainly the best actor of his generation), stands head and shoulders above the rest playing a variation of roles, or rather a variation of the same role. All in all this is exquisite, pertinent all-encompassing film-making that only confirms Almodovar's position in the front rank of world class directors.
Very dark
michelerealini24 October 2004
It is a very good film, although not as absolutely great as "Todo sobre my madre" and "Hable con ella"... Maybe because "Mala education" is sadder and darker than the previous Almodòvar films, the theme (the child abuse during college years) is disturbing and depressing, of course.
Almodòvar chooses this time a "noir" story. Enrique, a young movie director, looks for ideas for his next film. By chance he meets Ignacio, an old fellow of the college and his first love. Ignacio gives him a tale written by him, about the sexual abuses on him made by a priest during his childhood, in the college. This will be the inspiration for Enrique's movie, but the director will discover another dramatic truth...
In this film the gay element -which exists in all the Almodòvar's movies- comes back, stronger than in his last films. But above all there's the child rape problem, this is one of the most delicate themes the Spanish director has ever talked about. And naturally "Mala educacion" is one of his most tragic films. Whereas in the previous movies Almodòvar always let a place for hope, with this film it's not the case. That's why it is a very difficult tale to watch.
Cinematography is excellent, the music as well (with many recalls to the Sixties songs). Actors are also very good. For Gael Garcia Bernal (we saw him recently in "Motorcycle diaries") this is another solid effort. He portrays Ignacio, he enters the Almodòvar world with all the ambiguity required.
Almodòvar chooses this time a "noir" story. Enrique, a young movie director, looks for ideas for his next film. By chance he meets Ignacio, an old fellow of the college and his first love. Ignacio gives him a tale written by him, about the sexual abuses on him made by a priest during his childhood, in the college. This will be the inspiration for Enrique's movie, but the director will discover another dramatic truth...
In this film the gay element -which exists in all the Almodòvar's movies- comes back, stronger than in his last films. But above all there's the child rape problem, this is one of the most delicate themes the Spanish director has ever talked about. And naturally "Mala educacion" is one of his most tragic films. Whereas in the previous movies Almodòvar always let a place for hope, with this film it's not the case. That's why it is a very difficult tale to watch.
Cinematography is excellent, the music as well (with many recalls to the Sixties songs). Actors are also very good. For Gael Garcia Bernal (we saw him recently in "Motorcycle diaries") this is another solid effort. He portrays Ignacio, he enters the Almodòvar world with all the ambiguity required.
A hunk of a man, and a heck of a woman
lazarus_ca_4815 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Some movie reviewers have called "Bad Education" a Spanish film noir. Others have compared Almodovar to Hitchock. I can't see it, myself, except that the opening credits and music are a nod to "Psycho", and the instrumental score is well suited to the film noir genre.
But the main drawing card in this film is its male lead, Gael Garcia Bernal, most recently seen in "The Motorcycle Diaries".
I'd hate to be working at any theatre where "Bad Education" is showing. The staff is going to have to mop up a lot of drool off the floor. Garcia Bernal is hot, hot, hot -- buff, frequently shirtless, sometimes underwear-clad or bare-buttocked. He is to Almodovar's 21st-century fans what a young Antonio Banderas was in the director's breakthrough film, "Law of Desire". (Garcia Bernal turns out to be just as stunning and sensational as a drag queen.) But even Garcia Bernal's sultry, sexy, androgynous good looks cannot justify or support a fundamentally flawed yet crucial plot element. We are expected to believe that a former priest, who lusted after a ten-year-old boy, conceives an equally ardent passion for a twentysomething hunk. This runs counter to a pedophile's psychological makeup, and the logic of the film thus completely falls apart.
The transgenderism and child sexual abuse of "Bad Education" mirror certain aspects of "Law of Desire", in which Carmen Maura plays a sex-change who visits her old school and confronts the religious who served as its director. In this sense, Almodovar has come full circle.
Most of Almodovar's films have focused on female characters. It is as if he was not ready or willing to deal with his own male homosexuality in his work. "Bad Education" is, as it were, his cinematic coming-out. But even Almodovar's closet was as vibrant and colorful as any drag queen's wardrobe could ever be.
But the main drawing card in this film is its male lead, Gael Garcia Bernal, most recently seen in "The Motorcycle Diaries".
I'd hate to be working at any theatre where "Bad Education" is showing. The staff is going to have to mop up a lot of drool off the floor. Garcia Bernal is hot, hot, hot -- buff, frequently shirtless, sometimes underwear-clad or bare-buttocked. He is to Almodovar's 21st-century fans what a young Antonio Banderas was in the director's breakthrough film, "Law of Desire". (Garcia Bernal turns out to be just as stunning and sensational as a drag queen.) But even Garcia Bernal's sultry, sexy, androgynous good looks cannot justify or support a fundamentally flawed yet crucial plot element. We are expected to believe that a former priest, who lusted after a ten-year-old boy, conceives an equally ardent passion for a twentysomething hunk. This runs counter to a pedophile's psychological makeup, and the logic of the film thus completely falls apart.
The transgenderism and child sexual abuse of "Bad Education" mirror certain aspects of "Law of Desire", in which Carmen Maura plays a sex-change who visits her old school and confronts the religious who served as its director. In this sense, Almodovar has come full circle.
Most of Almodovar's films have focused on female characters. It is as if he was not ready or willing to deal with his own male homosexuality in his work. "Bad Education" is, as it were, his cinematic coming-out. But even Almodovar's closet was as vibrant and colorful as any drag queen's wardrobe could ever be.
Pederasty And Gay Explicit Relations Committed By Lustful Christian Priests!.
mailoflove1 April 2016
Warning: Spoilers
N 1980 Madrid, young film director Enrique Goded is looking for his next project when he receives the unexpected visit of an actor looking for work. The actor claims to be Enrique's boarding school friend and first love, Ignacio Rodriguez. Ignacio, who is using now the name Ángel Andrade, has brought with him a short story titled "The Visit" hoping that Enrique would be interested in making a film out of it giving him the starring role. Enrique is intrigued since "The Visit" described their time together at the Catholic school and it also includes a fictionalized account of their reunion many years later as adults.
"The Visit" is set in 1977. It tells the story of a drag artist and transsexual called Zahara, whose birth name is Ignacio. Zahara plans to rob a drunken admirer but discovers that the man is her boyhood lover Enrique. Next she visits her old school and confronts Father Manolo, who abused her when she was a boy. She demands one million pesetas from him in exchange for halting publication of her story "The Visit". The story is set in a Catholic boarding school for boys in 1964. At the school, Ignacio, a young boy with a beautiful singing voice, is the object of lust of Father Manolo, the school principal and literature teacher. Ignacio has found his first love and cinema in the company of Enrique, a classmate. One night, Manolo discovers them together and threatens to expel Enrique. In an attempt to prevent this, Ignacio gives himself to Manolo. The priest molests Ignacio, but expels Enrique nonetheless.
Enrique wants to adapt Ignacio's story into a film, but Ángel's condition is that he plays the part of Zahara, the transsexual lead. Enrique remains skeptical, for he feels that the Ignacio whom he loved and the Ignacio of today are totally different people. He drives to Galicia to Ignacio's mother and learns that the real Ignacio has been dead for four years and that the man who came to his office is really Ignacio's younger brother, Juan.
Enrique's interest is piqued, and he decides to do the film with Juan in the role of Ignacio to find out what drives Juan. Enrique and Ángel start a relationship, and Enrique revises the script so that it ends with Father Manolo, whom Ignacio was trying to blackmail to get money for sex reassignment surgery, having Ignacio murdered. When the scene is shot, Ángel breaks out in tears unexpectedly.
The film set is visited by Manuel Berenguer, who is the real Father Manolo, who has resigned from Church duty. Berenguer confesses to Enrique that the new ending of the film is not far from the truth: the real Ignacio blackmailed Berenguer, who somehow managed to scratch together the money but also took an interest in Ignacio's younger brother, Juan. Juan and Manuel started a relationship and after a while realized they both wanted to see Ignacio dead. Juan scored some very pure heroin, so that his brother would die by overdose after shooting up. After the crime, the relationship disintegrates; Berenguer wants to continue the relationship with Juan, but Juan is uninterested. Berenguer claims that he will never let Juan go, and Juan threatens to kill him if Berenguer continues to pursue him. Berenguer attempts to blackmail Juan for his part in the murder of Ignacio.
Enrique is shocked and not at all interested in Juan's weak vindications for what he did to his brother. Finally, before he leaves, Juan gives Enrique a piece of paper: a letter to Enrique that Ignacio was in the middle of typing when he died.
In the epilogue, it is mentioned that Enrique releases his film later and achieves great success. Despite the grief and guilt of his brother, Juan also achieves success, but was later relegated to television work. Berenguer dies in a hit-and-run (caused by Juan, who was being blackmailed by Berenguer, and thus fulfilling his promise made earlier in the film).
Rated NC-17 For Explicit Gay Content .I will never trust any priest again.
"The Visit" is set in 1977. It tells the story of a drag artist and transsexual called Zahara, whose birth name is Ignacio. Zahara plans to rob a drunken admirer but discovers that the man is her boyhood lover Enrique. Next she visits her old school and confronts Father Manolo, who abused her when she was a boy. She demands one million pesetas from him in exchange for halting publication of her story "The Visit". The story is set in a Catholic boarding school for boys in 1964. At the school, Ignacio, a young boy with a beautiful singing voice, is the object of lust of Father Manolo, the school principal and literature teacher. Ignacio has found his first love and cinema in the company of Enrique, a classmate. One night, Manolo discovers them together and threatens to expel Enrique. In an attempt to prevent this, Ignacio gives himself to Manolo. The priest molests Ignacio, but expels Enrique nonetheless.
Enrique wants to adapt Ignacio's story into a film, but Ángel's condition is that he plays the part of Zahara, the transsexual lead. Enrique remains skeptical, for he feels that the Ignacio whom he loved and the Ignacio of today are totally different people. He drives to Galicia to Ignacio's mother and learns that the real Ignacio has been dead for four years and that the man who came to his office is really Ignacio's younger brother, Juan.
Enrique's interest is piqued, and he decides to do the film with Juan in the role of Ignacio to find out what drives Juan. Enrique and Ángel start a relationship, and Enrique revises the script so that it ends with Father Manolo, whom Ignacio was trying to blackmail to get money for sex reassignment surgery, having Ignacio murdered. When the scene is shot, Ángel breaks out in tears unexpectedly.
The film set is visited by Manuel Berenguer, who is the real Father Manolo, who has resigned from Church duty. Berenguer confesses to Enrique that the new ending of the film is not far from the truth: the real Ignacio blackmailed Berenguer, who somehow managed to scratch together the money but also took an interest in Ignacio's younger brother, Juan. Juan and Manuel started a relationship and after a while realized they both wanted to see Ignacio dead. Juan scored some very pure heroin, so that his brother would die by overdose after shooting up. After the crime, the relationship disintegrates; Berenguer wants to continue the relationship with Juan, but Juan is uninterested. Berenguer claims that he will never let Juan go, and Juan threatens to kill him if Berenguer continues to pursue him. Berenguer attempts to blackmail Juan for his part in the murder of Ignacio.
Enrique is shocked and not at all interested in Juan's weak vindications for what he did to his brother. Finally, before he leaves, Juan gives Enrique a piece of paper: a letter to Enrique that Ignacio was in the middle of typing when he died.
In the epilogue, it is mentioned that Enrique releases his film later and achieves great success. Despite the grief and guilt of his brother, Juan also achieves success, but was later relegated to television work. Berenguer dies in a hit-and-run (caused by Juan, who was being blackmailed by Berenguer, and thus fulfilling his promise made earlier in the film).
Rated NC-17 For Explicit Gay Content .I will never trust any priest again.
Hard to review (spoilers)
TheOtherFool3 September 2004
Warning: Spoilers
After watching Almodovars previous much talked about movies Hable con Ella (Talk to her) and Todo sobre mi Madre (All about my mother), I was really anxious to see what he had done this time. If Todo sobre mi Madre in my opinion was a over-hyped, silly movie I was deeply touched by Hable con Ella. La Mala Educacion (Bad Education) left me somewhere in the middle: I admire the style, the story, the acting, the directing. But something is missing...
A director is being looked up by an old schoolfriend, a starting actor who also wrote a novel about their early years as choirboys, and the abrupt ending to their friendship in those times. But something more is going on, there's a lot more than meets the eye.
In short, the movie is about 4 things: the abuse of a young boy by a priest, the blossoming love between 2 young boys, the relationship between 2 brothers, and a sexually charged love triangle. All these issues are woven into each other, and for us, the public that is sometimes hard to follow (also given the language, which I don't speak).
If you haven't noticed yet, all the relationships are of a gay kind. And although the director doesn't show us any graphic details, a friend with whom I went was all like 'I don't wanna see it!'. And he didn't, just thought I should mention it.
When in the end all the pieces of the puzzle fall where they should, there was a strange feeling left inside me. As I said, the story sucks you in completely, but in the end I just felt there was something missing... please watch the movie and tell me here what it is...
7/10.
A director is being looked up by an old schoolfriend, a starting actor who also wrote a novel about their early years as choirboys, and the abrupt ending to their friendship in those times. But something more is going on, there's a lot more than meets the eye.
In short, the movie is about 4 things: the abuse of a young boy by a priest, the blossoming love between 2 young boys, the relationship between 2 brothers, and a sexually charged love triangle. All these issues are woven into each other, and for us, the public that is sometimes hard to follow (also given the language, which I don't speak).
If you haven't noticed yet, all the relationships are of a gay kind. And although the director doesn't show us any graphic details, a friend with whom I went was all like 'I don't wanna see it!'. And he didn't, just thought I should mention it.
When in the end all the pieces of the puzzle fall where they should, there was a strange feeling left inside me. As I said, the story sucks you in completely, but in the end I just felt there was something missing... please watch the movie and tell me here what it is...
7/10.
a trip in disturbing storytelling; edgy and original quasi-homage to Hitchcock
Quinoa198428 November 2007
Bad Education is risky film-making at its craftiest, a tightrope of innuendo, gay sex, murder, cinema, narrative, et all. Sounds like it might be pretentious, but it isn't. Almodovar's film folds into its storytelling like its the only way to go, stylistically and consciously, as if the only way to experience this is to find out where truth blends with fiction, and reverberates back again. Is the real thing as involving and melodramatic as the truth? Almodovar- contrary to what the Village Voice critic said- wisely only hints at the rampant pedophilia on hand, all we really get is that one suggestive moment with the priest and the boy as he tumbles out and cracks his head. Everything else is implied, but with such an emphasis on what more than likely happened that all we need is suggestion- anything more would be exploitive of a much larger issue than Almodovar wants to get into.
What Bad Education gets into then at its best is desire, and the paranoia surrounding desire, as well as revenge, and lustful abandon. One can find this in Hitchcock, but it's also found in the steamiest of film-noir. Appropriate then that for almost half of his screen time star Gael Garcia Bernal is in drag, practically as a femme fatale, named Zahara. Of course, she is only a fictional construct, though based on emotions and settings loosely based on true events for the character Ignacio (or is it Juan...wait, said too much, though he now wants to be called Angel), who visits his friend, Enrique, from back in Catholic school. There's a story he wants to give to his friend, soon a film deal is made, despite shady history surrounding the death of Angel's brother. Then comes the priest- no longer a priest of course- and then the story goes deeper, with what the real truth is, and while it contains the same level of heart from the characters, it's all the same melodramatic.
As well as the melodrama, Almodovar loves it as lurid and classy as possible (not to mention gay, of course, which Almodovar embraces to the point where the sex scenes carry an eroticism all their own, in spite of the NC-17 usually with only just enough shown to get the idea). But it may also be one of Almodovar's most disturbing pictures, and as it grows darker and more fatalistic in its last third one knows how deep the fissure is in the crime of passion at hand. But Almodovar, save for the experimental storytelling, like paperback novel style Citizen Kane, there's not a whole lot of messing around technical-wise, which is just fine for the actors (especially Bernal) to show off their amazing dramatic skills. What he does strive for, which he nearly gets as a great film, is the sensibility of cinema, the intoxicating power of a story told through conflict and danger, crime and (lack thereof) punishment. Hence the scene where the two boys sneak into the movie-house and the 'act' that they commit. Is it as obvious as it looks, or is there a quality to what they're watching- an old movie with Sara Montiel- that has them riled up? And what about the aspect-ratio change when going between The Visit and the 'main' narrative?
Almodovar's Bad Education is certainly not for the squeamish, and leaves a feeling that everything is left darker for a purpose. By the end no police have been involved, and everything unfolds as torrid love affairs gone awry. It's also appropriate then in The Visit that Zahara blackmails to send the story to Diario 16 on TV. The difference between this and a telanovela is simple: a telanovela would take this material as the pinnacle of camp and trash; Almodovar embraces it, enriches it, makes campy pulp into a strange art. One of the best Spanish films of the past several years.
What Bad Education gets into then at its best is desire, and the paranoia surrounding desire, as well as revenge, and lustful abandon. One can find this in Hitchcock, but it's also found in the steamiest of film-noir. Appropriate then that for almost half of his screen time star Gael Garcia Bernal is in drag, practically as a femme fatale, named Zahara. Of course, she is only a fictional construct, though based on emotions and settings loosely based on true events for the character Ignacio (or is it Juan...wait, said too much, though he now wants to be called Angel), who visits his friend, Enrique, from back in Catholic school. There's a story he wants to give to his friend, soon a film deal is made, despite shady history surrounding the death of Angel's brother. Then comes the priest- no longer a priest of course- and then the story goes deeper, with what the real truth is, and while it contains the same level of heart from the characters, it's all the same melodramatic.
As well as the melodrama, Almodovar loves it as lurid and classy as possible (not to mention gay, of course, which Almodovar embraces to the point where the sex scenes carry an eroticism all their own, in spite of the NC-17 usually with only just enough shown to get the idea). But it may also be one of Almodovar's most disturbing pictures, and as it grows darker and more fatalistic in its last third one knows how deep the fissure is in the crime of passion at hand. But Almodovar, save for the experimental storytelling, like paperback novel style Citizen Kane, there's not a whole lot of messing around technical-wise, which is just fine for the actors (especially Bernal) to show off their amazing dramatic skills. What he does strive for, which he nearly gets as a great film, is the sensibility of cinema, the intoxicating power of a story told through conflict and danger, crime and (lack thereof) punishment. Hence the scene where the two boys sneak into the movie-house and the 'act' that they commit. Is it as obvious as it looks, or is there a quality to what they're watching- an old movie with Sara Montiel- that has them riled up? And what about the aspect-ratio change when going between The Visit and the 'main' narrative?
Almodovar's Bad Education is certainly not for the squeamish, and leaves a feeling that everything is left darker for a purpose. By the end no police have been involved, and everything unfolds as torrid love affairs gone awry. It's also appropriate then in The Visit that Zahara blackmails to send the story to Diario 16 on TV. The difference between this and a telanovela is simple: a telanovela would take this material as the pinnacle of camp and trash; Almodovar embraces it, enriches it, makes campy pulp into a strange art. One of the best Spanish films of the past several years.
"Sara Is Beautiful"
Galina_movie_fan23 August 2005
"Bad Education" is a remarkable film - drama/ thriller/neo-noir with many surprises, with an interesting structure: it takes place in the present and tells the story about the past, presents the story as a film within the film, then mixes past and present together in a twisted turn. It's been said a lot about Gael García Bernal's performance (or should I say, three performances) - he is a triple star of the film, and he looks great as a woman (transsexual/drag queen) and a man. He is a talented actor, too. There is a lot to admire in perhaps, the most personal Almodovar's film but it felt strangely remote and cold to me. The one moment that brought some memories back and I felt that I was connected with the film was a scene where two young characters, Ignacio and Enrique went to see the movie "Esa mujer" (1969) with one of the most stunning Spanish movie stars and singers, Sara Montiel. The boy Ignacio whispered in awe, "Sara is beautiful." I had the pleasure to see Sara in two films, La Reina del chantecler, (1962) and Mi último tango (1960)... aka My Last Tango and I can confirm that she could make any movie worth of watching.
Dark, twisted and fun
PAolo-1024 December 2004
La Mala Educación could easily be Almodóvar's best movie ever. Yes the movie is darker than usual, but the plot is masterfully rendered in a mind-boggling game of morbid role-reversals. The best metaphor I can find is a distorted mirror: the story is broken down in pieces, a movie into a movie, characters shifting unexpectedly in even darker areas, stealing each other's lines and turning the table over and over. Gael García Bernal is at his best, finally playing on ambiguity rather than relying on his good looks.
The soundtrack is odd, and funny, with a clever use of old songs that perfectly fit the plot ("Cuore Matto", a Spanish version of "Moon River") and an amusingly obscene version of "Torna a Sorrento", which I am afraid most will miss. Aside from the mind boggling twists of the campy "noir" plot, the real mystery is the NC-17 rating. Pretty amazing in a movie with virtually no nudity and it speaks volumes about what we are going to see-- and not see in the future.
The soundtrack is odd, and funny, with a clever use of old songs that perfectly fit the plot ("Cuore Matto", a Spanish version of "Moon River") and an amusingly obscene version of "Torna a Sorrento", which I am afraid most will miss. Aside from the mind boggling twists of the campy "noir" plot, the real mystery is the NC-17 rating. Pretty amazing in a movie with virtually no nudity and it speaks volumes about what we are going to see-- and not see in the future.
Great design but weak in the details
kinaidos26 December 2004
The film plays on the various abuses of power and plays with the standard narratives one generally sees concerning these. Usually the abusive priest is denounced and is brought to justice. Usually the director who abuses the casting couch is eventually undone, while the abused goes on to fame and fortune when her real talents are discovered on the screen. Amaldovar makes us think that we are traveling down these well worn paths only to surprise us and take the story in a completely different direction. Along the way the comfortable tales of a justice that really does not exist become simple tales of banal tragedy. Then Amaldovar takes this a level deeper by making these ultimately unrealized justice fables the imaginings of the characters themselves. Obviously a film that sets out to do all of that is likely to be a bit weak when it comes to the details. Quite a few of the individual scenes are not very convincing. The actors seem to be struggling to come up with anything beyond the immediate in terms of motivation. The pool scene for example is very poorly directed. It's a great flesh scene, but the Angel character makes no sense. He makes even less sense in retrospect when you realize why he was there in the first place. He's a hustler. So why is he so off-putting when it comes to hustling Enrique? The ensuing awkwardness drives the plot, but it makes no sense in terms of the characters. The super-8 films that Angel and Berrenque take together don't seem to have any point at all. The don't reveal anything. They aren't interesting as a plot device. (That aren't very believable as something that could be used potentially for blackmail for example.) This is a very good film, but it lacks the clarity and precision that might have made it a great film. This film without the hot property of Gael G B would probably have fallen rather flat. There is a lot of ingenuity behind it, but the execution is lacking.
Flippant and unsatisfying
howard.schumann31 January 2005
Bad Education, Spanish director Pedro Almodóvar's comedy/ film noir, delights in being outrageous, thumbing its nose at mainstream conventions with its explicit depictions of gay sexuality and egotistical power plays. Featuring stories within stories, the film is set in 1980 with flashbacks to 1964 and 1977 and, like many of the director's previous films, depicts characters undergoing a crisis of identity.
Ignacio Rodriguez (Gael García Bernal), is an out-of-work actor who visits Enrique Goded (Fele Martínez), a successful film director, and recalls their relationship when they both attended Catholic school as young children. Although they haven't seen each other in sixteen years, their reaction is immediate. When Ignacio, who asks to be called Ángel, hands Enrique a story called "The Visit" based on his experience of their school days, Enrique believes he may have found the script for his next film.
The story describes the bond between Ignacio and Enrique --their shared experience of the unwanted overtures of the Catholic priest Father Manolo (Daniel Giménez Cacho). In a fantasy sequence, flashbacks return us to the Catholic school and we see Ignacio and Enrique in the first blush of sexual attraction as they hold and do other activities with their hands in a movie theater, in a scene that is as unnecessary as it is exploitative. The priest, a literature professor, is clearly attracted to young Ignacio, and when he finds the two boys together in the bathroom, he expels Enrique, presumably so he can have Ignacio to himself. The story also recounts Ignacio's later life as Zahara, a drug addicted drag queen working at a local club who picks up the adult Enrique as a trick and later attempts to blackmail Father Manolo for one million dollars.
Ignacio insists that he play the role of Zahara in the film, but Enrique tells him that he is not right for the part. When Ignacio withdraws the offer to film his story, Enrique begins to have doubts about his visitor and investigates his past, discovering that he is not who he pretends to be. Having won the coveted role of Zahara, however, Ángel becomes Enrique's friend and lover. The second half of the film becomes darker and more convoluted as Almodóvar attempts to emulate film noir conventions and the film degenerates into sordid melodrama.
The popular Mexican actor García Bernal is dressed in drag for much of the film and is displayed in many sexually alluring poses throughout its running time. I am not easily offended by explicit sexuality on the screen, whether gay or straight, yet without any conversation, a touch of romance, or other hallmarks of our humanity, it seemed distasteful. As in Talk to Her, Almodóvar attempts to poeticize irresponsible behavior and to shock us into awareness of the outer limits of the human condition. Yet the fact that the priest is not shown attempting to molest the boys (and in fact gets off rather easy) does not allow us to connect the trauma of the school years with the madness of the present day, and the resultant anti-social behavior has little impact.
In Bad Education, Almodóvar has given us a very personal film, one that he claims to be autobiographical, expect for specific details. It is stylish and playfully seductive and can be fun, yet for me it will almost certainly be considered a minor work. I found the characters neither interesting nor likable, all acting like ten-year olds in perpetuity. The first hour of the film is engaging and Mr. Bernal is a talented actor, but at the end I was left wondering what the purpose of all of it was. While the subject is a serious one and demands serious treatment, Bad Education treats it in a manner that is flippant and unsatisfying.
Ignacio Rodriguez (Gael García Bernal), is an out-of-work actor who visits Enrique Goded (Fele Martínez), a successful film director, and recalls their relationship when they both attended Catholic school as young children. Although they haven't seen each other in sixteen years, their reaction is immediate. When Ignacio, who asks to be called Ángel, hands Enrique a story called "The Visit" based on his experience of their school days, Enrique believes he may have found the script for his next film.
The story describes the bond between Ignacio and Enrique --their shared experience of the unwanted overtures of the Catholic priest Father Manolo (Daniel Giménez Cacho). In a fantasy sequence, flashbacks return us to the Catholic school and we see Ignacio and Enrique in the first blush of sexual attraction as they hold and do other activities with their hands in a movie theater, in a scene that is as unnecessary as it is exploitative. The priest, a literature professor, is clearly attracted to young Ignacio, and when he finds the two boys together in the bathroom, he expels Enrique, presumably so he can have Ignacio to himself. The story also recounts Ignacio's later life as Zahara, a drug addicted drag queen working at a local club who picks up the adult Enrique as a trick and later attempts to blackmail Father Manolo for one million dollars.
Ignacio insists that he play the role of Zahara in the film, but Enrique tells him that he is not right for the part. When Ignacio withdraws the offer to film his story, Enrique begins to have doubts about his visitor and investigates his past, discovering that he is not who he pretends to be. Having won the coveted role of Zahara, however, Ángel becomes Enrique's friend and lover. The second half of the film becomes darker and more convoluted as Almodóvar attempts to emulate film noir conventions and the film degenerates into sordid melodrama.
The popular Mexican actor García Bernal is dressed in drag for much of the film and is displayed in many sexually alluring poses throughout its running time. I am not easily offended by explicit sexuality on the screen, whether gay or straight, yet without any conversation, a touch of romance, or other hallmarks of our humanity, it seemed distasteful. As in Talk to Her, Almodóvar attempts to poeticize irresponsible behavior and to shock us into awareness of the outer limits of the human condition. Yet the fact that the priest is not shown attempting to molest the boys (and in fact gets off rather easy) does not allow us to connect the trauma of the school years with the madness of the present day, and the resultant anti-social behavior has little impact.
In Bad Education, Almodóvar has given us a very personal film, one that he claims to be autobiographical, expect for specific details. It is stylish and playfully seductive and can be fun, yet for me it will almost certainly be considered a minor work. I found the characters neither interesting nor likable, all acting like ten-year olds in perpetuity. The first hour of the film is engaging and Mr. Bernal is a talented actor, but at the end I was left wondering what the purpose of all of it was. While the subject is a serious one and demands serious treatment, Bad Education treats it in a manner that is flippant and unsatisfying.
Sensational movie: a perfect 10
vitoruss24 November 2004
Almodovar's latest film is a tantalizing, hypnotic and sexy mixture of VERTIGO, MEMENTO and MULLHOLLAND DRIVE. It's Almodovar's meatiest and most complex script in years. Although you may be confused early on as you're trying to figure out whats going on, its all revealed later and very satisfyingly. Gael Garcia Bernal is outstanding in his multi-dimensional, multi-character performance. Alberto Iglesia's music is wonderful--a homage to Bernard Herrmann.
The film is rated NC-17, which has more to do with the MPAA Board's homophobia than anything else. Sure, its a sexy drama with elements adult plotpoints, but had the sex scenes in this film been between a man and a woman, rather than two men, this would have easily gotten an R rating. All of the sex scenes are artfully filmed (there is no frontal nudity) and even the subplot concerning a pedophile priest is handled with care.
The film is rated NC-17, which has more to do with the MPAA Board's homophobia than anything else. Sure, its a sexy drama with elements adult plotpoints, but had the sex scenes in this film been between a man and a woman, rather than two men, this would have easily gotten an R rating. All of the sex scenes are artfully filmed (there is no frontal nudity) and even the subplot concerning a pedophile priest is handled with care.
Excellent story and great interpretation
atgbcn20 March 2004
The movie traps you from the very first minute. Almodovar explains several stories simultaneously. It can appear to be confusing but as the movie goes on everything interconnects.
Gael Garcia-Bernal's role has several twists, all of them played faultlessly. Javier Cámara makes you laugh all the time. Great characterization.
Almodovar returns to his origins: fresh and lively characters, original and surprising story.
It is one of those movies you wish to continue after the credits show on the screen!
Gael Garcia-Bernal's role has several twists, all of them played faultlessly. Javier Cámara makes you laugh all the time. Great characterization.
Almodovar returns to his origins: fresh and lively characters, original and surprising story.
It is one of those movies you wish to continue after the credits show on the screen!
Complicated mystery and morality
runamokprods29 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Fascinatingly complex nourish mystery. A film-maker is reunited with a boyhood lover, who wants to tell a dark story from their Catholic school days. But is the story true? And who's story is it really? Gael Garcia Bernal is terrific, and all the acting is very good. Gorgeously shot, with a great score.
I wish I felt more emotionally, but my mind was always completely absorbed, even if my heart stayed a little cool. Maybe that's the nature of a film where everyone is hustling and using each other.
(mild spoilers ahead)
A bit obvious and self-conscious in a few spots, and pederastic Catholic priests is a cliché the film only partially transcends (although the humanity given to the priest makes it far more interesting), and a couple of the climactic twists feel less motivated than what comes before. But worth it for the 'Vertigo' like layers of reality that keep getting pulled back and forcing us to keep reassessing 'good', 'bad', 'art' and 'real.' Many critics consider this Almodovar's masterpiece – and I could see re-watching a third time and liking it even more, given the film's many layers.)
I wish I felt more emotionally, but my mind was always completely absorbed, even if my heart stayed a little cool. Maybe that's the nature of a film where everyone is hustling and using each other.
(mild spoilers ahead)
A bit obvious and self-conscious in a few spots, and pederastic Catholic priests is a cliché the film only partially transcends (although the humanity given to the priest makes it far more interesting), and a couple of the climactic twists feel less motivated than what comes before. But worth it for the 'Vertigo' like layers of reality that keep getting pulled back and forcing us to keep reassessing 'good', 'bad', 'art' and 'real.' Many critics consider this Almodovar's masterpiece – and I could see re-watching a third time and liking it even more, given the film's many layers.)
A disappointing step backward for Almodóvar
roland-10424 November 2005
After his two recent, superb films "All About My Mother" and "Talk to Her," in which Almodóvar showed clear signs of a maturing, deepening sensibility in his portrayal of both women and men, my expectations for his newest film were running high, too high as it turns out.
"Bad Education" is a confusing and disappointing mess of a film with just a handful of redeeming features. A major subtext concerns the traumatic far reach of sexual abuse of a young boy by a Catholic priest, hardly a trailblazing topic. Another theme has to do with the darker side of the film-making business: a director's creative block, an actor's overweaning ambition, and the deal they strike to mutually achieve success.
Beyond that we have a bewildering amoral agenda that embraces - in addition to pedophilia and sex for favors drug addiction, identity theft, blackmail, murder, and even fratricide, all paraded before us with nonchalance, with hardly a raised eyebrow of concern. Who can you like here? Certainly not Enrique (Fele Martinez), the coolly calculating filmmaker. Nor Ignacio (Francisco Boira), Enrique's boyhood lover and now a twisted transsexual junkie who will do anything to get his next fix.
Nor Manuel Berenguer (Lluis Homar), the self serving, manipulative, now defrocked priest the erstwhile Father Manolo - who years ago expelled Enrique from school so he could have the young Ignacio for himself. And certainly not Ignacio's brother Juan (Gael Garcia Bernal), the would-be film star who's the most crooked of the lot.
So who are the characters that embody Almodóvar's supposedly new found capacity to penetrate the character of men rather than merely constructing farcical, two dimensional caricatures of them to ridicule machismo? (I guess I'm addressing this question to critic David Denby, who wrote in The New Yorker magazine about Almodóvar's evident interest in deepening the portrayals of his men in both "Talk to Her" and "Bad Education.") We certainly do see intriguing, complex men in "Talk to Her," in the roles of Benigno (Javier Camera) and Marco (Dario Grandinetti). The softer and more mysterious side of these men shines through, and issues of male reticence, commitment and unconditional love percolate throughout. Are we to think of "Bad Education" as now showing us another, harsher aspect of manhood? We've seen that aspect in a thousand other movies.
In fact the most interesting characters in this film are the youngsters who play Ignacio (Nacho Pérez) and Enrique (Raúl García Forneiro) when they were schoolboys, and, most interesting of all, the younger Father Manolo (Daniel Gimenez Cacho), whose sexual longing and attendant shame are writ so clearly in his every expression. Too bad the film did not center more on these three at that time.
Credit Almodóvar for evoking some passion from the usually impassive Gael Garcia Bernal and for framing Bernal's gorgeous androgynous face perfectly by having him perform in drag as the entertainer Zahara. And the musical score is first rate. (In Spanish). My rating: 6.5/10 (low B). (Seen on 05/19/05). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites.
"Bad Education" is a confusing and disappointing mess of a film with just a handful of redeeming features. A major subtext concerns the traumatic far reach of sexual abuse of a young boy by a Catholic priest, hardly a trailblazing topic. Another theme has to do with the darker side of the film-making business: a director's creative block, an actor's overweaning ambition, and the deal they strike to mutually achieve success.
Beyond that we have a bewildering amoral agenda that embraces - in addition to pedophilia and sex for favors drug addiction, identity theft, blackmail, murder, and even fratricide, all paraded before us with nonchalance, with hardly a raised eyebrow of concern. Who can you like here? Certainly not Enrique (Fele Martinez), the coolly calculating filmmaker. Nor Ignacio (Francisco Boira), Enrique's boyhood lover and now a twisted transsexual junkie who will do anything to get his next fix.
Nor Manuel Berenguer (Lluis Homar), the self serving, manipulative, now defrocked priest the erstwhile Father Manolo - who years ago expelled Enrique from school so he could have the young Ignacio for himself. And certainly not Ignacio's brother Juan (Gael Garcia Bernal), the would-be film star who's the most crooked of the lot.
So who are the characters that embody Almodóvar's supposedly new found capacity to penetrate the character of men rather than merely constructing farcical, two dimensional caricatures of them to ridicule machismo? (I guess I'm addressing this question to critic David Denby, who wrote in The New Yorker magazine about Almodóvar's evident interest in deepening the portrayals of his men in both "Talk to Her" and "Bad Education.") We certainly do see intriguing, complex men in "Talk to Her," in the roles of Benigno (Javier Camera) and Marco (Dario Grandinetti). The softer and more mysterious side of these men shines through, and issues of male reticence, commitment and unconditional love percolate throughout. Are we to think of "Bad Education" as now showing us another, harsher aspect of manhood? We've seen that aspect in a thousand other movies.
In fact the most interesting characters in this film are the youngsters who play Ignacio (Nacho Pérez) and Enrique (Raúl García Forneiro) when they were schoolboys, and, most interesting of all, the younger Father Manolo (Daniel Gimenez Cacho), whose sexual longing and attendant shame are writ so clearly in his every expression. Too bad the film did not center more on these three at that time.
Credit Almodóvar for evoking some passion from the usually impassive Gael Garcia Bernal and for framing Bernal's gorgeous androgynous face perfectly by having him perform in drag as the entertainer Zahara. And the musical score is first rate. (In Spanish). My rating: 6.5/10 (low B). (Seen on 05/19/05). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites.
Bad education, good movie
Karl Self1 March 2009
This is an astounding, captivating movie, although I have to admit I didn't fully understand it, at least not at the first viewing. It's the type of movie that is complex and demanding and constantly switches back and forth, and it's still a pleasure to watch (not just an intellectual exercises). And it deals with transvestites and homosexuality and pedophilia and you can still watch it with your mother. It's so driven by the story that it still sucks you in. Pedro Almodovar takes you for a ride you had no idea you could be interested in.
I'd recommend this to anyone who's interest goes beyond action movies, and don't be put off by the subject matter or the movie's "art house cinema" status.
I'd recommend this to anyone who's interest goes beyond action movies, and don't be put off by the subject matter or the movie's "art house cinema" status.
Great promise, partially redeemed
paul2001sw-119 April 2008
In Pedro Amoldovar's 'Bad Education', a film maker starts to collaborate with his childhood lover when the latter turns up with a script based on the consequences of their previous experiences together. But what is fact, and what is fiction; and who owns the rights to interpret their past? It's an intriguing and distinctive premise for what turns out to be an intelligent, tricksy thriller, and being an Amoldovar film there's also skillful direction, beautiful people and deviant sexuality in the mix. The ending, however, is less satisfactory: the conclusion depends on someone turning up from nowhere and filling in the missing pieces, and after a low-key ending, the final twenty years of plot is summarised in captions before the closing credits. And on reflection, perhaps the twisted narrative is actually a negative: the story might be stronger if allowed to unfold chronologically. But this is still a stylish and unique movie, even if it can't quite deliver its full promise.
Adults struggle to reassemble pieces of lives broken in their youth.
jwhutson6 August 2005
This is an intelligent portrayal of the lives of gay men, perhaps autobiographical, that strikes universal chords. It is frankly erotic, but in the context of telling a story. You do not necessarily like the characters, but they are complex and three dimensional. For those of us who like to lose ourselves in a movie, and not critique it as it unreels, the movie has plenty of suspense, action, and mystery. It is one of those movies you leave, debating the plot twists with your movie companion. This is a visually appealing work, not only of the characters but of the different locales shown in the firm. The film sticks with you long after you have seen it. The underlying themes of child molestation, and the power of adults in the lives of children give the film gravitas. Some scenes in the movie will no doubt bring back haunting memories to many film goers, both straight and gay. Notwithstanding the seriousness of these issues, this is not a polemic against the Church. Rather it is a multi layered exploration of complex relationships that clearly fall outside the limits of what we consider acceptable.
Interesting and intriguing film that does not let our attention slip but does not pull off greatness.
johnnyboyz2 May 2008
I suppose there is still a fan base, still a calling for these sorts of films that Almodóvar churns out. Given that when most of European cinema and indeed, the rest of the world's first world nations were progressing and developing their respective film forms throughout the twentieth century, Spain were hampered by their then leader Franco and his firm grasp on the film industry at his mercy. Young and upcoming filmmakers who wanted to experiment and produce were shunned in favour of large, over the top epics that glorified Franco and his regime (albeit metaphorically). Franco died in 1975 and his censorship ideations were overruled in 1977; perhaps it is no coincidence that Almodóvar was just beginning to arrive on the scene at this time.
And so onto La Mala Educación. To say that this wouldn't have been made thirty years ago is a given and to say that after Franco died, filmmakers explored with taboo subjects and issues to do with violence, sex and drugs is also correct. Almodóvar was experimenting in 'Pepi, Luci, Bom' what with its sexual content; he experimented in Labyrinth of Passion with homosexuality and more sex; he experimented in Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! with ideas of lust and sado-masochism and with Bad Education, he is further presenting us with more narratives revolving around homosexuality. But that isn't to say the film is terrible or indeed bad, merely stuffy. It's probably true to say that Almodóvar has earned his reputation through making films about taboo subjects at new and delicate times, but in 2004 the surprise has gone what happens when you take the 'shock' out of 'shock cinema'? You are just left with cinema.
But Bad Education as a film retains a quality; an advanced and intriguing aesthetical quality that keeps you watching. Almodóvar is no fool and peppers this film with several scenes that do enough to retain an interest and a want for resolution, indeed the twists and turns that occur towards the end keep you focused. But then again, the film feels like it gets needlessly complicated when issues of identity and honour get tangled up in a web that is bizarrely enough identified by the characters themselves like 'something out of an American film-noir'. This is just one of rather a few 'Almodóvar touches' or whatever you want to call it, further embodying a certain status of the auteur.
The film revolves around a film director or more importantly, a homosexual film director whose 'one that got away' just happened to be a young boy at a Catholic boarding school when they were both very young. Enrique Goded (Martínez) is the director and perhaps echoes Almodóvar himself, not necessarily in terms of past history, but in terms of character; he is the sort of guy who scans newspapers looking for odd stories that might make good films. It's this sort of 'real life' approach to the aesthetic of realism and film-making that gives European cinema such a kick and is something that Almodóvar brings up in a scene very early on. Almodóvar does, after all, make very 'real' films about rather odd people and scanning a newspaper just seems like something he might do for inspiration. Indeed the plots for Talk to Her; Tie Me Up!; To Return (Volver) and Bad Education might well have stemmed from newspaper articles.
But Goded (sounds eerily like Godard) has his former lover come back into his life in the form of Angel (García Bernal) who has a screenplay ready and waiting to be shot. But things are not that simple; it seems they have not forgotten the love affair, Angel wants to play a certain role in the film and further things are complicated when deception and intrigue arise later on. Almodóvar employs all his tiny touches to the film such as the extremely post-modern office in which Goded works out of what with its differentiating colours, shapes and props littered throughout the room you cannot literally look anywhere without seeing some 21st Century inspired piece of art or colour. Then there are the establishing shots of run-down cinemas in ruin maybe a statement of cinema in Spain at a certain point? The 'death' of cinema? But of course, Almodóvar does not take sides because in the 1960s, the cinema is up and running and the boys visit it.
The boundaries between fiction and reality become a little blurred later on but it makes for good viewing, at least until a certain point. I'm not sure where the film began to loose me but I suppose it was a good thing when it ended as it saved me from liking it any less. The screenplay and Goded's own distorted memories are played off one another in a dramatic and unravelling fashion that entertains and informs; it does not help that the script is partly based on true events involving him. But when his psychosis catches up with the real-life timeline, extended and tantalising shots of male pubic hair above a certain area cover the screen for a while in an awkward and seemingly random passage, the deception starts to loose us and the film threatens to become generic. Just like the characters say themselves when they liken their actions and personas to film noir caricatures.
And so onto La Mala Educación. To say that this wouldn't have been made thirty years ago is a given and to say that after Franco died, filmmakers explored with taboo subjects and issues to do with violence, sex and drugs is also correct. Almodóvar was experimenting in 'Pepi, Luci, Bom' what with its sexual content; he experimented in Labyrinth of Passion with homosexuality and more sex; he experimented in Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! with ideas of lust and sado-masochism and with Bad Education, he is further presenting us with more narratives revolving around homosexuality. But that isn't to say the film is terrible or indeed bad, merely stuffy. It's probably true to say that Almodóvar has earned his reputation through making films about taboo subjects at new and delicate times, but in 2004 the surprise has gone what happens when you take the 'shock' out of 'shock cinema'? You are just left with cinema.
But Bad Education as a film retains a quality; an advanced and intriguing aesthetical quality that keeps you watching. Almodóvar is no fool and peppers this film with several scenes that do enough to retain an interest and a want for resolution, indeed the twists and turns that occur towards the end keep you focused. But then again, the film feels like it gets needlessly complicated when issues of identity and honour get tangled up in a web that is bizarrely enough identified by the characters themselves like 'something out of an American film-noir'. This is just one of rather a few 'Almodóvar touches' or whatever you want to call it, further embodying a certain status of the auteur.
The film revolves around a film director or more importantly, a homosexual film director whose 'one that got away' just happened to be a young boy at a Catholic boarding school when they were both very young. Enrique Goded (Martínez) is the director and perhaps echoes Almodóvar himself, not necessarily in terms of past history, but in terms of character; he is the sort of guy who scans newspapers looking for odd stories that might make good films. It's this sort of 'real life' approach to the aesthetic of realism and film-making that gives European cinema such a kick and is something that Almodóvar brings up in a scene very early on. Almodóvar does, after all, make very 'real' films about rather odd people and scanning a newspaper just seems like something he might do for inspiration. Indeed the plots for Talk to Her; Tie Me Up!; To Return (Volver) and Bad Education might well have stemmed from newspaper articles.
But Goded (sounds eerily like Godard) has his former lover come back into his life in the form of Angel (García Bernal) who has a screenplay ready and waiting to be shot. But things are not that simple; it seems they have not forgotten the love affair, Angel wants to play a certain role in the film and further things are complicated when deception and intrigue arise later on. Almodóvar employs all his tiny touches to the film such as the extremely post-modern office in which Goded works out of what with its differentiating colours, shapes and props littered throughout the room you cannot literally look anywhere without seeing some 21st Century inspired piece of art or colour. Then there are the establishing shots of run-down cinemas in ruin maybe a statement of cinema in Spain at a certain point? The 'death' of cinema? But of course, Almodóvar does not take sides because in the 1960s, the cinema is up and running and the boys visit it.
The boundaries between fiction and reality become a little blurred later on but it makes for good viewing, at least until a certain point. I'm not sure where the film began to loose me but I suppose it was a good thing when it ended as it saved me from liking it any less. The screenplay and Goded's own distorted memories are played off one another in a dramatic and unravelling fashion that entertains and informs; it does not help that the script is partly based on true events involving him. But when his psychosis catches up with the real-life timeline, extended and tantalising shots of male pubic hair above a certain area cover the screen for a while in an awkward and seemingly random passage, the deception starts to loose us and the film threatens to become generic. Just like the characters say themselves when they liken their actions and personas to film noir caricatures.
Another Gael performance worth it's weight in gold
eng3k3lw10 January 2005
The surprising thing about this film is the sex scenes. I've seen previous films by Almodovar and he has never been as explicit as this.
I find it very exciting that Gael chose to do this movie but it seems obvious to me that Almodovar recognises his beauty. The camera caresses his body and his face and Gael gives an amazing performance as each of the three characters he portrays - Ignacio/Angel/Juan. For each one he subtly changes the way his whole body and face works and I found this to be a cunning and subtle performance overall.
The film is also a very sexy experience and another surprise is that there are almost no female characters in the whole film - another thing Almodovar does not normally do.
The plot sustains the level of mystery and the changing of actors throughout adds to the suspense as well as being an original way of telling a story.
The costumes, designed by Jean-Paul Gaultier, are superb down to the sunglasses and paisley shirts and I love the way Almodovar's films are always colourful. This makes for an aesthetically pleasing experience and one I would definitely recommend anyone to see.
I find it very exciting that Gael chose to do this movie but it seems obvious to me that Almodovar recognises his beauty. The camera caresses his body and his face and Gael gives an amazing performance as each of the three characters he portrays - Ignacio/Angel/Juan. For each one he subtly changes the way his whole body and face works and I found this to be a cunning and subtle performance overall.
The film is also a very sexy experience and another surprise is that there are almost no female characters in the whole film - another thing Almodovar does not normally do.
The plot sustains the level of mystery and the changing of actors throughout adds to the suspense as well as being an original way of telling a story.
The costumes, designed by Jean-Paul Gaultier, are superb down to the sunglasses and paisley shirts and I love the way Almodovar's films are always colourful. This makes for an aesthetically pleasing experience and one I would definitely recommend anyone to see.
"Mala educación" (ill-breeding) indeed
valadas14 December 2008
Within a world of gays, junkies, drug-addicts, transvestites and pedophilia by priests, Pedro Almodóvar made a dramatic story of love, blackmail and death, well told, solidly and stoutly directed. The plot is well and realistically built and developed and it's entirely believable except somehow in what happens to the characters performed by LLuís Homat and Francisco Boira in the end which sounds a bit artificial. But this small flaw doesn't affect much the general value of the movie which is rather good.It has also another movie within the movie both very well intertwined. The performers do a very good job. It's a movie that on the whole touches our deep feelings if we can be able of understanding those somewhat odd characters that may be considered as awkward according to conventional prejudices and providing we rise above these same prejudices.
A perfect illustration of the problems plaguing art cinema
SexyBeastMaster3 March 2005
Sitting in a trendily-shabby art cinema, seeing Almodovar's La Mala Educacion on an intentionally modest-sized screen with exquisite sound system (the setup du jour for the repackaged, mainstream-chic experience that art cinema has become), I was filled with two emotions: boredom and rage.
Boredom at the painfully mediocre film I was being subjected to - Almodovar gleefully pleasures himself on screen, content in the knowledge that throngs of trendy thick-rimmed glasses-wearing disciples will follow him to the end of the earth regardless of the sloppy writing, thoughtless direction, and textbook cinematography he shiftlessly assembles whilst greedily grabbing for any Hitchcock devices he could manage to steal from the filmmaker's general store. Plot is a lost concept...you can almost hear him in a hackneyed Spanish accent questioning "Plot? What is this...how you say...plot? What a funny word!"
Rage, however, at the eagerness with which the trendy Buddies Holly delight in swallowing every ounce of the film whole as per Almodovar's instructions on the side of the bottle. Rage at the haughty smile on the ticket vendor's face as he graciously grants me the ticket to True Cinema. Rage at the disdain upon his face as I loudly denounce the film upon my exit.
Bad Education is the perfect example of the commodity that is Art Cinema Gone Wild. The neatly-packaged, inspiration-impoverished per-pound trade good that independent or pure cinema has revamped itself to become. It was a horrible, shallow, confused film that could only conceivably be valued for the opportunity to gaze at sexually ambivalent attractive Spanish men. I spit upon this film, and upon the masses who eagerly applaud it.
Boredom at the painfully mediocre film I was being subjected to - Almodovar gleefully pleasures himself on screen, content in the knowledge that throngs of trendy thick-rimmed glasses-wearing disciples will follow him to the end of the earth regardless of the sloppy writing, thoughtless direction, and textbook cinematography he shiftlessly assembles whilst greedily grabbing for any Hitchcock devices he could manage to steal from the filmmaker's general store. Plot is a lost concept...you can almost hear him in a hackneyed Spanish accent questioning "Plot? What is this...how you say...plot? What a funny word!"
Rage, however, at the eagerness with which the trendy Buddies Holly delight in swallowing every ounce of the film whole as per Almodovar's instructions on the side of the bottle. Rage at the haughty smile on the ticket vendor's face as he graciously grants me the ticket to True Cinema. Rage at the disdain upon his face as I loudly denounce the film upon my exit.
Bad Education is the perfect example of the commodity that is Art Cinema Gone Wild. The neatly-packaged, inspiration-impoverished per-pound trade good that independent or pure cinema has revamped itself to become. It was a horrible, shallow, confused film that could only conceivably be valued for the opportunity to gaze at sexually ambivalent attractive Spanish men. I spit upon this film, and upon the masses who eagerly applaud it.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
