The DU Lounge

Last edited Sun Feb 3, 2019, 01:46 PM - Edit history (2)

A quibble: My response to what I see is without the context of background study, neither of history of the period nor of the resume of the director/writers, just the product I see in front of me, stand-alone.

Ahead of seeing it, I'd heard that "Roma" is not about the Roman Empire or anything else Eyetalian, but rather the name of an affluent neighborhood in Mexico City, set in the ('70s?), and all in Spanish without subtitles or dubbing, that it's in black and white, and that it's about the relationship of the indigenous maid and the economically upper class family, with a backdrop of societal turmoil, and that the depicted family is the director's own and their maid.

So imagine seeing a movie in a different language and then passing judgment on it, which is what we've got here since I'm cheeky.

First of all, the maid Cleo is in just about every scene in this very very long movie, and whatever scenes she's not in are for context about her, so it's definitely about her - big take-away, haha!1 It seems to move along in simple chronological order.

The family home is almost a character, just where everybody comes back to despite forays avoiding claustrophobia into the street outside and extended scenes elsewhere. This is the director's childhood home, is "upper" income ------ in Mexico, that is; would be fairly Middle Class here. At some point it seems the director made this whole movie to show how well off he grew up.

So it's a family in a house. Four(?) kids, the 40ish mother, a grandmother(?), and two(?) maids. The father is a member of the family, but except for a couple of cameos of his arriving from wherever he works, he is fairly much absent, no, almost totally absent. And nothing of school or any other outside activities are seen for the kids. It's all the daily activities of a family grouping inside a house - kids playing and quarreling, mother manager/boss, maids doing their chores interspersed with minor nannying.

The whole thing is comings and goings of everybody living their individual lives together and separately, along with the whole outside world of a giant metropolis also filled with everybody else going about their individual activities. It seems that the camera is always panning from left to right with complicated activities going on all at once and a few stock players dashing past close up.

I don't want to spell out what I gleaned of a "plot" so I'll just say that things happen, "things" being the everyday (and social turmoil) activities of all this multitude of populace have going on collectively and separately. Everything is with the camera seeing at a distance. The relationships are confined but don't give a sense of intimacy.

Cleo is always there but fairly much an impassive observer, a couple of times giving way to imploring in need, but enveloped in Stoic endurance ("stoic" - Rome, do you see what I did there?!1 ).

*********O.K., this is it. Really, my overwhelming impression is how complex it is to make *any* movie with all their moving parts, but especially one of these panoramic dimensions, oddly with an interior focus - "interior" in both senses of personal and of scene. I also think "Crash" (the movie) for complex activities going on (except for strict chronology of Roma) and Seinfeld for whatever is happening without seeming to be happening.

If it's up to me, I'm fine with giving it prizes for writing, maybe directing, and whatever is called putting all the parts together. Perhaps the acting is so restrained that it disguises artistry, but I'm hoping for The FavoUrite's three actresses.

***********Actually, what I'm left with is my mundane curiosity as to whether the real life Cleo is still alive and whether she and the director are in contact and what that's like.