Roma (2018)
I’ve really struggled with Roma.It has been hailed as a masterpiece from Alfonso Cuaron. His previous films include the excellent Children of Men, Gravity, Y Tu Mama Tambienand Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azbahan. But I found Roma terribly slow and indulgent. Ninety minutes in it finally takes off but who will still be watching it by then? My suspicion is that Alfonso has reached the point in his career where after so much success he is allowed to do exactly what he wants. Here he is writer, director and also has an editing credit. The lead producer, Nicolas Celis, has only produced two films before. Did he have any say in the running time or potential box office appeal? The opening shot of floor tiles runs a worrisome 4.33 and there is extensive use of wide shots which pan slowly to follow any (or no) action. I found the absence of close ups made us mere observers rather than involving us in the lives of the central characters, a Mexican family living in a sector fo the city called Roma,. They have servants and our film covers the years 1970 and 1971 during a time of political turmoil in the country. It is in black and white and this seems irrelevant – the recent colourisation of World War 1 footage surely gave it more impact – is there a reason for this decision other than passing fashion? Beds are changed, dogs leap in the air, our maid stares out of the kitchen window, the maids go the cinema but end up in bed with two blokes, more washing is hung to dry, cars arrive home, children scamper hither and yon, tea is made, a husband leaves home, the maid falls pregnant, her lover rejects her, paint dries. And then after 90 minutes (luckily it is on Netflix so I was able to pause it and watch it over two days) suddenly the students revolt, the maid and her mistress’s mother are involved in riots, the family goes to the seaside – the film has my full attention - and all are brought together by a near tragedy. They all return to the city and some semblance of their old lives, but so much has changed. It has some good moments and the potentially dystopian world we have seen so effectively in Children Of Men is well observed. But I return to an old theme – if the only way to convey boredom and monotony is to bore the cinema audience this is not film making – this is recording events. Cinema shorthand is not a crime – close ups, camera movement, sequence shooting and music are popular with film makers because they work! I note that Cuaron was given a film camera at the age of eight and “started filming everything he saw” Old habits die hard. It could have been great at 90 minutes, but at 135 it is too long – presuming that the purpose of making films is to get people to watch them and be affected by them. If only the students had revolted an hour earlier…