fluff-bomb Battle in Heaven is a difficult one to rate, and describe. It's like Marmite, you either love it or hate it. Or, it just confuses the hell out of you. Unfortunately I was subjected to the latter. Marcos, his wife and his son are a working class family who kidnap a baby for ransom money as they struggle to survive on an income derived from selling cake in a subway station and Marcos' long term security job for the local General and his daughter, Ana. There are some strange plot holes: You never find out precisely why the couple stole the baby, or why it died. Why does Ana cry when giving Marcos fellatio? How/why does Marcos spontaneously die at the altar after the pilgrimage? Why does Marcos leave the flat, wet himself, then return to stab Ana?However the film does redeem itself by some use of artistic cinematography. But it's hard to compliment much else for this film. The use of sex scenes help it achieve the 'art' feel but do not help to move forward the plot. The acting is amateur at best, poor use of expression makes it feel like one is watching robots perform. In conclusion it can be said that although this film captures the 'realism' of Mexico, it is supported by shoddy acting and a poorly written script which restricts plot development. I feel like this film is unfortunately a lot of wasted potential. 6/10

bikenavy I re-watched the film and I still liked it. The form is very forced to the point where it's borderline pretentious. But somehow, it's fun to watch and I except it. I'm really not sure why. I have problems with "Silent Light" but not this one. Maybe it's because the film is grounded on the rawness? It has some scenes that were shot on real streets with real events. So the pretentiousness blends well with the grittiness of reality? I like how the camera's movements, the cut and the use of sound are so mechanical. I also like how practically everything is symbolical. Everything is composed. Its pretension is so obvious that it's adorable. I can see how this film was conceived from a bunch of images in mind. It works like a comic book. "Post Tenebras Lux" is my favorite film of Raygadas. This one comes second.

Krishna Mohan Now this is one out of the box movie.The plot revolves around a Man in his 40's, who is overweight and has a mediocre life. He has a wife who is even overweight than him and a son. By profession he works as a driver and his wife sells petty item and cakes at the subway.The couple are driven by their poverty to commit the crime of kidnapping a child. But, fate does not have money for them. The child dies while in their custody and they are in tremendous pressure. The victim's family happens to be someone they know. And they are trying hard to give hope to the victim's family that the kidnapper(themselves) would return their child and that they need not go to the police.In the meantime, the man needs to tend to his daily job. He needs to pick up his employers daughter from the airport. He has been their driver since she was school going kid. But, now that she is all grown up, he has an sexual attraction towards her.The daughter works at a private brothel of whom only the driver knows. She sets him up with one of the hookers, but he cannot get excited due to the on-going tension in his life.The Girl inquires as to why he is behaving so. To which, the man confesses into her. She tells him that he should surrender to the police. He goes home and has sex which his wife and tells her that he has told his employer's daughter the true, as he needed to lighten the burden. The wife gets angry with him for his confessions to the girl. She tells him to wait until one day as she feels that the ongoing pilgrim festival will bring them some luck and help them out of their situation. Even though he is reluctant he agrees to wait another day before going to the police.He asks her whether she will miss him if they get separated after the surrender. The wife says to him, that she cannot leave without him.Next day he reports for his driver job at the girl's apartment. He find her boyfriend there, who leaves them alone to grab the newspaper from the shop. While, they are alone, the girl & the man have sex. She riding on him and then lies on him with his manhood still inside of her, for a long time.Then, she again tels him that he should surrender to the police. He asks her whether she will miss him. To which, she replies that she would not miss him as he will always be in her heart. He leaves the apartment and while he is in the outside corridor, he realizes that the girl has no value for him and recognizes the devotion of his wife. He returns back to the girl's apartment and kills her.He then proceeds toward the pilgrim temple half naked and on his knees, with his head covered with a cloth. Ultimately, the police discover the dead child at his home and arrest his wife & son. They re now in-pursuit for him and head towards the temple. He attains enlightenment at the temple and after getting shot, he is in heaven, where he is getting his manhood sucked by his employer's daughter.

Electric_Sheep I went into this film without realizing it was by Carlos R. I won't explain the storyline as you may have read it already by now - I will however try to rationalize why it may be loved/hated.This "artistic" film is not meant for the regular masses of people - that much is clear. It however goes a step ahead by trying to create a niche group amongst the "sophisticated" critics/viewers as well! It's a "short story" shot in exaggerated long moments of nothingness. You will be viewing the (deliberately) expressionless actors looking into space like zombies in addition to the Mexican landscape, roads, people, roads, sun rising, (did i mention roads?) etc with no coherence. It was during these long shots, I realized this film was reminiscent of another rather *boring* Mexican film I had once lost 2 hours of my life to.It wasn't until the much talked about "Real Life people" sex scene that I paused, checked and found it was indeed a film by Carlos Reygadas! At least he has succeeded in imprinting his style even on normal audiences! Once a director does it (ie Geriatrics Sex in Japon) in a movie, its considered artistic by the niche critics but to do something like that again in another gloom of a film? I call it a disturbing fetish crying out for media attention! Let me get this straight - the film is not about sex primarily - it also is *supposed* to be about human dilemmas of morality, class divides etc.However we never get to see it, comprehend it or actually feel for it. It's a film which will fulfill those niche audiences and allow them that seat of authority which they can have and enjoy.PS. This film will be enjoyable in 4x Fast forward.