I just watched this movie as part of the 56th Muestra International de Cine at the Cineteca Nacional, in Mexico City. As I noted in the synopsis, the director is also the protagonist, something that I don't consider sane for a movie. But the storyline seemed attractive. And my intuition was right: an excessive use of extreme close-ups, not helping to the narrative, but making it boring and exasperating. And yes, most of the close-ups, specially the long-lasting ones, were on the main character. I don't know the original text (I know it's a theatrical text), to make a difference between failures in the original story and the version of the director. The characters are interesting. They're strong. But I couldn't understand the basis of their actions. There is a scene when characters are doing this, and the next they're changing, and then they're going back, and then they make a new thing... The only well-presented character is a secondary one, appearing as much as 15 minutes. The actress in the role of the mother makes a very good work, but it's diluted by the failures in the story and the lack of strength in the work of the co-protagonists. At the end, I found the director being the protagonist, also made the selection of the music, the scenery, the dialogs (interestingly, the playwright helped with the dialogs). And it made sense with the result. A fragmented work, a complete lack of unity.
Review of Tom at the Farm
