No somos animales (2013) User Reviews

A miss

[hof-4 · 4/10 · 19 August 2017]

This movie belongs to the "film within a film" genre that opened up half a century ago with Fellini's 8 1/2. It features John Cusack and other American actors summoned to Buenos Aires to make a film that, we are told, experiments with cinematic language. The story is improvised (there is a script but nobody seems to take it seriously) and some scenes (like in Godard's La Chinoise) actually belong to the film within, as the point of view changes and we see the cameras rolling and the booms in place. Sequences are announced with title cards, also in Godard's style. The view of Buenos Aires and its people is that of an average American tourist; there are some comments about Peronism and the 1976-1982 military dictatorship but there is no depth or meaning in them. Everything we see or hear is capricious and at best whimsical, at worst pretentious and at times boring.

Al Pacino plays the mysterious (and somewhat devilish) long distance mastermind of the project, He gets the best lines and makes the most of them; the short time he is on screen is the best part of the movie.

The movie ends up saying nothing significant. Although some ideas may be interesting, it it difficult to gauge the intentions of the director. All in all, an unsatisfactory film.

Worst film ever.

[christophercurtis8 · 1/10 · 23 August 2017]

This might be the worst film I've ever seen. Oozes pretentiousness. Has no plot. Isn't funny. Lacks characters do nothing to endear you to them. They have no arc. And now they're making me write 5 lines on it, but I just had to write a review so nobody else fell in the trap of watching this film. It's also stupidly long considering that NOTHING happens. How it has an average so high I'll never know. End of story.

Most boring movie ever

[unclejwells · 1/10 · 25 August 2017]

I watched this largely because I love Argentina. What a waste of 90 minutes. I stuck it out and watched the entire thing because I wanted it to be a decent movie. It wasn't. To say this movie is dull and dry is really being generous. There's no plot. Nothing of any significance happens. It's not even funny. This seems like a movie where someone was trying way too hard to be sophisticated and ended up producing garbage as a result.

A Waste Of Time ... and I am from Argentina

[s_martelli · 1/10 · 29 August 2017]

This film reminded me of the Dogma film "Hotel" (2001 dir: Mike Figgis) where many American movie stars appear mostly as cameos, or barely as part of the plot. There was, however a plot there, at least. On this film, we have "Kubrick-like" intertitles preceding scenes, all about the planning of the filming of a movie, which is being filmed as this is a movie within a movie anyway. The dialogue for the first half is - as always - about "the evil military that killed people indiscriminately", without a full explanation of WHY and WHAT HAPPENED. This is as if you were learning about World War II and "there was a lot of killing going on" but absolutely no explanation of what happened, just tidbits of talk. Imagine every German film ever made from the end of the war to the present, in which they talk about Nazis. Every film. Or every American movie talking about Vietnam... even it if is a romantic comedy. They try, and fail, to make this some type of artsy film, some very recognizable names are in it, but the dialogue goes nowhere. They try to be "French New Wave" but with less plot, and a lot of scenes about Buenos Aires that serves more as a fantasyland attraction rather than the presentation of a city, or the history of the country, or even some type of plot. A complete waste of time and talent. Go see "Hotel" instead. There is a scene in which a girl tells John Cusack that Argentina is stuck in the past, 35 years back, and cannot move forward. Such is the state of filmmaking in ARG today. Stuck in the 1980s and forever trying to sanitize (but failing in omission) the event s that CAUSED the military coup of 1976. The Argentitnes need at least another 50 years to catch up to the rest of the world. This is a piece of garbage, and frankly, had the coup never occurred, Argentina would have been another Lebanon of the 1980s or the Venezuela of today. Che Guevara and Maoists forever admiring what is unclean only because it is "revolutionary" - conveniently ignoring that ARG, for all its faults, became rich and prosperous thanks to the European immigrants that worked - and di dnot pick the quick fix of a revolution to advance the country. For the lazy and the feeble minded, the Cuban revolution is a thing to be worshipped. These are still dangerous times!

Existential Movie of The Year

[lisalowell-17822 · 27 August 2017]

Pacino's character was right in this film. It's lais·sez-faire approach makes it poignant, up close and real and makes modern feel modern all over again. It's nice to see American actors getting to be like in European movies, talking back about American politics like that, without being lazy-cynical or nihilistic, just saying what is, and keeping it playful-real. Friendly, like it's supposed to be, even though all the darkest themes are on the roster. This is the dialogue America needs to be having. I loved all the songs too. They sport classic pop/rock undertones, with some of Hipp's Philly cheese steak grease warps in just the right places. Lyrics! Melody! I feel like I got to hang with the boys on this one, and watch them play at life, however daunting the playground.

If you want to go down the rabbit hole...

[Xony · 7/10 · 21 August 2017]

When I first started watching this, I had my mind set to write a completely sarcastic review and summarize this as a tale of a man who once won a sizable amount of money on a popular game show while wearing his magical Wonder Woman wristbands, only to later in life be reduced to begging on GoFundMe for attorney retainer funds after being charged with methamphetamine possession following a Grindr hook-up gone wrong. But then something about this movie made me very sad, in a very deeply painful, aching kind of way. I can't completely explain it. Maybe if you have horrible attention deficit disorder like I do you'll sit through the whole thing while eating a large burrito. This movie might make you question your sanity, sort of like a psychopath or narcissist does when gaslighting a person, making them wonder what actually is reality.

worst of the worst

[Cinema2kMendoza · 1/10 · 14 October 2021]

When u think 2012 and zoolander 2 are bad, this is worst. No plot, just people talking nonsense, even if is filmed in argentina doesnt have sense. Cant believe why they filmed this here.

Sill nice.

[pedrireso · 7/10 · 29 August 2017]

Was far much better the version I saw in the BAFICI festival, I miss that music and some scenes that are not there. This is now a kind of "making off" of what had far more sense and story, plus atmosphere. But, anyway, even if is not a real work of Agresti, and the Americans touched it like know all-know nothing typical spoiled, colonialist kids some are over there, I still I enjoy the freedom that exudes from the director's original. Hope Netflix could show us the original!!!

An interesting experience

[alditohux · 10/10 · 23 August 2017]

That's why I give it a 10 from Uruguay. As a normal movie it probably would have deserve only a 6 or 7. But this is another kind of "thing". Personally made me feel close to the characters, as never a movie made me feel before. I could call it an ODE to friendship. The "thing" never tried to manipulate me, from the start shows that taste of parody, makes you part of a crazy party, full of contradictions, drinks,different points of view, and space for personal thoughts...

Anyway, Cusack shows his best, or a my say himself after so many forgettable films. I wish it could be a serial, with those friends saying what come to their minds. After watching the last Argentine blockbusters designed to be that, like The Clan etc., or the "artistic movies", that are film school pastiches of old classics, overall french, No Somos Animales got my heart. Makes me believe that cinema could be something different that manipulation and money, something more simple, and participatory.

Outrageous Essay

[criticadorai · 10/10 · 6 September 2017]

I love Argentina, finally a film from that beautiful country discusses sad historical topics in a relaxed, humorous way, without making a pamphlet, or using so much suffering in a commercial way.

In a time when cinema is violence, rape, drugs or narcissistic pose, to see people like Cusack and Pacino so close to us and themselves, talking politics and art, with no fear of being disconcert by our times, makes of this movie something very special.

Da Da Homemovie

[manuelraggionei · 8/10 · 24 August 2017]

Warm little movie. A collage of digressions and partial thoughts, no apt for who is looking to be caught in a melodrama. To see great actors playing with such a freedom, makes me think on the cynical and shallow part of this art form.

As soon we have the chance to liberate our mind, we dream, and snore. As soon we seat front of the TV, we are forced to dream the dreams others, sometimes just money makers…

This movie have much of a dream, but is enough imperfect, rough, and sometimes nonsensical, that you can hear your own mind without feeling being used.

A punch in the nose to the false altruists.

[leidsewallen · 10/10 · 22 August 2017]

I'm Argentine, so do not expect good English from me. But for US- AR relations and revisions looking for the true, Agresti's movie is without any doubt a milestone. He laugh about the problems that we ourselves create and keep creating in order to be good clowns, and keep using in order to give pity when things go wrong. For instance, the name of the first who tried to kill this unique, humorous work calling it here "A Miss" is Emiliano Basile, an Argentine mediocre critic, who sign as as being North American, and use the US flag in his comment… Woow!... Contrary to that, Agresti did a face to face between both cultures, showing himself in the film, instead of hiding like that pathetic moron. He performs Mr. Pesto, a wannabe director who admits that doesn't know what cinema is… "The work", i'm not sure to call it "A Film", is like a handkerchief that unfolds, many times looking if still is there a spot free of crap in this society. The subtle investigation between lines is calling to watch it many times. I saw it 4 so far, and I keep discovering juxtapositions between images and discourse that thrills me. Also I admire the participation of actors like JK and Pacino, working for no money, much more preoccupied to embrace the experimental trip of questioning, of which some blind local critics, like that coward ignorant pretending being from the US, are just envious.

Once Again Agresti tries to show the Platonic Cavern that became our cultural parody. But like in any Platonic Cavern, Agresti goes back to his country and the ones who are on chains keep killing him, and denigrating him cowardly. They have an agenda with Agresti, and he knows that, but still produces some of the most interesting movies, and books on the Pampas. The most genuine and provocative reflections, without any concern about box office or any kind of conformism. Bravo!

First film dealing with Post-Truth .

[leapatuchie · 9/10 · 3 September 2017]

Not brilliant now, may be later. This unassuming piece of work, reunites big names, a pathetic lawyer, a musician, and a false artist of our times (played by the director in the fictional parts), showing how post-truth is here to stay.

A prismatic piece, that uses it cinematic media as message, not falling into the classical arrogance of other films playing the same game.

Masterpiece

[loucasi · 10/10 · 28 January 2020]

It's like they took a regular script and passed it through an Interstellar "shredder",glued the bits together and that's what came out. Or It's presented in some weird rhyme or something. Like iambic pentameter on LSD.

Doesn't seem to make sense, but read between the lines

[alfredokardashian · 10/10 · 2 September 2017]

Why is the main photo for this movie on Netflix a photo of Al Pacino looking wasted when he's not even credited in the movie? Why is the movie listed as being made in 2013 but just released in 2017? Why are there so many references to Pacino in Alejandro Agrestri's IMDb profile? There are a lot of red herrings surrounding Al Pacino these days, and none of it seems to make sense, much like this movie. But look past the bullshit and maybe you can solve the puzzle. Lucila Sola aka Lucila Polak is Pacino's current girlfriend who claims to have been with him ten years (though there are references to many different lengths of their relationship in various articles online). However, her daughter, Camila Morrone, age 20, has a photo of herself on her Instagram (camimorrone) as a very young child sitting right next to Mr. Pacino on a movie set. Lucila Polak was born in 1976, according to a public records database search, but she has often been referenced as being born in 1979 and was first issued a Social Security number in 1995/1996. Her brother, however, who was a member of the California bar for a period of time starting in 2011, is not listed at all in the same public records database. John Cusack's character in this movie is a known celebrity and wears a black headband like Al Pacino. Look at the multiple Instagram accounts surrounding Cami Morrone and Al Pacino and there are multiple bizarre posts, some that seem to refer to parts of this movie (like sex with a woman that makes her pass out). And last, but definitely not least, there is a wealth of information on a website called ArgentinaPrivate regarding the Argentine escort scene, and one post lists the age of consent as being 13, according to Article 119 of the Argentine Penal Code. Just be warned, if you have even half a soul, this website might make you vomit.

Much like that Crazy Days and Nights website (that may or may not even be run by the same person that started it originally) I'm just posting a few known facts and offering readers of this review the opportunity to try to make more sense out of this movie that doesn't seem to make much damn sense at all. Good luck.

History against Story...

[margaheyerdahal · 9/10 · 25 August 2017]

If a society avoids to face its own history, becomes a factory of stories in order to disguise facts. That we are living that in Argentina.

But like in his film Buenos Aires Viceversa, Agresti denounces that in We are not Animales. Here he cleverly commits the "sin" of making fun of Story telling, Plot, and all the shebang, underscoring those elements in order discuss History from an apparently superficial set up.

The second view of the film brought to my attention certain patterns that, late at night, the first time I was not ready to catch (Also because I was expecting a standard Cusack film).

The film discusses Art and Politics on a way that I'm not sure that here we are ready to digest.

To mention chronologically some structural points of this kaleidoscope:

Concentration Camps, Aramburu, Evita, sons of assassinated people during the military, West Point Academy,Trelew, Do a Story need cameras?, freedom, It was a War or not?, Obama, Terrorism, Justice, Participation of US on Argentine Genocide, Faith and church, Generalization of US a Evil, What is culture?, Media manipulation, Do we have to tell our kids what happen, or better we let them grow free from the demons and resentments of a country in which we are all partly responsible of the mess? --

The easygoing tone of the film, the courage to trash Story in favor of History, makes this an unique product, to be analyze more relaxed but deeply (also a strange combo?), than a normal movie. Probably Groucho Marx would had understood it much better, the other Marx too.

Liberating...

[hdmvanpuffelen · 9/10 · 24 August 2017]

I was born on 1989, the year when the Berlin wall went down. The USSR used cinema as a weapon, even before Hitler. Of course, because as a media for propaganda, nothing was, or still is, more effective. Of course, they use us because we tend to believe that any thing shown on a screen is a fact, or at least could happen cause, after all, now it's just happening in our living room.

But since I was a kid that I ask myself why the actors don't go to the loo, or why they pretend that I'm not there talking to each other. I know, my problem but this film give me some hope, in a sense. It showed me Donal Duck talking with Mickey, playing cards, being humans, trying to make up a story, showing how Sartre could be right, o wrong, or us. How far we are domesticated by cinema? How far we shout that not? Not so far the last, sometimes we crave for more blood, false love, sex, propaganda, phony identification in order to go on like hamsters.

Thanks, John Cusack and Al Pacino. Thanks, the makers of this allegory.