For the section of Almodovar’s fans made up of casual movie goers,Bad Educationis a divisive film. Many of the elements that cemented his cross-cultural appeal are more nuanced here, if not outright non-existent. Almodovar said that the script forBad Educationtook him over ten years to write. This is an intensely personal film, rooted in Almodovar’s own childhood; though Almodovar wasn’t sexually abused, he he knew people who were. In an interview with The New York Times, he described how he frequently clashed with the priests who considered his questions heretical.Bad Educationis a scathing indictment of Francoist Spain wrapped up in a film noir. The main character Enrique is an up and coming director who receives a script from his old school friend Ignacio that describes the abuse he suffered at the hands of Father Manolo. Few films has haunted or terrified me as much. I was reminded of Lynch’sBlue Velvetin terms of sheer horror. Even Almodovar’s candy colors and fantastic sets can barely contain the filth being spewed up from below. He captures the ridgid elegance of the Catholic ceremonies. In the same interview Almodovar said, “I do put in the whole Catholic ceremony. I don’t go to church anymore and I am not a believer, but I really enjoy the rituals of the church. The literary aspect is marvelous. The wording. Whether you believe or not, it is a beautiful ceremony.”Bad Education is a brave film, and we must admire the courage Almodovar displayed in making it. But it is a tough pill to swallow.
I'm in the minority, but I hated this film. Almodovar is a fine director whose work I often love and sometimes hate. Bad Education bored me. I found it to be claustrophobic, and I didn't like any of the characters enough to spend 2 hours with them. The acting was great, and I did want to know how it ended, but when all was said and done I would've preferred to have spent my time some other way.
Gael Garcia Bernal: as Ignacio / Angel is always the innocent boy who wants a chance to be successful, but Zahara is as surprising: its initial performance is amazing and far from being reminded of the man revered by women (and some men) know. Like Penelope Cruz in Volver, Almodovar explores the beauty of the character in order to convey this magnetic aura which attracts everyone, and that motivates follies.
This film proves that Gael is one of the best actors of his generation.. But the way Almodovar end it is somehow like a typical Mexican/Spanish movie....
A riveting mystery and a ravishing melodrama. A passionate delight from beginning to end.
To describe this Almodovar film as complex and layered may not be enough to cover its breadth and depth. The story goes farther than you can conceive and the surprises and reversals keep on whirring. It’s about life imitating art and art imitating life. It’s about concealed identities, guile, and hidden motives. It’s about pedophilia, religion, lust, and moral corruption. You’ve been warned: this film is a mouthful. And don’t miss Gael in drag. www.pixelatedpopcorn.blogspot.com
Way too deterministic and cookie-cutter about the way the movie unfolds- I think Almodovar just isn't very good at the film noir vibe. The stretch with Bernal and friend in drag was wonderful and all that followed was limpid in comparison. There was also something very smug and self-satisfied about the character of the director and his "passion" for the story.
There's only subjectivity. Objectivity is for small minds with prejudices eating the best of them. Actually better written than any Lynch movie, less subversive perhaps, but really clever writing, the division between fiction and reality...
You shouldn't like any Almodovar if you don't like what you call "homo erotic theme". That's a very stupid comment.
This is not a gay film for me! I found this film very personal for me as it was about how the stories are created by filmmakers. Usually they are inspired by their own experiences. In fact, facts are more serious and horrendous than fiction, which this film is trying to say. Facsinating!