The first principle of a film is that it should have a semblance of a plot. A person does an action in a place. This falls down right away as a film. At minimum we must have some kind of story to tell. It'sa film, not a collection of pet photos. If you take the immaculate scenery they have found and took them and printed them and made "Galicia At Night" it would be a gorgeous photo book. But as a movie this offers nothing.
A hyper minimalist saunter through Franco-Spain in an unspecified time by unspecified people somehow stretches the 90 minutes runtime into a long tedious slog. Characters were never get the name of muse conversationally about a time we don't know about. Every shot feels 10-90 seconds too long and too lingering, as if the director knew the Arthouse crowd will eat up a 50 second closeup of a cow breathing. But films that dabbled in self-importance usually accompany their grandeur with more than Chiaroscuro visuals of a forest.
Hopefully some people will enjoy the visuals or be looking for a collection of short stories about life in Spain, but for me it was a real struggle. Will not be revisiting.
A hyper minimalist saunter through Franco-Spain in an unspecified time by unspecified people somehow stretches the 90 minutes runtime into a long tedious slog. Characters were never get the name of muse conversationally about a time we don't know about. Every shot feels 10-90 seconds too long and too lingering, as if the director knew the Arthouse crowd will eat up a 50 second closeup of a cow breathing. But films that dabbled in self-importance usually accompany their grandeur with more than Chiaroscuro visuals of a forest.
Hopefully some people will enjoy the visuals or be looking for a collection of short stories about life in Spain, but for me it was a real struggle. Will not be revisiting.
