Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

Ginger Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

zzzorf This movie had a very amateurish look to it. The acting was overly poor, the camera work was shocking and the effects were bad. The thing is it all worked in this movies favour.Once you came to grips with all of the amateurishness you realise just how much it all fits in with the story being told. The longer I watched the more I forgot all the movie making sides of things and became more engrossed in what was actually happening.You have to feel for the old man, his return home was not what he would have expected and possibly the hardest part of his life (I have no context however to compare it to). Though if I were him I would be getting out of Columbia straight away, hell if the opportunity arose for me to go there after seeing this I would definitely pass on the opportunity.I recommend this to watch to whoever is interested just keep an open mind. Don't turn it off because it looks poor, that is part of its charm.

Python Hyena Our Lady of the Assassins (2000): Dir: Barbet Schroeder / Cast: German Jaramillo, Anderson Ballesteroes, Juan David Restrepo, Manuel Busquets, Juan Carlos Alvarez: Misfire art film with a ridiculous title that indicates that both leads are gay. German Jaramillo stars as a writer who has lived in Europe for thirty years and returns to Columbia for his sister's funeral. Before long he befriends a young hoodlum and they have a pointless sexual fling then they travel the streets where every other person takes crack shots at them and ends up dead. This becomes predictable and repetitious but director Barbet Schroeder does his best. While his efforts should be applauded, he has had greater success with films such as Single White Female and Reversal of Fortune. Unfortunately here his efforts fail to achieve even the slightest sympathy towards this kid. Jaramillo delivers a compelling performance as an individual of cunning intelligence who is trying to figure out what his home land has become. Anderson Ballesteroes as the hoodlum is hardly interesting. He shoots everything that he comes into contact with including an injured dog. We know his fate and we do not care. Flat supporting roles featuring Juan David Restrepo and Manuel Busquets who can only hope that Jaramillo attracts viewers to this film. It is a film about youth and change but it gets reduced to violence and idiocy. Score: 4 ½ / 10

jcesar-3 through cinema we all find out that movies have as many motives and meanings as the different tastes everyone has. left alone the fact that this movie was done on a low budget i realized that the movie is not about the violence that plagued the city (medellin)in the 80's and early 90's. after living in the streets of medellin myself through all my childhood, i recognized that the movie was about the main character (fernando) realizing that he has been unhappy for all his life and apparently until it ends, he'll always be. he comes back 30 years later to his birthplace as a "famous writer" being politics his main specialty. just to find out out that his town has changed for worse. he's travelled all over the world and lived in the big cities abroad just to come back to put up with the ignorance and lowlife lifestyle of everyone around him. which is why he attracts all the bad situations that happen in this film. he tries to find love wherever he can find it, and he does so in alexis and then again with wilmar who kills alexis in revenge for having killed his brother and so many other gang members. after seeing all the common-everyday violence he finds useless to kill wilmar in revenge for killing alexis,and instead he emotionally attaches himself to wilmar. just to loose him as easy as he found him. this movie is about the sadness in being unhappy all your life. and the value of it.

tmaclen i hated this movie. it is shot with digital video, and it looks a lot like a home video. perhaps that was the intent. i was certainly surprised to see the credits that suggested a lot of people on the production and a lot of post-production work.perhaps i've missed something. for me, this movie came across like a first film, filled with pretense, grand and overbearing monologue, plus poor acting.perhaps that was the point. maybe someone thought that a degree of realism could be achieved with poor light, sound, film, and 'special effects'. instead, it looks like a gay porn video, without the porn: leaving an dull romance between an old, self-absorbed whiner, and a rent boy.