Skunkyrate Gripping story with well-crafted characters

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Delight Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews To the backdrop of a massive protest against banks and large corporations, one of the latter tests 7 candidates to see which one will get the one open position. No one from Personnel shows up, instead, they get instructions, sometimes vague, through computer monitors, and this explores the group dynamics(which are not rigid throughout) of these very different, and all fully rounded, credible characters(not one of which is a scapegoat or only negative), as well as the nature of authority, social pressure, and the effect of capitalism on priorities and how far we're willing to go. It kind of plays out like watching one of those sick psychological experiments from the 60's. We are limited to these people and then the quirky, strange secretary(who really adds to this overall Kafkaesque feeling), and the setting is equally isolated(one could almost call it claustrophobic), with us not leaving the foreign, unfriendly environment of the office for the entire duration. The acting is excellent. Dialog is great. This is tense from start to finish, only increasing as it goes, and the pacing is incredible. Not only are you never bored, it only gets more gripping as it goes, and the ending is utterly spot-on, and perfect. There are some nice surprises along the way, if you can figure some things out from tendencies and the like(something I don't see anything wrong with, if it comes naturally, then it doesn't have to pull the carpet out from underneath the audience). There is a bit of moderate to strong language and a brief but rather direct sex scene, with female frontal nudity(possibly full, it's hard to tell) in this. I recommend this to fans of Spanish cinema and films driven by those they follow, and that go into human nature(including the ugly parts). 8/10

Absyrd The Method Before I begin my review, I think I should clear up that the "Gronholm Method" is an obscure method of interviewing someone for a job. It involves gathering up a number of candidates eligible for a position, but rather than openly interviewing them as a process of discovering their usefulness and weaknesses, there technically is no "interviewer". In the film, the candidates are placed in a room with six laptops (one for each contender to receive notes) and they are forced to psychologically analyze each other to discover a "winner". They are issued a series of challenges and hypothetical situations in which they are forced to pick out the weakest of their group. There is always the lingering plausibility that any one of these contestants can be the true interviewer, or perhaps there could be multiple interviewers? Maybe there is only one true contestant, or maybe they are all role-playing in a method to promote a staff member in the company? Any of these explanations are reasonable, because when we're discussing a method as cynical as the film's depiction, it's almost superficial to narrow it down to one solution.I'm not entirely sure about the historical authenticity of the Gronholm Method, or if it even exists (a Google search sent me to the film's IMDb + Wikipedia page), but I can almost assure if the film were a multinational box-office success, small businesses would begin to experiment and possibly adapt the assumed fictional method. I personally wouldn't mind being an interviewee of such a system, for it allows me to challenge my intellectual abilities in an intense competition. As for the film itself, when its narrative followed the characters as they explored each other's limitations and the film analyzed their credulity and startling enthusiasm to such a sport, it was an intensely riveting experience. The characters were developed with careful and relentlessly strengthening three-dimensional traits, and the methods of interviewing grew more severe and brooding to reveal the true nature of man. The first 50 minutes of this film were pure exhilaration, a haunting psychological depiction of cat & mouse. To me it was almost a nostalgic resemblance of the superfluous anxiety found in 12 ANGRY MEN, as I'd never felt so absorbed by long-running dialogue since.After several characters are eliminated from the process (I'm not about to explain who, why, or how), the film takes a break from its intense onslaught of psychosomatic progression. This veers the film off-course and unfortunately causes it to wane off a bit. Greed is replaced by hormones as one character randomly feels like having sex with one of the remaining interviewees. Although a bit absurd, it also fits the animalistic desperation the contestants must be feeling by this point. They've been stripped bare from social courtesy, and are now physically fighting one another, no longer caring for outer appearance. I'm not sure if it justifies going as far as it does, but it would've been totally implausible to remain as a restrained and gracious drama.A romantic subplot also develops between two interviewees. They had once been lovers, but one betrayed the other, and neither had ever forgotten. They still longed to be together, but the hostile circumstances made it impossible for them. The subplot does reach startling poignancy at one point, but does the film ever get back on track? Does it ever re-enter its initial excitement? Unfortunately, the writer didn't trust his sardonic examination would make for a fully satisfying viewing. His decision to switch gears was more detrimental than refreshing, and that may be the only aspect of the film that inhibited greatness. It still makes for a relentlessly entertaining viewing, one that not only provokes thought, but questions human morality in a time of conflict. Cynical, but excellent.

vostf The idea was nice: 7 people in one room and a kind of role-play game as a selection to get 1 much coveted position in a big corporation. How long can a movie benefit from a good premise and keep all aboard despite a slight shortage in the follow-up? Admittedly it is 10 minutes, 10 minutes that are sufficient for the audience to judge whether the movie delivers the goods or not (with regards to the level of expectations set beforehand).El Método doesn't fall flat after 10 or 30 minutes, instead it gradually loses traction with each eliminated applicant. With the first applicant on the way out the movie already shows its inner weaknesses. Actually this character goes too fast from a pretty strong position in the group to the status of a victim. I'd say this means the script was quite a bit weak.ONE SIMPLE GOOD IDEA IS FINE, BUT THE SIMPLER THE IDEA THE STRONGER THE SCRIPT AND DIRECTION NEED TO BEWhen you watch the movie there's an inner mechanism of suspense (Next out?) leading you to expect more from the next elimination, so there's some kind of suspension of disbelief stretched until you no longer care for the outcome. The movie lost me as a good-willing viewer (i.e. not getting to think about what is wrong in it) with the luncheon intermezzo. Just before that, the second applicant was out, losing through a 'Nuclear after-world' role play which was good, not great but it was right to heat up the atmosphere. The lunch was certainly necessary to change gears, deviate, scatter and broaden the narration, yet it feels more like a lull. Lasts too long as a whole as well as in the inter-cut narrative between the various sub-groups. Script softness plus direction flaw. Stemming down from there the ending is not very interesting, you no longer care for one character or the other.10 MINUTES DEAL?So was the movie getting bad only halfway? No, actually the titles already say it all. They mean nothing, don't set up the narration, and worse of all the images chosen as a dressing for the opening credits represent exactly the kind of cliché a lazy director would chose. You've got vignettes of various characters waking up and on their ways to the building for the group job interview. What can be more devoid of creativity than a movie starting with a character waking up in the morning then having breakfast? Can you believe some useless split-screen makes this poor start even worse? On the other hand the alter-globalization demonstration context is a fine idea but it's not enforced to the full in the closed-space narration.On the whole a movie that would have need re-writing and a better director. Bring in the true talents for a remake.

incitatus-org Seven candidates show up at some multinational in Madrid, all of them in the last round of a recruitment process. While the city is immersed by anti-globalization protests on the streets down below, the candidates are turned on each other for the selection. A sadistic analysis of the contemporary business world, pushed just that little bit further to earn it the title of a satire.The cruel game is played out in the confines of the office, with the candidates fending for themselves under the presumed watchful eye of the named, but anonymous, entity which is the corporation. The tension mounts quickly, as the strong characters clash head-on in their perfectly developed manipulative manners after their years in business life. An excellent cast plays clever but tough dialogues in scenes which are a little too close to reality for comfort. A clear message surfaces as the film comes to a close, leaving a sour aftertaste. Not an uplifting movie to watch, but ingeniously crafted. Bare in mind that you may want to lay in the sun after surviving this one.