-First let me be clear with this, "La Casa Muda" was not made in one single shot as it's publicized to be... The ending alone which takes place the next day after the events just eliminated that possibility without taken into account all the times the camera goes to black to hide the cuts. Also the film was shot in 5 days so that also rules out that possibility.
Good points about the film:
For all of this I give the film 4 points out of 10
- Second, this was not based on real events. The only part about the film that is based on real events is the fact that two people were found murdered on a house in Uruguay. As much this could be called "Inspired" by real events but what work of art is not, at some extent, inspired by things happening to the writer or something the writer took from reality... Is Silence of the Lambs a film BASED on real events just because the character of Buffalo Bill was inspired by Ed Gain?
- Besides this two points, I needed to be clear on; the film is not very good. It lacks an interesting story, the script is terrible, the actors performs some of the most stupid dialogs I have heard on any film (Example: Would you like to go to Granma's house? she has a canoe that is like a small boat. Do you know what a canoe is?.... YOU JUST FREAKING EXPLAINED WHAT THE FREAKING CANOE IS! Really that like pisses me off so much. Another example: - Where is your dad? - I don't know... YES YOU KNOW, HE IS DEAD, YOU JUST SAY YOU DON'T KNOW BECAUSE OTHERWISE THERE WOULD BE NO REASON TO GO BACK TO THE BLOODY HOUSE!)
- The argument is stretched mindlessly just to make this possibly acceptable short film story into a long feature film (resulting in like half an hour of a woman walking through a house whining)
- There are stupid jump scares like the scene in which, for no good reason, the woman goes to investigate what is over the fridge and some birds came flying out from behind some cans into her face (a variation on the Scary Jumping Cat scene we all know and hate by know)
- Another thing that bothered me was the unnecessary shaky camera. This is not a camera point of view film, is not like we need to understand a character is holding a camera like in REC or Blair Witch Project. Here the camera is not supposed to exist, but the endless movement makes it impossible not to notice the camera. The camera is always present and that took me away from the story all the running time.
- The actress did a moderately good job but was not good enough to hold the film by herself and she is almost alone all the time.
- There are also some conceptual problems that bothered me a lot. In the film one of the main points is the fact that these two old men take young women to have sex into the house and took pictures of those women... Now, when you see the pictures of these women... none of them are naked, the most you would see is women in their bras. Now tell me why this couple of perverted old dirty men would not take pictures of these young women naked... And is not like they show you just a couple of this photos from a distance so you can think "well, this is just a sample" they show you a lot of pictures in great detail and none of this women takes their bras off. Not suggesting a film to be good need to show tits, but is just so off the character of how you are portraying the characters.
Good points about the film:
- Very good camera choreography, besides the shaky aspects of the camera I found all the placements and composition of the shots to be very good and the most interesting part of the film.
- A well though and complete soundtrack.
- Great looking image. It is dark and monotone but it looks pristine. The photographic camera used in this film really marks a great point for independent films with low budget. Other production companies should follow this lead.
- Some effective scenes worked really well, a good example of this was the scene when the woman first gets out of the house and runs into the forest, very good scene in an otherwise mediocre film.
For all of this I give the film 4 points out of 10