Order by:

Add your comment

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

Comments 1 - 15 of 21

luclanty's avatar


Had to pause it to try to make that pose with my eyes closed
1 year 11 months ago
phacohen's avatar


This film gave me a familiar feeling. I feel what he felt being a child, being ignorant of the struggles that the grown ups have, what their fears are.. we are so naive when we are kids, and then we become adults too and we start to think about our loved ones and what we saw growing up, we began to be consious and finally understand the deeps of our past days, this film hit home.
1 year 12 months ago
Adrian B AWESOME's avatar


Me 45 minutes in: What exactly is the point of this film? It's shot well, but I just don't get what critics see in it.

Me after credits, having sobbed twice: I completely get it. A masterpiece in every sense of the word.
1 year 11 months ago
frankqb's avatar


Absolutely dripping with stunning photography, like a Fellini film recreated in Mexico, Roma is hard to fault. So many scenes are like a visual symphony with depth of flavour requiring return visits.

Roma's story is tightly tied to its hero, but loosely woven with many holes the audience has to peer through to parse.

With all this, it's hard to fault Roma but it's also hard to say that I love it. It is interesting, it is a wonderful art object, but it is not much of a story. It's slow, it's unfocused in some ways, and much is left for the viewer to think about. Problem is, that most people won't think about it. Most will just call it slow and boring.

Nonetheless, it's hard to fault.

4.5 stars out of 5
1 year 11 months ago
TomServo's avatar


To call it the best Fellini film Fellini never made would be doing a disservice to Cuaron's incredible humanism. Every frame of this film is filled with so much love and empathy, it's one of those films that can accurately be described as a tonic for the times we live in. Like saudade said, it's a masterpiece.
2 years ago
dombrewer's avatar


I very rarely, if ever, leave comments on here any more, but I'm absolutely compelled to do so having read other comments tonight describing this film as "boring", "overrated" and "unfocused".

At a guess these reviewers didn't see the film in the cinema, but easily distracted at home on Netflix... checking text messages, having conversations, pausing for comfort breaks. And that's why the Netflix producing model is a travesty of film-making. If you didn't experience the film in the sharpest definition, filling your whole vision, and heard the 360 degree sound design as it was made to be presented then you didn't really see or hear this film.

The gradual build of the opening hour allows you to care for the characters by stealth, you grow to love Cleo and the children as they unquestionably love each other, and by the time of the earthquake, student uprising, hospital, restaurant table and beach scenes you'd need a heart of stone not to be gripped, scared or heartbroken. This is cinema as pure empathy and compassion, a heartfelt love letter and an evocation of childhood both intensely personal and universal.

Just magnificent work, and worthy of every award coming its way.
1 year 11 months ago
Siskoid's avatar


According to Alfonso Cuarón, Roma is 90% pulled from his memories, so presumably, he's one of the kids in the film, probably the youngest boy who has the closest relationship to Cleo, the family's maid and nanny who is the subject of the film. The black and white cinematography is absolutely gorgeous, and Cuarón favors wide shots and slow pans that, when combined to the lack of score, presents events without judgement, emotional ambiguities abound. How are we supposed to feel about Cleo and her role in the family? Obviously, the film is meant as a love letter to someone real, but I think also an examination of something darker about the child/family-nanny dynamic in a context where it's understood Mexico is as racially divided as the U.S. is, and Cleo is a member of the underclass. I think it's extremely poignant that the family has a dog no white person really interacts with, matching their obliviousness to Cleo's drama as opposed to their own. The switch between "we love you" and "fetch me this" is automatic and thoughtless. It's the servant as echo of slavery, and holding the role of "beloved pet". Dogs are everywhere in Mexico - a common remark - and Cuarón somehow uses this over and over to create this effect. Despite the slow and stark presentation, he nevertheless pulls some directorial tricks, mostly to create portentous heralds, bad omens, of tragedies to come, and yet can just let scenes play out in single shots - I'm thinking of a couple of harrowing ones specifically - using a lot of non-actors (including the lead) without any of the awkwardness that sometimes entails. This is one of those films that has so much to unpack, it could become a standard essay topic in film history classes.
1 year 10 months ago
saudade's avatar


2 years 2 months ago
Agrimorfee's avatar


It's been a long time since I've seen a movie where the director (and cinematographer) has such complete control of the mise en scene. This is where the movie excels more than anything. It is breathtaking. But, yeah, I wonder what we can come away with regarding Cleo.
1 year 11 months ago
goldan's avatar


It is a nice movie that made me think about what my life is about, whether I made wrong turns or not, and so forth. It's good if a movie makes you think like that. Some movies just blow your mind (like Fight Club), and this movie is more calm and slow, even though it provokes emotions too.
I found the following topics/ideas in the movie:
1. Life of the rich vs life of the poor. spoiler.
2. Some things are common regardless of wealth. spoiler
3. spoiler

The movie doesn't have any pathos. It just portrays real life. And it does that beautifully.
1 year 10 months ago
Fastkit's avatar


What a fantastic film! Best cinematography 2018
1 year 11 months ago
GrooveRemote's avatar


I want to be very diligent in how I present my case, because the very last thing I want is to be lumped in with those calling Roma, as dombrewer said, "unfocused." That kind of complaint is one that totally misses the whole point of the movie. I'm going to try to explain, as clearly as I can, why I admire Roma more than I really like it.

On the surface, Roma is a movie about a nanny in 1970s Mexico (Mexico City, to be more precise). Peel back that logline, and you find an articulately-crafted analysis of social class. Cleo, the aforementioned nanny, works for an affluent family in the aforementioned capital of Mexico. She cares for the four children of a largely absent father; a doctor who may have more pressing interests than the life of a family man. She's a very quiet woman, with a mind surrounded by no apparent walls, but no clear entrances either. She's an enigma in a very understated way. In this film she goes through a whole lot of hardship, but she's unique in that she's not terribly emotive. Cleo has a rock-solid foundation. She's like a great boulder in a howling storm. She is touched by everything around her, but never budged.

The areas of the film that seem to be the most beloved are the technical ones. The cinematography is magnificent in its subdued beauty. Every shot could be hanging in an art gallery (even the ones with crystal-clear full-frontal nudity). It suits the film perfectly and is a true achievement for Cuaron. The production and sound design are also very commendable, though I get the sense that the latter would be more greatly appreciated in a theatre, and this brings me to my first big caveat: I watched Roma on a laptop and, based on everything I've heard from people who watched it the same way vs. those who had the opportunity to watch in on the big screen, it's not the same thing. Make no mistake, I like Roma, but a lot of the technical finesse is lost in a more casual setting. The curse of the film is that more people will see it when it's a Netflix release, but fewer people will be able to really appreciate it. I'm sadly one of many (yes, yes, the pity party is in full swing), and I do wonder how much more I would have liked Roma if I had seen it in a theatre.

My other caveat is that, while the film's screenplay is a very nuanced take on social class that aligns quite nicely with my personal attitudes, and a soothing mediation on life itself, it just did not connect. There was an absent X factor; a spark to light a fire for Roma in my heart. On a purely human level I felt for Cleo, and I felt for her employer Sofia (played to a well-deserved Oscar nom by Marina de Tavira), but beyond that I simply didn't care what happened. It reminded me of My Neighbor Totoro, a film that legions of people relate to in very meaningful ways that didn't inspire any of the same emotions in me. I wish I could say otherwise, I really do, because the response to Roma I see from so many is touching, and I hate the sensation of seeing everyone around me touched and being left in the cold. In some small way I do fear judgement from my peers; being labeled as a stick in the mud or a cold snob. I don't want to be labeled for my views by people who don't even take the opportunity to understand them, which is why I want to be as delicate as I can be in this situation. I do not want to be thought of as someone who doesn't "get" Roma, because I think I do. I think I get Roma as much as I have the capacity to (which, for all intensive purposes, might not be much. I really don't know).

But, again, woe is me. What the hell do I have to complain about? I might get some downvotes on a freakin' movie checking website? I'm the first to admit that it's no dire plight. I just want to request one thing, and that's for anyone reading this to hear me out. I'm not crapping on Roma. It's not sugarcoating for me to say I like the movie. It just didn't work for me in the spectacular way it did for a lot of others. It's a complex film that deserves to be seen and accepted for what it is, not for what we may want it to be.

6/10 most overrated movie ever!!! The critics must be crazy!!!
1 year 9 months ago
heat_'s avatar


This is Alfonso. Alfonso makes a movie. Alfonso shows a lot. Alfonso shows in his own aesthetic style. Alfonso is a first class director. Be like Alfonso.
1 year 11 months ago
elcid's avatar


Like the planes we see in background, I found this film distant and cold.
1 year 8 months ago
satisfythecrave's avatar


It would have been nice if we had any insight into how Cleo, our protagonist, was feeling. Or what she thought. OR if she had a personality. OR if she had a voice.

Like, there are Pieter Bruegel-like scenarios happening in the background, in front of Cleo's eyes...she's watching humongous, tragic events unfold, but how does she feel?? Why is she impenetrable to the audience??????? Why is the episodic structure of the film FORCING us to move on so quickly???????
1 year 11 months ago

Showing items 1 – 15 of 21

View comments