Lakme Products Indian Price

1968. Rodrigo Cortés. 2007

Martin is a young Argentine who lives and works in Spain for years. Is Professor of Economic History at the University, and "fortunately", after participating in a televised competition wins the largest prize in history, three million in assets.

With this basic approach, the film starts Rodrigo Cortez, a thirty-long rookie, who dares to make a very personal film for what is meant here by debut. Before that, a few short I guarantee ( Within , 15 days, The Callao 150 meters).

The film itself has of actor Leonardo Sbaraglia complete, and a small supporting cast among them a Chete Lera and Fernando Cayo proud in their histrionic roles.

Technically, the film is a somersault with twist included. Anything. There are moments when music and the camera refer to Guy Ritchie in Snatch , other planes remember moments Fincher in Fight Club , and even the latter's pedantry when the character stops talking to the camera, instructing the viewer. Cortes

allows even parody The Seventh Seal Bergman of applying moral examples, in the end, reload the film. But it is something we should forgive. Going

theme of the movie, there's talk of money, luck and the lack thereof. Of how an ordinary man, as anyone who aspires to be rich and live well, that privilege is given misleading and that it leads to an irreversible downward spiral of mistakes and failures, to a destruction told from the first frame.

In the middle is a debate that constantly shows the viewer, in which the characters turn and talk to the camera, and the economic system of slavery.

banking as perfect idea for shared debt and the establishment of the false belief in a money that does not exist and never has been, is what we are told that spins the wheel of the socioeconomic system in which we live.

and criticism arises from the negligence. The false belief that democracy is the least bad of systems, and that if what we have now is because the most exalted minds throughout the history of humanity, is what has given valid. And it may perhaps not be so. Because

impersonal system which provides debt with the system itself and not with a group of people, a being, or something tangible, is a perverse and immoral for the individual. And the worst thing that arises from tacit acceptance of the mass, which provides for their happiness in consumption patterns.

why the film, despite technically being pedantic and cumbersome, and tell a story that, after all can be a simple story about something that never before had anyone dared to speak so shamelessly, that there something wrong.

Martin, in a moment of the film, explains that among the poor and the rich the difference is because the poor believe that money makes happiness, and instead the rich, they know that Money makes happiness.

And not without reason.

Rating: 7