Los ojos de Julia (2010) Reviews

• Walking in the dark

  DogFilmCritic2015-05-04

  The Spanish horror cinema is one of the big surprises of recent years. The orphanage, and less-in measure-REC REC 2 showed signs of the vitality of a genre that scares when it comes forward with a Spanish accent. Julia's Eyes is a psychological thriller where a woman who is going blind in the middle of her job has the sensation that she is being strangled after that she shortly receives news that her sister who is already blind due to both having a genetic illness they both share, committed suicide (the myth that twins,can feel when something happens to his/her sibling at the same time)which is never brought again in the film,Julia who knew her sister pretty well knows that it wasn't a suicide but murder instead. This is an excellent hook for a thriller that, relatively speaking, could be related more with old mysteries of Alfred Hitchcock or the early films of Dario Argento.In fact it would not be unusual for Alone in the Dark (1967), Terrence Young film with Audrey Hepburn would have represented some influence in this story, as they have some points in common. The tension in the film is produced by great acting specially from Belen Rueda, the strong band and effectiveness of the sound effects,angle shots framing( there's a brilliant technique in the middle of the film that gives an idea on how a blind person interacts with someone that they can not see), photography, and the locations. it has some minor flaws in the plot but above all its a terrific film to enjoy

• average

  chomiqu2011-11-28

  Let me start with the GOOD POINTS: 1) Good leading actors who acted naturally and were credible. Although I felt that the too much focus was givem to the actress's cleavage. She is a beautiful woman. There s no need to get viewer's attention to something else than her face. 2) Nice, dark atmosphere and surroundings. 3) Feeling of desperation, fear - needed in horror. BAD: 1) The ending. Too much of a coincidence and twists (blind neighbour's secret - why would she do that, mother-son situation) 2) Mystery man who followed her (Why would he do that? Especially as he couldn't know she was going blind at first) 3) Affair thing - very unconvincing for me 4) Her husband's suicide - not exactly explained. How could this thin man hang him? If it was him? Or why would her husband kill himself? Out of guilt? I don't get that. 5) Lea girl and her weird behavior. Couldn;t she warn Julia just after she went out of her father's house. Why wait and braek into somebody's house? So, not exactly a good movie, although seems so at the beginning.

• Surprisingly good!

  rowiko2011-02-12

  I watched this movie on the plane the other day, trying to find something to keep me awake (as sleep on an airplane never leaves you rested, but merely with a stiff body). What I saw was, however - to my positive surprise - much more than just something to pass time, as I actually enjoyed it a lot. I find the plot quite fascinating and very original, and it has, with its unpredictability, more than just a few surprises in store. Granted, there are a few inconsistencies with the storyline, but I didn't see them as a big problem, as the movie, as a whole, works. All in all, a really good horror thriller, which keeps you guessing till the very end.

• Original idea with conventional pitfalls.

  rhill-272010-09-12

  I watched the Julia's Eyes world premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival a couple of days ago, and I have to say that although I was entertained, it did fall short of my expectations. Seeing how the film was produced by Guillermo del Toro, I was really hoping for a horror/thriller on par with Pans Labyrinth or The Orphanage. Julia's Eyes does have an original idea at its core and that's what keeps you guessing and entertained through the duration of the film. Unfortunately the film does fall into some cliché horror jump scares and the plot does not completely come together. It feels as though the filmmaker started with a great idea but wasn't fully able to pull it all together cohesively in the end. I want to keep this review spoiler free so I'm not going to get into any plot details, but suffice to say that the antagonist's plot line does not come to a rewarding conclusion. That said, I think there is a lot to like here, the acting is great, some wholly original ideas are explored and there is enough tense and truly scary scenes to keep most horror/thriller fans happy. Julia's Eyes is a film I enjoyed on the whole and I think people should seek out.

• Entertaining, but not totally satisfactory

  Argemaluco2011-03-18

  Foremost, I am going to allow myself the indulgent whim of an editorial comment in order to express my disgust for the phrase: "(insert the name of a famous director) presents". In many movies (specially, from the fantastic genre, and even more specially when they were made by unknown directors), we have seen that tricky phrase before the title, like announcing the fact that a famous director was responsible for the film we are about to see. I perfectly understand the commercial utility from that ruse; and I imagine that many young and unknown directors can tolerate the humiliation of the semi-anonymity in exchange of the economical potential which represents the "approval" from a famous director. But even like that, I still think that that is a cheap trick which, above all things, has the "accidental" consequence of fooling to the spectators. I do not know about you, but I know many people who still think that The Nightmare Before Christmas was directed by Tim Burton, or that Guillermo del Toro directed El Orfanato, or that Hostel was directed by Quentin Tarantino. Is that an important problem? I guess it is not. That may not even reach the "problem" category. And I really do not have any solution or suggestion in order to solve the situation. After all, that is another necessary evil from marketing in order to attract more people to the cinema, or to sell more DVDs. But still, that is not enough for me to like it. End of the editorial comment. I had been thinking all that because Los Ojos de Julia is another film "presented" by a famous director, in this case, the previously mentioned del Toro. I highly doubt the fact that he had a real influence in the making of this film, but his name prominently appears in this film's publicity. Anyway, I think that that simultaneously is an advantage and a disadvantage, because even though that may make more people to see this film, many of them might expect one of the many supernatural fantasies full of special effects that that director uses to make, when the truth is that Los Ojos de Julia is a thriller with slight supernatural touches which may result too modest to the people who might expected to see Hellboy 3 or Pan's Labyrinth 2. I liked the first half from Los Ojos de Julia very much. The screenplay raises a fascinating and unpredictable mystery, which genuinely kept me in suspense during that while, because it was impossible for me to predict where the story was going. The previously mentioned "supernatural touches" are very well achieved, and they never reach the tiring extremes of "ghost woman with a long black hair" or "vengeful spirit from the past". In fact, there are various elements in order for us to doubt about the existence of supernatural factors in the story, because Guillem Morales' direction keeps on that thin line between the realism and the fantasy, with a lot of atmosphere but at the same time "real". However, all that does not avoid Los Ojos de Julia from having some clichés, from the chases through dark underground corridors which seem ten times longer of the building they are in, to the mysterious old man who warns the main character on the danger she runs if she keeps investigating, without forgetting about the unbelievers policemen who do not take the desperate theories from the main character seriously. Speaking of which, Belén Rueda makes an excellent work on her dual role of Sara and Julia (even though she only appears as Sara for a few minutes). Her performance is even more appreciated during the second half of the movie, when the tense initial narrative starts to crumble with a sudden twist to the melodrama, anchoring the movie into a much more predictable and conventional formula, which we have already seen in too many North American movies. Fortunately, that did not avoid Rueda from keeping the necessary energy and conviction in order to make that second half entertaining and lead us to an appropriate, but somewhat corny, ending. Anyway, I think it is a shame the fact that Los Ojos de Julia betrayed its excellent first half with a poor second one, but it still has enough positive elements to recommend it, like Rueda's performance, the good atmosphere and the fact that it is entertaining.