Here's another entry into the 'Films to Keep you Awake' series but while its production values and its outgoing approach to one or two themes is very much present, La Culpa is nothing more than a short, sharp way to spend 70 minutes watching a horror film that although is foreboding at times, is nothing particularly special. La Culpa, I find, was written and directed by a Uruguayan man named Narciso Ibáñez Serrador; a man who has been writing and directing for decades so perhaps my reaction to the film being a little 'iffy' is down to a mere off day on the directors behalf.
La Culpa translates into the English for 'Blame' but from memory, I cannot recall any reason for anyone to be 'blamed' for anything and nor can I really recall an underlying theme based on the title to tie in with the film's story and developments. For the record, Blame sees a struggling female nurse named Gloria (Mostaza) and her young daughter Vicky (Lorenzo) move in with a fellow nurse called Ana (de Medina). But there is supposedly more than meets the eye to this person. She has an abortion clinic set up within the walls of the house, the house itself shares a through-door with the next door neighbours and Ana's sexual preferences seem a little ambiguous at best. The trouble is, I think the film liked to think that it had all these ingredients and ideas going for it when really they were merely a series of set ups and let downs to fill up time. In fact, I do not think La Culpa can even be classed as a horror film but a mere urban drama revolving around a financially struggling single mother and her hardships.
Take the abortion clinic for instance as an idea. Yes, abortions are always going to make for uneasy viewing when placed within the boundaries of a film but what do we actually get? Nothing of the frightening quantity. Then there is the door that leads into the adjoining house which for a horror film, is, I suppose a pretty good idea: 'where does this door lead? Why should the character's not go in? What's the knocking from the other side? But the set up and anxiety exists for only a mere scene or two it turns out there is a logical explanation for the door, where it leads and what's the other side of it. Yes, a creepy looking old woman lying in a bed in the room through the door can be perceived as creepy but when the owner of the house shows up and sates that it is someone's bedroom in next doors house, are we really going to be so full of anxiety come the next uncanny set up? I for one was not and this is where La Culpa lost me as a horror film.
This idea continues on into one of the film's later scenes when Gloria approaches a 'creepy' rocking cradle. But by this point we are sort of confused; there is nothing uncanny in this film, right? This is taking place in the real world the house is not haunted and there are no such things as monsters. What is actually in the cradle sums up not only the film's approach but how we react to the foreboding set ups in the sense it's an anticlimax. If anything, Blame borrows from To Let in the same way the film involves a seemingly psychotic landlady, they both centre around a young adult who is either in a crisis due to impending birth or already owns a young child and they both seem to want the ambiguity of their respective locations to generate half the scares for the film. But while To Let's location was actually quite eerie because we had reason to fear what was going on, Blame extinguishes fear and anxiety early on resulting in the later exchanges to become anti-climatic.
But La Culpa deserves credit for its general approach to its subject matter. I think the word 'blame' from the title has something to do with casual sex and unwanted pregnancy. I think the film is some sort of covert morality tale to do with sex before marriage the young girls come into the abortion clinic and we generally get all the nasty, hair tingling build up you'd expect when the abortion is prepared and then followed through and the flushed away. We get the anaesthetic, we get the blood and the talk during the operation with the only thing that is missing being the 'nod' to the females amongst the audience: "You don't want this to be you, do you?" So Blame demonises casual sex which is fair enough if the director is going to make that statement but it does so with a supernatural approach which is something I cannot reckon the thinking behind. Blame is willing to be slower and more sedate in its setting up of the situation. Scenes involving little Vicky and her mother exchanging, being picked up from school, etc. are sweet and everything but then the film is supposed to be scary, isn't it?
La Culpa misses the mark as a horror film but as a vague statement on why kids should wait for marriage before sex I suppose it succeeds; but it does so through telling us how nasty abortions are and the how nasty the procedure is rather than giving us evil looking zombie babies and haunted houses come to think of it, maybe that's a good thing. But if elderly women asleep in beds in rooms you should not enter and characters finding odd looking goo on the floor and leading upstairs sounds scary to you then by all means give La Culpa a go. Since there are explanations for these events, the film fails for me.
La Culpa translates into the English for 'Blame' but from memory, I cannot recall any reason for anyone to be 'blamed' for anything and nor can I really recall an underlying theme based on the title to tie in with the film's story and developments. For the record, Blame sees a struggling female nurse named Gloria (Mostaza) and her young daughter Vicky (Lorenzo) move in with a fellow nurse called Ana (de Medina). But there is supposedly more than meets the eye to this person. She has an abortion clinic set up within the walls of the house, the house itself shares a through-door with the next door neighbours and Ana's sexual preferences seem a little ambiguous at best. The trouble is, I think the film liked to think that it had all these ingredients and ideas going for it when really they were merely a series of set ups and let downs to fill up time. In fact, I do not think La Culpa can even be classed as a horror film but a mere urban drama revolving around a financially struggling single mother and her hardships.
Take the abortion clinic for instance as an idea. Yes, abortions are always going to make for uneasy viewing when placed within the boundaries of a film but what do we actually get? Nothing of the frightening quantity. Then there is the door that leads into the adjoining house which for a horror film, is, I suppose a pretty good idea: 'where does this door lead? Why should the character's not go in? What's the knocking from the other side? But the set up and anxiety exists for only a mere scene or two it turns out there is a logical explanation for the door, where it leads and what's the other side of it. Yes, a creepy looking old woman lying in a bed in the room through the door can be perceived as creepy but when the owner of the house shows up and sates that it is someone's bedroom in next doors house, are we really going to be so full of anxiety come the next uncanny set up? I for one was not and this is where La Culpa lost me as a horror film.
This idea continues on into one of the film's later scenes when Gloria approaches a 'creepy' rocking cradle. But by this point we are sort of confused; there is nothing uncanny in this film, right? This is taking place in the real world the house is not haunted and there are no such things as monsters. What is actually in the cradle sums up not only the film's approach but how we react to the foreboding set ups in the sense it's an anticlimax. If anything, Blame borrows from To Let in the same way the film involves a seemingly psychotic landlady, they both centre around a young adult who is either in a crisis due to impending birth or already owns a young child and they both seem to want the ambiguity of their respective locations to generate half the scares for the film. But while To Let's location was actually quite eerie because we had reason to fear what was going on, Blame extinguishes fear and anxiety early on resulting in the later exchanges to become anti-climatic.
But La Culpa deserves credit for its general approach to its subject matter. I think the word 'blame' from the title has something to do with casual sex and unwanted pregnancy. I think the film is some sort of covert morality tale to do with sex before marriage the young girls come into the abortion clinic and we generally get all the nasty, hair tingling build up you'd expect when the abortion is prepared and then followed through and the flushed away. We get the anaesthetic, we get the blood and the talk during the operation with the only thing that is missing being the 'nod' to the females amongst the audience: "You don't want this to be you, do you?" So Blame demonises casual sex which is fair enough if the director is going to make that statement but it does so with a supernatural approach which is something I cannot reckon the thinking behind. Blame is willing to be slower and more sedate in its setting up of the situation. Scenes involving little Vicky and her mother exchanging, being picked up from school, etc. are sweet and everything but then the film is supposed to be scary, isn't it?
La Culpa misses the mark as a horror film but as a vague statement on why kids should wait for marriage before sex I suppose it succeeds; but it does so through telling us how nasty abortions are and the how nasty the procedure is rather than giving us evil looking zombie babies and haunted houses come to think of it, maybe that's a good thing. But if elderly women asleep in beds in rooms you should not enter and characters finding odd looking goo on the floor and leading upstairs sounds scary to you then by all means give La Culpa a go. Since there are explanations for these events, the film fails for me.