Watch Intacto For Free

hyped garbage

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

I think that this is meant to be a meditation on fate couched in a fantasy about luck. This movie asks you to follow a tale about some people who are preternaturally lucky and about one person in particular, Sam, who is the supreme being of the lucky. Sam is so lucky that he survives many games of roulette where he gives a challenger first crack at shooting him with a six-shooter having only one empty chamber. Even if Sam has survived ten of these challenges, his odds of survival are about ten million to one. So, you have to take the premise with a grain of salt and try to just go with it. The movie is structured like reporting on a sporting event where the players bet on their luck to survive events like crossing a busy highway blindfolded, or running blindfolded through a dense forest. Those who make in through these trials intact ultimately get to face Sam and his roulette game--kind of like getting to the World Series of the lucky people. In addition there are some mystical elements thrown in, like Sam's being able to suck the luck out of someone by touching them, as if luck were a commodity of exchange. Then there are some musings on how an apparently lucky event may turn out poorly in the long run. The story was too much of an abstraction to seriously engage me.On the upside director Fresnadillo has style. Many scenes have you on the edge of your seat, like the scene that has the blindfolded men racing through the dense forest with their being sequentially taken out by hitting a tree at a dead run. Or there is a car accident that is the most chilling and realistic I have scene. And it is impossible not to flinch when someone fires in a game of roulette, as those who watched "The Deer Hunter" will attest. The story is filmed in an intricate style that interleaves the lives of four protagonists, both in real time and in flashbacks. This style works for me when everything comes together in a revelatory climax. While everything did come together in the end, I found it to be more of an anti-climax than a grand climax. The actors do well enough, but this in not the kind of movie that depends much on strong dramatic performances. As Sam, Max von Sydow is pretty much wasted, except he is good at projecting a world-weary sadness.This is the only Fresnadillo film I have seen; I am hoping he can apply his talents to better stories.

An stylish original and intriguing Spanish film that will keep you entertained with your mouth open in a shaped O and your forehead frowned.It is a story of some gifted and sickening lucky people who gamble for luck (not for money) to get even luckier and win a competition to meet and have a duel against the luckiest of them all, the only survivor of a Nazi concentration camp, who owns a casino in a deserted place in the Canaries.Some of the ideas of the film are really original and brilliantly filmed, and that's a lot to say nowadays, when the same stories are repeated to the infinite. The scene of the race in the forest by blindfolded runners is just fantastic, so thrilling, crazy and engaging. However, every single gamble game is original in its conception and filmic realization. The movie has the mood that some experimental Spanish and European movies of the 1970s, but it is, above all, a film noir with an original plot.Leonardo Sbaraglia (as a forced and naive "believer" Tomas), Eusebio Poncela (as the unscrupulous and vengeful Federico), Antonio Dechent (as the playful and down to earth retired bullfighter), and a superb Max Von Sidow as the sad and cold "mother of all lucks" are terrific in their respective and devious roles. However, I found Monica Lopez unconvincing in her role, and this somewhat weighed down the film.Although I liked the very last scene, I thought that it wasn't appropriate, as it was too generic and inconclusive, while, minutes before, the movie had had a clear closure.

i wish i did not watch it, so that i can re-watch it like the first time with the same feeling i got,so are you, if you have not watched it yet, its a great opportunity for you to see one of a great examples of how could anybody shot a beautiful film like that without making big or even small expenses.The film is about some very lucky guys saving their ass out of some big troubles, crashes, accidents and about their own competition between themselves to find who's the luckier one, and this luckier then goes to face off the luckiest one... The film is superb from the start till the end if you like the story as the most important matter in a film more than any other, no need to comment more, watch it.

While it's no chore to get the premise of this film at the start, certain people can take the "luck" of others, there's several points in the first half-hour that are muddled and may cause viewers to wonder who's who and what are they in the film for. If you are adept enough to get beyond that, all will become apparent and the film will be very satisfying. Of course the premise is so absurd that a great suspension of belief will be needed, but this is no more absurd than any really good fright flick, and most weird sci-fi. It is a quasi-fantasy thriller that sets itself up as a realistic drama with elements of the fantastic, but nothing terribly bizarre so that we then view it as completely realistic. Not an easy thing to do with a subject matter that could have become laughable. There are enough points of departure from the idea that luck is destiny so to give control to the participants of the games of luck. Now what about the possibility of getting the bad luck as well as the good? But that's a premise for a different film.