Unlike Rashomon, I didn't get the feeling that the three stories were telling different versions of the truth. Instead, I thought that each story was a refusal by first Lola and then Manni to let their lives end without their questions being answered. Both of them weren't totally satisfied in the relationship--in Lola's story she was unsure of Manni's love (or at least the absolute truth of it) and in Manni's story he was doubtful that Lola loved him enough to be of lasting impact on her life. I really liked this bit--what kind of person do you have to be, what niche do you have to fill in somebody's life to matter in the big scheme of things? Over a span of a lifetime, who matters? The people you love? The people who love you?
away
I'm having trouble pinning down "truth" in Lola. Is truth something that happens by chance, as events happen by chance? Is truth irrelevant, because the domino effect is random?
Also, what's with Lola's screaming? Not to say that all of us wouldn't mind screaming in frustration sometimes...but for Lola, when she screams, things happen in her favor.
Red symbolism? Lola's hair, the first bag, the phone...
I also really liked the fact that Manni and Lola's criminal actions weren't judged by the movie, but left up to us to decipher. Did the third story work out in their favor because Lola won the money fairly and because Manni took the money without violence from the homeless man? The nuns and the story of the woman (who in one story had her child taken and in another won the lottery) who became religious brings the question of religious crime and punishment into play.
No comments:
Post a Comment