Amores Perros

arguably inarritu's most thoughtfull work but where i struggle to understand his line of thinking is in that...well what does it say?

it WANTS to put its best foot foward and blur the line between animal and man but the film doesn't recognize what constitutes as animal behavior and human behavior. to me animal behavior is just like any other creature, there are good and bad but mostly those bad things are nurtured into or a defense mechanism. so where amores perros and it fails to portray that is in the fact that for one, its characters are all rather unlikeable, and you don't need likeable characters and i recognize the film wants to seek the horrid in society but to me its never that mean and only portrays vague ideas of that. Like the way nurture plays for human, its never interesting nor portrayed beyond what you'd expect from a b grade drama flick about crime.

animal and people are put against eachother alike but there is no greater force present in case of the people and its just....themselves, the animals are fighting because of the people so....who is controlling the people in this? the homeless man who turns out to be someone else? i mean sure he is a important character and is shown to be just as bad but he isn't shown to be in a powerfull position so it makes me all the more confused. i think more so then any other inarritu film is his most earnest work yet its the one that also fails the hardest for me.
it tries to go big, it uses multiple perspectives in its story yet those perspectives are from 1 dimensional characters that are well performed yet lack nuance to me.

and just like another recent watch, a girl with the dragon tattoo, its partial commentary on violence against woman remains shallow by the lack of time and dialogue given TO the woman.