As I sat down with my bowl of popcorn to watch this movie I was entirely convinced that this was going to be nothing but a classic ghost story that leaves you with spine chilling goose bumps and eyes wide awake as you lay down for the night. As the movie played out I was the victim of the horror shivers, nonetheless, I realized that the director was really trying to show a deeper message than that of surviving the night in a poltergeist house. The movie is set with a couple that recently bought the orphanage that Laura, played by Belen Rueda, lived in as a child. As they prepare to have their open house their son Tomas comes up missing. In a desperate struggle to find their son, they find themselves six months later with no child and no leads. As Laura looks for her son, she finds interesting objects and hears mysterious sounds in the orphanage that lead her to believe her son is still alive. Towards the end of the movie, she spends three days alone in her old orphanage to find out the secret to all the mysteries she was revealing. She finds out about a freak accident that took Tomas’s life as well as uncovering a series of murders that took place at the orphanage years earlier. Now, towards the end of the movie, she is taken for a moment to the other side and has the opportunity to either spend eternity with these lost children and her son Tomas, or to go back to live her life as it was without Tomas. Laura chooses to be with her son and the other children. Some would say that this was selfish in her not accepting death, others would debate that it was a form of love and obligation for those children and that it was a form of spiritual progress through sacrificial love. Is the phrase, “ Is it better to have loved and lost, then never to have loved at all”, applied to this, or is it a deeper meaning that shows the reality of life after death and how wonderful it will be?
No comments:
Post a Comment