Copyright, Sony Pictures Classics

Movie Review
BAD EDUCATION
MPAA Rating: NC-17 for a scene of explicit sexual content

Reviewed by: Dr. Jim O’Neill
CONTRIBUTOR

Extremely Offensive
Moviemaking Quality:
starstar
Primary Audience:
Adults
Genre:
Drama
Length:
1 hr. 49 min.
Year of Release:
2004
USA Release:
______
Featuring: Gael Garcia Bernal, Fele Martinez, Leonor Watling, Francisco Boira, Lluis Homar
Director: Pedro Almodóvar
Producer: Agustin Almodovar, Pedro Almodóvar
Distributor: Sony Pictures Classics
Copyright, Sony Pictures Classics
Copyright, Sony Pictures Classics
Copyright, Sony Pictures Classics
Copyright, Sony Pictures Classics
Relevant Issues

Article on sexual abuse of children

What’s wrong with being gay? Answer

What should be the attitude of the church toward homosexuals and homosexuality? Answer

Paradise or Pain? Why is the world the way it is?

Relationship issues
Learn how to make your love the best it can be. Discover biblical answers to questions about sex, marriage, sexual addictions, and more.

What are the consequences of sexual immorality? Answer

How can I deal with temptations? Answer

Click here to watch THE HOPE on-line!

Do Not Enter

Special note: This rating means no one under 17 can be admitted, but that the film does not contain outright pornography, as defined by the MPAA. The distributor (Sony) had hoped for an R-rating, but was denied it by the MPAA, despite an appeal. We do not normally review NC-17 films, however, the reviewer Dr. O’Neill (M.D.) wished to do so, and the rating was unknown when the arrangements were made. Neither Christian Spotight nor the reviewer recommend this film. It was found to include sex scenes between men. There is also a scene that suggests a priest sexually abuses a boy.

Pedro Almodovar’s “Bad Education” begins with a title sequence reminiscent of the title sequence of Alfred Hitchcock’s 1960 film, “Psycho.” But it’s there that the similarities between the two films end. Despite the vibrant comic-book colors (cherry red Venetian blinds in a room with banana yellow walls — yikes!), and the perfect performances by actors with model-perfect faces, Almodovar’s movie lacks the clarity and directness of Hitchcock’s black and white classic.

Both films deal with the effects of sin. Hitchcock goes to the heart of the matter; Almodovar dances around it. That is why the first film haunts me even today, and why the second one, while it held my interest for awhile, didn’t move me.

Hitchcock understood and conveyed how sin can lead to more sin, and eventually to violence, corruption and death. He also understood that evil often masqueraded as a gentleman with a warm and welcoming face. Almodovar conveys the allure of evil--an undisguised homoeroticism that is on view in all of his movies and comes front and center here--but he has a hard time portraying its effects and its costs.

There’s been a lot of talk in the news lately about officials calling evil a “nuisance.” A nuisance is how Almodovar seems to look at the concept. He lacks the will to face it, the courage to call it what it is, and the resolve to condemn it. He certainly doesn’t let his handsome characters pay a price for it.

The film takes place in Madrid and in other parts of Northern Spain around 1980 (Franco, Spain’s long reigning dictator has been dead just a short time, and Spain is enjoying new political and cultural freedoms). It is the story of two boarding school boys who reunite after they grow up. Ignazio (Gael Garcia Bernal - “The Motorcycle Diaries”) is an actor and screenwriter, and Enrique (Fele Martinez) is a director (I’ve mixed the identities up a bit here in order not to give too much of the plot, which involves some identity changes, away).

Ignazio has written a screenplay which he wants to star in and have Enrique direct. The film would deal with the traumatic experiences and the effects of their education in a Catholic boarding school while under the tutelage of a sexually abusive priest, Father Manolo (Daniel Gimenez-Cacho).

After school, the boys' lives take many turns. One or the other becomes involved in homosexuality, transvestitism, drug addiction, blackmail, identity theft, murder, even fratricide. The mayhem and the mix-ups get confusing, but eventually things clear up in time to let the viewer ponder a shocking crime.

Unfortunately, by then, it’s too late. The suspense has been watered down because there’s not enough clarity in the story. It’s too muddled to evoke true horror. I was only left with a sense of disillusionment.

When Paul wrote to the Romans he spoke about what could happen to a people when they turned from God, and from the plain truths He has shown them…”They become futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened.”

The characters in “Bad Education” wade through streams of bright colors and lofty torch songs and lush Galician landscapes, but underneath those cool waters is a dark and murky bottom. Almodovar shows us the surface currents, but he avoids the depths, and the plain truth about the human soul.

Violence: Moderate / Profanity: Heavy / Sex/Nudity: Extreme


Viewer CommentsSend your comments

Neutral - …It deals with murder, blackmail, stealing, the list goes on & on. Unless you wish to gain a celluloid experience about the unconverted, secular world & the pain & reputed pleasures of the transexual/homosexual/bisexual individual, then you need not spend time with this movie.

It presents amorality, not immorality mind you, as the main character seems not to be able to distinguish between right & wrong, in its perplexing continuum. An odd statement he makes before he gives the pure-heroin to the ex-priest who gives it to the main character’s transexual brother & ultimately causes an overdose, hints at his knowledge of wrong-doing in that he refuses to give the heroin himself to his brother saying, “What do you think I am, a monster!” Though that is the only time he admits wrongdoing. He normally sees both good & evil acts as equally desirable. Herman Hesse’s Demian still exerts its influence all these years later. As when he first thinks to steal his ex-boyfriend’s money, but finding out the man has a wife & child & is broke & unemployed, he instead places money in the sleeping man’s wallet.

The child-molesting priest in the film-within-a film has some kind of conscience as a fellow-priest kills the transexual when he tries to blackmail the priest. He says to the killing priest that God has witnessed this killing. The priest who does the killing replies, yes, but God’s on our side, so it’s forgiven.

Thus this is a very complex & intellectually challenging film for the Christian who is secure in his faith & wishes to gain a painful insight into how the unredeemed live & die — in order to better be able to witness & reach out to such individuals…
My Ratings: [Extremely Offensive/5]
—Raul Batista, age 49