Hi Roy, I liked your thoughts on the movie, though I’m not sure I find it as light as you describe it, and I’m saying this thinking of the last scene – SPOILER ALERT (better stop reading now if you haven’t seen the movie yet) -  of Vicky and Christina going back home with their sad faces: one with her chronic dissatisfaction, and the other going to live her girl’s dream- married to a good looking successful husband who loves her, a beautiful house with a pool and a tennis court and friends that are like them, and realizing now how little this is worth. The supposed beautiful end of her fairy tale is nothing more than a golden cage for the poor little bird (like the bird Doug thought of offering Judy and Marc, the one he wishes to have at home). I feel this is very much an older man’s movie for whom it’s important to teach us, to show us the danger and traps we so easily fall to in our lives as young people. The danger for women, of loving so much their image in the world that they are actually ready to sacrifice the most important things for it- their own life and happiness.

It’s nice the way he juxtaposes the materialist world with its skyscrapers (Doug talking on the phone with the Starbucks coffee, proposing to get married immediately to Vicky), the uninteresting talks about houses, internet, inside decorators, golf and so on with the “friends” of Doug and Vicky to the organic world of Barcelona - which is alive and meaningful through its architecture and through the culture that one finds there, the music evenings outside (also as part of nature), also the Spanish language is only used to express passion and deep feelings.

Don’t you find that most people’s choices in life are a complete mystery? The scene where Vicky is lightly hurt by the gun clearly demonstrates that choosing the other life is dangerous, but isn’t it worth taking this risk?

Having viewed the movie just recently and parting from a girlfriend just recently too I found the film very easy to relate to.

You mentioned the ending of the movie, so I’d like to highlight the opening where the narrator presents two women that are very similar in their views on life, beside one thing – their preferences in relationships. As I prefer directness and simplicity (even in art!), I thought it was a very good opening (and non-typical to Allen (-: ).

I too thought the movie was not a light one although it was definitely wrapped in a light air (indeed to reflect youth and its un-awareness). My interpretation of the movie was that when we select a partner we have two choices (of course we eventually encounter some sort of mixture of the two). The first is to select a person which relates strongly to our passions. Unfortunately that person will often also relate to our difficulties. So for example, I would relate easily to someone who is over sensitive but it would also be difficult for me to live with such a person. The second is to select a person which is not so exciting for us, but is an easy smooth match, which we will probably learn to love as time goes by. Of course the first selection would better relate to someone that tends to be more romantic but also in chronic dissatisfaction, since facing difficulties heads on is not an easy game for all. The second selection is un-romantic and might even require that you let a small part of you to die, but it would seem to lead to a better life.

Of course Allen can’t make that choice for you, so he ends the movie showing the two women and what their choices would lead them to do, not really saying what is better, only displaying a mirror.

I saw this movie recently on an airplane, so there are two disclaimers -- I missed the very beginning, and I'm sure it was the censored version. Still, I wanted to reply. I liked it a lot though I certainly found it fairly serious (and a fairly serious indictment of the way women often act in the world). "Loving so much their image in the world" says it nicely. I might say more cynically, identifying themselves almost completely with their image or with the narrative of how their lives will go. Both Vicky and Cristina (photographer) do this, following stories which are not ultimately about themselves as specific people, but rather generic, about ideas. The voiceover was nice in this respect. It really was a wonderful and simple illustration of the ways in which people narrativize their lives to themselves, and you get to feel the interesting effect it has on your relation to the events. A nice mixing of film and writing.

Ram, I think I would say the issue is not someone who relates to our passions versus someone stable, but rather how to strike a balance between one's inside and outside, one's very specific personality/gut reactions/desires and one's existence as a person in society, taking on a certain role. The film shows us each side alone, in many different ways (remember e.g. the father who won't give the world the satisfaction of seeing his poetry). The instincts without critical distance are blind and often (self-)destructive, but too much detachment is so arbitrary as to make things meaningless.

How to find someone (a person, a vocation) who touches your inside and outside? Who both loves you for what is completely unique to you and also allows you to take a certain social place, to live/write a certain story, a meaningful autobiography in a language others can understand.

For the cynics among us: post.  :-)