1/5 Waste of time...
  by Pipo The Book Worm (los angeles, ca United States)
Imagining Argentina is, simply put, a poorly crafted film.
I have not read the novel on which it is based but being familiar with the subject matter makes me furious about the lack of substance with which the story has been treated. There is a sheer absence of research, which constitutes clear proof of negligence as there is plenty of material available to learn about it. The film also fails on all levels on the very basics of film-making. We never get to know the characters -therefore we don't really care about them- and the little we see is basically a contrived commonplace of mellow idealists. We see the military as just a bunch of perverted Nazis with refined, obscure fixations, when the truth is that they were extremely well organized and coordinated in their systematic goals of control and extermination. The director fails to tell the most basic aspects of the story, relying instead on silly, melodramatic details [such as a shoe] and confusing, tourist-inspired scenes in which you see a Brazilianesque carnival, tango dancers, and gauchos all living happily together in La Boca. Nothing farther from the truth.
In short, don't waste your time watching this parody of a film.
If you are interested in learning about the tragic events that happened in South America 30 years ago, I recommend watching 'The Official Story' and 'Missing'.

2/5 If Stephen King had been born in South America....
  by The JuRK (Our Vast, Cultural Desert)
I really feel hesitant about giving this movie a poor review because it's very well-made and everyone in it is excellent...but it doesn't work. I agree with the other review that criticizes the film for trivializing the sad horrors of South America by playing them out in a movie about a psychic. The 1982 film MISSING with Jack Lemmon and DEATH & THE MAIDEN with Sigourney Weaver touch on the same topic and do a better job of handling it.
You almost feel guilty for watching a form of entertainment about a dark and despicable part of history.

Watching IMAGINING ARGENTINA is kind of like watching THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION if that film had included numerous brutal prison gang rapes.

4/5 Symbolical political drama
  by Starfire (Austin, TX)
Mix one part magical realism with two parts government corruption and a heavy dose of good acting and you've basically got the idea for this unflinching portrayal of the Videl dictatorship in Argentina in the 1970s. I admit I am not altogether familiar with the history behind this story but this film, under the assumption that it is portrayed somewhat correctly, gave me a fairly good idea of what happened. However, it is not entirely heavy on the political realm for much symbolism is used throughout. Indeed, the political backstory is almost put on the back-burner in favor of the more dramatically-pleasing plot of finding missing family members.

Antonio Banderas proves that he can actually act and gives a fine performance (if at time slightly cheesy). Emma Thompson is, as always, brilliant in a surprising South American accent which she does very well. The film is emotionally charged throughout, especially the last shot. It's a good thing the writers didn't opt for a happy-everyone-returns-safely-ending (cough*War of the Worlds*cough).

I can't think why this movie was so badly received at the Venice Film Festival where it was first premiered. The plot moves slowly at times (are all those 'garden' scenes really necessary?) but otherwise I found the plot quite tightly-knit with the appropriate symbols reappearing in the correct places. The major asset to the film, however, is the performances of the two lead actors. The supporting cast is slightly weak, though passable.

All in all, a recommended film, especially if you are a fan of either Banderas or Thompson.

note: The DVD is woefully bereft of extras.

4/5 We Must Use Imagination To Find Our Humanity
  by No Stone Left Unturned (Michigan, USA)
A fine movie about true events,adapted from a book,and yes, very brutal. Nothing is spared as the viewer relives this horrific era in Argentinian history. Although at the beginning I thought this movie was kind of choppy and uneven, as it progressed I was drawn in completely by the characters, the story and their suffering, and believe the director could have been using this intentionally to put the viewer off balance. A part of this movie's beauty- it feels real, like one is there with them. I really felt I was there with these people, and Carlos relationship with his daughter, wife, and friends were well portrayed. No one was doing the typical phony overemoting hysterics, which drowns out real emotion, (which was very evident). Banderas was very convincing with just his eyes, and his soft spoken ways. People in the movie make some bad decisions, there is confusion, and one can feel them floundering to find a way to fight back. I thought to myself, geez, I would be fleeing the country! Yet, history shows people do not generally flee, but, endure. Carlos clairvoyance( I thought he conveyed well his clumsiness of being new to that gift, and as is often the case with clairvoyance,the Seer cannot always use it for their own gain or turn it off and on at will), the growing numbers of the "disappeared", the flashes of memory of happy lives, the symbolism of the birds- by the end one is unsure of reality- until the very moment of the ending- which brings back hope, love and yes, imagination. Genocide and torture are never easy to watch. We need to all imagine Peace. Change all the bad endings in the world story. Now. Imagine Peace.

2/5 Disappearance in Argentina: Unnesesarry Plot Devices Spoil the Impact of the Historical Truths
  by Tsuyoshi (Kyoto, Japan)
Christopher Hampton adapted and directed Lawrence Thornton's novel of the same title, and the film stars Antonio Banderas and Emma Thompson. The theme of the film is very serious, for it deals with the historical fact in Argentina during the late 70s and early 80s, the time of dictatorship when, as the film says, as many as 30,000 people disappeared without trace.

The film starts with such a `disappearance of one journalist in Argentina. Cecilia (Emma Thompson) is suddenly taken away, and her husband and stage director for kids Carlos cannot find a single trace of her. Around him, many similar cases had happened, but Carlos never dreamed that it could happen to Cecilia.

However ... now, here is the point that divides the opinions, but we are told that Carlos has a certain kind of gift - clairvoyance. He is surprised to find (as much as we would do) that he can see things. Tell Carlos the name and the place of the ones who have vanished, and he can 'see' what happened to them. In fact, he can sometimes tell you what will happen to them, and while Carlos searches his missing wife, his strange psychic-like ability starts to attract people as well as the government.

[MAGIC REALISM?] Perhaps Antonio Banderas himself would explain, if asked about Carlos's unique ability, that it is based on the idea often associated with South American literature, the tradition of magic realism. I know the idea, and that works on paper (and in books), but when I see the acting of Banderas in thick beard grimacing at table, I just don't buy the idea simply because his acting is too bad to sustain the heavy weight of the truths about the victims of the brutal violence done by the dictators. And tell me, please, if he can predict the future events, why didn't he think of hiding his own daughter, most sensible thing that even I can think of without supernatural power.

Emma Thompson is much better, but when Christopher Hampton mixes many things with the serious social issue so carelessly that `Imagining Argentina' defeats its purpose in the end. There is a message Carlos proudly says -- that is, no violence can kill the imagination of people, but the film's graphic torture scenes suggest otherwise. The symbolism about birds, or the spiritual `guidance' by an owl, could be interesting if the film had presented them with more sophisticated hand. Christopher Hampton (who adapted `Dangerous Liaisons' for screen in 1988) is a good writer but not a great director, and his heavy-handed direction only leaves us bemused when Banderas' Carlos is literally (yes, literally) led by the birds to the place where he should go.

And this is about the worst period of this country, which many people must still vividly remember. I do not disagree with the film's violence, which I believe is tamed for the general audiences. I am not against the use of supernatural concept as long as it shows the pains of the people who suffered. But `Imagining Argentina' does them so clumsily and heavy-handedly, with unnecessary flashbacks (about the happy lovers by the seaside, for example); the Great-Escape-like action that has no meaning, and these plot devices all look merely weak and cumbersome before the cruel and shocking historical fact. I admit the film's intention is laudable, but clairvoyance is not the way to tell this story, not the right way to confront the hard reality.