Pan's Labyrinth

Directed by Guillermo del Toro
Written by Guillermo del Toro

Not that i had any to begin with, or even cared if I did or did not, but I am sure I have lost every shred of movie reviewing street cred I could ever have with the following statement: I did not like Pan's Labyrinth. I wanted to like it, and there were things that I did like about it, but if you were sit me down and force me to choose between whether I did or did not like it, I would have to come down firmly on the side of did not like it.

Pan's Labyrinth tells the dual stories of the Spanish resistance against the fascist regime of 1940s Spain, and a fairy story of young Ofelia (Ivana Baquero) called by the mythic Faun/Pan (del Toro alumnus Doug Jones, who had to learn to speak Spanish for the role) to complete three tasks by the next full moon in order to restore her status as princess of the underworld. Surely, you would think that in a movie of this nature the two stories would come together in a satisfying, possibly magic realist way at the end, wouldn't you? Even thematically? Otherwise it would just feel like we're watching two completely separate movies, right?

Most reviews I've read for this film refer to it as "magic realism" - I totally disagree. Magic realism is when forces and figures of magic actually exist in the "world" (diegesis?) of the story, which must always bear a strong resemblance to the world in which the audience exists (hence realism). In Pan's Labyrinth, there is little or no indication that the "magic" exists anywhere outside of Ofelia's imagination. So what we have here is NOT magic realism, it's one story of the "real world" and another story that exists only in somebody's head.

And what's the deal with that story going on inside Ofelia's head? Unless figures like the giant toad and the creepy guy with nostrils instead of eyes (also played by Doug Jones) are archetypal figures from Spanish folklore unknown to me, their placement in the story is completely random. With the story existing in this girl's head, you would think that these figures would have some sort of symbolic or thematic connection to figures or situations in her real life, wouldn't you? Think of Dorothy's fantasy in The Wizard of Oz (another story which is not magic realism). With no connection to life, these figures, these tasks she must perform, are just completely random.

That's how this part of the movie felt to me - just random. Which I suppose it could be argued was the point. Just a story a kid would tell. A rambling, incoherent, make-it-up-as-you-go-along story.

But, the movie had some nice visuals, and much as in del Toro's earlier The Devil's Backbone I found the "real" story far more interesting. Good performances by all; I just wish they had a more coherent story to tell.