Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Humbersi The first must-see film of the year.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

groggo This ridiculously contrived movie sprawls over almost two hours when it's essentially a 50-minute flick at best, and 'best' is not a good adjective to use in the company of this clunker, which bills itself as a 'comedy'. There might be about two laughs in the entire movie, and they're unintentional. It's also rated 'R' for alleged sexual content, which consists, as far as I could tell, of fleeting scenes of decidedly UNerotic strippers doing what strippers are supposed to do. Other than this questionable titillation, there is no sex in this movie at all. Take away the brief nudity of the strippers, and this is easily a PG flick acceptable for 11 years and younger (they might be the only ones who would enjoy it).To try to explain the 'plot' of this movie would be futile: there IS a plot (more or less), but it suffocates under a flurry of red herrings, laborious dialogue and truly forced contrivances. Living It Up (La Gran Vida) is so dumb that I, for one, am left with only one conclusion: it started with what seemed like a good idea, and it went downhill from there. I think a committee was brought in to work on the script, and each member of the committee had a different idea of how the 'story' (you should excuse the expression) should unfold. That's how the movie presents itself: a whacking dog's breakfast of confusion. The viewer is left in befuddled head-scratching throughout. I kept asking the screen: 'what in the name of God is going on here?'Salma Hayek is just too ultra-glamorous to be taken seriously as a smart-mouthed member of the lumpen proletariat, which we are somehow expected to believe here. She plays a waitress, but she really isn't a waitress. Carmelo Gomez is a gormless would-be suicide who becomes a jet-setting millionaire, but he really isn't a jet-setting millionaire. Tito Valverde is an agent of the Spanish Mafia who 'arranges' for Gomez to live life to the fullest, except he's really not an agent of the Spanish Mafia.You learn all these things in one of the sloppiest, most awkward and self-conscious denouements I have seen in a long time. The 'explanation' is just plain silly, but, of course, don't ya know, everyone lives happily ever after. Columbia-Tristar distributed this bomb with fanfare, pretending it was loaded with sexy stuff, explosive hijinks and ripping comedy, when all three commodities just aren't there. I felt cheated spending $3.00 (Canadian) just to rent it. Imagine how the poor saps who paid for premier seats in a theatre felt.I can't really buy Hayek in any film she makes. She just isn't believable. She never really acts: she poses, she pouts, she looks gorgeous and tells the camera: 'hey, am I gorgeous or what?'. She's sexy, but you'd never know it from this flick. Gomez and Valverde are good actors who unfortunately end up slumming here. I can only hope they felt embarrassed when they saw the finished product.This is the kind of 'European' movie that could drive me back to watching equally stupid Hollywood movies -- at least I wouldn't have to labour over subtitles.

jotix100 Imagine the dreary life of Martin, a bus driver in Madrid. His job has gotten the best of him, as well as his bored colleagues, but only Martin wants to do something to remedy the situation. When one night he climbs atop a viaduct over a busy intersection, a passerby, Salva, convinces him not to jump. After all, what would he accomplish? Instead, Salva has a different plan for Martin. Why not 'borrow' money from the local mafia. He can have millions with just the promise that he will repay at a high rate. For that, he must go into a clinic, where an old lady, lying on what appears to be her death bed, will decide whether to approve the loan, or not. At the end of the term, the mafia will "take care of him" when he can't come up with the money he owes.The new riches brings Martin to a life of luxury. He doesn't care how he spends his money. When he decides to throw a party, he goes all out. A young waitress, Lola, who is let go because of her inefficiency, catches Martin's eye. They begin a whirlwind tour of the fine places in Europe, and Madrid. Lola, it seems, has her own agenda about what to do with Martin's money."Living it Up", this Spanish comedy, has a glossy surface given by its director, Antonio Caudri. What doesn't make much sense is the screen play by Carlos Asorey and Fernando Leon Aranoa, a director, himself. We don't buy for a moment that even the criminal element would consider Martin worthy of a loan they are not to get repaid. Of course, we realize that Salva, is the key figure in the larger scheme of things, and we go along for the fun. The explanation as to why Martin was selected, makes no sense at all! And Lola's role in the whole thing is false from beginning to end.The film tried to capitalize having attracted Salma Hayek for the role of Lola. We don't recall this film being released commercially in this country, maybe in some markets, but no big distribution. Ms. Hayek's charm doesn't work miracles for her character, but she is a pleasant presence in the film. Carmelo Gomez, one of Spain's leading actors, has good moments. Best of all is Fernando Valverde who is seen as Salva.The film is mildly amusing, but it doesn't make much sense.

prolific_writer2000 Wow, I rented this on a whim just because I'm a huge Salma Hayek fan. I must say, I really enjoyed it. I'm pretty sure most people already know the basic concept of the story (if you didn't you wouldn't be here), so I won't go into it. But I will speak on everything else. The acting all around was very good. Salma was a good choice for the feisty, opinionated Lola, Carmelo Gomez was the perfect choice for the goofy yet lovable Martin. He sort of reminds me of Mathew Perry. And Fernando Valverde was awesome as Salva. The script was very witty, and inventive. Also, the chemistry between Salma and Carmelo was truly special. I also enjoyed the aggressive rhythmic soundtrack. Some people will complain about the third act, and say it is a little to mainstream (read: Hollywood), and maybe it is. But it works! It was totally unpredictable and it resolved the story nicely. La Gran Vida also, makes for a great date movie, if she's into foreign films.

Alek Davis Spoilers The first scenes of the movie look very promising: interesting situation, good character, cinematography... Up until the main character (Martin) is about to jump from the bridge. The rest of the movie is an insult to intelligence.First of all, why would the Mafia give Martin $1 M (or whatever amount it was) in the first place? How did they expect him to pay back $1.5 M? What kind of agreement was it? Yes, I know that if he wouldn't pay they would have to kill him, but how did they expect him to pay? Do they just give away money to every stranger? This would be the stupidest (if there is such word) Mafia in the world. OK, since he didn't pay (anyone surprised?), why didn't they kill him immediately? Why didn't they go after Salva, since he introduced Martin to them? Why did Martin start asking for time extension? Was he really hoping to make this amount of money? Why do all characters behave so irrationally and make the worst possible choices? Why are all rich guys shown as perverts? Why does Salma Hayek behave like a brat in the beginning? I can go on, an on, and on. It just does not make sense. I was so irritated by this movie that I stopped the tape after watching for about an hour. I don't even care about the characters and the rest of the story.3 out of 10.