Gordon-11 This film is about a group of candidates in a job interview, where they have to eliminate themselves so that only one person is left to get the job."The Method" is an intense film with constant psychological battles going on. It is very dialog heavy, and actors all speak very fast. It was not east to catch up with the amount of subtitles I had to read, but the intelligent exchanges of words made up for it. The battles in the room for the job echoes the riots outside the building, which further enhances the atmosphere of aggressiveness. Despite that, the film has many moments of relative ease and humour. The story is engaging throughout, but the open ended ending disappoints me. I hoped for a clear ending, as it would be satisfying to see who won the psychological battles.

krigler The absurdity and grotesque one-upmanship of an executive job interview is sometimes perfectly captured in El Metodo, with an anti-capitalist demonstration used as an invisible backdrop with subtle symbolism. Directing is handled with confidence, and there is some memorable acting, although towards the end the ugly head of melodramatic overacting rears, destroying the atmosphere.Also demolishing is the flawed characterization. One huge problem of the basic concept is that people interviewing for a high level managerial position have very rarely got anything to lose. Failure only gets the applicants back to other well paid, plush jobs. Such is a case with these people too; apart from their dignity and self-respect, there is nothing much at stake. Bigger problem is that even those they could easily keep were it not for their conveniently convoluted behaviour. From the writer's perspective it's simply a matter of bad characterization choices and some silly plotting. The competing interviewees behave with enormous stupidity sometimes to conveniently fit the dramatic wishes of the storyteller. One of the protagonists, a woman is rendered a victim about halfway through the film, a weak character unable to resist the sexual advances of a fellow male participant. This completely stupid and unrealistic plot development alone almost makes everything that follows implausible and shallow. (I mean, who in the world has sex in his mind during a supposedly important job interview? Come on, even the most macho males can control their animal urges - if they can't, there's no way they get to an executive position.) It's a pity the filmmakers could not muster up more courage to let the situation play itself out without sensationalist, melodramatic actions and resort to such cheap moves. What started out very well and tense, derails because of increasingly melodramatic plot solutions from the midpoint on.It's a pity also that apart from a nicely symbolic final image and some subtly added subtext the storytellers did not make more of the anti-capitalist protests apparently going on simultaneously. It's a device completely wasted.All in all, a film worth watching once for some nice psychodrama elements, but ultimately a terribly missed opportunity. For a similar premise, but a much more thrilling story watch "The Killing Room".

lastliberal Seven executives are gathered in a room, ostensibly to chose one to fill an open position. I tuned in to see Eduardo Noriega, but he was not the star of this film. The real stars were the writers Mateo Gil and Marcelo Piñeyro, who took a Jordi Galcerán play and made a film that was compelling from start to finish.In addition to Noriega, there were outstanding performances by Ernesto Alterio, Carmelo Gómez, Eduard Fernández, Adriana Ozores, and Pablo Echarri. While her role was minor, Natalia Verbeke had a charm that captivated me every time she entered the room.I don't know about this Grönholm method, but it certainly brought out the best and worst of the people, and showed what they would be like in the company. I guess the closest thing to this film would be 12 Angry Men, except here it was seven, and two were women. Sexism, ageism, nationalism: they all came into play as the individuals competed.What part of yourself do you give up to win? Outstanding ending.

Absyrd The Method Before I begin my review, I think I should clear up that the "Gronholm Method" is an obscure method of interviewing someone for a job. It involves gathering up a number of candidates eligible for a position, but rather than openly interviewing them as a process of discovering their usefulness and weaknesses, there technically is no "interviewer". In the film, the candidates are placed in a room with six laptops (one for each contender to receive notes) and they are forced to psychologically analyze each other to discover a "winner". They are issued a series of challenges and hypothetical situations in which they are forced to pick out the weakest of their group. There is always the lingering plausibility that any one of these contestants can be the true interviewer, or perhaps there could be multiple interviewers? Maybe there is only one true contestant, or maybe they are all role-playing in a method to promote a staff member in the company? Any of these explanations are reasonable, because when we're discussing a method as cynical as the film's depiction, it's almost superficial to narrow it down to one solution.I'm not entirely sure about the historical authenticity of the Gronholm Method, or if it even exists (a Google search sent me to the film's IMDb + Wikipedia page), but I can almost assure if the film were a multinational box-office success, small businesses would begin to experiment and possibly adapt the assumed fictional method. I personally wouldn't mind being an interviewee of such a system, for it allows me to challenge my intellectual abilities in an intense competition. As for the film itself, when its narrative followed the characters as they explored each other's limitations and the film analyzed their credulity and startling enthusiasm to such a sport, it was an intensely riveting experience. The characters were developed with careful and relentlessly strengthening three-dimensional traits, and the methods of interviewing grew more severe and brooding to reveal the true nature of man. The first 50 minutes of this film were pure exhilaration, a haunting psychological depiction of cat & mouse. To me it was almost a nostalgic resemblance of the superfluous anxiety found in 12 ANGRY MEN, as I'd never felt so absorbed by long-running dialogue since.After several characters are eliminated from the process (I'm not about to explain who, why, or how), the film takes a break from its intense onslaught of psychosomatic progression. This veers the film off-course and unfortunately causes it to wane off a bit. Greed is replaced by hormones as one character randomly feels like having sex with one of the remaining interviewees. Although a bit absurd, it also fits the animalistic desperation the contestants must be feeling by this point. They've been stripped bare from social courtesy, and are now physically fighting one another, no longer caring for outer appearance. I'm not sure if it justifies going as far as it does, but it would've been totally implausible to remain as a restrained and gracious drama.A romantic subplot also develops between two interviewees. They had once been lovers, but one betrayed the other, and neither had ever forgotten. They still longed to be together, but the hostile circumstances made it impossible for them. The subplot does reach startling poignancy at one point, but does the film ever get back on track? Does it ever re-enter its initial excitement? Unfortunately, the writer didn't trust his sardonic examination would make for a fully satisfying viewing. His decision to switch gears was more detrimental than refreshing, and that may be the only aspect of the film that inhibited greatness. It still makes for a relentlessly entertaining viewing, one that not only provokes thought, but questions human morality in a time of conflict. Cynical, but excellent.