I already want to see "Roma" again.

It took me a good while to settle into the rhythms of Alfonso Cuaron's critically acclaimed new film, and by the time I did I wanted to go back and start it over to see what I might have missed. A lot comes at the viewer in "Roma," and it's hard to take it all in on a first viewing. No...that's the wrong way to put it. Nothing comes at you -- you have to go after it. That's what makes "Roma" unique. Cuaron crams his frame in any given scene with tons of movement and sound, but he shoots almost everything in medium and long shots and chooses to pan his camera rather than insert a lot of edits. The result is you have to decide what you want to look at, and while the main protagonist is in virtually every scene, she's not always necessarily the focal point.

That protagonist, by the way, is Cleo, maid to a wealthy family and played in a quiet and quietly devastating performance by Yalitza Aparicio. "Roma" is an episodic assemblage of scenes that shows what life is like for Cleo, without big showy emotional moments or much editorializing. She's treated fairly well by the family she works for, but make no mistake -- they rarely let her forget she's their employee. The film is a lot about privilege. The family treats Cleo as one of their own when they feel like it or when it's convenient to, but don't when it's not. She's part of their most intimate moments and they her's, but she'll never really be one of them. She has much to take care of, but nothing of her own to really care for. And there's a big wide world out there, the movie makes clear, that will never include people like Cleo.

For a while I was a little disappointed that I wasn't feeling "Roma" as much as I wanted to and as much as rapturous reviews led me to believe I would. I was engaged by it, but I didn't feel heavily involved emotionally. But then pretty far into the movie something happens to Cleo, and in that moment I realized how invested I was in how things turned out for her. "Roma" sneaks up on you in that way.

Grade: A

ROMA is a 'snapshot of life' style movie from director Alfonso Cuaron, one which has received plenty of acclaim recently as well as the award for best foreign language film at the Oscars. Still, what do they know? For me, ROMA is a typical kind of movie, not particularly powerful or hard-hitting, and flawed to say the least. Cuaron has done much better with the likes of CHILDREN OF MEN and even HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN. The film follows an ordinary poor family and their nanny as they go through a period of social upheaval in Mexico in the 1960s and 1970s. Naturalistic performances from an unknown cast count towards it, but the story is episodic and stretched out and the decision to shoot in black and white robs it of vitality. It's better than GRAVITY, but that's not saying much.

Cleo Gutiérrez is one of two maids working for an affluent family in Mexico City. There is marital difficulties as the husband Antonio leaves for Quebec City. Cleo's boyfriend disappears after she tells him about her pregnancy.

The black and white cinematography is terrific. The movie starts looking good but horribly slow. It's the slowest of art house movies. It borders on pretentious. Then Cleo starts to have more to do than simply mop the floor. It's interesting to have a non-actor be the lead but it's also limiting. The movie builds up its story until an epic street battle. I like almost everything about that sequence except holding the last scene on that couple in the streets. The power of seeing the horror indirectly is completely obliterated by pointing the camera at the specific aftermath. There is also the drowning scene. It's too obvious. Again, filmmaker Alfonso Cuarón is pushing the point too hard. It's in your face and he can do better. There is also something awkward about being that obvious when the shooting style is so observational. They are minor bumps in an otherwise compelling ride.