So much average

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

This dark fairy tale for adults is hauntingly beautiful. Pan's Labyrinth is visually stunning and creates memorable characters and unforgettable horrors.

Spain, 1944, five years after the Spanish Civil War: a young girl, Ofelia (Ivana Baquero), travels to the countryside with her pregnant mother, Carmen (Ariadna Gil), to meet her new stepfather, Captain Vidal (Sergi López), a staunch Falangist who has been assigned to hunt down the band of rebels still holding out in the forests. While exploring the land surrounding her new home, Ofelia discovers a strange labyrinth where she meets a faun, who tells her that she is the reincarnation of a princess, and that she must perform three tasks in order to return to her magical realm.Has the girl retreated into a world of make-believe influenced by her storybooks? Or is the faun very real and telling the truth? Either way, director Guillermo Del Toro's movie is utterly compelling viewing, expertly blending the cruelty of war with its supernatural elements. With imagination to spare, brought to life by an array of incredible special effects (both animatronic and digital), and excellent performances from all involved, Pan's Labyrinth is an unforgettable journey into dark fantasy, where the supernatural horrors faced by Ofelia as she performs her tasks are more than matched by the unspeakable acts perpetrated by the sadistic Captain Vidal (his cruelty making the film unsuitable for the kiddies, despite the fairytale plot).Unforgettable scenes include the brutal killing of a hunter and his son, an encounter with a giant toad, Ofelia pursued by a freaky child-eating creature with eyes in its hands, and the haunting ending, which is either happy or sad, depending on your point of view.

Second viewing: My appreciation only grows. Interpretations-1st interpretation: Ophelia's world is real- happy ending.If this interpretation is valid, we deal with themes of war and disobedience. Here, Pan's Labyrinth serves as an allegory against the totalitarian regime of Fascist Spain, symbolized by Vidal. Vidal is represented in the fantasy storyline by the Pale Man; they both sit at the end of the table at the feasts, and they are both violent and cruel. Furthermore, the Pale Man is an allegory to "Saturn Devouring his Son" by Fransisco Goya, as both Cronus and the Pale Man eat the heads off of their victims first. If Cronus represents the Pale Man, and the Pale Man represents Vidal, and Vidal represents Fascist Spain, Del Toro implies that Fascist Spain is just as cruel as Cronus; like how Cronus devours his own sons, Fascist Spain kills their own people.2nd interpretation: Ophelia's world is her imagination- tragic ending (or is it? Some might say that she was better off dead than having to live with her terrible hardships).If this interpretation is valid, we deal with themes of self-deception and how reality and fantasy can coexist. Here, Pan's Labyrinth explores how Ophelia creates a fantasy for herself to deal with the harsh realities of war. In this case, we can interpret the final fantasy sequence as Ophelia's imagination, her creation and the world she wished to live. Besides, you can tell she is still alive, as Del Toro shows her lips quiver right after the fantasy sequence.Observations-*The film features many smooth cuts, which Del Toro hides with trees and black screens. This could imply how reality and fantasy intertwine, supporting the second interpretation. BUT smooth cuts never go from fantasy to reality or reality to fantasy, only fantasy to fantasy or reality to reality. This could suggest the first interpretation, where reality and fantasy are separate.*Vidal sees the monster under the bed, which supports the 1st interpretation. Yet at the same time, he does not see the faun at the end, which supports the 2nd interpretation. But again, Vidal has just consumed some kind of poison, so it may be his hallucinations in which he does not see the faun.*Del Toro never cuts away from the violence, emphasizing the brutality of war.*Cinematography is magnificent- dark, gloomy, blue colors in reality sequences to depict its dreariness, while bright, vibrant reds and oranges to depict enthusiasm. In the final scenes, the reds of blood and explosions stand out because the blues have become so common with the eye. Del Toro consciously had the blood and explosions to stand out to emphasize the violence of war.*Notice how Del Toro establishes tension between Ophelia and Vidal; When Ophelia shakes with the wrong hand, Vidal points it out, forming an uneasy tone between them. This first encounter between the two main characters in their respective storylines is vital for their relationship in the future scenes, especially the climax.Bottom line is, both interpretations are valid, and Del Toro utilizes both of them to deliver both of their respective themes.As magnificent as this film is, there may be authenticity flaws. For example, why didn't Mercedes kill Vidal after she escaped? Is she still obedient to Vidal? Then why did he directly disobey his order at the end when Vidal asked to tell his son the time of his death? For me, it's clear why Del Toro left these authenticity flaws: to drive the story forward. Attempting to patch these flaws would've been at the expense of pacing, and the audience's engagement is more important than plot holes.After all, these flaws are more or less hidden; visible only to those who know where to look.

At this point I think the problem is mine. Anytime a new Del Toro movie comes out, I think that finally I'll like this one. But no. None. Never.