There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Really enjoyable film. Totally unpredictable. I had read other people's views on how the camera work is rough / shaky etc - I didn't find this to be the case. Sure there are some scenes, mostly set outside that are a little shaky, but this added to the atmosphere. During the making of we learn that this is Director Andrés Waissbluth first film, which makes it even more amazing. Antonella Ríos who plays Gracia, the girl on the DVD cover with the shaving foam covering her bits, is just so damn sexy. IMDb reveals she did a lot of TV work after, but no films. That makes no sense. All the cast, which isn't that big, do a great job, and really take the viewer to that place, the bar, the house etc. I had my reservations before buying Los Debutantes, buy now I know I should have watched it much sooner. Now it's time to check out the other work from Andrés Waissbluth .

Other reviewers here seem to think this is an awful film. That's simply not true and a little unfair.The acting is of a good quality and the direction moves on with a decent fluidity. I don't think there's anything wrong with the Tarantino-esquire way of interlocking stories together. Perhaps its just a new tool for directors to try. I thought it made the film much more interesting. Perhaps a few elements of the script need tightening, but that's about the only fault I can find. Nestor Cantillana gives a great performance as Sylvio, also Antonella Rios is stunning and worth the price of admission alone.

this film tries to be immensely clever, and Tarantino-like before you try that though, you need solid filmic fundamentals. these include good sound, editing, set design etc...lets talk about the sound in this movie. absolutely atrocious. i have never been more distracted by a sound track, everand before we talk about low budget, film made in Chile etc.. lets bear in mind that desent sound these days is far more achievable than it ever has been. anywhere. and more info on technique is available then ever beforethe sound in this movie is plain bad. the foley in particular is out of place and inappropriate throughout, the atmos is equally terrible. i heard at least four loud clicks during the movie, which are the result of poor sound editing. the sound inside cars is awful, the sound of car doors closing is awful. the sound of the lady singing is wrong. foley is either overboard, or simply not there like the sound person just got bored and gave up. the spaces are wrong. everything about it is wrong and yet, not letting limitations of creativity get in the way, at the same time the movie tries boldly to be clever. for example the sound of the aquarium is used in the following street scene. we hear sound when we're not supposed to. sound edits precede visual cuts. every trick in the book is used, and yet the foundations are just not thereediting-wise we have scenes using heavy jump cuts, we have tinkering around with the time line etc etc etc, yawn. all of these techniques are imitated to a splendidly low standard overall the mix is crap, the sound is crap. and so, the film is crap. how can a movie with so many fundamental flaws be considered for awards and high praise? Chile's cinematic new wave? the best creative output that Chile has to offer? i hope not, and i think not.my theory is that Chile's more selective and better talent avoided this film like the plague maybe due to its risqué content. equally, the film has likely received so much unwarranted critical acclaim from so called 'world-cinema' enthusiasts for the same grubby reasons. they likely revel in it's trashiness. of course film critics rarely pay attention to technical details and quality this film is rubbish. it's all mouth and no trousers and is never deserving of a 6.8 rating. the film has all the production quality of a cheap Tarantino, new wave inspired porno!

I saw this movie in Santiago last summer and unfortunately it will probably not be released outside of that country. It would be interesting to watch it again with English subtitles as Chilean Spanish is notoriously difficult (especially for someone like myself who left that country as a small child in 1973 and grew up speaking English). At times I could have sworn the characters were speaking Italian. The movie is a kind of a South American version of Pulp Fiction with three interweaving narrative strands focusing on a stripper, an inexperienced teen, and his more experienced older brother. It's no Pulp Fiction, but it's superior to most Pulp Fiction knock-offs. Juan Pablo Miranda is very convincing as the teen. Antonella Rios, who plays the stripper, would make even someone who wasn't born in Chile want to go there. Alejandro Trejo is convincing as a gangster/strip club owner, and Anita Alvarado, a local scandal queen known as the "the Geisha of Chile", puts in a cameo as the prostitute who first deflowers the Miranda character. Only Nestor Cantillana as the older brother disappoints, not because he's a bad actor, but because this rail-thin pretty-boy is woefully miscast as a tough-guy bodyguard. Still, check it out if you get a chance.