why do they call roma a masterpiece? that's ridiculous. dogspoop! it's pretty to look at but the storytelling's weak, the characters are undeveloped, the dialogue is flat and contrived, it's emotionally devoid. what are the critics talking about. masterpiece, pff. 
i did like the dog though. but what the, they got two servants and a bunch of kids and two 'dults and they can't bother to walk the dog? or even clean up the poop they have to walk through and drive through every time they enter and exit? forget about the drama of class difference, these people are whacked, upstairs and down.
who was the who who compared this masterpiece to 400 blows? critic as clown. a picture of mexico through oscar's eyes.


post dat.
the critics are part of the media establishment and everybody wants a masterpiece and everybody wants to toss mexico a megabone by having a raging commercial success by a hollywood mexican director after we treat the mexican people like criminals and slaves. everybody wants to give good box office to the feel good non-threatening money masterpieces, but that doesn't make a masterpiece.
it seems cuaron was raised by nannies in an affluent household watching hollywood movies and bits of revolution on tv.