Hello, my armchair friends. Today I present to you a review of the movie Blink Twice (2024). You know what, there are definitely movies that grab us from the first minute with their mysterious atmosphere, tense pace and the promise of a revelation that will leave us with our mouths open. Then on the other hand, there are those that, although they manage to arouse our interest, take us down a path that at the end leaves us bewildered and wondering: what exactly was it that we saw? Blink Twice (2024), belongs to this second category, in my very personal opinion.
Hola, mis amigos de butacas. Hoy les presento una reseña de la película Parpadea dos veces (2024). Saben que, definitivamente hay películas que nos atrapan desde el primer minuto con su atmósfera misteriosa, su ritmo tenso y la promesa de una revelación que nos dejará con la boca abierta. Luego por otro lado, están aquellas que, aunque consiguen despertar nuestro interés, nos llevan por un camino que al final nos deja desconcertados y preguntándonos. ¿Qué fue exactamente lo que vimos? Parpadea dos veces (2024), pertenece a esta segunda categoría, en mi opinión muy personal.
The truth, Blink Twice, caught my attention because of its enigmatic title, is presented as a film that mixes mystery and social criticism, with a striking cast headed by Naomi Ackie and Channing Tatum, among other great actors. Under the direction of Zoë Kravetz. With all these elements, my curiosity was growing. When I decided to see it, I did so attracted by its premise. An ordinary woman is dragged into the luxurious life of a tech tycoon and his exclusive circle of friends. It all sounds like a story with potential for suspense, for exploring themes of manipulation and power. However, I must confess that, while the film has its visually stunning moments, the ending left me with a lot of questions and, in a way, a bit puzzled. I'll tell you all about it below, without spoiling too much so you can form your own opinion.
La verdad, Parpadea dos veces, me llamó la atención por su título enigmático, se presenta como una película que mezcla misterio y crítica social, con un elenco llamativo encabezado por Naomi Ackie y Channing Tatum, entre otros grandes actores. Bajo la dirección de Zoë Kravetz. Con todos estos elementos, mi curiosidad fue en aumento. Cuando decidí verla, lo hice atraída por su premisa. Una mujer común es arrastrada a la vida de lujo de un magnate tecnológico y su exclusivo círculo de amistades. Todo esto suena a una historia con potencial para el suspenso, para explorar temas de manipulación y poder. Sin embargo, debo confesarles que, aunque la película tiene sus momentos visualmente impactantes, el final me dejó con un montón de preguntas y, en cierto modo, un poco desconcertada. A continuación, les contaré todo, sin spoilearles demasiado para que puedan formarse su propia opinión.
Without going into too much detail, here you have the Synopsis: The protagonist, Frida (Naomi Ackie), is a waitress who, in a chance encounter, catches the eye of Slater King (Channing Tatum), a powerful and magnetic man. What begins as an unexpected connection ends in an invitation to his private island, where a select group of friends enjoy what seems to be a dream vacation in a true paradise. Wild nights mix with sun-drenched mornings and everyone has a great time. No one wants the trip to end.
However, from the moment Frida arrives, there is something strange in the atmosphere. Conversations have a forced tone, the rules of the place seem to exist, but are never directly mentioned, and little by little, the air of exclusivity turns into an invisible cage. Frida senses that something is wrong in this place and she will have to discover the truth in order to get out alive.
However, from the moment Frida arrives, there is something strange in the atmosphere. Conversations have a forced tone, the rules of the place seem to exist, but are never directly mentioned, and little by little, the air of exclusivity turns into an invisible cage. Frida senses that something is wrong in this place and she will have to discover the truth in order to get out alive.
Sin entrar en demasiados detalles aquí les dejo la Sinopsis: La protagonista, Frida (Naomi Ackie), es una camarera que, en un encuentro casual, llama la atención de Slater King (Channing Tatum), un hombre poderoso y magnético. Lo que empieza como una conexión inesperada termina en una invitación a su isla privada, donde un selecto grupo de amigos disfruta de lo que parece ser unas vacaciones de ensueño en un auténtico paraíso. Las noches salvajes se mezclan con mañanas bañadas por el sol y todo el mundo se lo pasa en grande. Nadie quiere que el viaje termine.
Sin embargo, desde el momento en que Frida llega, hay algo extraño en el ambiente. Las conversaciones tienen un tono forzado, las reglas del lugar parecen existir, pero nunca se mencionan directamente, y poco a poco, el aire de exclusividad se transforma en una jaula invisible. Frida intuye que algo anda mal en ese lugar y tendrá que descubrir la verdad para poder salir viva.
I'll tell you why my experience with Blink Twice became a bit complicated. I won't deny that there are some really interesting elements in the film. The atmosphere it manages to create is really enveloping, and in several scenes, the cinematography and the use of sound immerse you in that sense of bewilderment that seeks to convey a disturbing atmosphere and that feeling of watching something that could become dangerous at any time. And what to say about the performances that reinforce the uncertainty. Naomi Ackie, (Frida), manages to strongly convey the growing suspicion and confusion of her character. Channing Tatum (Slater King), fulfills well his role as an enigmatic figure, someone who inspires confidence, but at the same time seems to be hiding something.
However, where I think it really stumbles is in the execution of its narrative. The first half maintains a good balance between mystery and tension, but once the pieces start to fall into place, the script becomes rushed and fragmented. There are moments when the tension rises and it feels like we're about to discover something crucial, but instead of a shocking twist, the film chooses to leave too many answers up in the air. The ending, in particular, left me not really knowing what happened. I understand that thrillers don't have to be spelled out in every detail, but there is a line between well-constructed intrigue and the feeling that something in the story doesn't quite add up. I think “Blink Twice” doesn't quite define whether it wants to be a tense thriller, a satire on power or a reflection on memory control, which leaves a lot of unclear lines.
If the intention was to construct an enigmatic narrative that would leave subtle clues for the audience to piece together their own interpretation, I think the script failed to do so effectively. For me, the result is a film that leaves more questions than answers, and while some viewers may enjoy the ambiguity, in my case it ended up feeling like an incomplete story.
However, where I think it really stumbles is in the execution of its narrative. The first half maintains a good balance between mystery and tension, but once the pieces start to fall into place, the script becomes rushed and fragmented. There are moments when the tension rises and it feels like we're about to discover something crucial, but instead of a shocking twist, the film chooses to leave too many answers up in the air. The ending, in particular, left me not really knowing what happened. I understand that thrillers don't have to be spelled out in every detail, but there is a line between well-constructed intrigue and the feeling that something in the story doesn't quite add up. I think “Blink Twice” doesn't quite define whether it wants to be a tense thriller, a satire on power or a reflection on memory control, which leaves a lot of unclear lines.
If the intention was to construct an enigmatic narrative that would leave subtle clues for the audience to piece together their own interpretation, I think the script failed to do so effectively. For me, the result is a film that leaves more questions than answers, and while some viewers may enjoy the ambiguity, in my case it ended up feeling like an incomplete story.
Les platicare porque mi experiencia con Parpadea dos veces se vuelve un tanto complicada. No les negare que en la película hay ciertos aciertos y elementos realmente interesantes. La atmósfera que logra crear es realmente envolvente, y en varias escenas, la cinematografía y el uso del sonido te sumergen en esa sensación de desconcierto que busca transmitir un ambiente inquietante y esa sensación de estar observando algo que podría volverse peligroso en cualquier momento. Y qué decir de las actuaciones que refuerzan la incertidumbre. Naomi Ackie, (Frida), logra transmitir con fuerza la creciente sospecha y confusión de su personaje. Channing Tatum (Slater King), cumple bien con su rol de figura enigmática, alguien que inspira confianza, pero al mismo tiempo parece estar ocultando algo.
Sin embargo, donde considero que realmente tropieza es en la ejecución de su narrativa. La primera mitad mantiene un buen equilibrio entre el misterio y la tensión, pero una vez que las piezas comienzan a encajar, el guion se vuelve atropellado y fragmentado. Hay momentos en los que la tensión sube y parece que estamos a punto de descubrir algo crucial, pero en lugar de un giro impactante, la película elige dejar demasiadas respuestas en el aire. El final, en particular, me dejó sin saber realmente qué sucedió. Entiendo que los thrillers no tengan que ser explicado en cada detalle, pero existe una línea entre la intriga bien construida y la sensación de que algo en la historia no acaba de encajar. Pienso que” Parpadea dos veces “no termina de definirse si quiere ser un thriller tenso, una sátira sobre el poder o una reflexión sobre el control de la memoria, lo que deja muchas líneas no muy claras.
Si la intención era construir una narrativa enigmática que dejara pistas sutiles para que el público armara su propia interpretación, creo que el guion no logró hacerlo de manera efectiva. Para mí, el resultado es una película que deja más preguntas que respuestas, y aunque algunos espectadores pueden disfrutar la ambigüedad, en mi caso terminó sintiéndose como una historia incompleta.
Yes, there is one thing that Blink Twice makes very clear to me, and that is that enigmas can be a double-edged sword in cinema. On the one hand, they can generate mystery and reflection. But on the other hand, when they are not well structured, they can leave a feeling of bewilderment rather than intrigue.
The phrase "Blinks twice", which in real life represents a subtle signal to ask for help, from my point of view could have been a more powerful resource in the film, it practically went unnoticed. However, it leaves us with a reflection on the importance of recognizing the signs, of being alert when someone is silently asking for help and of questioning what surrounds us instead of just accepting it. I think the film also tries to reflect how power can manipulate the perception of reality. Throughout the story, Frida struggles to discern the truth in an environment designed to confuse her, which can be applied to real situations where manipulation is invisible but devastating. From media control to toxic relationships in which reality is distorted, this concept could have been a very good opportunity for deeper reflection. But unfortunately it is wasted.
The phrase "Blinks twice", which in real life represents a subtle signal to ask for help, from my point of view could have been a more powerful resource in the film, it practically went unnoticed. However, it leaves us with a reflection on the importance of recognizing the signs, of being alert when someone is silently asking for help and of questioning what surrounds us instead of just accepting it. I think the film also tries to reflect how power can manipulate the perception of reality. Throughout the story, Frida struggles to discern the truth in an environment designed to confuse her, which can be applied to real situations where manipulation is invisible but devastating. From media control to toxic relationships in which reality is distorted, this concept could have been a very good opportunity for deeper reflection. But unfortunately it is wasted.
Si, hay algo que me deja muy claro Parpadea dos veces es que los enigmas puede ser un arma de doble filo en el cine. Por un parte, puede generar misterio y reflexión. Pero, por otro lado, cuando no están bien estructurados, pueden dejar una sensación de desconcierto más que de intriga.
La frase "Parpadea dos veces", que en la vida real representa una señal sutil de pedir ayuda, desde mi punto de vista pudo haber sido un recurso más poderoso en la película, prácticamente paso desapercibida. Sin embargo, nos deja una reflexión sobre la importancia de reconocer las señales, de estar alerta cuando alguien está pidiendo auxilio de manera silenciosa y de cuestionar aquello que nos rodea en lugar de aceptarlo sin más. Creo que la película también intenta reflejar cómo el poder puede manipular la percepción de la realidad. A lo largo de la historia, Frida lucha por distinguir la verdad en un entorno diseñado para confundirla, lo que puede aplicarse a situaciones reales en las que la manipulación es invisible pero devastadora. Desde el control mediático hasta relaciones tóxicas en las que la realidad se distorsiona, este concepto pudo haber sido una muy buena oportunidad para una reflexión más profunda. Pero lamentablemente se desperdicia.
I leave you with my final verdict: If you are looking for a psychological thriller that plays with your perception, that doesn't offer easy answers, forces you to debate and theorize about the meaning of its denouement, “Blink Twice” could be an interesting option. But if you're hoping for a story with a more solid closure and clear answers, you'll probably be left like me, with more questions than answers.
I would love to read your opinions in the comments.
Thank you very much. Take care.
I would love to read your opinions in the comments.
Thank you very much. Take care.
Les dejo mi veredicto final: Si buscan un thriller psicológico que juegue con su percepción, que no ofrezca respuestas fáciles, los obliguen debatir y teorizar sobre el significado de su desenlace, "Parpadea Dos Veces" podría ser una opción interesante. Pero si esperas una historia con un cierre más sólido y respuestas claras, es probable que queden igual que yo, con más preguntas que respuestas.
Me encantaría leer sus opiniones en los comentarios.
Muchas gracias. Cuídense.
Translation: DeepL Translate (free version) / Traducción: DeepL Translate (version gratuita)