Learn Hardcore Spanish (Spain): La película de anoche era muy romántica y al final los protagonistas se besan bajo la lluvia. - Last night’s movie was very romantic and at the end the main characters kiss in the rain.

La película de anoche → noun + de + time word = “the film from last night”.
… la película anoche → needs a verb: “I watched the film last night.”

Why do we say “de anoche” and not “de la anoche”?

Because “anoche” is an adverb, not a noun. It means “last night”, like “yesterday” in English.

You don’t say “the yesterday”, and in Spanish you don’t say “la anoche”.

So:

Correct: la película de anoche
Incorrect: la película de la anoche

You only use an article with nouns like la noche, la tarde, etc.:

la película de la noche = the night-time film / the late-night film

But “anoche” is a single adverb meaning “last night”, with no article.

What’s the difference between “era muy romántica” and “fue muy romántica” here?

Both are past, but they have different nuances:

Era muy romántica (imperfect)
- Describes the film in a general, background or descriptive way.
- Focus on the quality over a period of time.
- Sounds neutral and very natural in comments about a film you saw.
Fue muy romántica (preterite)
- Presents the film’s romantic quality as a completed fact or final judgment.
- Can sound a bit more like a verdict / evaluation: “It turned out to be very romantic.”

In Spain, for a casual comment about a movie you saw, “era muy romántica” is very common because you’re mainly describing what the film was like, not narrating a sequence of events.

Both are correct; the sentence simply chooses the more descriptive imperfect.

Why does the sentence suddenly use the present tense: “los protagonistas se besan” instead of a past tense?

This is a very common stylistic choice in Spanish (and also in English):

You start in the past to talk about the situation:
La película de anoche era muy romántica…
Then you switch to present to narrate the action of the plot:
… y al final los protagonistas se besan bajo la lluvia.

This is called the “narrative present”: you use the present tense to make the scene feel vivid and direct, as if it’s happening in front of you.

It’s especially frequent when:

summarizing films, books, and series
recounting stories, jokes, plotlines

So “se besan” in present is intentional, not a mistake.

Could we also say “se besaron” instead of “se besan”?

Yes:

… al final los protagonistas se besan bajo la lluvia.
→ narrative present; feels vivid, like a live commentary.
… al final los protagonistas se besaron bajo la lluvia.
→ normal past narration; everything is in the past.

Both are correct. The choice is stylistic:

If you’re summarizing the plot (very common in Spain), present is very natural.
If you’re retelling something that happened, like a personal story, you might prefer preterite (se besaron).

What does the “se” mean in “los protagonistas se besan”?

Here “se” shows a reciprocal action: they do the action to each other.

besan = they kiss (someone)
se besan = they kiss each other

Other examples:

Se miran. = They look at each other.
Se abrazan. = They hug each other.
Se odian. = They hate each other.

Grammatically, “se” is the same form used for reflexive verbs, but in this kind of plural subject it often has a reciprocal meaning.

Why “los protagonistas” and not “las protagonistas”?

“Protagonista” is one of those nouns that has one form for both genders:

el protagonista = the male main character
la protagonista = the female main character

In the plural:

los protagonistas = group that is all male or mixed (male + female)
las protagonistas = group that is all female

Spanish grammar says that in a mixed group, you use the masculine plural (los), even if there are more women than men. That’s why “los protagonistas” is the default if you don’t specify gender or if it’s mixed.

Why is it “muy romántica” and not “mucho romántica”?

Because “romántica” is an adjective, and the normal intensifier for adjectives is “muy”:

muy romántica = very romantic
muy guapa = very pretty
muy importante = very important

“Mucho” is used:

Before nouns:
- mucho dinero = a lot of money
- mucha lluvia = a lot of rain
As an adverb with verbs:
- Llueve mucho. = It rains a lot.
- Me gusta mucho. = I like it a lot.

So:

muy + adjective → muy romántica
mucho + noun / verb → mucha lluvia, me llovió mucho

Why “bajo la lluvia” and not “en la lluvia” or “debajo de la lluvia”?

All three prepositions exist, but they don’t sound equally natural here.

bajo la lluvia = literally “under the rain”, but idiomatically “in the pouring rain / while it’s raining”
- Very common, especially in poetic or romantic contexts.
- Sounds natural and slightly literary.
en la lluvia
- Grammatically possible, but much less idiomatic in this phrase.
- You would more often say “bajo la lluvia” or “bajo la tormenta”.
debajo de la lluvia
- Very rarely used; sounds strange because “lluvia” isn’t a solid object you’re physically under.
- “debajo de” is better for concrete things: debajo de la mesa (under the table), debajo del puente (under the bridge).

So in Spanish, the set phrase for this romantic movie cliché is “besarse bajo la lluvia”.

Is a comma needed after “al final”? Should it be “al final, los protagonistas se besan…”?

Both with and without a comma are possible:

Al final los protagonistas se besan bajo la lluvia.
Al final, los protagonistas se besan bajo la lluvia.

Difference:

Without comma: slightly more fluid, like one continuous clause.
With comma: a little pause after “al final”, adding emphasis to the idea “in the end” / “eventually”.

In everyday writing, many people in Spain leave out the comma in a short sentence like this, and it’s perfectly acceptable.

Can the word order change? For example, can I say “al final se besan los protagonistas bajo la lluvia”?

Yes, Spanish allows fairly flexible word order, but the default and clearest here is:

Al final los protagonistas se besan bajo la lluvia.

Other possible orders:

Al final se besan los protagonistas bajo la lluvia.
→ Grammatically correct, but puts a bit more focus on the action “se besan” before saying who.
Los protagonistas, al final, se besan bajo la lluvia.
→ Commas add pauses; can sound a bit more dramatic or emphatic in writing.

For a learner, it’s best to stick to the original order, which is the most neutral and natural.

Does “la película de anoche” mean “the movie we watched last night” or “the movie that was on TV last night”?

It can mean either, depending on context. Literally it is “the film from last night”. Common uses in Spain:

Talking about what you watched at home:
- La película de anoche era muy romántica.
  → The film we watched last night (at home or in the cinema).
Talking about TV programming:
- La película de anoche en la tele tuvo mucha audiencia.
  → Last night’s film on TV had high ratings.

So “de anoche” simply anchors the film to the time “last night”; who watched it or where it was shown depends on context.

In Spain, would people often say “la peli de anoche” instead of “la película de anoche”?

Yes. “Peli” is a very common informal shortening of “película” in Spain:

La peli de anoche era muy romántica.
¿Te gustó la peli de anoche?

It’s widely used in everyday speech, among friends, family, etc.
In more formal contexts (essays, reviews, news articles), people usually prefer the full word “película”.