American moviegoers were not interested in Columbus when this film was released back in 1992. Darn, the 500th anniversary of Columbus and his discovery's (1492-1992). The film was released on Columbus day to, and yet it failed at the box office. It doesn't really matter now. Though, with Scott's recent success with Gladiator (Russell Crowe), one cannot help to think that timing is everything for a movie at the box-office. 1492, was released at the wrong time. That's why it failed. That, and the critics who picked on the film didn't help it, just becuase it had a French actor playing an Italian. Gerard I think was wonderful as Columbus. He fit into the role like a rock thrown into the water. Now let's get past all of the nostalgia. Here we have one of Ridley Scott's best motion pictures. A remarkable score (composed by Vangelis). A very human storyline and the film is not just about Christopher Columbus. It's also a study of the human psyche. The cinematography is just breathtaking, gorgeous, very moving. The film itself feels like the real life of the 15th century. No their not carrying cell phones with them. Or pagers. So if you cannot relate with the material, it's probably because their all stuck in the middle ages. The acting is completely solid. Three of the performers deserved Oscar recognition for their roles (Depardieu, Wincott, Assante). The film itself should have taken home and Oscar or two. Especially for Best Picture. Yes, I think it's that good. I am a very picky movie fan. I also admire the likes of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odessy, Frank Darabont's The Shawshank Redemption, Barry Levinson's Rain Man, Terry Gilliam's The Fisher King, Mike Figgis's Leaving Las Vegas. All oscar worthy films. So in some respect, I am trying to tell you that they are all wrong on this film. It's a work of art..... 10/10
Review of 1492: Conquest of Paradise
