Own the rights?
102 out of 135 people found the following review useful: 17th century brought to life, 25 August 2006 Author: rogornmoradan from León, Spain
'Alatriste' is a film based in a series of novels by Arturo Pérez-Reverte (five until release time, with a sixth published four months later) which is hugely popular in Spain. But undoubtedly it was the news that Viggo Mortensen was to be playing the title character what put the project onto the international radar.In fact, had it not been for Mortensen's acceptance of the role, the film would not have been made at all. Director Agustín Díaz Yanes, who also adapted the script, condensing the five novels into 134 minutes of action, said from the beginning that the film would be made only if a major movie star fronted it, and the search soon took him beyond the Spanish frontiers. To his credit, Mortensen accepted to follow up his stardom-achieving role in 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy (the clinching conversation for 'Alatriste' took place during the Berlin premiere of 'The return of the king' in December 2003) with a daring move that raised many eyebrows: starring in a non-English language film, and speaking his whole part in Spanish with his own voice, whose accent he had to change from the South American he knew since childhood to the Old Castillian his role demanded.The film follows 40-something Diego de Alatriste y Tenorio through 20 years of his life, from the wars in Flanders in 1623 to those against France in 1643, when Spain, under king Philip IV, accelerated its decline from its position as the world's dominating superpower. The film is bookended by two spectacular feats of arms taken from each of these conflicts, but in the middle we get to know the man under the wide-brimmed hat and the long cloak. When not in the thick of the action, he has to make a living hiring his skills, and those involve killing for a few gold coins back in the dark corners of Madrid or Seville: not for people of his type the kind of glamourised glory depicted in victory-celebrating murals. Mortensen's portrayal - raspy voice, cold-eyed gaze and menacing professional manner - is every bit what the role demands, and his performance is one of the triumphs of the film.However, he is not all there is, even if the hype has made it seem that Mortensen was all that mattered in the film. He is surrounded by a crew he has celebrated as being as fine as any he's worked with anywhere, and a cast of the best 'hidden' talent Spain has to offer (no Antonio Banderas or Javier Bardem here). Accompanying the 'tired hero', as he is described in the books, we have Unax Ugalde as Íñigo de Balboa, the young buck Alatriste raises in lieu of his dead father; Elena Anaya as Angélica de Alquézar, the scheming ladyservant of the queen; and Ariadna Gil as 'la gran actriz' María de Castro, Alatriste's luscious love interest. They form the heart of the film from the perspective of personal relationships. In none of their hearts love for each other is the only ingredient by any means, and negotiating their twists and turns can be as dangerous as avoiding sharp and pointy steel objects in the street. In fact, they don't stay sheathed indoors all the time either… The rest of the painting is full of extraordinary nuances and details. And 'painting' is the right word, because none other than one of the greatest masters of the trade ever, Diego Velázquez, has been the visual inspiration for the film, with his grave palette of black and brown colours, a world away from the splendour and shine of previous and later historical films. Spain was wealthy on the outside but poor and rotten on the inside, and his paintings show this, as does the film. The novels mix the imaginary characters hitherto mentioned with real-life figures, and two of the supporting ones are brought to life directly from his canvases. These are Javier Cámara as the Count-Duke of Olivares, the mover and shaker behind the throne, and Juan Echanove as the writer and poet Francisco de Quevedo. The first one is, as can be expected, important to move the political plot forward, and the second might seem peripheral and time-consuming, but his picture and verses are in every school textbook in Spain, so for Spanish people these two play the important role of making Velázquez's paintings move and speak, bringing closer to home the other characters. It's been Pérez-Reverte's aim from the beginning of the saga to use Alatriste's stories to re-educate Spanish people in their own history, too neglected in recent years (see trivia section on this site) and this is a way of seeing what could have happened 400 years ago in the streets one can still walk today. Not for nothing the premiere was planned, old fashion style, in La Gran Vía, in the heart of El Madrid de los Austrias.This is the first English review of the film ever written (as far as I know), fully one week ahead of the official Spanish release, so it is mostly introductory and I am not going into more details on purpose. Outside Spain, the film will be seen mostly in festivals, with foreign releases happening gradually towards Christmas 2006. Just to say that those who have read the books will find, as it usually happens, many changes among a genuine attempt to be faithful to the spirit of the original material, and that one thing you should avoid doing is seeing it under the shadow of 'The Lord of the Rings', because of Viggo, or under the shine of glossy Hollywood historical recreations full of dizzying light and colour. The scale is much smaller, the atmosphere darker and grittier, and sword master Bob Anderson, who crossed blades with the likes of Errol Flynn (not to mention humming lightsabres and Elvish-lettered weapons), has never been happier teaching people 'a matar, y mucho'.
61 out of 76 people found the following review useful: A lost opportunity, 5 September 2006 Author: Eugenia Andino from Seville, Spain
I went to see this movie without reading the books first and with only a vague knowledge of the historical events the novels are based upon. Apparently, the director thought that it would be a good idea to condensate the five Alatriste novels in a single film, in order to give depth to the characters. A big mistake. The pace is for the most part too fast and anecdotic, and the action jumps from here to there without ever giving a clear reason why everyone behaves the way they do, from the romantic plots scattered along the movie to the great political conspiracies. It is never very clear either why Alatriste, who is little more than a soldier and hired assassin, is so important to so many people of high rank.In spite of all this, I cannot give the film a bad rating because it is certainly a pleasure to watch. The technical aspects, the general "look" of the film, the music, and the acting are splendid. The casting can be a controversial point, but the chosen actors do wonders.
66 out of 96 people found the following review useful: A great surprise, impactant and visually astounding, 4 September 2006 Author: andrea2004 from nowhere
Is no surprise for anyone that Spanish writers are conquering the international market: there are the cases of Javier Sierra (Secret Supper), Ruiz-Zafón (Shadow of the Wind) or Juan Gómez-Jurado (God's Spy). Well, this movie is based in five novels of a Spanish bestselling author who preceded all of them in the lists: Arturo Pérez Reverte.The movie tell the whole story of old soldier Diego Alatriste, a captain of Spanish Army in Spanish Golden Century. This is the most expensive Spanish-language film ever made in Spain (about €24 million – US$30 million). It portrays Spain of the 17th century using both fictional and real characters. Twentieth Century Fox has taken the rights on the film.The story start whit the Spanish Armada had already been defeated but Spain was still the world's greatest superpower. The Captain is recently home from fighting in Flanders in the Dutch war for independence from Spain. He has come home because of a serious wound that has left him unfit for the military. However, and like many of veterans of Spain's wars, he is fit enough to eke out a meager living as something of a gun, or sword, or knife for hire. He collects debts, avenges the honor of cuckolded husbands, and even kills for the right price. He is very good at his job. Year by year we follow Diego in his violent life, to the bitter end, and his tale is the one of both Spain and the whole world.The acting, obviously leaded by star Viggo Mortensen is absolutely amazing. A well acting job by Mr Mortensen is no surprise for anyone, but the real living characters that Eduard Fernández (Copons) and Blanca Portillo (friar Emilio Bocanegra) creates are astounding.Indenpendent chapter deserves the photography, spectacular, and costumes design. A delight.
48 out of 63 people found the following review useful: Come on..., 10 September 2006 Author: jorgddh from Spain
All the time complaining about the lack of commercial movies in the Spanish industry, and when a nice effort comes trough, everybody is bashing it!! Now, it's true that the movie has his share of flaws: The story feels disjointed, but in the second part it takes more time to develop it; There's a well known actress playing a man ( which is something obvious). But the main reasons of complain seem to be two: The action sequences: The intention of the filmmakers was to make them look raw and cruel, not stylish and hollywoodesque. This is not Kill Bill, or Lord of the rings. The story takes place in a real time in history, and i'm sure that the sword-fighting wasn't like in the middle earth.And Viggo: I think he's great in the role. Yes, the voice, the pronunciation of the "s", is strange. But the stance, the expression, the looks, and the physical work in general is pure gold.Final conclusion: This isn't a great movie, but a good and solid commercial one, a movie that needed to be made ( and to be watched and discussed). A movie that, finally, we Spanish people need to support. Don't let the envy blinds you, and take out your own impressions.
46 out of 64 people found the following review useful: Nice surprise - Great adaptation, 2 September 2006 Author: Paco Pil from Spain
Just saw the movie today and have to say that it was a very nice surprise.Two years ago I read a couple of books within the 5-books saga by Spanish writer Arturo Pérez Reverte and have to say that the movie captures the complexity of Capitán Alatriste and the rest of characters as well as recreates the atmosphere that is present in the books in the 17th century of Spain. Quite difficult deals bearing in mind the ambitious narrative line traced in the books, were good and bad concepts are just embossed (I guess it was like that in Spain 3-4 centuries ago).There would be a lot to say but just briefly, the story is good and entertaining, the movie is brilliant recreating the books (in my imagination, Alatriste is exactly Viggo's characterization/performance), script is powerful, actors and actresses performance's are in average good, remarking Viggo Mortensen (Alatriste), Javier Cámara (Conde-Duque de Olivares) and Juan Echanove (Francisco de Quevedo). Special mention to the clothing, light, ambiance and the interiors. Just exactly the same you can see in Velazquez and Goyas pictures in the Prado Museum in Madrid! In the bad side, I felt the rhythm was bit slow a few times, and maybe more digital effects to recreate opened scenarios would have been good idea. But maybe these are just personal feelings (used to megaproductions!).Nice surprise from the Spanish industry. Entertaining. I will definitely read the three books left in the saga!
33 out of 43 people found the following review useful: Beautifully filmed and solid period movie, 8 September 2006 Author: chimichambo from Barcelona
I enjoyed Alatriste; it's not your typical fast-paced Hollywood action flick (if you go see it expecting something of the sort, you'll probably be disappointed and bored) and the plot is not too clearly defined, but it has an excellent cinematography and costume design that recreate Velazquez's Spain, and most of the actors are very good. Mortensen is an awesome Capitán Alatriste despite his slight accent. You can see he took this role very seriously. He fits perfectly into the roguish, ruthless but noble character's skin. The sword fights are nicely choreographed. The atmosphere of seventeen-century Spain and the historical context are superbly recreated. Actually, I find there are interesting parallels between the decay of the Spanish Empire and present day United States, between the "tercios" and the US Marines. I recommend this film highly to anybody who's interested in period films, or who likes Mortensen as an actor.
37 out of 51 people found the following review useful: A superb movie with one or two stains..., 3 September 2006 Author: lexesblancas from Madrid, Spain
Alatriste is definitely one of the best Spanish movies of the last years.The cast is definitely wonderful with special mention to Javier Cámara as Count-Duke of Olivares, Juan Echanove as Francisco de Quevedo, Eduard Fernández as Sebastián Copons and Elena Anaya as Angélica de Alquézar. The rest of the cast is pretty good as well with the possible exception of Martín Saldaña being played by Francesc Garrido whose acting just didn't move me.The music is gorgeous and a big effort was made to reproduce the atmosphere both in the filthy dangerous streets of XVII century's Madrid and in the opulent royal palaces and nobility's villas.The decadence of the Empire and the selfish and greedy courtesan life is very well shown as well.I would remark just two weak points in my opinion: 1) The attempt to concentrate 5 books in a single film makes you get the feeling that the script lacks continuity at some points, even when the story is a good one itself.2) Although the atmosphere of the narrow old streets of Madrid is well reproduced I miss scenes where whole areas of imperial Madrid can be seen. The Austria's castle or the Plaza Mayor could have been shown in order to display a general view of the city's architectonic grandeur. However no open areas can be seen in the movie and it's all narrow streets and little squares which can be confusing at some points.Even if I think it could be improved, I find Alatriste worth a visit to your favourite theatre.
31 out of 40 people found the following review useful: Intrigue, love and loyalty: a big-budget portrait of a 17th century Spanish mercenary, 10 September 2006 Author: westofcordoba from Spain
It's big-budget, it boasts extras by the planeload, and a broad historical panorama: it's all about intrigue, loyalty, love, and loads of a real man doing what a real man's gotta do. This is the Spanish film industry's most serious attempt yet to break into the mainstream international market, and Viggo Mortensen's brooding, laconic Alatriste makes a convincing bid for the job. A heroic figure despite himself, Alatriste is the poor bloody footsoldier whose unquestioning courage provided the flesh and blood foundations of the Siglo de Oro, the golden age of the early 17th Century when the Spanish crown laid claim to half of western Europe.In scuffed boots and floppy fedora, Mortensen cuts an attractive figure in an amoral, down-at-heel sort of way: women are prepared to leave their husbands for him, men fight for the privilege of dying at his side. We are led, or perhaps bullied, on an epic sweep through the muck and bullets of Spain's military meddling in its neighbours' affairs, seen through the jaundiced eyes of Alatriste and his fellow hired hands. Death is a constant presence; if you're not torn apart by a cannonball on the battlefield, or knifed in a dark alley, it may well come for you in the shape of the Inquisition – and in which case, you might be better off cutting your own throat.We cut frantically and frequently back to the Spanish court, where the grandees plot and connive, and we just know that someone inconvenient is about to get dispatched to the colonies at the very least. Here, Alatriste's glint-eyed soldier's determination gives way to the quizzical gaze of a hard man out of his depth, as matters of State are signed and sealed on oaken desks. Watch your back -- you get the impression that the most blood-sodden battlefield is a far safer place to be.The film covers a massive swathe of turbulent European history, some three decades of a long Spanish Catholic struggle against the Protestant heretics of the Low Countries. And this, perhaps, is the film's greatest flaw – the screenplay is a pull-together of some of the most dramatic episodes from a clutch of Arturo Pérez-Reverte's Captain Alatriste books, and the joins show badly. Sub-plots come and go in a tangle, and the film develops its undoubted dynamism from a regular dripfeed of another bit of swashbuckling, or whispered courtly dirty deeds, rather than the convincing development of any interplay between the characters themselves. For such a valiant warrior, poor Alatriste doesn't seem to have much say in his destiny.That said, the film looks fabulous, from the opening misty waterlogged shots off the Flanders coast, to the final crunching battle of Rocroi. Director of Photography Paco Femenia -- responsible for the similarly atmospheric Carmen and Juana la Loca -- takes his inspiration from the contemporary canvases of Velásquez to evoke an atmosphere painted in rich earthy tones; the camera conveys the glittering sterility of the Spanish court as tangibly as the dirt that Alatriste and his ever-dwindling band of chums are forced to eat – so often without pay -- to enable their lordships to live in the appropriate style.The film, at two hours and 20 minutes, rattles along well, but is too long. If only director Augustín Díaz Yanes had the faith in the attraction and bankability of his lead character to take a deep breath, and slice the action up into more manageable chunks: a trilogy, even. Why not? Everybody else seems to be doing it, and so often with inferior material to this.
32 out of 43 people found the following review useful: A good history film, 6 September 2006 Author: malaksabo from Spain
XVII Spanish Century is too rich to be told in two hours and a half, and that's what the film has tried. Perhaps too many characters that unable us to be identified with them. Alatriste is too many things in just one: the brave, the hard, the rebel, the lover, the good father... but far from us. I don't think it is Viggo's problem. If you read the novels you will find the same lack. Although we have expected more of this film, it would be unfair to say that this film is not worthy watching it. Actors are great, also wigs and customs (sometimes Spanish people cannot forget them without wigs!). Battles and photography are excellent. The films' atmosphere is much more better than other history films, the fog, the use of light. Go, watch it and make your opinion!
93 out of 168 people found the following review useful: Why? Oh Lord!, 2 September 2006 Author: Arturo Briones-Carcaré from Spain
Firstly, I must say I haven't read the Alatriste books, so my comments are not based at all in the classic 'book into film' translation disappointment.As a trained professional filmmaker my opinions can't be and are not based in personal taste; they actually are not opinion, but fact analysis: This film, which I really, really expected to be a very good one, specially after watching the cinema trailer (which is really good, something exceptional, as Spanish trailers go), got me shocked when I saw it on its premiere day in Spain: It is really, really bad. Why am I saying this? I'll summarize it within the supplied word allowance: The script and direction (from a technical point of view) is just plain bad storytelling. The film being just a succession of events loosely related, like scattered paintbrush strokes which just give a vague impression of a whole when seen in its entirety from a distance (too many books to condense into a single film?); and mostly poorly covered, with far too many close shots and close-ups (some of them really painful to watch) and an acute scarcity of wide coverage, in part probably due to lack of big enough period locations and sets (a not big enough budget???), and in general Diaz-Yanes shows a constant clumsiness in terms of telling through a meaningful succession of shots; apparently more interested in portraying period scenarios in a painterly manner (mostly a là Velazquez) than in actually telling a story.Another example of this is the scene in which the interior of a Spanish galley is shown just to tell us the character played by Unax Ugalde is to be released from his chained rowing penalty. An incredibly expensive scene which adds nothing to the film but a nice-looking moving postcard.The 10,000 extras who worked in the film were not used very wisely. While there were far too many in some Madrid street scenes, both the Breda scenes and the long shots, specially in the Spainish side coverage of the battle of Rocroi scenes showed a ludicrously small amount of extras - casualties included (they could have even multiplied digitally the number, but no - ???!).Most of the cast is both not very good but quite famous, a fact sadly usual in Spain; but to be fair, both a good deal of their dialogue and scenes and their direction were also quite bad, something which is a real handicap, kind of 'Mission: Impossible'. But not all of them rated so low: Javier Cámara (in the role of the Count-Duke of Olivares) was not too bad, even better was Juan Echanove, who plays the role of writer Francisco de Quevedo, and specially Eduard Fernández's performance was a fine one. Viggo Mortensen's is good as well, but his effort at adapting his Spanish accent with a harsh voice does not quite work and in some places his forced speech works against a proper intonation.The editing of the film is just plain rubbish. The story simply doesn't flow; the scenes just bump one against the previous. Though I have the suspicion it is probably about the best any editor could have made out of the material supplied and also that he probably had to follow wrong directions and clean out loads of out-of-focus shots, of which nevertheless the final cut is still well supplied. All that would exonerate the editor. You just can't cut into the film what you don't have available.Regarding the cinematography, leaving aside the usual corrected clearly underexposed shots (which an untrained eye can't detect as such), it is a mix of very good work and wrong choices: The lighting in the night battle scenes is just too clichéd in its intense blue-hued over-lit lighting. The general dark shadowy moody style was appropriate in most scenes, but in others it is just excessive. And then, the tavern scenes are far too bright when they naturally asked for a dim atmosphere.The film's best asset is undoubtedly its art direction. A first class work with little to object if at all.But disappointment is not the worst the film raises. The saddest thing is that if the film fails at the box-office it will work against future efforts by other filmmakers in getting the industry to back ambitious high budget projects and thus it would have helped the Spanish film industry to remain at the low level in which it keeps stagnated.In the other hand, if all the hype surrounding the film and the unusually high promotion it's been given, together with the almost sure success the film will have at the next Goya Awards (the Spanish Academy Awards), results in a big box-office success; as quality is never what drives the interest in film investment, it could lead, paradoxically, to a positive change in the Spanish film industry.Let's hope it works for the best.
Add another review
