25 reviews
A good film about a young general who wants to change the world, and an old writer who wants to bid it farewell
- Nazi_Fighter_David
- Apr 12, 2007
- Permalink
Old Gringo Review
Mexico in the teen years of the last century was no place to be, not even for Mexicans as the country broke down completely after the overthrow of dictator Porfirio Diaz. A lot of people grabbed for power, including one Pancho Villa who got emboldened enough to cross the U.S. border and shoot up Columbus, New Mexico. That got Woodrow Wilson to sending the army to capture Villa without success.
But that's getting way ahead of this story. It concerns American writer Ambrose Bierce who went to revolutionary Mexico and disappeared into obscurity much in the manner of the French poet Francois Villon. The plot of this film offers a theory as to what could have happened to Bierce.
Dominating the film is Gregory Peck in the title role. He captures Bierce in all of his sardonic cynicism for which his writing lives on. This Bierce has all the reason to just want to leave his world behind, his wife had recently died, but not after being discovered to be involved with another man. Two of his three children, both of his sons died violent deaths. Bierce was a man who felt he had no reason to live on.
Peck gets involved with two other people in a romantic triangle, Jane Fonda as a spinster who gets hired to tutor some landowner children and Jimmy Smits who's using the revolution to settle some personal scores with that same landowner family. In fact Smits gets himself rather caught up in the whole ambiance of being to the manor born with what he feels are good reasons.
All though all three of the leads have been in much better product, Old Gringo still is a good piece of cinema and does capture some of the anarchy that was revolutionary Mexico.
But that's getting way ahead of this story. It concerns American writer Ambrose Bierce who went to revolutionary Mexico and disappeared into obscurity much in the manner of the French poet Francois Villon. The plot of this film offers a theory as to what could have happened to Bierce.
Dominating the film is Gregory Peck in the title role. He captures Bierce in all of his sardonic cynicism for which his writing lives on. This Bierce has all the reason to just want to leave his world behind, his wife had recently died, but not after being discovered to be involved with another man. Two of his three children, both of his sons died violent deaths. Bierce was a man who felt he had no reason to live on.
Peck gets involved with two other people in a romantic triangle, Jane Fonda as a spinster who gets hired to tutor some landowner children and Jimmy Smits who's using the revolution to settle some personal scores with that same landowner family. In fact Smits gets himself rather caught up in the whole ambiance of being to the manor born with what he feels are good reasons.
All though all three of the leads have been in much better product, Old Gringo still is a good piece of cinema and does capture some of the anarchy that was revolutionary Mexico.
- bkoganbing
- May 8, 2007
- Permalink
It looks nice...but that's all...
The idea for this film isn't bad. Back in 1913, a sickly and aging writer (Ambrose Bierce) decided to go to one of the most exciting and dangerous places on the planet--Mexico during the revolution that followed the ouster of the dictator, Porfirio Diaz. While no one knows for sure why he chose to do this, the film's contention that he was suicidal and wanted to "go out with a bang" seems quite reasonable. However, exactly what happened to the man is a total mystery--and to this day no one knows exactly what happened to him. Contact with his simply stopped! This film seems to create a fictionalized idea of what COULD have happened to Bierce (played by Gregory Peck). However, the film did so by creating a fictionalized character of an American teacher (Jane Fonda) who gets tricked into walking into the midst of the fighting--and, naturally, slowly is won over to the side of the soldiers of Pancho Villa--though Villa himself does not appear in the film until the end. In the meantime, Fonda and Peck meet with and spend time with General Aroyo (I have no idea if he was a real person or fictionalized--I assume he was fictionalized since I found nothing on him on the internet). Aroyo is played by Jimmy Smits.
So what did I think of this film? Well, on one hand it was a lovely film. The music and cinematography worked together to make a film that was quite pleasing to the senses. The slow pacing and evocative spirit was quite nice. Plus, the three leads are all very good actors and you have to respect their talents. However, despite these factors, the film also had a lot of problems--too many to make it worth seeking out yourself. While it looked good, the film was, after a while, incredibly boring. The plot just seemed to stagnate after a while and seemed to go no where--like they never really worked out the plot completely. And, the most serious problem is that it's hard to like or relate to the characters. Just when you start to connect with them, they behave in ways that make you either hate them or wonder what the @%## motivates them. It's rare to see a movie that has characters that are more ill-defined--and excellent acting can't make up for that.
There is one final problem with the film, though most who watch it won't realize it. As a history teacher, I was well acquainted with the Mexican revolution. The various factions, frankly, were all pretty screwed up! While there were things to admire about Pancho Villa and his faction, he was also a blood-thirsty bandit as well as reformer--provided HE was the one doing all the reforms. As for the alternatives, they weren't any better. The ideas of land reform and democracy were wonderful--too bad no one leading any of the factions really did anything to actually improve the lot for the average Mexican! A lot of people died, but essentially the country wasn't much better off when all was said and done. So, in a war when there are no clear "good guys", who do you care about in this film?!
As for Miss Fonda and Mr. Peck, they both have been long-time leftists--and very pro-revolution. I strongly suspect that this is why they made this film. I am all in favor of revolution when it means getting rid of evil, but like the Beatles song "Revolution", such movements need to have more to them than just a desire to change things. I wish in hindsight they'd chosen a more productive and life-changing revolution to dramatize--such as the "Velvet Revolution" Czechsolovakia or the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Just my two cents worth.
So what did I think of this film? Well, on one hand it was a lovely film. The music and cinematography worked together to make a film that was quite pleasing to the senses. The slow pacing and evocative spirit was quite nice. Plus, the three leads are all very good actors and you have to respect their talents. However, despite these factors, the film also had a lot of problems--too many to make it worth seeking out yourself. While it looked good, the film was, after a while, incredibly boring. The plot just seemed to stagnate after a while and seemed to go no where--like they never really worked out the plot completely. And, the most serious problem is that it's hard to like or relate to the characters. Just when you start to connect with them, they behave in ways that make you either hate them or wonder what the @%## motivates them. It's rare to see a movie that has characters that are more ill-defined--and excellent acting can't make up for that.
There is one final problem with the film, though most who watch it won't realize it. As a history teacher, I was well acquainted with the Mexican revolution. The various factions, frankly, were all pretty screwed up! While there were things to admire about Pancho Villa and his faction, he was also a blood-thirsty bandit as well as reformer--provided HE was the one doing all the reforms. As for the alternatives, they weren't any better. The ideas of land reform and democracy were wonderful--too bad no one leading any of the factions really did anything to actually improve the lot for the average Mexican! A lot of people died, but essentially the country wasn't much better off when all was said and done. So, in a war when there are no clear "good guys", who do you care about in this film?!
As for Miss Fonda and Mr. Peck, they both have been long-time leftists--and very pro-revolution. I strongly suspect that this is why they made this film. I am all in favor of revolution when it means getting rid of evil, but like the Beatles song "Revolution", such movements need to have more to them than just a desire to change things. I wish in hindsight they'd chosen a more productive and life-changing revolution to dramatize--such as the "Velvet Revolution" Czechsolovakia or the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Just my two cents worth.
- planktonrules
- Mar 7, 2010
- Permalink
A journey of a beginning and an end
In 1913, Harriet Winslow (Jane Fonda) is hired by a Mexican family as a governess, but she then is kidnapped by Gen Tomas Arroyo (Jimmy Smits) and along with other revolutionaries. She also meets Ambrose Bierce (Gregory Peck), who conceals his true identity and who is ready to die on this foreign land. The three of them form a love triangle, Harriet becomes Tomas's lover and her affection towards Bierce is rather like a daughter to a father. But when Tomas invades the house of Miranda, where his birth father, the master, rapes his mother and where his shoots Mr Miranda dead when he is seventeen, he becomes so haunted by his past and obsessed with the old papers. As he befriends Bierce, he also turns into a ruthless commander. In the end, things get tragic- Harriet is determined to fulfill Bierce' dying wish of not being publicised and Tomas has to face his ultimate punishment. Harriet now is the sole survivor who remembers her two beloved men. 'He said I would forget. But how could I not remember?'
I really like this film. Jimmy Smits is excellent as the tormented general and Gregory Peck was marvellous as the disillusioned writer and journalist. Jane Fonda is not too bad. The direction is okay, the story is very poignant and twisted. All in all, a nicely done drama.
I really like this film. Jimmy Smits is excellent as the tormented general and Gregory Peck was marvellous as the disillusioned writer and journalist. Jane Fonda is not too bad. The direction is okay, the story is very poignant and twisted. All in all, a nicely done drama.
- RachelLone
- Mar 15, 2004
- Permalink
Peck is mesmerizing, but it's just too long.
- audiemurph
- Aug 31, 2014
- Permalink
Despite some positives, overall a disappointment
- vincentlynch-moonoi
- Jan 1, 2015
- Permalink
A Revolutionary Misfire
- dedwardloftin
- Jul 11, 2005
- Permalink
Not bad, but too cluttered
Old Gringo is perhaps not as bad as has been made out by other reviewers, but it is not without its problems. The basic plot (generic war movie) is sufficient, but casting three headliners and trying to make sure they all get their stories and screen time in hollows out all three characters. All three characters were actually worthy of being portrayed as the lead, but it seems that none of the trio actually was. The movie would actually have been better with slightly lesser actors in two of the roles and more emphasis on just one of them.
I'm sure being a "Fonda Film" there was some thinly veiled commentary about something or another, but I either didn't catch it or didn't care enough to pay attention. I'd say it's an OK watch if you can find it for free, but maybe not worth paying for.
I'm sure being a "Fonda Film" there was some thinly veiled commentary about something or another, but I either didn't catch it or didn't care enough to pay attention. I'd say it's an OK watch if you can find it for free, but maybe not worth paying for.
Us old gringos have a lot to learn about life according to the non-gringos.
- mark.waltz
- Aug 4, 2017
- Permalink
Interesting tale
A cpmplcated story with complicated subjects all coming to some kind of end. Jimmy Smits performs well.
Start the revolution without me!
Mix a sexually repressed teacher(Fonda),a fiery revolutionary(Smits), and a dying author(Peck) with hundreds of Mexican extras, mariachi's, romance, pretty photography and you've got Old Stinko: a boring, lackluster cliché ridden waste of time for all involved. Essentially, it's The Rainmaker(56) set against the background of the Mexican Revolution. This misbegotten project lacks a purpose for being and never really involves the audience. Smits is cliché but less ridiculous than the other 2 characters who suck the life out of the movie and get in the way of the background which while pretty and pleasing to the eye is too pretty and overblown for the sketchy story being told. Peck plays Ambrose Bierce like Atticus Finch, and the scenes between he and Fonda recall Atticus and Scout in To Kill a Mockingbird. As the wide eyed pupil/teacher Fonda is unconvincing and embarrassing, and Peck is a hollow bore. The people involved in this project should have asked themselves Why will audiences care? They didn't, and the film was a box office and critical disappointment. Just ignore it, and it will go away.
Brilliant in all respects
The director, Luis Puenzo, crafted an extraordinary vision of the drama that confronts players when they decide to make revolution. Puenzo took us behind the scenes of a sweeping political struggle and made the viewer examine the personal details and the personal confrontations of the actors as they tred the stage of events that were much bigger than themselves.
I know, I know-all of this has been done before; it's formula scrip work but the brilliance of the cast and the direction make Old Gringo into a movie that you will return to over and over again like a favourite old wine or a dish that you never tire of eating.
The principal cast of Fonda, Smits and Peck enliven an already sumptuous tapestry woven by Puenzo. The film is visually rich and the eye is as entranced by the beauty of the scenes as much as the mind is satisfied with the meat of the story.
People owe it to themselves to see such a rich film.
I know, I know-all of this has been done before; it's formula scrip work but the brilliance of the cast and the direction make Old Gringo into a movie that you will return to over and over again like a favourite old wine or a dish that you never tire of eating.
The principal cast of Fonda, Smits and Peck enliven an already sumptuous tapestry woven by Puenzo. The film is visually rich and the eye is as entranced by the beauty of the scenes as much as the mind is satisfied with the meat of the story.
People owe it to themselves to see such a rich film.
A lost opportunity
Although the story had a great potential, although the production was supporting and although the trio in the leading roles performed honorably, this film was ultimately betrayed by the director and notably the editor. It frequently looks incoherent, the scenes do not tie with each other and the result is so superficial (and superfluous at times) it looks like tv and soap opera. I remember the other historical drama N&S from the '80s - although it was done for tv it was ambitious and had quality. Not this one though - the few good moments (especially between Gregory Peck and Fonda) are abandoned and almost suffocated by the mediocrity of the entire. Maybe the director should have worked with Mexicans.
Don't let the details kill a good story
Gregory Peck's over the top performance and Jimmy Smits in over his head do not however destroy a good story. Jane Fonda truly loved this story but even she looks lost in the pages told. But just imagine the last days of Bitter as recounted here. Just picture the upheaval and pain so universally shared by any people in the throes of hell and in the midst, yeah corny, but in the midst of that pain, the universal tale of hope and love. Sacrifice for something bigger than yourself. A story teller must always moralize. Worth the watch. All romantics welcomed. (PS Note to director: There are light skin Mexicans (not me but others) - no need for the garish make-up - ugh.)
Some GREAT performances- Peck is Inspiring
There is more soul in this film than in 50 'modern' films.
While there is a lot of bad acting, and many other flaws in this movie, there are some GREAT scenes, great dialog, great characters, and great performances. Gregory Peck has some very memorable, outstanding monologues, there are many interesting and complex relationships, and there are no simple resolutions to conflicts.
Again- there are many areas of the film that do not work: doesn't matter, ignore them. There is tremendous depth here, and a lot of value to draw from the good parts of this movie. Peck and Smits are great, and even Fonda has some excellent moments.
They don't make 'em like this any more, and they don't make actors like Peck.
While there is a lot of bad acting, and many other flaws in this movie, there are some GREAT scenes, great dialog, great characters, and great performances. Gregory Peck has some very memorable, outstanding monologues, there are many interesting and complex relationships, and there are no simple resolutions to conflicts.
Again- there are many areas of the film that do not work: doesn't matter, ignore them. There is tremendous depth here, and a lot of value to draw from the good parts of this movie. Peck and Smits are great, and even Fonda has some excellent moments.
They don't make 'em like this any more, and they don't make actors like Peck.
Adapted from Carlos Fuentes' novel and set in the turbulent period of mexican history.
This is a novelization of writer Ambrose Bierce's mysterious disappearance in Mexico during the bloody revoution in 1913. Features two big-name stars: Jane Fonda in the unlikely character of a virgin schoolteacher and a wasted Gregory Peck in the title role, adding atmospheric sets and costumes. A North American teacher, Harrier Winslow (Jane Fonda, besides carrying the voice-over), recently arrived in Mexico to work in a wealthy family, finds herself involved in this outbreak of the Revolution. In this situation she lives a romance with one of Pancho Villa's generals , Arroyo (Jimmy Smits' silly moustache), while at the same time she finds herself attracted to Gringo Viejo (Gregory Peck), a North American writer who has traveled to Mexico to die. In the autumn of his years Ambrose finds a surrogate family, a daughter and a satisfying quietus. Harriet Winslow is something of a stereotype, initially brittle and later melted by love. Some people spend their whole lives searching for something !. Some people find it. A woman inspired by a man of dreams swept into the arms of a general, and drawn into a worlds of danger !.
Novelist Carlos Fuentes speculation about what actually befell writer Ambrose Bierce when he joined Pancho Villa's revolution down Mexico way in 1913 makes a riveting but no superior story. Technical troubles and cheesy script spoil the triumph that the producers expected, which turned out to be a commercial flop. Enjoyable but uneven film, it is rich in characters, Mexican environment, relationships and cultural clashes. The movie, though it doesn't look particularly notable, and often sounds rather literary, certainly bulges with content, and the principals, Ambrose Bierce: Gregory Peck, middled-aged spinster: Jane Fonda and revolutionary general Arroyo: Jimmy Smits grab the dramatic opportunities with both hands. The picture can't substantiate its claim to play out the personal drama in terms of this thunderous period history, but it's a worthy project and will probably send people back to the book in order to explore better the interesting roles and even better to Ambrose Bierce himself. Functional acting by all: Jane Fonda, Jimmy Smits but Gregory Peck, whose presence is wasted in a sketchy and unlikely role. They're accompanied by a fine cast, mainly Mexican secondaries, such as: Gabriela Roel, Jenny Gago, Patricio Contreras, Sergio Calderón, Jim Metzler, Josefina Echánove, Pedro Damián and Pedro Armendáriz Jr.
In Old Gringo(1989) excels the sensitive and evocative musical score by Lee Holdridge. Likewise , a colorful and brilliant cinematography by cameraman Félix Monti. The motion picture was unevenly directed by Luis Puenzo, including some flaws, gaps and shortcomings. Luis Puenzo was born in Buenos Aires (1946) Argentina, he's a director and producer known for Luces en los zapatos (1973), Las sorpresas (1975), La peste (1992) y Broken Silence (2002), La puta y la ballena (2004) and especially La historia oficial (The official story1985), which won the Oscar for Argentina for best foreign film. Rating: 5.5/10. It is a passable and acceptable film, but better to read the novel.
Novelist Carlos Fuentes speculation about what actually befell writer Ambrose Bierce when he joined Pancho Villa's revolution down Mexico way in 1913 makes a riveting but no superior story. Technical troubles and cheesy script spoil the triumph that the producers expected, which turned out to be a commercial flop. Enjoyable but uneven film, it is rich in characters, Mexican environment, relationships and cultural clashes. The movie, though it doesn't look particularly notable, and often sounds rather literary, certainly bulges with content, and the principals, Ambrose Bierce: Gregory Peck, middled-aged spinster: Jane Fonda and revolutionary general Arroyo: Jimmy Smits grab the dramatic opportunities with both hands. The picture can't substantiate its claim to play out the personal drama in terms of this thunderous period history, but it's a worthy project and will probably send people back to the book in order to explore better the interesting roles and even better to Ambrose Bierce himself. Functional acting by all: Jane Fonda, Jimmy Smits but Gregory Peck, whose presence is wasted in a sketchy and unlikely role. They're accompanied by a fine cast, mainly Mexican secondaries, such as: Gabriela Roel, Jenny Gago, Patricio Contreras, Sergio Calderón, Jim Metzler, Josefina Echánove, Pedro Damián and Pedro Armendáriz Jr.
In Old Gringo(1989) excels the sensitive and evocative musical score by Lee Holdridge. Likewise , a colorful and brilliant cinematography by cameraman Félix Monti. The motion picture was unevenly directed by Luis Puenzo, including some flaws, gaps and shortcomings. Luis Puenzo was born in Buenos Aires (1946) Argentina, he's a director and producer known for Luces en los zapatos (1973), Las sorpresas (1975), La peste (1992) y Broken Silence (2002), La puta y la ballena (2004) and especially La historia oficial (The official story1985), which won the Oscar for Argentina for best foreign film. Rating: 5.5/10. It is a passable and acceptable film, but better to read the novel.
"Tolerate me, please"
Not for Bierceophiles, but not too bad (slight spoiler)
Peck, as usual, is great...
Gregory Peck is great here, as he is one of the finest actors ever. Smits does a fine job here, too. But I could really do without Fonda. Anyone would have been better than she is here. I suffered through her parts just to watch the others.
Peck's Great Ambrose Bierce Buried
A truly wonderful performance by Gregory Peck as Ambrose Bierce is blurred & upstaged by the director.
- spivinsink
- Jan 3, 2019
- Permalink
Interesting Movie, Great Book
somewhere in here
American schoolteacher Harriet Winslow (Jane Fonda) finds herself caught up in the Mexican revolution when the Federals set a trap for the revolutionaries. The revolutionaries set their own trap by smuggling weapons in her luggage. Meanwhile, author Ambrose "Old Gringo/bitter" Bierce (Gregory Peck) is looking to join Pancho Villa and befriends one of his military leaders, Gen. Arroyo (Jimmy Smits).
Jane Fonda seems to be the protagonist in this one and it's not a good thing. I don't care for her character both in writing and in acting. I also don't care for Jimmy Smits' erratic character. Their romance is awkward and it goes into bad melodrama. It's trying to say something about the Mexican identity but it's completely lost in this mess. Gregory Peck could be a better protagonist but even his character has some weird moments. There is a good movie somewhere in here. It seems to be based on an award winning novel which only adds to the disappointment. Like the character himself, the movie gets stuck and does not recover.
Jane Fonda seems to be the protagonist in this one and it's not a good thing. I don't care for her character both in writing and in acting. I also don't care for Jimmy Smits' erratic character. Their romance is awkward and it goes into bad melodrama. It's trying to say something about the Mexican identity but it's completely lost in this mess. Gregory Peck could be a better protagonist but even his character has some weird moments. There is a good movie somewhere in here. It seems to be based on an award winning novel which only adds to the disappointment. Like the character himself, the movie gets stuck and does not recover.
- SnoopyStyle
- Dec 21, 2020
- Permalink
Another One of Those Corn-Filled Vehicles of the 1980s That No One Rode.
Opulent mess that died at the box office and with critics alike in 1989. In early-20th Century Mexico an American school teacher (Jane Fonda) is kidnapped by a desperado (Jimmy Smits) and his rebellious gang. The titled character (Gregory Peck) is slowly dying of an illness and tries to get himself killed by Smits on numerous occasions as he also tries to get Fonda to safety. Strangely a bond develops between Smits and Peck just as Fonda becomes Smits' lover and then surprisingly Fonda learns who Peck really is and falls in love with him as well (and also tries to fulfill his dying wish). "Old Gringo" is a lot of smoke and sand that tries to become the "Dr. Zhivago" of its time, but falls completely. The big-name performers cannot make it through a story that drags along and never gets to a suitable pay-off. The direction is disastrous too and we are left with a huh? movie that really means nothing at all. 2.5 out of 5 stars.
The Old Maid, the Old Gringo and the Young Revolutionary
- weezeralfalfa
- Jun 15, 2008
- Permalink
I was awed by it every time I watched it
A great story from a famous Mexican writer, Carlos Fuentes. The movie was great for a person like me. The story was like a parable of human frailties, desires, loves of different kinds, and revenge, all while being a part of the Mexican Revolution. Gregory Peck is one of my heroes and Jane Fonda is another, both for different reasons, but they're both bigger than life to me, as the story also was bigger than life to me. And film-making at its finest, as far as I'm concerned.