PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
6,4/10
34 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Sobre el descubrimiento de las Américas por Cristóbal Colón, y el efecto que tuvo en los pueblos indígenas.Sobre el descubrimiento de las Américas por Cristóbal Colón, y el efecto que tuvo en los pueblos indígenas.Sobre el descubrimiento de las Américas por Cristóbal Colón, y el efecto que tuvo en los pueblos indígenas.
- Premios
- 2 nominaciones en total
Ángela Molina
- Beatrix
- (as Angela Molina)
Tchéky Karyo
- Pinzon
- (as Tcheky Karyo)
Billy L. Sullivan
- Fernando (aged 10)
- (as Billy Sullivan)
Fernando Guillén Cuervo
- Giacomo
- (as Fernando G. Cuervo)
José Luis Ferrer
- Alonso
- (as Jose Luis Ferrer)
Reseñas destacadas
1992 marked the 500th anniversary of the 'discovery' of the Americas.
It meant there were a plethora of documentaries and articles on Columbus. Some were critical that he discovered a continent that already had 1 million people living there.
Others suggested that the Americas might had been discovered by others before. Also Columbus found the wrong place as he thought it was India.
Ultimately many of the original inhabitants of the continent suffered from his discovery.
1492 from Ridley Scott tries to makes sense of these contradictions. It is a gloriously flawed film that has great art direction, production and music.
A multinational cast with Depardieu speaking his lines with a heavy French accent but bringing presence. Scott scored with his supporting cast of villains, all of them hiss-able as vipers on the head of Medusa. You know early on things are going to turn ugly for the native in the new world.
Scott likes his history, he admires Islamic history and you see it early on when it comes to the Reconquista. When Moorish structures are destroyed and lost forever, it shows that the Spanish aristocrats were not appreciative of the arts and noble causes.
They only care about the monarchy, church and gold.
Columbus is painted as a romantic adventurer, misguided even naive.
Depardieu cannot quiet hold the film together, frankly his English is not good enough. It is still a bold attempt at filmmaking but we lack the real, more complex and a more greedy Columbus.
It meant there were a plethora of documentaries and articles on Columbus. Some were critical that he discovered a continent that already had 1 million people living there.
Others suggested that the Americas might had been discovered by others before. Also Columbus found the wrong place as he thought it was India.
Ultimately many of the original inhabitants of the continent suffered from his discovery.
1492 from Ridley Scott tries to makes sense of these contradictions. It is a gloriously flawed film that has great art direction, production and music.
A multinational cast with Depardieu speaking his lines with a heavy French accent but bringing presence. Scott scored with his supporting cast of villains, all of them hiss-able as vipers on the head of Medusa. You know early on things are going to turn ugly for the native in the new world.
Scott likes his history, he admires Islamic history and you see it early on when it comes to the Reconquista. When Moorish structures are destroyed and lost forever, it shows that the Spanish aristocrats were not appreciative of the arts and noble causes.
They only care about the monarchy, church and gold.
Columbus is painted as a romantic adventurer, misguided even naive.
Depardieu cannot quiet hold the film together, frankly his English is not good enough. It is still a bold attempt at filmmaking but we lack the real, more complex and a more greedy Columbus.
One of the most important events in the world.
I found it average as a movie, it was also a bit long, but I had fun watching it.
Vangelis did a great job.
I found it average as a movie, it was also a bit long, but I had fun watching it.
Vangelis did a great job.
Yes, too long, too boring, too much license on the culture, and the characters aren't very believable. Also very surprising how it can be so outrageously kind to Columbus since this film was produced at a time when politically correct forces were raking the guy into infamy. I hate to sound like a broken record, but the music was beautiful. Maybe too much so. A inconspicuously second-rate score might have been more appropriate.
Director Ridley Scott and writer Roselyne Bosch play fast and loose with historical accuracy in this white-washed telling of Christopher Columbus' adventures.
Rather than seeing the Columbus of history plundering other lands in search of gold while brutally enslaving and mass murdering the natives, we are presented with a kind, gentle, benign Columbus (portrayed by the surrealistically cast Gérard Depardieu) who's surrounded by unscrupulous characters. Scott's Columbus is an idealistic visionary who only wants "a new world," yet is a pawn caught between bad people doing bad things. Poor Columbus ... all he wants to do is explore.
Of course, this calls for *a lot* of historical revisionism for the screenplay, which re-arranges events and the instigators of them (atrocities are shifted to the work of others rather than Columbus, and for different reasons; otherwise, it's omitted from the story).
But why fictionalize history (reality is always more interesting) with this pabulum, and then pass it off as "history"? Either no research was done, or they intentionally fabricated the story; there is no other option.
"Life has more imagination than we carry in our dreams," we are told just before the closing credits. Indeed. Too bad the writer didn't follow this advice. The truth would have made far better drama.
Rather than seeing the Columbus of history plundering other lands in search of gold while brutally enslaving and mass murdering the natives, we are presented with a kind, gentle, benign Columbus (portrayed by the surrealistically cast Gérard Depardieu) who's surrounded by unscrupulous characters. Scott's Columbus is an idealistic visionary who only wants "a new world," yet is a pawn caught between bad people doing bad things. Poor Columbus ... all he wants to do is explore.
Of course, this calls for *a lot* of historical revisionism for the screenplay, which re-arranges events and the instigators of them (atrocities are shifted to the work of others rather than Columbus, and for different reasons; otherwise, it's omitted from the story).
But why fictionalize history (reality is always more interesting) with this pabulum, and then pass it off as "history"? Either no research was done, or they intentionally fabricated the story; there is no other option.
"Life has more imagination than we carry in our dreams," we are told just before the closing credits. Indeed. Too bad the writer didn't follow this advice. The truth would have made far better drama.
This film is not completely historically accurate, although it is fairly true to events. Some omissions are Columbus' mistress by which he had a second son, which is not even mentioned in the film, which tends to paint Columbus almost as a saintly figure. He was far from that. In addition to his infidelity, he was an advocate of Indian slavery, which is not mentioned in the film as well. Those miscues aside, the film is gorgeously shot, well-directed and acted, and the sense of the realities of the royal court appear to be fairly accurate. The film also fails to mention that Columbus took Indian prisoners away from their homes back to Spain against their will. The film is quite engaging, otherwise.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesThe replicas of Christopher Columbus' ships used in the film were built in Spain between 1990 and 1992. In 1992 they sailed the route of Columbus' first voyage to commemorate to 500th anniversary of the discovery of America. Today they are exhibited in Palos de la Frontera, Spain, and they are visited by approximately 200.000 people each year.
- PifiasIn the film, the nobleman Adrián de Moxica cuts the hand of a Native American because he wasn't able to pay taxes in gold to the Spaniards, something which Columbus condemns. In fact, it was Columbus himself who introduced this practice of cutting the hands.
- Versiones alternativasJapanese laserdisc is a longer cut of the film with five deleted scenes and a few extended ones. And R-rated violence that was cut for the US PG-13 version. The soundtrack for the film indicates that the film was originally much longer.
- ConexionesEdited into Spisok korabley (2008)
- Banda sonoraAmazonia
Permission of Grem Records, France
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is 1492: Conquest of Paradise?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Idiomas
- Títulos en diferentes países
- 1492: Conquista del Paraíso
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 47.000.000 US$ (estimación)
- Recaudación en Estados Unidos y Canadá
- 7.191.399 US$
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- 3.002.680 US$
- 12 oct 1992
- Recaudación en todo el mundo
- 7.191.399 US$
- Duración2 horas 34 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta
Principal laguna de datos
By what name was 1492: La conquista del paraíso (1992) officially released in India in English?
Responde