Las nieves del Kilimanjaro

Director Henry King is what keeps this movie from getting 10 stars. Yet, despite his poor cinematography, poor directing and failure to take advantage of scenic backdrops (yet they shine through occasionally), the cast and the story save the film.

Peck portrays former Chicago Times journalist Harry Street, a fictional character penned by Ernest Hemmingway, portraying a strong glimpse himself . . . a bit ego-centric while feigning humility and modesty. Peck is superb at bringing Harry Street to life . . . and Hemmingway is always looming in the background of Street's character, like a phantom . . . the boozing womanizer, masking his insecurities with alcohol, egotism, aloofness toward other's feelings and needs. The beautiful, sexy, gorgeous Ava Gardner, one of the VERY few Hollywood starlets who could actually act, gives an excellent performance as the emotionally insecure, very dependent, sexually charged, less than moral, love of his life. Co-dependency could have been based on her character, Cynthia Green. Cynthia was too insecure to let Street live his life . . . Street was too self-centered and aloof to recognize Cynthia's emotional needs . . . very Hemmingway!

As he lay delirious on a bed in Africa, from a thorn scratch infection, snow covered Mt. Kilimanjaro looming in the background, Street recalls the lost loves of his past years, with Cynthia dominating his memories, as his one true love. His current wife, Helen, portrayed by Susan Hayward, tries desperately to find her place in his life, always feeling herself in the shadow of Cynthia and a later love, Countess Liz, played by Hildegard Neff, a selfish and insecure socialite, desperate to hang onto Street. Feverishly, Street flows in and out of consciousness, the scenes from his memories playing out in his mind, as Helen compassionately wipes his sweaty brow and tries to care for him, as he pushes her away.

This is a good film! Hemmingway fans should receive it well, as should fans of Peck and Gardner.

The interesting characters and some good performances are what keep this adaptation of Ernest Hemingway's "The Snows of Kilimanjaro" going. Many of the story details reflect the movie's source, although it has a heavier, slower tone instead of Hemingway's own economical style of writing. The scenes of hunting, bull-fighting, and combat all fit in with Hemingway's fascination with vigorous action, and the screenplay does make some use of Hemingway's 'leopard riddle', but not with any significant depth. Instead, it does have a lot of photography of African scenery and wildlife, which is good in itself.

Gregory Peck gives his usual effective performance in the lead role as Harry, a jaded writer who reflects on his past loves as he suffers through the effects of a dangerous injury. Peck fleshes out the character believably, alternating between the writer's energetic but flawed personality in the flashbacks and his increasing delirium in the present. It's a different kind of role for Peck, and he thus adapts his style somewhat from that of his more well- remembered roles.

Ava Gardner and Susan Hayward, along with Hildegarde Neff in a smaller part, portray the women in Harry's past and present. Gardner's ethereal elegance makes a nice contrast with Hayward's stronger screen persona, and Neff's characterization is a believable depiction of the unsuitable woman whom Harry finds during a time of despair.

The characters and the African atmosphere are the parts of the movie that work the best, and they make it worth seeing. It moves rather slowly, and occasionally expends screen time on less interesting material, or otherwise it might have been more compelling. It still leaves you with a thoughtful impression of its main characters.

Having saved a young man from a hippo, writer Harry Street lies dying from an infection in his African safari campsite. As his unappreciated wife Helen tends to his wounds and ensures him everything will be alright, Harry sinks into feverish reminiscing about a life that he perceives as being a failure in terms of both writing and his love life. He recalls the one woman that he believes he truly loved which, helpfully for Helen, isn't his current wife but a woman called Cynthia Green whom he met in Paris. The more he recalls the deeper his depression and the more Helen watches him surrendering his fight and will to live.

Taking a "deathbed" flashback structure we always know that things between Harry and his other loves didn't work out and the only question is "why". On paper we are meant to be with a bitter angry man who is facing death with a superficial devil-may-care attitude but underneath carries a deep sense of regret. The first problem I encountered with the film was that the script didn't carry this off very well at all and I wasn't convinced about the supposed years of failure that are stacked on top of Harry – people with such things have much more baggage than came out here. The flashbacks are reasonable interesting but are closer to melodrama than a searing tale of regret and loss, which personally I thought it should have been. The film does flit around the world which must have been a selling point for it at the time of release but it doesn't actually add much to the story or characters other than providing a different background for some scenes.

King's direction is fairly workmanlike; he enjoys the locations but the mix of his footage with stock footage doesn't sit well together – I know it is a limitation of the period but it still doesn't work. Peck is solid enough in the lead but he does the superficial things and doesn't get to grips with anything deeper or more complex. He gets no help from Hayward who is watching her husband long for women past but never appears to have any problem with this whatsoever. Gardner is pretty but again she doesn't convince in her character when asked to do anything more (seeing her in the middle of the Spanish civil war was pretty funny as well). Support from Leo G Carroll is always welcome but he doesn't have much to work with here.

Overall this is a so-so film that never fulfils its potential or is as engaging as it should have been. Instead of being complex and full of pain it is melodramatic and soapy; instead of being about the tragic souls of the characters it seems to have as much interest in stock footage and global locations. The cast give solid but superficial performances in response to this and the film never really gets a handle on any of it.

This film has been in the public domain for years and every copy I've seen on video or DVD as well as the ones I've seen on TV all feature a pretty lousy print. Perhaps there is a clean one out there somewhere, but I haven't seen it. And, after watching the film all the way through (something I have attempted unsuccessfully before on several occasions), I could see why no one bothered to protect the copyright on this film. While it isn't exactly bad, it's so dull and uninspired that I am sure nobody even cared to worry about royalties! Now think about it,...the film stars Gregory Peck, Ava Gardner and Susan Hayward and is based on the tumultuous life of Ernest Hemmingway and it still is very dull in places and at best an ordinary film (though I won't be that generous).

So why is it such a disappointment? Well, the biggest problem was just how cheap the film looked. The location scenes clearly look like they were filmed by a second unit without the stars and the close-up scenes appear as if they were poorly staged in front of filmed footage. While I might expect this sort of sloppiness from an old one-reel comedy, I don't expect it from a big-budget film with top Hollywood talent. It really looked as if they spent too much on the stars and had nothing left to make the film! The other problem was that although Hemingway led a very adventurous life and traveled the world, once you dig beneath the exterior, you are left with a pretty rotten person who isn't exactly cuddly and endearing. While his devoted friends and fans probably will care whether Peck survives his injury, I found I just didn't particularly care--as the character Peck played didn't care--nor did I. And what you are left with are a long series of mildly interesting of flashbacks that tell about the author. The only way the film really works is as a psychological study--not as entertainment.

I usually like old films and the title and cast of this one seemed a good bet. What a disappointment. Peck is grossly miscast - he's just not the gigolo he's portrayed, nor does he look like a man who's dying. Nor does 'Cynthia Green' convince me, even the name is too boring for the beautiful Ava Gardner. And the 'hunting' scene - sorry, standing in front of somebody else's adventure backdrop is again unconvincing as are the actual rhino shots, another time another place. The whole script is endlessly boring and I can't wait to get rid of it to the charity shop where I found it. And the 'Africans' - who are they kidding? 'What's he gonna do, sprinkle me with monkey dust?" Oh Lord, somebody please put him out of his misery and dismantle the set. The 'natives' did try to sound as though they'd learned their lines and that unconvincing chant with the luckless rhino head on a stretcher PULEASE! i don't know how painful gangrene is but Peck sure is bearing up well considering he only had his bandage changed but once and did he utter a sound when Hayward lanced the horrid green swelling? Nope, just looked his normal handsome self. Perhaps Humphrey Bogart might have managed this ponderously awful script better..but even he can't do miracles. The only one who deserved an Oscar was the hyena sniffing around the tent with a view to his next meal.