Opiniones de usuarios

Shot in Costa Rica in 1988, 'El Dorado' is one of a rare breed, a Spanish film about its own role in America in the 16th century. However, this film doesn't tell a story of glory and conquest, but one of failure and slow descent into madness.

The story is about an expedition down the Orinoco river in 1560, undertaken by Spanish soldiers with the aim of finding the famed land of El Dorado, where gold is supposedly plentiful. I suppose that it is not a spoiler to say that the place doesn't exist and that what the expeditioners find is something completely different.

The film is 142 minutes long, and not exactly action-packed, so a prospective viewer should realise that the leisurely pace is meant to reflect the utter boredom provoked by the long and uneventful days in the journey, but these 'dead' days, as in many expeditions, are punctuated by moments of high intensity and tension in which the travellers will have to react to the challenges thrown at them by the jungle... or by themselves. In this sense the film is a study on how to face (or not) insurmountable obstacles in extreme conditions, in particular when greed, pride and lust are thrown into the mix.

The filming on location does half the job for the film-makers. The river and the jungle are like one additional character, and one can feel the stuffy Old-worlders slowly stewing under their heavy shirts and armour as the days pass. I find a bit of fault with the way Lope de Aguirre, the main character, is played. The film goes for understated menace from a quietly unscrupulous man, which ends up adding to the slowness of the film. Of course, that's the director's choice, but I feel that a bit of energy and feeling of danger coming from the villain of the piece would have been welcome.

All in all, it's an effort that meant a lot for Spanish cinema in the 1980s, having been filmed only four years before the 5th centenary of the discovery of America and just a decade into full democracy after the Franco dictatorship. But it if has to be enjoyed, one must come with 'Apocalypto' Mode firmly shut off.

There were not so many films about conquistadores in the movie history, not so many; I only know those three. And I stlll search for more material to purchase. This film seems more accurate to the actual truth and details, the preparation was very very meticulous, focusing less on the myth and eerie atmosphere - as Werner Herzog did - than on factual events. ORO was I guess more fiction material, but very interesting too. So, you can watch AGUIRRE and this one, you'll then have two approaches for the same subject. In AGUIRRE, Herzog litterally created this special, suffocating, wet, lethal, madly atmosphere, EXCESS IS THE TRUE WORD, but Carlos Saura used it, so far circumstances of the story allowed him to. He did not abuse of it. Saura was the servant of true facts, of pure history. Very subtle difference between two films speaking of the same subject. In both films - Saura's and Herzog's - Aguirre character is not shown in the same way, though both are ruthless and ambitious. Here Aguirre looks and behaves like a Mafia mob leader, whilst in Herzog"s feature, Klaus Kinski is closer to Colonel Kurtz in Joseph Conrad's HEART OF DARKNESS than Lucky Luciano.

In the conquest of America, saved more than this gem that reveals the misery, violence and sacrifice, but also the epic adventure .An excellent cast,highlight the Antonutti actors as a martial Aguirre ranging from sanity to madness caused by the feverish lust for gold and embellished by a tangled grandeur and endless forest, well intrigues existing between the characters as Eusebio Ponzela (Guzmán),Lambert Wilson (Ursúa) and José Sancho (La Bandera). Saura mark time creating an oppressive atmosphere that surrounds with men about looking for anything. Do not miss the occasion to see this movie.Thousands of adventures to exploit in particular by the American industry.It is possible to imagine a big budget Spielberg.