Alive

I live in Uruguay and i have been hearing about the "The tragedy of the Andes" ever since I was born. One day I decided to read the book and short after that this movie was released. I couldn't wait to see it, and when I did I was a little disappointed (as you always are when you've already read the book). If you really want to know everything about the accident, read the book.

Some thoughts and facts:

• The movie is faithfull to the book (of course, the book has much more information).

• The survivors had plenty of offers for a book deal, and they took the one that gave them almost not money at all because they didn't want their tragedy to become a shocking Stephen King-like novel with gore, etc. The book documents facts, it has no tear-dropping dialogue or 20/20-like lines.

Some points about other comments and critics:

• Yes, they were nice boys. They were the rugby team of the Old Christians School (I'm not translating the name of the school, that's the actual one), an English catholic school for boys only (at that time at least), private and expensive, where only high-class boys attended.

-Also to the previous point: Maybe none of the survivors looks exactly like Ethan Hawke, but, YES... some of them WERE blonde with blue eyes. Most people, especially in the US and Europe, tend to think that in Uruguay (a country with a weird name, i give you that)we all look like native-americans. PLAIN WRONG. Almost all of us are European-americans... the 95% of the population is white and the rest is black or else. As a matter of fact, this is the ONLY American (i mean, North, Central and Southamerica) country that has no native-american population at all. This territory had a very small population when it was conquered by Spain, and they were later killed by our government about 150 years ago (we are not proud of that, but that's the awful truth).

• Yes, it was a charter flight, not an airline flight, in an Air Force rented plane to carry the players and some relatives and acquaintances to Chile. (Remember: this was people with money and good social positions, therefore connections... and this is a small country).

• Yes, the avalanche DID take place.

• Yes, the Andes are nice (I myself flew over them twice, breathtaking sights, TRULY beautiful), but this movie was shot in the Canadian Rockies (hehe :)

Bottom line: you can't compress 72 days into two hours and give each one of the people involved enough screen time to understand the part they played in that complex society they constructed in order to survive. Some of the most interesting characters are barely mentioned in the movie. If you are really interested in knowing what happened in that ordeal, again, READ THE BOOK.

I watched this when I was a kid and probably far too young for this type of a movie. It was scary back then especially being forced to eat people to survive. I recently watched Society Of The Snow with the English dub on Netflix it was really great and very heartbreaking. I think it's everything that Alive was lacking. I will say Alive was a great attempt to tell a very difficult story though so without comparing it to Society Of The Snow, it's a good movie and still shows you what the human spirit can do to survive but if you really want to feel the horror of what happened to this rugby team, then check out Society Of The Snow.

Alive is a great movie experience. It is based on a true event in 1972 and on the narrative book by Piers Paul Read. It's about a Uraguayan college rugby team whose chartered airplane crashed deep in the icy Andes Mountains while on its way to a game in Santiago, Chile. Reeling with disbelief and shock and bleeding from dozens of wounds, the passengers who lived through the crash are faced with the brutal elements, starvation and the horror that they may never be found alive. The cast is terrific: Ethan Hawke as Nando, the levelheaded, determined leader; Vincent Spano as desperate Antonio, whose optimism slowly crumbles under the weight of hopelessness; Josh Hamilton as medical student Roberto, who tirelessly treats gangrenous wounds knowing his ministrations are useless; and especially Bruce Ramsay as Carlitos, whose unwavering faith in God and his sense of dark humor ("If you eat me, will you promise to clean your plates?") acts as the glue that holds this wet, shivering clump of survivors together. You indeed can feel the cold and the misery as you watch these poor people wade through waist deep snow, endure a nightmarish avalanche, spend days at a time soaked to their skins in minus forty degree winds, and face the ultimate decision that will make or break them physically, emotionally and spiritually: whether or not they can bring themselves to eat the bodies of friends and relatives who did not survive the crash. Everything in this movie, from James Newton Howard's touching music score to the unbeatable cinematography showing the majesty and severity of the Andes, is beautiful and flawless. This movie is one I'd recommend to anyone who wants an exciting, touching, unforgettable movie to chew on for years to come.

I can remember reading the book on which this story was based many years ago when I was in High School and being engrossed by the story. The movie version is no less engrossing, the entire story being made absolutely gut-wrenching by the fact that it's true. A South American rugby team is stranded in the remote heights of the Andes after a plane crash and has to find a way to survive the freezing temperatures, their injuries and a variety of other challenges (not the least of which is a lack of food.) The acting in it is good, but the situation itself becomes the focus rather than the actors, and so I can't really say that anyone in particular stood out to me, but that doesn't come across as a weakness here. After all, the story of survival was a story of teamwork; a "star" to the movie would have detracted from that.

This is literally gut-wrenching stuff, and I'm surprised it doesn't have a higher rating. It is not an easy movie to watch at times. The injuries are graphically portrayed, the suffering of the injured very realistic and the ultimate solution to the food problem will upset some people (but, in spite of what I've heard some say about this movie, it isn't the focus of the story. It's just an example of what had to be done to survive in an impossible situation.) It also has a surprisingly strong spiritual component to it.

Truly excellent.

10/10

I first saw the film "Alive" on video. I really wish I had seen it in the theater as it was probably one of the better films to come out around that time. I thought it was well shot, well acted and the fact that the real survivors were on hand as technical advisors showed me that the film was as accurate as it could be. One of the frustrations Ive come across in discussing this film is when you mention it to someone, and their immediate response is "isn't that the movie where they all eat each other?"...obviously, these people latched on to one small part of the story, and feel it is the basis for the entire movie. I found "Alive" to be more of an uplifting story. Sure, there's cannibalism involved, but in the 2 hours the film takes, cannibalism is focused on for approximately 10-15 minutes. I, instead, found myself moved by the determination of these young boys to survive. The plane crash, the avalanche, starvation, illness...all insurmountable odds stacking themselves against them, and they STILL found the strength to preserve their own lives. Alive as a movie about cannibalism? No. It is an example of the human spirit, and (I use the term again) an uplifting film with many touching moments. In closing, I borrow a line from the film..."If I die, you can eat me". :-)