Zapata - El sueño del héroe
AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
2,2/10
1,1 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaA look at the life of Mexican Revolution Hero Emiliano Zapata.A look at the life of Mexican Revolution Hero Emiliano Zapata.A look at the life of Mexican Revolution Hero Emiliano Zapata.
- Prêmios
- 2 indicações no total
Avaliações em destaque
That's what this "movie" is.
I can't even start explaining on details of what's wrong about this piece of crap, it is everything.
It made me laugh at some point, but it was sorrow laughter, but the worst of all is the screenplay, miscasting and directing.
Dumb fiction characters and weak based on real life character. You just can't respect a director such as Arau that the only thing he did on pre-production and therefore was going along where the wind blew.
You just can't have any kind of respect, avoid it at any cost...
what a shame...
I can't even start explaining on details of what's wrong about this piece of crap, it is everything.
It made me laugh at some point, but it was sorrow laughter, but the worst of all is the screenplay, miscasting and directing.
Dumb fiction characters and weak based on real life character. You just can't respect a director such as Arau that the only thing he did on pre-production and therefore was going along where the wind blew.
You just can't have any kind of respect, avoid it at any cost...
what a shame...
After so many negative comments, I didn't expect much from Arau´s Zapata besides beautiful cinematography. I went to see it with the curiosity to see why it generates so much criticism.
I was surprised that I liked and enjoyed parts of the movie. I disagree with the people that say it was a waste of time, I didn't think that it was the worst movie I have seen (like some others in imdb comments have said) - there are so many movies worse than this one in México. Jaime Camil was interesting as Eufemio, maybe a little more than Alejandro Fernandez as Emiliano, but I don't think that was all his fault. Jesus Ochoa was good as Huerta, but I think the villain is usually interesting and stands out in movies any ways. I think the script could have been more interesting but it seemed that the film was badly chopped and jumped from one scene to the next in the first half in particular, like we didn't really see what it was supposed to be. Some of the special effects were fine, the explosions and rain of petals was interesting but the CG in some cases were disappointing, for the chamana and the final of the film were from twenty years ago or more.
Maybe it was good that I saw it with low expectations - overall I liked it more than I thought I would but I would have liked to see more depth and explanation. As a mexican I understand what it was planned to be about, I wanted it to be good, to explain about our hero and I liked the mystical idea but some things were missing that I thought could have made it better. Now that I have seen the movie, I wish they would go back and fix it, make a better edition, add some flavor. It was like going to a dinner where the food looks so good but doesn't satisfy you. I hope someone makes a better one.
I know some persons will say nothing can help the film and don't like it anyway. Other people in the theater with me said they like most of the film, but didn't like the poor visual quality of the ending scene.
I don't blame the actors or crew, but the director or editors under his direction I imagine or whoever damaged a good idea. I think a good director should see the obvious faults in the film and fix them before it is released.
I was surprised that I liked and enjoyed parts of the movie. I disagree with the people that say it was a waste of time, I didn't think that it was the worst movie I have seen (like some others in imdb comments have said) - there are so many movies worse than this one in México. Jaime Camil was interesting as Eufemio, maybe a little more than Alejandro Fernandez as Emiliano, but I don't think that was all his fault. Jesus Ochoa was good as Huerta, but I think the villain is usually interesting and stands out in movies any ways. I think the script could have been more interesting but it seemed that the film was badly chopped and jumped from one scene to the next in the first half in particular, like we didn't really see what it was supposed to be. Some of the special effects were fine, the explosions and rain of petals was interesting but the CG in some cases were disappointing, for the chamana and the final of the film were from twenty years ago or more.
Maybe it was good that I saw it with low expectations - overall I liked it more than I thought I would but I would have liked to see more depth and explanation. As a mexican I understand what it was planned to be about, I wanted it to be good, to explain about our hero and I liked the mystical idea but some things were missing that I thought could have made it better. Now that I have seen the movie, I wish they would go back and fix it, make a better edition, add some flavor. It was like going to a dinner where the food looks so good but doesn't satisfy you. I hope someone makes a better one.
I know some persons will say nothing can help the film and don't like it anyway. Other people in the theater with me said they like most of the film, but didn't like the poor visual quality of the ending scene.
I don't blame the actors or crew, but the director or editors under his direction I imagine or whoever damaged a good idea. I think a good director should see the obvious faults in the film and fix them before it is released.
I think everything's already said on all other comments, but its all true: This movie sucks; the script sucks; the actors suck; has awful historical flaws; is totally unrealistic; its nonsense; its absolutely wrong made; its lame; its an offense to a national hero, to Mexican culture, and to Mexican film industry!
In my opinion it has 2 major flaws:
1) It tried so hard to be an 'American style' epic movie... with 10% of an American movie budget. I would say its Mexican wannabe-Hollywood at its lowest.
2) I bet much of the budget spent on this production is obviously on hiring "Known" actors to be on the movie. Even if just for a couple of seconds. That's how we can see cameos of people like Angélica Aragón and Carmen Salinas, and the main characters are stared by well known icons of Mexican pop culture, who sing pretty well, but can't act. Even Jaime Camil (Emiliano Zapata's brother) looks more like the actual Emiliano Zapata. Just because Alejandro Fernandez its a famous singer doesn't mean its gonna be a blockbuster! And he SUCKS acting!!!
So, by spending money in hiring celebrities, renting thousands of horses, and some explosive material, they left out things like a good story, or the backgrounds; Anybody noticed how all the interior shots where in ruins of old haciendas? People where living inside great ruins, with expensive furniture... but no ceilings or windows and walls that are about to fall. Who is this guy trying to imitate, Fellini?
I don't know how or why do this movie happened. How does it actually was made? Who allowed it? I'm afraid that it could go around the world and People from every country would think that this is Mexico, and this is how Mexican movies are, and Mexican actors, and Mexican scripts and stories... I'm afraid of this happening. Quoting the main character of the movie: 'The guy who made this film, Arau, "Is not a real Mexican"'. A real Mexican would not let an important issue like this, become such a shame! Its a big bad joke; A ridicule waste of time.
I lost 2 hours of my life forever, by watching this "film". Save your eyes!
In my opinion it has 2 major flaws:
1) It tried so hard to be an 'American style' epic movie... with 10% of an American movie budget. I would say its Mexican wannabe-Hollywood at its lowest.
2) I bet much of the budget spent on this production is obviously on hiring "Known" actors to be on the movie. Even if just for a couple of seconds. That's how we can see cameos of people like Angélica Aragón and Carmen Salinas, and the main characters are stared by well known icons of Mexican pop culture, who sing pretty well, but can't act. Even Jaime Camil (Emiliano Zapata's brother) looks more like the actual Emiliano Zapata. Just because Alejandro Fernandez its a famous singer doesn't mean its gonna be a blockbuster! And he SUCKS acting!!!
So, by spending money in hiring celebrities, renting thousands of horses, and some explosive material, they left out things like a good story, or the backgrounds; Anybody noticed how all the interior shots where in ruins of old haciendas? People where living inside great ruins, with expensive furniture... but no ceilings or windows and walls that are about to fall. Who is this guy trying to imitate, Fellini?
I don't know how or why do this movie happened. How does it actually was made? Who allowed it? I'm afraid that it could go around the world and People from every country would think that this is Mexico, and this is how Mexican movies are, and Mexican actors, and Mexican scripts and stories... I'm afraid of this happening. Quoting the main character of the movie: 'The guy who made this film, Arau, "Is not a real Mexican"'. A real Mexican would not let an important issue like this, become such a shame! Its a big bad joke; A ridicule waste of time.
I lost 2 hours of my life forever, by watching this "film". Save your eyes!
I saw this movie last Friday here in Mexico. First of all Alejandro Fernandez is a SINGER not an ACTOR. In my school years when i was studying History of Mexico all the books showed Zapata as a stronger and rude man and in this movie Alejandro Fernandez is too far from that. I had some funny moments like the dance of the witches (Oh my god, what was that?), when I saw that Zapata had magical powers over the horses and the fake explicit scene when Zapata was falling from a mountain.
So if you are curious or really want to see this movie wait until it comes in DVD or Video so you wont waste money.
So i give -1/5
So if you are curious or really want to see this movie wait until it comes in DVD or Video so you wont waste money.
So i give -1/5
How do you turn a man into a myth? Or worse yet, how do you make 2 hours of pretty terrible viewing? The answer would be this sad attempt at the retelling of one of Mexico's greatest heros. For starters, Alejandro Fernandez doesn't look anything like Emiliano Zapata--he's way too white. And Fernandez looks more like a Mexicano Clive Owen, which was somewhat distracting. The scenes jump with no ryhme or reason as the movie tries to follow the trajectory of Zapata's life. Unless you are completely familiar with the Diaz dictatorship and the land struggles and revolution in Mexico in the early 20th century, you're gonna be completely lost. The film vacillates between grand epic and art film. Zapata/Fernandez is guided by three wise women whose presence in the movie is distracting and just downright goofy. The previous reviewer made mention of several present day Mexican stars who have cameos, including Lucero as Zapata's upper-crust lover(!). I did enjoy the scene where Zapata meets Villa, which re-enacts the famous photograph of the two revolutionary leaders. You do get a sense of the larger than life character that Villa was. However, that short scene is not enough to make up for all the tedious scenes that came before. Really, this movie stinks and doesn't do justice to the memory of a great man who helped led the peasant revolt in Mexico.
Você sabia?
- ConexõesVersion of Viva Zapata! (1952)
- Trilhas sonorasLucharé por tu amor
Composed by Maria Entraigues, Ruy Folguera & Facundo Monty
Performed by Alejandro Fernández
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Сапата - сон героя
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 7.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 3.487.321
- Cor
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente