Les Survivants

The riveting story of the Uruguayan rugby team who had to find unorthodox methods for survival after their chartered plane crashed into the Andes en route to an away game in Chile in 1972 is relatively well adapted to the big screen by Steven Spielberg's regular partners Frank Marshall (director) and Kathleen Kennedy (producer). Marshall directs the air disaster brilliantly, but cannot avoid some B-movie sensibilities in the film's first part. He is an old-school director, meaning that even the interpersonal elements - which are the most interesting part of the story - come off as action-driven. I suspect the film may have made more of a lasting impression had they been made to carry the script to a larger degree. Still, once Ethan Hawke's character finds his footing, the film becomes truer, more poignant and a tad less Hollywoodized. Alive may well derive a large part of its effectiveness from the fact that it's based on real events, but it's effective nonetheless.

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 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 would like to say how powerful the movie is. Being forced into a circumstance where you are being tested constantly in order to survive for 72 days. I thought that the acting in such a disaster film was expressed decently. Although critics and viewers(why then did you waste your money?) nitpick the dialogue, it ran smoothly in the compressed time given. Exactly how would you pass the time in conversation if you survived the plane crash, freezing temperatures, hunger and watching other people die in front you for 72 days? I don't think the dialogue was that bad, considering the time slot and trying to keep the story interesting for its two hours. When I first saw it, I was shocked by the plane crash sequence. I first thought it was all about cannibalism-like the Donner party- but it wasn't. It was more about keeping hope alive and working together even when despair and dying seems easier to give in to. What the rugby teammates did under the circumstances was incredible until they made the solution to hike out and get help. I haven't read the book its based on, yet I read a little about the actual people who went through the ordeal. There are similarities and contrasts with the real-life story and the movie. I appreciate the movie after seeing several times and the actual story behind it. I think it's one of the most fantastic films that I have seen.

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.