Le crime du père Amaro

This "modern" adaptation from the classic novel written by Portuguese writer Eça de Queiroz in 1875 is very disappointing. The daring and exquisite novel was turned into a Mexican melodrama. Gael García Bernal ("Amores Perros", "Y Tu Mamá También", "La Mala Educación", "The Motorcycle Diaries") is a talented actor, but even his charisma couldn't conceal the flaws of the movie.

Eça de Queiroz is a very esteemed writer at Brazilian schools, and his importance for Portuguese Literature is incontestable; he deserved more respect. I just can't understand why this "El Crimen del Padre Amaro" was so praised by most critics. Anyway, it's sad to see that such a strong book was so poorly adapted. It isn't horrible, but could have been too much better. 4 out of 10.

"One of the most controversial films ever made"? NO WAY!

I enjoyed this movie, not because it was gripping or exciting, but because of what it had to say.

I'm not completely aware of everything to do with the Catholic Church, but the controversy in this movie is a necessary one.

I've never seen a Gael Garcia movie before and I thought this was good. The most powerful part of the movie is what it leaves you with - the message at the end; the themes of confession, of sin, of mistakes, of being human.

If you can't watch something that is quite slow and is not edge of the seat stuff, then forget it. Even the music isn't very memorable. But the movie stuck in my mind.

This is a very honest film and as i was born in spain i can tell is a hard to watch film for any catholic, because it touches some issues about the hipocrasy involved in the church and some believers in a small town. Very good movie honest, direct and well directed. The Acting and pacing is awesome.

From a novel by the 19th century Portuguese well-known novelist Eça de Queirós, the Mexican director Carlos Carrera made this good movie in which to the main ingredients present at all times everywhere (lust, the temptations of the flesh haunting Catholic priests, religious hypocrisy, love and bourgeois prejudices) he added specific Mexican ones of our times such as the fight for independent journalism, drug traffic, complicity of authorities and the fight of the peasants for dignity, freedom and a better life. He was very successful in telling the same story contained in the Portuguese novel, transposing it from the atmosphere of a Portuguese provincial town in the second half of 19th century to rural Mexico of present times. The acting of all performers is sober and efficient with special prominence to Ana Claudia in the role of the sensual nymphet who seduces the young priest not with great difficulty it must be said.

`El Crimen' was not a bad film, although it was hardly worthy of accolades. While the acting was passable, the story did not move along in a provocative enough manner to thoroughly captivate its audience-- in simple terms, the movie was somewhat slow.

What is interesting to notice is the reaction that the public-- especially the Catholic public-- has had to this film. As a Catholic, it saddens me to see the amazing amount of rage focused around the lust of the film's central character, Padre Amaro. The film, on a superficial level, was rebellion against stale relics of Catholic tradition-- such as requisite chastity for clergy and the deification of inanimate objects-- that may well spell the end of the faith if they are not shed. It is on these superficial levels that Padre Amaro is decried as a criminal of the faith by the viewing public, but lust is not this priest's true crime.

Central to the film's controversy is the corruption that propels the church. The truest crime of the film is the web of cover-ups and lies that the church creates in order to propagate its cause. The church is held deep in the pockets of the drug cartel and in order to maintain their stability, the majority of the church leadership, from the bishop down to the sacristans,

are quite comfortable with, at worst, lying and falsifying evidence or, at best, looking the other way. The crime of Padre Amaro is not so much that he acted upon his human impulses as that he accepts the corruption of the church by participating in its lies and creating lies of his own.

Unfortunately, this film's only exposé is not the corruption of the church, which has become more and more evident in recent times, but the faithful church body's willingness to pretend that none of this goes on. One of the most terrifyingly ironic cries of foul against this film, as evidenced in many of these reviews, is, `Priests would never act that way!' How can one, in today's climate, make such assertions? While this film should, in an ideal world, be objectionable, the current outcry by supposedly devout Catholics represents a denial of epidemic proportions.

If one would set aside one's group think for two hours while watching this film, one might gain a perspective of the church that our priests do not offer in their Sunday morning Masses. This film may not represent what we would like our church to be, but it does represent what our church is. If we continue to pretend that the current state of affairs of our faith is acceptable, then el crimen de Padre Amaro will also be our crime: complacence.