User reviews

Amazing, only for theaters. Realistic. You may think, it must has been that way. Rigorous, something unusual in historical movies. If you look for Hollywood here, wrong place. I do love Hollywood, anyway. Something odd: no or little music. The sound of the wind among the stones, the valleys, the mountains and the towns, animals, soldiers, people, nature and guns is the perfect soundtrack in this case. Main character is such intense: his mission is always in his eyes, always fighting, always angry, always tense. You would not say this movie comes from a third world country. I suggest a five minutes research on wiki about this fairly unknown episode of South American History. Open your mind, it is different, but good cinema.

It's one of those movies that give to speak. And furthermore, by which is based in a part of history, which is difficult to do, not just because everything is known and can not lie, but you have to put so much history in 1 ½ hours of film. by is that only focuses on the Crossing of the Andes. the interpretation San Martin by Rodrigo de la Serna is more than excellent. the sound section is a separate issue. Despite the lack of music (almost nonexistent in the course of the film) is filled in by the natural sounds, both the combat and the arid landscape that reflects the film. Ultimately, the film is done so bright background transcribing what he wants to show, personality of the greatest liberator in America and one of the most major military campaigns of human history.

This must be probably the best of the movies inspired by the life and works of General José De San Martín. The attention to detail, costumes, flags, military uniforms, weaponry, etc. is remarkable. I am so glad I was FINALLY able to watch a film based on early XIX-Century Argentina showing the soldiers correctly armed with flintlock muskets and pistols instead of anachronistic Remington rifles! The natural settings and filming locations provide plenty of eye-candy and stunning views of the Andes and the battle scenes are well done and convincing. So far so good, now for the flawed stuff: Rodrigo De la Serna tends to overact quite a bit at times, and the character telling the story in flashback in 1880 (Manuel Corvalán) is actually loosely based on real-life Manuel De Pueyrredón, San Martín's scribe; the real-life Manuel Corvalán was actually a lieutenant colonel who did not take part on the crossing nor the battle, was 42-year old at that time and had been dead for 33 years in 1880. I know: only pedantic history geeks like me could notice or even care for details like this, but it was one which could have been easily avoided simply by naming the character correctly. Other than that, a quite enjoyable flick. Give it a try.