Film Review
The 500th anniversary of Christopher Columbus's discovery of the New World certainly merited a spectacular
historical production to mark the event. Unfortunately, of the various films which
were made to commemorate the event, all fell short of their objectives and most ended
up being mauled, deservedly, by the critics. Thankfully, not all of them were
as awful as the inexecrably bad
Carry on Columbus (1992).
Ridley Scott's lavish production is no exception, falling far short of the
monumental celebratory work it clearly aspires to be. In common
with much of Scott's cinema - notably his groundbreaking sci-fi masterpieces
Alien (1979) and
Blade Runner (1982) -
the film's strength is in the quality of its visuals. Some of the scenes are visually so powerful, so
well realised, that you are momentarily compelled to forget the film's weaker points and
marvel at the talent of the film's designers.
The problem is that that impressive visuals are not enough to make this film work. This
is first and foremost a historical drama, which means that characterisation, good acting
and good scripting are paramount to the film's success. Where the film fails most
notably is in the characterisation, which is only reinforced by poor dialogue and some
unfortunate casting decisions.
Perhaps the biggest error was to cast Gérard Depardieu as Columbus. Depardieu is
unquestionably one of the greatest, if not the greatest living actor in the world, and
he certainly has the physique and stature to take on the role. Unfortunately, his
command of English was not excellent when he made this film, and whenever he speaks his
performance suffers. In some scenes, the actor is scene to be visibly struggling
with some lines, and this prevents him from having anything like the impact he had previously had
on earlier French historical dramas such as
Danton (1983)
and
Cyrano de Bergerac (1990).
If the film had been made in French, Depardieu could well have made it a masterpiece.
Critics have also lampooned the film for its historical inaccuracies. To a cinema
audience this probably matters far less than the film's inability to maintain its interest.
At two and half hours, the film feels far too long, relying far too much on shock visuals
to keep the audience interested. After a short while, the visceral killings become
tiresome and distasteful, and only end up eroding the film's credibility further.
The most frustrating thing about this film is that, despite all the talent that went into
it, it had to end up such a mediocre work, one which does a great disservice to the historic
event it attempts to commemorate.
1492: Conquest of Paradise flopped at the box office, recovering
only a fraction of its 47 million dollar budget.
© James Travers 2001
The above content is owned by filmsdefrance.com and must not be copied.
Next Ridley Scott film:
Alien (1979)
Film Synopsis
Christopher Columbus is convinced that by sailing West, he will discover a new route to
the bountiful lands of the East. Eventually, he manages to persuade the Queen of
Spain to finance an expedition, and three ships set sail to look for the Indies of the
West. After a long and hazardous voyage, Columbus' expedition reaches land - an
island paradise where the natives appear friendly and cooperative. Leaving a contingent
of men behind to build a fort, Columbus returns triumphantly to Spain to raise more men
to search for gold. When he returns, Columbus soon discovers that his island paradise
has become Hell...
© James Travers
The above content is owned by filmsdefrance.com and must not be copied.