Customer Reviews

Mountain Men, the / Old Gringo Pack

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

This movie was a surprise to me and a pleasant one and I would actually rate it four and a half stars. While I have never read the book on which it is based, I found it a haunting and memorable work of art in itself. The figure of Ambrose Bierce, as played by Gregory Peck, is quite fascinating but unless you are familiar with the writer (and even if you are)you may find the characterization rather hard to comprehend. However, Peck's performance is strong enough to carry you along despite this and his interaction with the other two characters--the frustrated spinster, played beautifully by Fonda, and the volatile and sexy rebel general played equally well by Smits--is totally engrossing. The love triangle, which seemed more of a father-daughter-lover relationship, could have been fleshed out more but was still pretty riveting. However, the real pull of the film is the beauty of the cinematography in battle scenes, love scenes and interiors, equally; the passion and brutality of the revolutionaries and at the same time their humanity, and the connection between the rather wildly different three central characters based on that humanity and despite the brutality, all during an epic era in the history of Mexico. I have watched this film several times now and each time I find new reasons to admire it, not the least of which is that it is just a wonderful story about characters who are electric, vibrant and mesmerizing in their search for meaning in their lives. It is fast becoming one of my all-time favorites.

Because the events of the film occur during the revolution in Mexico, one might be tempted to think of Old Gringo as an action oriented war film. Not so. It is a visual and emotional feast, a slice-of-life film that truly makes you feel what it must have been like for an American woman in a foreign country. The trio of actors, Jimmy Smits, Jane Fonda and Gregory Peck, are outstanding. Be prepared to think and feel. This is a rich feast indeed.

Argentinean director Luis Puenzo seems like a smart choice to helm this epic drama since his specialty seems to be offering probing character studies in the face of larger sociopolitical issues. But this 1989 movie falls short of expectations, especially if you've read Carlos Fuentes' 1985 novel upon which this movie is based. All the elements for success seem present - a fascinating historical setting (the Mexican Revolution); rather flamboyant characters (both fictitious and fictionalized); explosive battle scenes; dramatic executions; and a romantic triangle with gauzy love scenes. Indeed, the problem is that the elements don't quite add up to a cohesive whole that induces any heartfelt passion. Set in 1913, the story focuses on an American spinster named Harriet Winslow, who has been hired to be a governess for a wealthy Mexican family on their grand hacienda. The beginning of the story shows great promise as the period detail is vivid, and the set-up of the characters promises some intriguing interactions. However, when the three primary characters come together on the hacienda, the plot seems to narrow in scope, and the story's initial gallop slows to a cant until the conclusion.

I was afraid that at 51, Jane Fonda would be at least a decade too old to play Harriet, but she actually looks right most of the time, slightly worn but constantly engaged with the swirl of activities around her. However, with a stellar career spanning three decades, she just doesn't surprise with this performance (unlike, say, her alcoholic has-been actress in 1986's "The Morning After"), and after one more film, she retired from the big screen for the next fifteen years. Granted she is playing an uptight woman on the verge of a political and sexual awakening, she just comes across as too mannered and frankly too wizened to draw the carnal attentions of two completely different men. On the other hand, it's a joy to see the relish with which Gregory Peck plays Ambrose Bierce, the real American journalist who disappeared into Mexico at this time. His charisma intact, he makes palatable his romantic overtures to Harriet and brings a realistic blend of gusto and frailty to his constant philosophizing and his slow march toward death. As the virulent General Arroyo, one of Pancho Villa's men, Jimmy Smits has to maintain a delicate balancing act between quick-tempered, violent revolutionary and smitten romantic hero. He succeeds up to a point, especially in expressing his obsession with past injustices through firepower, but there is little chemistry between him and Fonda, which leaves the ending scenes oddly hollow. The one exception is the firing squad scene, which is sufficiently shocking. The film is not a complete misfire, but given its interesting mix of historical fact and fiction, I wish it was much more than it is, even though in Peck's case, it is.

The Old Gringo--an historically-based novel by Mexican diplomat, intellectual and author Carlos Fuentes--is a sensitive, complex, and ultimately satisfying portrayal of the Mexican people and a core period in their history. Not only is the acting intense and heartfelt, but also the hemisphere is turned upside down and one is allowed in for a moment to a world that trips to modern resort beaches can never access--the passionate, fascinating, suffering, poverty-stricken, and tempted-to-revolution nature of life in Latin America. For Fonda, herself a young revolutionary (disagree if you like) during the Vietnam War, and those like myself who have been to war-stricken lands like Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, and, yes, today's Mexico with its Zapatista movement in Chiapas, the passion of a people actively engaged in fundamental rhythms of everyday life and survival is inspiring beyond words. Each of the three principle characters--the young revolutionary general (Jimmy Smits), the spinster American school teacher (Jane Fonda) and the self-exiled American writer Ambrose Bierce (Gregory Peck)--are presented with a common dilemma, a dilemma presented to many of us of relative wealth and privilege (i.e., any American by comparison with our third world brothers and sisters) by the choice between our life of comfort and relative ease as compared with a life of sacrifice and commitment to a greater common good. The dilemmas are real, the passions are palpable, and a world turned upside down--like the upside-down map of the hemisphere on revolutionary General Poncho Villa's wall--is a wonder to behold. From the brutal "murder" of a horse to the beautiful and sensitive portrayals of the peasant people in the midst of revolution, this movie is an all-time favorite of mine. I am glad I have found out where to get it because at one time I had been told it was unavailable. It will now hold a spot on my shelf with a number of other signicant "main stream" pictures on Latin America, including Olmos's 1992 "American Me", Nava's 1983 "El Norte" and Oliver Stone's 1986 "Salvador"--pictures that had to be made but could only have been made by the right person in the right time. Puenzo as director with Fonda, Peck, and Smits were the right people coming together in the right place for this one.

El Gringo Viejo was a truly remarkable book. When I found that they had made a movie of it I was skeptical. How could a movie portray the characters in the book with any justice. I was plesantly surprised. Gregory Peck's portrayal of truth and it's death in the Mexican Revolution, Jane Fonda's portrayal of innocence and it's ultimate loss and Jimmy Smits portrayal of General Arroyo, a parallel for the idealistic beginnings, eventual corruption, and finally death of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, were a wonderful tribute to the book and it's author. It is a rare masterpiece.
It is a treasure that I would recommend to anyone.

Few movies are better than the book that contains the history that inspires them. Old Gringo is an example. Carlos Fuentes wrote Gringo Viejo and in my opinion, this is his more successful work; but Fuentes is lazy and some chapters of his books are unconnected. Nevertheless, the movie has a perfect rhythm. Each personage has an extraordinary evolution during the whole film.

There cannot be the slightest doubt: Gregory Peck was the perfect actor for to be Ambrose Bierce.

In this movie we have the Real Life Of Oft Married Jane Fonda looking every one of her 51 years and trying to convince the viewer that she is a "spinster" which is a euphenism for the girls in my High School Class . Then we have the Academically Jaded Gregory Peck who bids farewell to his life of books and heads to Mexico. At the time this film was released I saw an interview with Ms. Fonda who seemed to have a Mutual Admiration Society going on with Mr. Peck and she was in rapture at Jimmy Smits being the next BIG star which didn't happen.The peasant women of loose moral character in this movie discover the Joys Of A Corset through Ms. Fonda which they feel gives them lots of power in getting the Mexican Soldiers to be willing to fight, get blown up and die. They are kind of like the Mexican Version of Cheerleaders from what I can gather. I don't know where all the big bucks went in the making of this movie but the scenery is quite pretty which is why I give it 5 stars.

Few of us have much insight into history outside of the United States, so this is a good tutorial, if you can see past the personal character dynamics. Gregory Peck is really the stand-out in the film and Smits is passionate and compelling in his role. Jane Fonda plays a fairly believeable naive spinster, who finds herself immersed in a world that she knows nothing of, but she rallies her spirits and makes the best of her unexpected situation. Some surprises.

At one level, this film focuses on the much delayed coming of age adventure for Jane Fonda's character, Harriet Winslow, who suddenly decides she has had enough of her mother-dominated spinster school marm life. Yes, we would expect her to be maybe 10-20 years younger than Fonda's 50 years. However, her relatively advanced age makes her crush on Peck's 70 year old character, Ambrose Bierce, more believable. Peck's characterization of Bierce is somewhat at odds with what I have read of this man. We get the impression that, like Harriet, he has forsaken his bookish life, as a sick old man, for a final hands-on adventure, as an aid to the rebels of the Mexican revolution. However, the real Bierce fought in the Civil War and later crossed the continent on another mission. He was not a one-dimensional bookish writer, by experience.
Fonda simultaneously develops crushes on both Bierce and General Arroyo(Jimmy Smits). They are both seen as romantic rebels, though of very different sorts and for different reasons. Harriet reminds Bierce of his daughter, whom he hasn't seen for many years, while Bierce reminds Harriet of her father, who abandoned his domineering wife for a new love, and who fought in the Spanish American War to free Cuba. But after partially destroying the Miranda mansion, where he was conceived, Arroyo delays taking his troops to join Villa's, as ordered. Arroyo's bedding of Harriet on the very bed where he was conceived symbolically reverses the power relationship in which his european father raped his native american mother. He finds the original spanish land grant papers giving the land of this hacienda to the peasants. Since Spain no longer governed Mexico, these papers were not necessarily valid, as Bierce points out, but Arroyo refuses to heed. Arroyo's shootings of his favorite horse and of Bierce
emphasize his determination to stay at the hacienda instead of joining Villa.
There are several references accusing Arroyo of having become the new Miranda, and thus betraying the revolution. I don't understand why Arroyo had one of his soldiers shot for doing exactly what he was doing. He must have known he would receive the same sentence if he did not soon join Villa. Perhaps this symbolizes the near universal tendency of revolutionary leaders to gradually become tyrants as bad or worse than those they topple. So it had been with Porfirio Diaz, the once revolutionary general the revolutionists now fought against. So it would be with various successors to Diaz during these turbulent times.
This is an entertaining film, for the most part. There are enough action scenes to complement the philosophizing and other tamer scenes. You will have to pay close attention or see it several times to catch all the symbolism. I can see why this film was important to Jane Fonda. It is, in a sense, autobiographical, symbolizing her mid-life transformation from an apolitical sex kitten into an anti-establishment political spokeswoman for the powerless of the world.

Taking place against the backdrop of the Mexican revolution, this movie fills an unusual niche in the filmography of the three main actors, none of whom have done anything like it before or since.

Peck plays Ambrose Bierce, a man whose personality was "...as flinty as the soil of his native New England..."--and probably then some. Although portrayed as cantakerous and feisty and even mean-spirited in the movie, Bierce apparently had a soft spot for the idea of a grass-roots Mexican revolution, and left the U.S. to throw his lot as well as his not inconsiderable reputation behind it.

After that, nothing is known about what became of Bierce, although the movie presents one theory about how he may have died, by getting involved with a tragic love triangle between a beautiful but estranged American woman (played by Jane Fonda), and a young Mexican general fighting for the revolution, played by Jimmy Smits. All the fireworks are certainly not all on the battlefield in this movie, and the tension between the three gradually but inexorably increases until the explosive climax. Overall, it's an unusual movie with fine performances by all three artists, and the only time that I know of that all three worked together.