Eisenstein in Guanajuato (2015) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
15 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Editing and visuals: fantastic! Plot and characters: ...
peefyn19 October 2015
I have not seen any of Greenaway's previous movies, and while I have seen Potemkin, I barley knew anything about (the actual) Eisenstein going in.

What I loved about this movie: The editing is fantastic. It plays around with the format, having real life photos of the characters and the locations next to characters as they are mentioned, playing with angles and positions of the characters, experimenting with colors, and obviously, using montages in a great way. I hope this is all based on Eisenstein's actual writings about the subject, as it is clear that he has thoughts about what movies can do with these tools.

That's the one positive thing I have to say about this movie. The characters are stylized into cartoon characters, and the dialog is boring and unengaging. The actual storyline is very forgettable. Greenaway chose to have the movie focus on Eisenstein's experiences in Mexico, but did not include any of the actual movie-making Eisenstein did there. To me, that would have been a more interesting movie - but I can understand that Greenaway had a different vision for this story.

The sexual scenes were graphical, but not grotesque or provoking (unless you are provoked by homosexuality).
22 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Greenaway's self-reflexive, symphonically flamboyant opus can be construed as a nonconformist filmmaker's knowing salute to a free-spirited genius
lasttimeisaw17 May 2018
As the title indicates, this is a biopic inspired by the Mexican days of Soviet Union cinema vanguard Sergei Eisenstein (1898-1948), after his sortie into Hollywood proved to be futile, in 1930, he was assigned to make the ambitious but ultimately problematic project QUE VIVA MEXICO in Mexico (the whole ordeal is worthy of its own screen re-enactment), which Eisenstein would later relinquishes, a relatively intact version would only be released posthumously in 1979.

No one would expect Peter Greenaway's treatment to be strictly reverent, although now in his seventies, Greenaway has no hesitation of venturing into the prurient facet of Eisenstein's idiosyncrasy and abandon, preponderantly, the film is a two-hander between Sergei (Bäck) and his Mexican guide Palomino Cañedo (Alberti), to whom Sergei claims to lose his virginity. Sergei's homosexual initiation is explicitly explored in the palatial hotel room he stays, on that vast bed, the sex temple he shares with Palomino, and coins the first ten days in Guanajuato as "Ten Days that shook Eisenstein", a wordplay to his revolutionary pièce-de-résistence OCTOBER: TEN DAYS THAT SHOOK THE WORLD (1928).

Greenaway delights in magnifying Eisenstein's blunt self-reflection and directorial frustration (although it is mostly an interior piece that largely overlooks the filmmaker's onerous field work, excluding a visit to the Mummies of Guanajuato and the institution of the Day of the Dead celebration) through his larger-than-life approach which constitutes operatic ways of utterance, info-dumping sleight-of-hand where real-life footage is rapidly juxtaposed to counterpoint the references in a triptych split-screen, and majestic, but noticeably digitally airbrushed and light-inflected scenography, being put into great use in the flourishes of 360 degree twirling shots and seamlessly edited faux-long shots, etc., all is impressive on a grandiose scale, but also appreciably betrays an overreaching effort to reassure us that he is still at the top of his game.

Under the spotlight is Finnish actor Elmer Bäck's madcap impersonation of a ludic, unprepossessing Eisenstein, sporting a fuzzy, bouffant hairdo à la Einstein, and gives his all to Greenaway's undue caprices, which on the whole leaves the impression that Eisenstein is more hysterical than sympathetic, a clownish figure whose brilliance is very much elusive to moderately stunned audience, a typical case of miscast should be noted. Luis Alberti, by comparison, comes off less scathed owing to his more natural and unaffected "stud" role in the play.

By and large, Greenaway's self-reflexive, symphonically flamboyant opus can be construed as a nonconformist filmmaker's knowing salute to a free-spirited genius who constantly clashes with his times and whose legacy should be incessantly exhumed to meet new light and fresh air, and knock dead any number of spectators.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
This movie has balls
HollywoodFlicks21 March 2023
A very touching story about a filmmakers trip to Mexico that touches on identity , sexuality, desires , truth, death and filmmaking.

The love story in this is really touching , seeing someone discover there own body and accept it in such a way was beautiful.

Feels like a companion pieces do 8 & 1/2 somehow.

A bold film that takes composition to new levels with passionate experimental shots and beautifully blocked and lit frames.

Greenaway has a way of saying so much in his films that make me ask myself so many questions or feel so many feelings.

If you enjoy art and being provoked in an artful way then this film is for you. Underrated and under appreciated in my humble opinion.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
A waste of time - and bad for the stomach
evito123 June 2015
When I was waiting for the movie to start, I was wondering why so many gay couples had come in to see it. However this was all explained as soon as the movie started.

This film indeed is not about Eisenstein making a film (we see very little to nothing of that), or about his time in Mexico: except for some beautiful shots of nature and some dead masks and philosophical bladibla which has been taken totally out of context and are never truly deepened, there is little to no true interaction with Mexican culture. All conversations except for a very small amount are in English.

No, this movie is all about the male body and, to put it frank, gay anal sex. Yes, indeed the butt-loving Eisenstein receives from his Mexican guide Cañedo is probably his most profound encounter with the Mexicans, and for the rest of the movie the two characters do little else than run around naked with their willies flopping up and down. Other characters do appear in the movie but get no real chance at any story or development. The prime example of this are the American brother and sister who barge into Eisenstein's hotel room towards to end of the movie. This is actually the moment that the viewer discovers that Eisenstein has already been in Mexico for 8 months shooting a movie with American funding, something quite essential but completely discarded during the first part of the picture.

The most annoying part of the film was certainly the vertiginous camera work. In the scene in the hotel room just described, the camera spins for about 5 minutes around the bed with a half-naked Eisenstein in it. I had to actually close my eyes as I felt the whole scene was making me sick. The vomiting and diarrhea scenes at the start of the movie had already done the same thing.

In other words, for those profoundly into male nudity and gay cinema, I would recommend to go and see this film; otherwise, you'll probably have some other place you'd rather be.
40 out of 137 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
at crossroads in Mexico
dromasca1 October 2015
Peter Greenaway's career is beyond any ambitions of commercial success - his most successful (audience-wise) movies were made in the 80s. Even then the combination of colors and music, architecture (he is an architect by formation) and composition, his obsessions for sex and death and his bluntness in approaching them were much out of the beaten track. For the last two decades his projects became more and more exploratory, with the moving images being only one of the tools in combinations of multi-disciplinary explorations and experiments that brought together almost every artistic discipline that was invented. Eisenstein in Guanajuato can be seen almost as a return to the more conventional tools of film making. It has a story, and it has a hero and it has a theme, one of these themes film makers love to bring to screen, maybe the ultimate film theme - film making!

If you listen to what Peter Greenaway has to tell about his film (and he speaks a lot as he promotes the film in the international festival tour) Eisentein in Guanajuato is before all a homage to one of the greatest directors in the history of cinema who was Sergei Eisenstein. It also is a social and political commentary, as it deals with what was probably the most exuberant, liberal and care-free period in the life of the screen director of the Soviet Revolution, and also with the sexual orientation of Eisenstein which was kind of a well known secret in his biography, tolerated by the Soviet authorities but maybe also a tool of blackmail by the KGB. The period spent by Eisenstein in Mexico while shooting material never gathered and edited for a film about the country and its revolutions may have been the happiest time in the life of the director already famous for Potemkin and October. It allowed him not only a unique encounter with a culture that was so different from some aspects yet so close from other compared with the Russian culture he knew from home, but also an encounter with himself, with his own demons, his self-denied homosexuality, his tendency to the luxury and the decadence of the bourgeois life, so different from the austerity he left in the Soviet Russia and to which he was condemned to return.

There is almost nothing in this film about Eisenstein's film making. At no point does he shout 'Camera!' or 'Action!' - at some moment he even refuses to do so. Peter Greenaway does not try to expose any secrets of the film making art of Eisenstein, but rather deals with the surrounding context that made his films possible. Finnish actor Elmer Bäck brings on screen an Eisenstein who hides his doubts behind exuberance, and his fears behinds carelessness, who is sure of his artistic genius but unaware about his personal charisma. Mexican actor Luis Alberti builds a fine counterpoint to Eisenstein's character and a credible gay love interest. The camera work does not try to replicate anything that Eisenstein has done on screen, but rather quotes and incorporates fragments of Eisentein's movies with the visual commentaries of Greenaway. I read some critical opinions about viewers 'getting tired' by the too intense camera work - I do not agree with them. When what you see on screen is expressive and interesting you cannot get tired, as one does not get tired of seeing more masterpieces in an art museum, or of listening to fine opera or classical music. Sets are as exuberant and as complex as an architect mind like Greenaway's can conceive. Overall Eisenstein in Guanajuato was for me a very satisfying and surprisingly entertaining experience.
29 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
i've rated virtually every Greenaway a nine or ten, but this is a three
VoyagerMN198621 December 2018
I've met Greenaway several times. Worked on one of his a projects in a tangential way. His work in the 1980's was without par and quite a bit of his work since is still excellent, although 8 1/2, Pillow don't reach his prior levels -- and Guanajuato in my view is a mess. I can't recommend enough seeing Nightwatching and then J'Accuse if you want to really delve into a stunning view by one artist of another. I am very much looking forward to Greenaway's treatment of Brancusi, who he has referenced in several films, and not looking forward to the Eisenstein sequel set in Switzerland and the US.

On the film itself I guess the problem is that it neither looks at Eisenstein's work nor brings him to life. Greenway has done hagiographies of a dozen artists, but it gets a bit more uncomfortable with Eisenstein knowing he worked closely with Stalin (not Lenin who was long gone when this film is set) at destroying other artists. We know form recently opened soviet archives that Eisenstein had a side that was a nasty piece of work, promoting himself as a functionary of totalitarianism. And yes we now know that Eisenstein was the consummate sycophant to Stalin in "Ten Days.." essentially overseeing a Goebbels/Riefenstahl-like reinterpretation of the Russian revolution to write in Stalin above Trotsky, Zinoviev and perversely put him on par with Lenin.

Lets not forget that Eisenstein doggedly worked to mock the moderate revolutionary democratic socialists like Alexander Kerensky while slavishly celebrating an enabling Stalin who turned out to be the biggest mass murderer and oppressor in human history. I can't figure out if Greenaway was being ironic in proffering up the scene with the Soviet flag being planted in Eisenstein's bleeding orifice.

I would recommend every Greenaway film except this.
5 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Great trama and beautiful mexican scenery get ruined by rotating camera work, cheap dialogue and green screens
eduluciodee18 February 2024
The premise holds a lot of potential: The true story of a soviet director making an improvised film about Mexico with some US funding. Elements of political intrigue, Stalin, art, filmmaking, surrealism, a shock of cultures, and the beautiful Mexican landscape all give plenty of opportunities for an interesting film.

Unfortunately, the film version of this story does not make it justice. The movie is plagued by unending pretentious speeches by Eisenstein, these are rather empty speeches and simplistic. The characters in the movie react to Eisenstein's observations as if they would hold unending charisma, wit, or insight, but none is to be found inside Greenaway's script.

It is very clear from the start that this movie is all about Eisenstein getting sex from his backend. There is no tension nor chemistry nor romance . Any exploration of obsession, erotism, love or feeling of sin is badly executed.

The movie has some beautiful shots of Mexico and Guanajuato. The colourful houses, skeletons and the dark and wet Guanajuato tunnels, however any aesthetic gets ruined by the constant usage of three framing, some awful rotating 360 degree scenes that go for way too long and some questionable use of green screens.

The green screens are particularly strange for me. Why is Greenaway shooting with a noticeable green-screened theater backdrop when the scene has no need of a theater backdrop and could have happened anywhere?

A big miss, and one that makes me not want to explore the rest of Greenaway's works.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Eisenstein Lives!
cllrdr-17 July 2015
Ordinarily I can take Peter Greenaway or leave him alone -- chiefly the latter. But he really scores this time with a story that has longed to be told.

As is known Sergei Eisenstein hoped to work in Hollywood in the early thirties just as sound came in. But thanks to aright-wing campaign (plus its own lack of imagination) Paramount Pictures was scared off from making films of with of the scripts the great Russian director had written : an adaptation of Dreiser's "An American Tragedy" and an original historical drama "Sutter's Gold." The novelist Upton Sinclair stepped in and elected to back a film Eisenstein wanted to make about Mexico. But he knew nothing about film production and less about Eisenstein's highly improvisatory working methods. Under-budgeted and best by problems the shoot was brought to a halt when Sinclair's brother-in-law, Hunter Kimbrough discovered SME was having too much fun south of the border. Moreover he got a gander at the great man's cache of frankly gay pornographic drawings. Eisenstein not only never got to edit "Que Viva Mexico" -- he never even saw the rushes. He returned to Russia where he made "Alexander Nevsky" and "Ivam the Terrible" Sinclair meanwhile had the "Que Viva Mexico" footage sliced and diced into travelogues.

This is the backdrop of what Greenaway has done which s to present Eisenstein's Mexican sojourn as a sexual awakening. He falls madly in love (and lust) with a handsome guide. Greenaway brings the full bore of his visual imagination to telling this tale with multiple images and lighting the likes of which hasn't been seen since Sternberg. Elmer Back is superb as SME and Luis Alberti is equally great as his love interest. Not to be missed.
26 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A little piece of film history. Very erotic. Showy cinematography.
alanjj3 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Peter Greenaway's ambitions and talent are gargantuan, and his achievements, films such as Prospero's Books and The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover, are mighty. Eisenstein in Guanajuato, which chronicles 10 days in the life of Sergei Eisenstein, is not a masterpiece, but is unique in its visual techniques and its inclusion of explicit sex (and anal sex at that!) that make it stand out among biographical films. It would have been helpful to have read a biography of Eisenstain before seeing the movie, and to have recently viewed 10 Days that Shook the World and The Battleship Potemkin and Que Viva Mexico. Nevertheless, I was thrilled by the cinematography which used techniques that I have never seen used in quite the way they are used here. For example, scenes shift quickly and often from B&W to color, and sometimes use both B&W and color in the same frame.

There is one amazing scene that seems to take place at a street corner, but gradually the building behind Sergei straightens out and reveals itself to be the straight facade of a mid-block building.

Every reference to an Eisenstein movie is accompanied by a shot of that actual movie. Every name dropped by the characters is accompanied by a photo of the actual person whose name was dropped. It helps in understanding the movie.

The most thrilling thing about the movie, for me, is the inclusion of a rather explicit gay sex scene. It is Sergei's first time having sex, and he seduced by a very handsome young man, his handler and interpreter, who joyously teaches Sergei about the Mexican siesta, and has Sergei undress. Sergei is quite uncomfortable about his body (the actor playing him is rather ungainly, like Sergei was). Sergei does not think that anyone would want to have sex with him, no man, no woman. The handler assures Sergei that he is wrong, and proceeds, graphically, and erotically, to enter the Eisenstein anus. I rarely get aroused by non- porn movies, but this scene is one that I think about often, and fondly. The notion that an unsexy man can been seen as sexy and can become sexual, is one that I appreciate. And so, Viva Greenaway!
16 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Stunning Cinematography
derek-duerden24 September 2020
After the relative disappointment of "Goltzius" (was that made with any budget at all?) - this felt to me like a great return to form for Greenaway.

Clearly here he had enough money to put his talents for framing, colour and composition to great effect. Also, I thought that the two main characters were very well-cast and imbued the story with real depth; as did many of the supporting actors, such as Palomino's wife, and the bell-ringer (the only jarring note for me being the guy playing "Hunter" - who mostly seemed to be standing stiffly waiting for his next line...).

As others have noted, this is not the film you need if you want lots of "Eisenstein on set, directing" footage, but for me there was plenty of implied and explicit context regarding his standing in Russia, support in the USA and the point in his life he'd got to at the time. Well worth a viewing.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Wow! Excellent !
cekadah5 June 2016
I read the reviews for this film by the other writers here and some are so spot on and well informed I feel a bit intimidated writing this short review. This film by Director/writer: Peter Greenaway is spellbinding, modern, surreal, and above all, as other writers expressed, captures the inner spirit of Eisenstein's genius.

Just as Guanajuato is geographically located in the center of Mexico this story is focused on Eisenstein discovering his personal center. He wanted to be accepted by Hollywood and they rejected him. In Soviet Russia he glorified the revolution with his film "October" and everyone saw him as an artist but he had to hide the person the artist is. He was a great artist of the cinema but here in Guanajuato Eisenstein finds himself and realizes he doesn't need the approval of his peers to be the person he is. With the companionship of his Mexican guide 'Palomino', performed so wonderfully by Luis Alberti, Eisenstein gives into his own desires, his own needs, and is given the chance (though briefly) to be himself physically, artistically, and intellectually.

If anyone wants to see the art of Eisenstein just find one of his movies and you will be stunned by it's grand yet simple photography and story. If you want to see an element of 'the man' that created these remarkable films catch this movie. Here the artist brakes the shackles others have place upon him. But in the end he must return to Soviet Russia and back to judging eyes that are so symbolically shown throughout the movie by the three Mexican men in traditional dress. They represent the establishment, society, they eyes and minds that judge all who try to be who they really are.

Great cinema for the thinking person!
12 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
What happens in Mexico stays in Mexico...
andychrist2716 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
New Peter Greenaway movie about Russian movie-maker Eisenstein's Mexico odyssey in 1931, when he went there to make a documentary with the financing of famous writer Upton Sinclair and ended up with 400km of film reel he was never allowed to edit. According to the movie, comrade Eisenstein, as a closet homo, also lost his (anal) virginity there, at age 33...and the scene where it happens is quite graphic.

I'm not a fan of Greenaway but this movie proved to be very enjoyable as long as you don't take it too seriously. It is not a traditional biopic, being quite experimental and with constant over-the-top intensive dialogue. Some visually beautiful scenes and inventive camera work and framing. It also has quite a lot of emotional and even existential depth.

Right at the beginning, when we are introduced to all the main characters, Greenaway shows photos of real historical figures in a split scene with actors portraying them...it must be said every one of them looks surprisingly similar to the real thing. For me as a Estonian it was pretty funny to hear all the Russian characters speaking English with Finnish accent (apparently for Greenaway as a Briton this sounded close enough to legit Russian accent so he had Finnish Swedes playing all the Soviets). Elmer Bäck as Eisenstein is fantastic in this movie and pretty much carries it on his own at times.

Homophobes are advised to avoid this one like a plague though.
8 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Greenaway...So underrated!
zacknabo30 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Elmer Back plays Eisenstein (where did they find this guy?). Back's performance is magnetic and mesmerizing, one of my favorites of the year. Back brings a wonderful sense of humor to the film and is an outstanding physical actor/comedian. His slight facial gestures and mannerisms bring a full depth of dimension to his portrayal of Sergei Eisenstein. His frenetic, manic energy with a resting heart rate of about 150 beats per minute is simply a wonder to watch and in perfect step with the film's visual explosiveness. Biopics (by the way this is a VERY loose biopic) are exceptionally easy to make bad, pretty easy to make mediocre, hard as s**t to make good and nearly impossible to make unique. So it comes as no surprise that it a truly formula shattering biopic covering one of the most wildly innovative, complex and enigmatic geniuses in the history of cinema (or in the world).

It's the thirties and Soviet film pioneer and Stalinists propagandists Sergei Eisenstein has been shunned by Hollywood for his obvious Red connections and on taking advice by friends such as Charlie Chaplin has gone to Mexico to make his next great "Masterpiece!" Which is more than a struggle, for as the audience slowly finds out, largely in manic diatribes spouted by Eisenstein himself, the legendary auteur is in a highly confused and vulnerable state in his life: financially, politically, sexually, philosophically and artistically. The set pieces in Eisenstein explode in glorious color imposed in fine tuned geometric framing; the depth of staging creates a world within a world, making the sets in Guanajuato a place that existed yet never quite existed. Greenaway in homage to Eisenstein uses many of his techniques montage editing, curt shots, quick scenes that suddenly cut in about three seconds just as Eisenstein, Aleksandr Dovzhenko, Dziga Vertov or other similar montage formalists such as Abel Gance would have. The difference in Greenaway's adoption and mixing of his own techniques with those classic reverence styles is that he maintains continuity in style yet never grows too predictable with his camera and never falls into the deathtrap that is nauseating Tarantino-esque pastiche. Greenaway's use of wide-angle lenses and wonderful tracking dolly shots (reminiscent of Max Ophuls) to follow the frenzied, perpetually moving Eisenstein to-and-fro is amazing and never misses a beat. At certain points Greenaway splits the screen using classic clips of Eisenstein's films and photographs of people that are being referenced as Eisenstein speaks, putting on full display the classic stylings of classic art-cinema, all the while maintaining an air of freshness.

Back's performance can become much too some, but in all of Eisenstein's rambling monologues one becomes aware of this man's inner feelings, his emotions that swing from one pole to the next, his true feelings about the Soviet Bear, his fears, his eccentricities, his hang-ups, his diva-bility, as well as his true genius. While the story may seem to remain a bit too vague for some, the devil is in the details. Greenaway is not the man that is going to do a traditional deep-sea delving into the life a character. In Eisenstein Greenaway methodically externalizes the director's philosophies on life and art (and the machinations behind art). We learn about Eisenstein through simple, seemingly unimportant instances (in terms of the man's work), like how he falls for his Mexican chaperone Palomino (Luis Alberti), who eventually anally deflowers Eisenstein in a very funny, touching, matter of fact scene that I assume made many audience members cringe uncomfortably. There are also a few striking scenes with skeletons and a skull; Eisenstein becoming truly enamored with all of this imagery that's semiotics recall the mystery and exotic pageantry of "The Day of the Dead." The Day of the Dead…Eisenstein was very much interested in how the mind processed associations and I couldn't help but to think of the hopeless drunk Albert Finney played in John Huston's Mexico-set film Under the Volcano, where both Eisenstein and Finney's characters mirror each other in a particular way. Both are confused, wasting their talents, lost, lost in an existential sense and lost in a foreign place. Eisenstein in Guanajuato is crucially underrated. For fans of Eisenstein it is a must see and is still enjoyable for fans of film even if unaware of the great Sergei Eisenstein and early cinematic forms, though will certainly miss a lot.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Attention, Auteur at work! --Just remember, Guanajuato is not Guantànamo!
Barev20135 April 2015
Warning: Spoilers
EISENSTEIN IN GUANAJUATO is elder British auteur Greenaway's extravagant view of the famous Russian film pioneer he claims to admire immensely. The World Premiere presented at the 2015 Berlin Film Festival was an outrageously colorful ball buster, much better than expected after numerous previous Greenaway fiascos seen over the years ~ In fact, a glorious raucous Wakeup Call in the wake of a string of big name festival soporifics earlier in the week. The film bursts forth immediately with numerous three-way split screens bulging with highly informative and educational archival footage~~ almost too many messages to absorb at a single sitting.

Most outrageous of all, we see the revered cinema Grandmaster Eisenstein presented In unabashed full frontal nude glory as a gloating Fag (extinct word for "gay") --receiving rectal penis injection from handsome Mexican producer and new found Latin lover (Luis Alberti) who introduces the austere Russian filmmaker to the pleasures of alternative sexual orientation. Presumably about Eisenstein's trip to Mexico in 1931 to make his legendary lost film which was later pieced together from existing fragments by others -- his grandiose epic collage "QUE VIVA MEJICO!". Finnish born Actor Elmer Bäck (b. 1981) is no dead ringer for the real Eisenstein but the wild wiry genius hairdo serves to identify the character. This is actually more about the fun he had there than the making of the famous movie -- thought to be lost for many years -- which is a story in itself. Just remember that Guanajuato is a city in Mexico, not to be confused with GUANTÀNAMO, the infamous CIA water-boarding school in Cuba. Bring along your Mexican jumping beans and an open mind. Not for every taste, but then -- What is? Eisenstein purists may consider all this an insult to his memory while others may see it as a loose tribute to be taken with a few grains of salt.

It is well worth quoting the director's own view of the subject of his film: "The venerated filmmaker Eisenstein is comparable in talent, insight and wisdom, with the likes of Shakespeare or Beethoven; there are few - if any - directors who can be elevated to such heights. On the back of his revolutionary film Battleship Potemkin, he was celebrated around the world, and invited to the US. Ultimately rejected by Hollywood and maliciously maligned by conservative Americans, Eisenstein traveled to Mexico in 1931 to consider a film privately funded by American pro-Communist sympathizers, headed by the American writer Upton Sinclair. Eisenstein's sensual Mexican experience appears to have been pivotal in his life and film career - a significant hinge between the early successes of Strike, Battleship Potemkin, and October, which mad him a world-renowned figure, and his hesitant later career with Alexander Nevsky, Ivan the Terrible and The Boyar's Plot". Peter Greenaway Hmm -- xMakes one wonder about Greenaway's own orientation ...N'est-ce pas?
8 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of just a few very poor Greenaway works
random-7077821 February 2021
Greenaway has been doing more forays into commercial oriented films of late and it is exactly those films that are the most problematic. There is just no excuse for ignoring Eisenstein's effusive fawning over and sycophant relationship to Joseph Stalin. Perhaps no artist in Soviet history was more complicit in actively betraying other artists. Eisenstein did not simply get cornered; he sought out other creative talent, especially in film, engaged them with the goal of destroying them, and dutifully reported them to the NKVD in order to send them into the nightmare and abyss. The man's main talent was manipulation and betrayal We also now know Jay Leyda, who was central to the Mexico project, was complicit. This is all a shame since the the cinematography of Guanajuato is quite good, the narrative structure flows very well, and it is a more approachable Greenaway than most. Still though, if you know the history of the subject, it is an overwhelmingly nauseating whitewash.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed