CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

Contentar Best movie of this year hands down!

Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

jazerbini I got a DVD copy of "Behold a Pale Horse" and I can now after many years seeing it more calmly as I did a few times. It is a hymn to liberty and resistance to tyranny. Impressive in every way. A film that should make us wonder about its depth. Men who are murdered and banished from their homeland, children who lose their parents and grow up with the feeling of revenge. Mothers who die without the right to see their children banished to another country. Zinnemann made ​​a masterpiece. The black and white only reinforce their distress. Peck have here a magnificent performance as the revolutionary Artiguez that an almost suicidal gesture, and that also deserves further analysis,back to their homeland, knowing that he would die, but why should it back to his mother and the boy who trusted him. The gesture is much more important than the continued oppression of Vinolas, Artiguez knew this would also end. At the end of the film there is the impression that Viñolas is the winner. Applauded by all those who live with tyranny, blind and cowardly. But Viñolas own wonders: Why Artiguez back? Each of us knows the answer: Artiguez returned to prove that it can be beaten but not defeated. His gesture fighting for freedom would bear fruit. Others would follow the the steps of Artiguez finally ridding Spain of terror that dominated the Franco era. A monumental wonderful work.

Jay Raskin This movie reminded me a bit of "The Third Man," where there are a lot of street scenes that lead you places you do not expect. It is not nearly as brilliant or satisfying as "The Third Man," but it is interesting and surprising. The biggest surprise is the intensity of Gregory Peck as guerrilla leader Manuel Artiguez. He is a defeated Spanish Partisan who has continued to fight for twenty years after the Spanish Civil War ended. Peck slowly realizes that his importance as a symbol of resistance is more important than his life, and his only chance for victory.Omar Sheriff and Anthony Quinn are fine as a priest and police chief, but their characters are pretty straightforward. It was interesting to watch Quinn prayer to God to help him catch Artiquez. Usually antagonists get to kick a dog so that the audience knows that hes the bad guy. Here the director Fred Zinnemann doesn't stack the deck and allows the audience to decide who is morally right or wrong. A director who treats his audience with respect and assumes they are intelligent, is quite unusual and should be treasured.The only thing I didn't like about the movie was the cinematography. It was sometimes underexposed and muddy. Back in the film days, there would be a final timed print, with each scene getting its own exposure based on its density. It seems as if the print was not timed, or not timed well.Also, the viewer should be warned that there is very little action in the film. The movie focuses on the psychology of the characters, so don't expect "the Guns of Navarone."

ewarn-1 This is a film which has almost faded into total obscurity, and that's tragic, because it's well worth seeing. It's sort of a thinking person's suspense movie, better appreciated if you know some details about the intricate historical background in which it is set. Even so, it can be appreciated for its dramatic settings and characterizations. It has a complicated plot, to be sure, but the story rolls right along...not a lot of action until the end, but the tension builds steadily. I'm no fan of Peck, but his role here really drew me in. He looks beaten down by a hard life and way too much unhealthy passion. Quinn doesn't have much screen time, but I liked some of the minor characters best...their faces were great. The credit sequence, meshed together perfectly with newsreels, shows a long line of defeated soldiers, their faces reflecting defeat and confusion... a great tracking scene.Here are some reasons I think the film is unknown: 1. The main character is an atheist communist anti-catholic guerilla bandit. Not a popular icon in American movies. 2. Complex historical background. 3. Knowledge of political situation in Spain a minimum requirement. Not a priority on many American's lists. 4. Black and white photography in 1964. (Hey, I liked the scenery...but you always wonder how it would look in color...and this was a late date for a black and white feature film.) 5. Civil War movies (even Spain's) always run a risk...you might alienate half the audience.

hitzzen This excellent film tells the story of a stubborn Spanish republican, Manuel Artiguez, who refused to give up the fight when his side lost the Spanish civil war to the fascists in 1938. The film takes place twenty years later, when after many successful raids, Artiguez has lost the will to continue. However, his adversary, a Spanish police chief called Vinolas, has not yet given up on capturing or killing him and sets a trap for him. The trap and the question of whether Artiguez will fall into it it will keep you on your seat for most of the movie. Three men caught between Artiguez and Vinolas, an informer, a priest, and an idealistic Spanish exile boy, add a rich psychological and moral dimension to the film, following themes of idealism, revenge, and the uses of violence. "Behold" is a great thriller with highly complex characters and a profound moral sensibility. The idealism of Spanish republicans like the boy is on the one hand supported by the oily and hypocritical Vinolas, and on the other hand undercut by the rawness and violence of Artiguez. Neither of the adversaries is vindicated, but neither are they equivalent to one another. The ending will set you thinking for hours, if you're so inclined.Performances by Peck (Artiguez) and Quinn (Vinolas) are great. Peck is less stuffy than usual. I'm not generally a fan of earnest, wet-eyed Sharif (the priest), but his performance here suits the movie quite well. I can still hear his voice saying "Did the informer escape? Is the bandit safe?"My only complaint is that for all of its thematic complexity and richness of character the film is at times somewhat melodramatic and the dialogue is sometimes a little clunky. And for some reason its parts, good characters, good plot, good actors, all excellent, do not quite add up into a perfect whole. Nor is it as good as some of the movies it slightly resembles: Guns of Navarone, Battle of Algiers, Wild Bunch. However, it is definitely worthwhile for fans of 'thoughtful thrillers'.