Pluskylang Great Film overall

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

Josephina Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

JohnHowardReid It is certainly a change to find a Hollywood-sponsored film espousing the anti-Communist side in a Spanish Civil War film, though the edge is taken off one's initial surprise as the film progresses and the Fascists come in for some criticism too. As it turns out one is not supposed to be rooting for either side, but simply for Mr Bogarde and Miss Gardner who find themselves hunted by both. Unfortunately, neither writing nor direction conspire to elicit audience identification or sympathy with these characters, and the performances are somewhat below the usual high standard of these two players. Miss Gardner seems particularly hampered by the necessity for post-dubbing and seems quite unable to match her words with her lip movements. Moreover, she reads her lines in a flat, listless voice. M-G-M have seen fit not to use Vittorio De Sica's voice although he can speak English as fluently as you or I. The voice they do use has a very odd accent and is disconcerting to say the least. Nunnally Johnson's direction is pretty ordinary, though the film does have one outstanding scene with Aldo Fabrizi, lifted from Open City. The abrupt conclusion of the film is one of the most unconvincing I have ever seen. Rotunno's photography is a considerable comedown after his fine work on On the Beach and Miss Gardner often is made to appear unflatteringly haggard. Some of the sets are impressive and the film has some lavish crowd scenes. The script retains a bit of the bite from Bruce Marshall's novel but not enough to add up to satisfying entertainment.

hopkinshughes Though far from perfect, I could watch this movie again, and perhaps even more than that. It's a fascinating movie, for one thing, pairing two of the most beautiful people who ever lived, in a story with real depth, or at least the promise of real depth, which says a lot in a world where 99 movies out of 100 don't even try. Imagine, complaining that at 37, Ava Gardner was "past her prime." It is wonderful to see Bogarde, whose roles usually had him sneering worldly-wise ironies, showing heartfelt passion for the good and the true. It is equally wonderful to see Gardner in a role far more suited for her than the calculating charmer or the tormented playgirl. She never seemed to be really trying until this one, where perhaps the part touched something deep in her. Their chemistry was superlative, their love scene one of the greats of all time, in my view. That this portrayal of a love that goes beyond time and place occurs in the context of one of the most astonishingly wicked and absurd wars of all time is another sublimity that seems to have whizzed right by all but one of the previous reviewers. Hemingway showed only that Robert Jordan thought the war was absurd, he didn't show its absurdity, which director Nunnally Johnson managed to do here in both direction and dialog, and against great odds. Like another of my favorites, Viva Zapata, this movie is a flawed masterpiece, better by far than 100 polished banalities. Blame its flaws on the trials of filming in 1960 (still stuck in the 50s), on sloppy editing, on the meaningless title, and the inevitable hurdles that writers and directors have to overcome in the complicated and difficult art of film-making, truly daunting in the case of this film. (Imagine attempting to film a love story between a priest and a prostitute in 50s Sicily?!) Don't blame the the actors, the director, or the beautiful and poignant story.

alanrhobson This film has an abiding place in my film canon, for one very good reason.It isn't a great film, as both the other IMDb reviewers have gone out of their way to stress (although some of their criticisms were a little unfair. I thought, for example, that Joseph Cotten fared better than they say). However, it is virtually the only entertainment vehicle I have ever seen - including film, TV, radio, newspaper, magazine - that dares to show the truth about the left-wing Republicans/anti-Nationalists in the Spanish Civil War.The Spanish Republicans have been lionised for decades for their allegedly heroic struggle against fascism (although it is actually a moot point to what extent Franco's Nationalists were fascist). However, this film is brave enough to show the truth - that the Spanish Republicans singled out religious targets and many harmless middle class targets and killed or persecuted them. It also dares to show the truth that the Republicans ran the areas they controlled along Stalinist lines. Which is not surprising, given the links with Communists and Stalinist Russia that some of them had.The file deserves enormous credit for showing this, and it is a shame that no-one has pointed this out on IMDb - until now.

Eric Chapman A fairly potent script with an interesting plot device at its core (both believers and non-believers alike chase after a sacred religious relic during a bloody civil war), undermined by rather bland, pedestrian film-making. Thus, it's not terribly surprising this was the last film directed by the prolific screenwriter Nunnally Johnson. He shoots just about everything in an overly dark and cramped way making it often impossible to determine where a scene is set, let alone what is going on or even who is in it. This may have been intentional, with the absence of light meant to convey the spiritual darkness in which the country of Spain was submerged at the time, but it comes off as crude and makes for rough viewing. There's something strange about the sound as well; there are few if any sufficiently lit close ups and it seems as if some of the actors' voices have been dubbed. Vittorio DeSica's character, for instance, comes across a bit like Truman Capote playing General Patton. Joseph Cotten pops up every now and again, as a cynical, gravel-voiced newsman, (in fact, he also narrates) but you never ever really see his face and there is something disembodied about his entire presence. It's all a bit unsettling.Nonetheless, if you can endure its flaws, the movie raises some thought provoking questions on the nature of faith and religion in times of strife, and Dirk Bogarde is quite impassioned as the troubled priest. Ava Gardner, however, is noticeably past her prime as Bogarde's love interest, and her character isn't adequately fleshed out.