poewilson
Do you stay faithful to the book or do you adapt a work so that it presents itself as the best film? Always an issue and for this film the adaption kills the work it does not suit the cinema and feels like a plodding piece instead of the insightful tale of humanity that the novella was. The framing of shots is poor and the blurring of the frame to hide the low quality of the special effects should have been better done, I felt like I was seeing a film from the late 30's rather than nearing the sixties. You could place anyone into the role of the old man and come away with a decent performance and Tracey does not give us anything that one may consider amazing.
siderite
Spencer Tracy acts and narrates in this film about an old fisherman getting the catch of his life. The small boy, the terrace owner and any other characters are really there for a few scenes. The entire story is about the old man and the struggle with the fish a metaphor for life: it's hard and it sucks, and then you die. It was funny that my wife was always asking me "is he going to die?" like there was any chance the old man could be immortal. In the film he doesn't die, but that is clearly besides the point.Tracy was nominated for an Oscar for his performance, but really, it's just a guy in a boat, talking to himself and to a fish and nothing much is going on. The film is just one hour and a half, but its simplistic plot makes it feel a bit too long, especially now, more than 50 years later since the movie was made. I guess it is a nice movie and it helps if you want to not read the written story, just don't expect too much.
Armand
the Hemingway novel. as seed for a great film. more than an adaptation, it is a impressive parable about hope, fight, desire and limits. each scene - as perfect circle. the fight against sharks scene - memorable. one of the most powerful roles of Tracy. and beautiful nuances of an extraordinary performance.the beauty of images and precise script are keys of this remarkable movie. a parable - movie because it can be a Christian story about faith and will of God. about ambition and sense of a bitter lesson. about yourself. a fisherman in his boat. a huge fish. and the return to home. all - in powerful light and heavy shadows. parts of a movie about small life things.
Robert J. Maxwell
Spencer Tracy is Santiago, an old impoverished Cuban fisherman who has had eighty-four days of bad luck and is being helped to survive by a young boy of the village. Tracy takes his little fishing boat farther out than usual, lands a giant marlin after a fierce three-day struggle, and then loses his trophy to the sharks who tear the great fish to pieces, leaving only the head, spine, and tail.If it get off to something of a slow start, it nevertheless involves us in Tracy's fate all the way. There are lyrical interludes while Tracy watches the birds, the flying fish, the porpoises, and dreams of lions on the African shore. He follows the baseball in the newspapers and admires Joe DiMaggio.And the battles are monumental. Tracy has to fight the huge marlin, then the multitude of sharks that attack it, and -- constantly -- his own age and fatigue. The viewer gets to feel the desperation behind all of these contests. Tracy pulls it off with the help of Dmitri Tiomkin's somewhat bombastic score, with its echoes of "Rio Bravo" and "High Noon." There are three problems though. First, modern viewers have been spoiled by recent advances in special effects and process work. The marlin, seen up close, looks like the rubber bladder it is, even when disguised by the blurry image representing Tracy's dizziness. After it's been stripped by the sharks, the spine looks like a lead pipe bought at the local plumber's, with a few plastic ribs attached. The scenes of the marlin leaping out of the sea aren't well integrated with the studio footage.Second -- and let's face facts -- Big Ernie doesn't translate well to the screen. His bare-bones attempts at thought-provoking folk poetry come across as stilted and sometimes risible.Tracy (to himself): "Do not blame the hand. It is not the hand's fault." (To his cramped hand): "You have been a long time with the fish." Third, there is a problem with the casting. Harry Bellaver is a pug, or a cop, or a reporter in Hollywood movies. He is not a Cuban bartender; he is not strong and has no aficion. Most of all, there is a problem with Spencer Tracy, an actor whom I deeply admire. Even my crude Irish stepfather from Charlestown who never had a sensitive thought in his life, was once moved to say, "Y'know, he's a good-lookin' guy. I don't mean handsome, but manly." But Tracy is not a poor Cuban fisherman. Ernie himself said Tracy "looks like a fat, rich actor." He didn't care for the boy either, who looked like "a cross between a tadpole and Anita Loos." I'm certain I've read somewhere that Hemingway was among the spectators at the arm wrestling contest flashback but I'm not sure it's true.Despite these deficiencies, the author, the cast and crew pull it off. Hemingway had Hispanic fatalism down pat. In the face of what we would call bad luck, they become Stoics. That Olympian generalization isn't mine. A Latin American professor devoted an entire lecture to it. It's a moving and tragic story touching on Hemingway's familiar themes of pride and defeat. As Hemingway has the fisherman say, "You can destroy a man but you can not defeat him," to which I'm tempted to reply, "Like hell, you can't."
