And Starring Pancho Villa as Himself

source: And Starring Pancho Villa as Himself

Watching a movie like this makes me really think that the future of interesting american cinema is in television. This is a movie that has the production value of a theatrical movie and the gray (not black and white) characters of something like Lawrence of Arabia. People are sell outs. People are three dimensionally portrayed. They aren't cardboard heros and villians. There isn't the "good guy in the end" that infiltrates so many other movies. Great cast and great cinematography. Well done, guys. Keep up the great work. Now if we can only find the original film, wouldn't that be something?

I really enjoyed watching this moive, despite its flaws. The film should a realistc portal of a person whos regarded as evil man, and a war mongering murder by the America Media of the time, to stirr up feeling against him, so that thye can protect their investments in Mexico... but film should him as a crusador of the people, a revoluionary that wanted the best for his people... While watching this movie i couldn't help but think of other such icons in the worlds history that has gotten a bad press by American Media, ie.. Ché Guevera, Fidel Castro, Hochiming, so on and so on... the american held such evil though of these people, as murders... but reality they where the victim of a smear campaign by American investors to proctect there investments much like Poncho was by Hearst... I don't think that this film was just a movie about Ponoch Villa,... this movie is a comontary on all misunderstood revolutionay Heros!

Antonio Banderas is not my favorite actor, but with the 13th Warrior, and now this I see that his talent is wasted on "action/adventure" flicks, which is where I have usually seen him. However, with the viewing of this film I now see he is indeed an actor of high caliber. Every gesture he made I was lost in the character and utterly forgot it was Banderas acting - this is superb. The anger, frustration, tiredness came through in his every word and gesture. Also note how Banderas is able to act in the style of silent films. This is no small task because you have to step backward, step out of yourself, and step into very uncomfortable shoes. Because the movie has a "TV feel" to it I only gave it a 9/10, but Banderas' performance is absolutely 11/10. -Zafoid PS: An exceptional movie is always surrounded by an exceptional supporting caste and crew. -Z

Considering that this was made for TV, it is one strange take on the life of a 'man who would be king', and deserves a much wider viewing audience that it may have attracted. Antonio Banderas is a much underrated actor - partially because he seems to accept any role that comes his way - and this should indicate to the harshest critic that he is most capable! Much as Robin Hood and, here in Australia, Ned Kelly, are revered as 'outlaws with a conscience', Pancho Villa is perceived as a folk hero. I hope this film dispels THAT particular notion. He was a self-serving bandit with a huge ego and, as the film shows, not above killing the 'locals' to further his grandiose schemes. Banderas makes a fine fist of what is, essentially, a portrait of a seemingly-complex yet simple man seduced by the notion of Hollywood stardom. The irony, of course, is that, these days, anyone who appears on the screen (silver or no) is perceived as a 'star'. Villa is presented as one in a long line of anti-heroes who find themselves fighting an unjust regime - but essentially just as brutal. Overall a charmer of a film. Definitely worth more than one viewing.

The Mexican revolutionary Pancho Villa needs money to fund his war against the current government in Mexico and also against the American federals who try to steal Mexico's oil and other Natural Richness, as well to add Mexico's lands to US. Pancho also knows that he is not well seen in US because of the press campaign against him, so he decides to invite many studios to shoot his battles and his life, in order to raise money for financing guns and ammunition and also for people to get a better impression of his attitudes. The Mutual Film Corporation sends Frank Thayer and a film crew to make a deal with Pancho and to start shooting. Thayer stays fascinated with Pancho, and after the failure of Thayer's initial footage, he convinces Aitkin to invest even more money in a second attempt,with a longer and more personal movie about Pancho's life. I personally enjoyed this movie a lot. I randomly choose this movie to watch to practice my Spanish, but I am glad I did it! I am not much familiar with Pancho Villa's story to know if the movie is accurate or not, but I liked to see a movie with a different story from a different hero that is not very famous outside Mexico. And It was good to see a movie portraying Mexico's side of the story for a change. I think Antonio Bandeiras is great in his role( and it was good to see him talking in Spanish as well!), rude and soft at the same time, and I believe that this movie has one of his best performances. Such a pity that this movie didn't get the much wider viewing audience that it deserves! Ps: I stayed curious to watch the original movie from Pancho Villa from the 20's. Does anyone knows if it is really lost?

The film chronicles about the title role,the Mexican bandit and guerrilla leader, with broadened focus on the filming his life and actual war.Mexican revolutionary urges funds to finance the battles against the Huertas government.Great director D.W.Griffith(Colm Feore)sends Frank Thayer(Eion Bailey)and crew as Raoul Walsh(Kyle Chandler) pull off the shooting the events around Pancho Villa.Thayer converts annoyed and disappointed by the rebel. This vibrant film an uneven rehash of Pancho Villa legend including strong violence,profanities,epics battles and bloody scenes. Antonio Banderas plays the famous and rowdy bandit,he is perfect in title role.Remainder casting is frankly well:Alan Arkin,Colm Feore(Griffith),Michel McKean,Kyle Chandler..Another films about Villa feats are : the classic ¨Viva Villa¨with Wallace Beery,forever belongs this role;¨Villa¨with Rodolfo Hoyos and Brian Keith; ¨Villa riders¨with Yul Brynner,¨Pancho Villa¨with Telly Savalas and Clint Walker. The picture is based on true events,thus : Pancho Villa born in Chihuahua with the name Doroteo Arango,from his peasant upbringing he became an outlaw in his youth and adopted the name Francisco Villa from another outlaw.He played a leading role in the Mexican Revolution(1910-1920),winning many victories (as Torreon battle narrated in the film).For a time Villa,who seemed in line for leadership of Mexico,enjoyed the agreeable interest of the United States government;but William Randolph Hearsts media empire's press campaign against him and USA authorities then dropped Villa and supported his rival,Carranza.Villa's resentment resulted in the revenge raid on Columbus(deeds narrated in another films but no here) by General Pershing's column.Unable to suppress Villa by force,the Mexican government purchased his retirement from the political arena as a weary, disillusioned political liability with a handsome pension and large estate.Villa was assassinated in 1923 when gunmen ambushed his car.

Spoilers herein. The purest and most powerful of films are films about films, especially the subset that are about the making of themselves. Such endeavors often provide windows into our souls by tricking us into perverting the truth as we judge someone else doing the same. This one has some particularly strong material to work with, strong material with historical resonance and driven by a usually powerful actor. But in typical HBO fashion, it is so watered and dumbed down that the cleverness is reduced to a mere stain. Along the way, they twist the truth around in precisely the way they demean. Don't these people pay attention to their own moral? Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

I was intrigued by the idea that revolutionary Pancho Villa appeared in one of the world's first docu-dramas, but not much was done with the idea. This movie could have been a satire of Hollywood's version of the truth or it could have brought Pancho Villa to life, but the movie does a little of one, a little of the other, but suffers from insisting on focusing on Thayer. Thayer comes across as too nice to fill the role of villain in a satire and too intelligent to play the role of a dupe, and he only sees Villa from the outside, unable to bring any insight to the character. There are interesting moments scattered here and there throughout the movie, and while it's bland it's watchable, I guess, but I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Although I will say, Alan Arkin was terrific in a small but colorful role.

That the movies are a perfect way of making propaganda isn't new. The Germans used it very often during the Second World War and even in more recent times it has been used to make publicity for the army (remember the boom of young men who wanted to join the US Air Force after seeing "Top Gun"). But that Pancho Villa already used it during his Mexican Revolution between 1912-1916 is something special. And don't think that this has been made up by some smart Hollywood wise guys who thought that this might be a nice story and an easy way to make a lot of money. No, this actually happened. If you don't believe me: just type Pancho Villa in the IMDb search box and check his filmography. You'll see that there have been several movies made with him in a leading role. Too bad that they are all lost. But no problem, we still have HBO, a company that is known for its good quality work when it comes to historical projects (think for instance of "Band of Brothers" and "Citizen X"). This time they have recreated the actual events of the film crews that had an exclusive deal with Pancho Villa and that followed him during the different battles with the federal Mexican army. They show how the studio payed big money (which Villa used to fund his revolution with), so they could introduce Villa (as a good man, but also as a merciless villain), his revolution and the war the way the American public had never seen it before. All this resulted in the very first feature length movie in history. When you are interested in the history behind the Mexican Revolution, than this is definitely a movie you shouldn't miss. But even when that subject doesn't appeal to you all that much, you should give it a try, because it's also very interesting to see how the movie studio's worked at the time and how a movie was shot. OK, you don't get to see the actual movie from 1912, but you get a very good idea of how it all worked. And the fact that this is a TV movie certainly doesn't mean that the battles don't look real or that the characters seem to be made out of cardboard. Next to the 'historical' value of this movie and the interesting story, I also want to point out that Antonio Banderas did an excellent job portraying Pancho Villa. There are perhaps people who don't agree with me, but personally I find this his best and most convincing role ever. The other actors did a very good job as well, but in my in my opinion he was the best. All in all this may not be a masterpiece, but it certainly is worth a watch. Don't be scared off by the label TV that you find behind the title. This isn't a typical, extremely dramatic TV movie, but a very decent and strong historical drama. I reward this movie with a 7.5/10.