Cargando...
Cargando...



Lo único más grande que su pasión por Estados Unidos ... era la pasión que tenían el uno por el otro
En el verano de 1870, Averill e Irvine terminan sus estudios en la Universidad de Harvard. Veinte años después, viven en circunstancias muy distintas. Averill, más serio y visiblemente más viejo, se ha convertido en un "marshall" federal. Por su parte, Irvine, destruido y arruinado por la bebida, pero todavía en su sano juicio, es miembro de la asociación Stock Growers Agricultores, que está involucrada en un conflicto.
Avis de la communauté (8)
It is hard for me to understand why this movie was such a disaster at its release that it brought down the United Artists Studios. It is for sure not the best movie ever, but it is also far from terrible. The story does at times go into irrelevant side storylines that break the flow and the ending is not a clear black and white classic Hollywood ending. But the ending is one of the elements that I find excellent in the movie, as it feels more like real life. The main characters portrayed by Kristofferson, Bridges, Walken and Huppert namely deliver solid performances. I also like the portrayal of the multicultural, multilingual community of poor and often naive settlers fresh from Europe who are confronted to the realities of their American dream. I believe that one problem of the movie is that it say itself to be “based on true events” while the story is 99% fictional. If you can ignore this, it is a solid western that breaks with the white hat/black hat narratives of many earlier Hollywood Westerns. Worth the watch.
This movie has a bad rep because it was an epic flop that led to the ruin of United Artists (allegedly). And sure, this movie has some flaws. It's mediocre for the most part. It's too long. The prologue and epilogue, some side-stories and characters could have been easily cut. The story is meandering. I do not always understand the motivation and decisions of some people. The epic finale is ruined by people that simply act very stupid in battle. Sure they are farmers or shopkeepers. But they must know the fundamentals of a firefight right? This is infuriatingly bad. There's some things I like though: stage design and landscapes are awesome. Full of details. The number of people (and horses) involved in some scenes is breathtaking (and may have contributed to the budget overrun). Acting is good for the most part. I like that not everything is explicitly explained. The Babylonic language variety is great (especially when you understand some of the languages spoken). I like that this is a real story. I like that the birth of a nation is portrayed very differently from earlier US Western movies. Instead of clean gun-slinging heroes, there are dirty, conflicted, drunk protagonists. I like how the desperation of the immigrants is conveyed. I like the social commentary. In 2025, this immigrant story is perhaps much more modern than it used to be back in the 80's.
One of Hollywood's biggest flops, without being too bad.
A sprawling epic which languishes luxuriantly over atmosphere, sound and visuals. Storywise it falters, as it builds too slowly, with too much given over to the artistic excess. Yes, a feast for the eyes, but it spends too long on establishing shots or creating a feeling. The Johnson County War was just a thematic device and the story is not really to be found her except in a few bits of plot scaffolding. Yet, and I mean this, the story once you get through it, stays with you, and you are there with him on the boat at the end, pondering what could have been.