@@janmentz4476 en esta película, hay una escena donde los protagonistas; comen con tenedor. Para los que nunca visitaron el Salvador, aquí en el salvador es normal comer con las manos sin andar con etiqueta: comiendo con tenedor. Hablando la verdad sin hipocresías, en la época en que hicieron esta película el salvador era un país desconocido; del que solo se conocían las historias viejas de la guerra civil. En 1994 y 1995, el salvador se hizo famoso internacionalmente; como el país más peligroso del mundo.
Jim Belushi's character was a fantastic addition to the movie. Gene has made a lot of bad calls on movies that are considered classics now. I have a feeling Gene makes a decision on whether he likes a movie within the first 20 minutes. Some superficial issue will spoil the entire movie for him. He's a shallow movie critic..
What I liked about Salvador was that this wasn't a cut and dry right vs left war. Boyle "preaches" to the audience, but we have to remember. At the time, the red wave and Cold War was still a very prominent narrative. In Central America, the oligarch bourgeois had forced the poor into a corner. It looks like the film is sympathetic to the communist, but voting for Donald Duck as he puts it, isn't much of a choice. I enjoy Under Fire, but Salvador was a true gonzo journalist tale. It feels like a stamp in time captured by great cinematography, and dialogue. It feels like youre in this 80s banana republic, post Vietnam. The world was still this huge isolated place. As close to what the final part of Apocalypse Now was.
Salvador was awesome it's probably my favorite Stone film. Maybe because I'm Hispanic and I'm a sucker for stuff set in Latin America. But it captures a conflict in el salvador that very few Americans even knew about today. Or all the cia shadow wars we helped wage in Central America
This only shows like 35 % of what was really going on they could've easily made a part 2 & probly 3 really good epic classic movie its above many of the greats
AWESEOME WORK. you also pick out some great scenes to counterpoint Siskels points. I never realize how much of an establishment liberal he was. I wonder if Ebert's lapsed Catholicism allowed him to approach the film with more openness?
I saw Salvador many years ago. I agree with Gene calling it melodramatic, but it's still a good movie. Under Fire and The Year of Living Dangerously are better movies in this genre, just like Gene said.
I disagree with most of Gene's reviews. This one especially. I don't really remember much of Under Fire or The Year of Living Dangerously but I do remember Salvador especially the ending when Richard Boyle can't get his girl friend over the border. Maybe I'm biased because it's an Oliver Stone film. One thing is sure though, Salvador was overshadowed due to the success of Platoon and I have talked to people who think that Salvador is a better film than Platoon.
James Woods receives his first Oscar nomination for this film It's a picture that not many people know it exist . That's primarily b/c of the subject matter. But, still one of the best 1986.
@@harryfrantz4968 In El Salvador, citizens of the country are ware of the atrocities the United States - trained Salvadoran army participated in, but many are scared to speak against because of the fear of being attacked by familiars or Salvadoran army apologist.
@@DavidFlores-ik3fr this isn't 1985. Most of those dinosaurs are dead. Or gone. They held trials in Miami like 15 years ago over the Mozote massacre. There's youtube videos everywhere of veterans giving their side. No one is scared. It's that most know both sides are guilty of innocent killings.
In a torn country during the 80's it wasn't unusual to attack women by means of rape. The idea here was to attack Americans so as America would get involved in the issues of El Salvador, apparently a primisary note prior was written in America concerning El Salvador thus concerning Americans, which vividly states only conflict hedes in this war, not Americans, notwithstanding.22-912 King v. Brownback (10/30/2023)
I’m Salvadoran but was brought to the USA at 4. The film tried to condense major occurrences of the Salvadoran Civil War. It’s no documentary and the actors were all Mexican, so that took away from the authenticity of the film. Doubt they could have filmed in El Salvador in 1985-86. The main protagonist’s are annoying but still watched the movie. It’s so so.
You have to remember el salvador doesn't have much of a film industry so they have to rely on Mexican actors and studios. Innocent voices which was also about the Civil War was also shot in Mexico
@@jonathanramos8414 think it’s time to build up an industry. Having a movie about Salvadorans with mo-Salvadorans actors detracts from the authenticity. We can’t outsource everything. I’d rather see a Salvadoran new actor than a seasoned non-Salvadoran.
Gene is right about the tone of this film being all over the place. I saw it after Platoon and was surprised that Oliver Stone made the two films back to back because Salvador is so terribly inferior.
You obviously missed what the film was. If this was all over the place? You must've missed Scarface. This was arguably Wood's greatest role. A fine piece of art. Before Fear and Loathing (which was also all over the place). It was the first Gonzo Jounalist film. It's a chaotic tragedy. And sadly one that was as close to real life as a movie got.
@@FormerHumanXthe tone isn’t all over the place the tone is set it’s gritty and it’s meant to feel dry and hot and humid and all over the place because that’s how it feels to be there even though we never were there that’s what it’s like and also my girlfriends father fought in that war as a child soldier and I’ve seen the photo of him in there
Кино
Good film by Oliver Stone. Felt like watching a real documentary on screen. The realism works in "Salvador"
Amd a bitter lesson for what is happening in Ukraine.
@@janmentz4476 en esta película, hay una escena donde los protagonistas; comen con tenedor. Para los que nunca visitaron el Salvador, aquí en el salvador es normal comer con las manos sin andar con etiqueta: comiendo con tenedor. Hablando la verdad sin hipocresías, en la época en que hicieron esta película el salvador era un país desconocido; del que solo se conocían las historias viejas de la guerra civil. En 1994 y 1995, el salvador se hizo famoso internacionalmente; como el país más peligroso del mundo.
Agreed - powerful film. 🇫🇮
The nuns scene was hugely disturbing.........still affects me
That’s a true story. My mother left back for the states before that happened…
Jim Belushi's character was a fantastic addition to the movie. Gene has made a lot of bad calls on movies that are considered classics now. I have a feeling Gene makes a decision on whether he likes a movie within the first 20 minutes. Some superficial issue will spoil the entire movie for him. He's a shallow movie critic..
I agree I always agree with Ebert
Underrated, under appreciated masterpiece!
What I liked about Salvador was that this wasn't a cut and dry right vs left war. Boyle "preaches" to the audience, but we have to remember. At the time, the red wave and Cold War was still a very prominent narrative.
In Central America, the oligarch bourgeois had forced the poor into a corner. It looks like the film is sympathetic to the communist, but voting for Donald Duck as he puts it, isn't much of a choice.
I enjoy Under Fire, but Salvador was a true gonzo journalist tale. It feels like a stamp in time captured by great cinematography, and dialogue. It feels like youre in this 80s banana republic, post Vietnam. The world was still this huge isolated place. As close to what the final part of Apocalypse Now was.
It was one of Oliver Stone’s first movies. Originally it was 2 hours 45 minutes. I believe the editing down effected the tone.
Hopefully one day we can see the longer version.
@@JasonBagherian hopefully. According to Stone the movie and that Hemsdale studio is tied up legal hell. The producer was pretty shady.
I thought it was a Great movie. Woods was born for this role. Belushi was outstanding.
Salvador was awesome it's probably my favorite Stone film. Maybe because I'm Hispanic and I'm a sucker for stuff set in Latin America. But it captures a conflict in el salvador that very few Americans even knew about today. Or all the cia shadow wars we helped wage in Central America
Where are the scenes that belong in a comedy?
He’s talking out of his ass
This only shows like 35 % of what was really going on they could've easily made a part 2 & probly 3 really good epic classic movie its above many of the greats
A good debate. i have my own opinions about the film.
Great 🎥 jim belushi and james woods are 🎥 icons!!!!!!!!
AWESEOME WORK. you also pick out some great scenes to counterpoint Siskels points. I never realize how much of an establishment liberal he was. I wonder if Ebert's lapsed Catholicism allowed him to approach the film with more openness?
I saw Salvador many years ago. I agree with Gene calling it melodramatic, but it's still a good movie. Under Fire and The Year of Living Dangerously are better movies in this genre, just like Gene said.
I disagree with most of Gene's reviews. This one especially. I don't really remember much of Under Fire or The Year of Living Dangerously but I do remember Salvador especially the ending when Richard Boyle can't get his girl friend over the border. Maybe I'm biased because it's an Oliver Stone film. One thing is sure though, Salvador was overshadowed due to the success of Platoon and I have talked to people who think that Salvador is a better film than Platoon.
James Woods receives his first Oscar nomination for this film
It's a picture that not many people know it exist . That's primarily b/c of the subject matter. But, still one of the best 1986.
@@errolbourgeois8230 I agree that it is a good movie.
It is a mesmerizing treat of a film, but its very much eclipsed by THE PLATOON. Thats my preference.
Saw it recently, it’s not the greatest film but still worth watching.
Great movie. Do you have their review of Radio Talk, Heaven and Earth and UTurn
I working on them over the coming weeks. Stay tuned.
usa helped the dicatur in el salvador, thats only the trute, i remember.
the red cross nuns that were raped and buried by school for Americas trainees. The murder of Arch Bishop Ramero was also true
@@harryfrantz4968 In El Salvador, citizens of the country are ware of the atrocities the United States - trained Salvadoran army participated in, but many are scared to speak against because of the fear of being attacked by familiars or Salvadoran army apologist.
@@DavidFlores-ik3fr this isn't 1985. Most of those dinosaurs are dead. Or gone. They held trials in Miami like 15 years ago over the Mozote massacre. There's youtube videos everywhere of veterans giving their side. No one is scared. It's that most know both sides are guilty of innocent killings.
I'm very surprised by Gene's reaction. It's almost like he was directed by a Reagan administration official to give this review.
In a torn country during the 80's it wasn't unusual to attack women by means of rape. The idea here was to attack Americans so as America would get involved in the issues of El Salvador, apparently a primisary note prior was written in America concerning El Salvador thus concerning Americans, which vividly states only conflict hedes in this war, not Americans, notwithstanding.22-912 King v. Brownback (10/30/2023)
Isa is like that and a good movie
I liked it
How can u not like Salvador…..Siskel always had weird opinions
South America…really? 🙄
I’m Salvadoran but was brought to the USA at 4. The film tried to condense major occurrences of the Salvadoran Civil War. It’s no documentary and the actors were all Mexican, so that took away from the authenticity of the film. Doubt they could have filmed in El Salvador in 1985-86. The main protagonist’s are annoying but still watched the movie. It’s so so.
Part of the film was filmed in El Salvador and part in Mexico.
You have to remember el salvador doesn't have much of a film industry so they have to rely on Mexican actors and studios. Innocent voices which was also about the Civil War was also shot in Mexico
@@jonathanramos8414 think it’s time to build up an industry. Having a movie about Salvadorans with mo-Salvadorans actors detracts from the authenticity. We can’t outsource everything. I’d rather see a Salvadoran new actor than a seasoned non-Salvadoran.
@@MightyMouse11 well then el salvador needs to make one but I doubt it given how small the country is and they're money goes into other stuff.
@@MightyMouse11 Mexico along with Argentina have always dominated the latin American film industry
Definitely a lesser film in the Stone canon
Gene is right about the tone of this film being all over the place. I saw it after Platoon and was surprised that Oliver Stone made the two films back to back because Salvador is so terribly inferior.
Gene is a moron & so are you!! This was a tremendously powerful film, almost as good as PLATOON.
You obviously missed what the film was. If this was all over the place? You must've missed Scarface. This was arguably Wood's greatest role. A fine piece of art.
Before Fear and Loathing (which was also all over the place). It was the first Gonzo Jounalist film. It's a chaotic tragedy. And sadly one that was as close to real life as a movie got.
@@NoNo-ng9sl I didn't miss anything. You just don't understand what tone means.
Haha, what's the weather like up your ass ?
@@FormerHumanXthe tone isn’t all over the place the tone is set it’s gritty and it’s meant to feel dry and hot and humid and all over the place because that’s how it feels to be there even though we never were there that’s what it’s like and also my girlfriends father fought in that war as a child soldier and I’ve seen the photo of him in there