User reviews

I went to see this movie without reading the books first and with only a vague knowledge of the historical events the novels are based upon. Apparently, the director thought that it would be a good idea to condensate the five Alatriste novels in a single film, in order to give depth to the characters. A big mistake. The pace is for the most part too fast and anecdotic, and the action jumps from here to there without ever giving a clear reason why everyone behaves the way they do, from the romantic plots scattered along the movie to the great political conspiracies. It is never very clear either why Alatriste, who is little more than a soldier and hired assassin, is so important to so many people of high rank.

In spite of all this, I cannot give the film a bad rating because it is certainly a pleasure to watch. The technical aspects, the general "look" of the film, the music, and the acting are splendid. The casting can be a controversial point, but the chosen actors do wonders.

It's 1622. Spain is ruled by King Philip IV. Diego Alatriste (Viggo Mortensen) leads his feared Spanish soldiers on a raid in Flanders. He returns to Madrid and gets caught up in an assassination attempt with Gualtiero Malatesta. His young charge Íñigo Balboa is taken with Angélica de Alquézar. He and his men are sent back to Flanders.

The plot is jam packed and disjointed. It's hard to follow. It skips time. The story simply doesn't flow. Apparently, this encompassed several books and it shows. The actors are game. There are compelling fighting scenes. It's just a pain to keep track of the characters and their story lines. Without the flow, it's hard to feel for these characters. It has to be much more compelling to do a smaller part of the story and let the sequels come if they're able. This is good for fans of the books but I doubt others would find this compelling.

We should not trust in occasions of what is worth to make a movie as for money refers. The expensive thing is not always good. Alatriste, in spite of being the most expensive movie in the Spanish cinema (so far), it doesn't leave of being failed in their biggest part.

Based on a series of novels that, at the beginning, it seems very interesting to be adapted, Díaz Yanes makes a mix of histories to those that you grieve it contributes a flash of interest and it tries, by all possible means to endow of certain coherence and naturalness to attract the audience. The result is not anything good, and it happens this way that the great majority of subplots that makes the history of Alatriste is not well told and they don't care for anything to the audience, not even the own Diego Alatriste.

On the other hand, this enormous quantity of defects is compensated with some that another interesting scenes (few, everything is to say it) and with an extraordinary atmosphere. In that sense, Alatriste, in the technical section is fantastic (even the music of the always brilliant Roque Baños). But as the cinema it is not only put in scene, the truth is that the film "enters us" more for the eyes (if it is that some is not sleeping during its endless length) that for another sense. To this we must add that most of the interpretations don't convince, not even a Viggo Mortense that, in spite of having a presence more than notable in the history, doesn't end up us to hook as character. The same thing happens to the secondaries, saving some few ones, the other ones don't seem to be very in their world with the papers that they has played them.

Alatriste disappoints, gives us a lunge in false and it also leaves us so indifferent. Having one of the best teams that can have a Spanish production, how is it possible that similar product has come out?. A director as Yanes it hasn't seem to have had the enough quality as a director (and that that "Nobody Will Speak of Us When We're Dead" a splendid movie) to be taken charge of a project that, it seems to be "too big" for the Spanish cinema industry.

No matter how good is the script or the novel the movie is based on, If it is directed by a Spanish director, the movie will be a total mess and it will suck. I have read the books and the movie is just a documentary film that shows "a few" scenes from the five books, and no link of what happens among them, It is hard to know who is who even if you have read the book, and you may get lost in the movie from the beginning. Voice Acting is good, viggo tries it hard to look like Diego alatriste and he did it very good but sadly he has to improve his Spanish. Costumes, scenarios----> 10 Actors --------> 10 (but not the actor who played emlio bocanegra, he looked like a gay priest, it was horrible) As I said the movie could have been very good, but the smart guy who thought that just taking a few parts from the five books and no showing any connection among them, that blew the entire movie.

This lengthy film will likely disappoint North American readers who have yet to read the fifth in the Antonio Perez-Reverte historical series chronicling the life and death of one Captain Diego Alatriste. Then again very few will be aware that a film has been made, and that it stars VIGGO MORTENSON, best known here for his on-going role in the hugely successful adaption of J. R. R. TOLKIEN's THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy.

This film attempts to compact the first five novels into one epic yet personal picture about Spain at the height of its powers. Unfortunately the fourth work in the series THE KING'S GOLD has only just become available in hardcover, AND it may be another two years before the fifth arrives! Significantly, I feel that American readers could find many parallels to this Spain and their own country. One memorable piece of verse says something like, Spain plundered the whole world alone, But now the whole world waits to plunder Spain alone.

That said, I give this film low marks because of the difficulties my girlfriend and I had in viewing it. The film begins in Flanders and sets up the lifelong relationship between the fiercely independent Alatriste and Inigo, the son of a deceased comrade in arms. This situation which makes up most of the first novel is over and done with very quickly. So too is the introduction of the masterful Italian swordsman MALATESTA who is commissioned along with ALATRISTE to assassinate two visiting English members of the royalty.

Somehow within the first hour we get to book four, THE KING'S GOLD. This is especially poorly done, as Alatriste's motivation for taking on the suicidal task is not properly explained and neither is his recruiting of the team. In the film a very moving celebration of life - for a condemned man - is somehow dismissed, and shown only because Alatriste approaches the man for help.

So when the late night/early morning assault on the ship carrying gold from the Americas takes place we know of the men, and worse, the dutiful accountant - OLMEDILLA, if I remember correctly - written in such detail is invisible.

As to the one great love in Alatriste's life, I do not recall the woman MARIA in any of the books, and she is really given short shrift in the film, though it is obvious that the Captain makes great sacrifices for her.

Two other major concerns: no one ever addresses anyone else by name and so you have no idea who is who, and the girl Angelica is dark haired and not blonde with ringlets and green eyes! The running time of this film is frequently listed as 147 minutes but my copy courtesy of Xploited Video only runs 138 minutes (the credits are lengthy and accompanied by music that adds nothing).

The first four books in the series probably total a 1000 pages, and sadly it shows. Thank you for your patience in reading this lengthy discourse.

I haven't read any of the books in which this movie is based, so I cannot compare to the original story. I cannot say either that I disliked the movie, but mainly because I really wanted it to be good. Leaving all the sentimental things aside, I'm afraid this movie has been a waste of money and time.

To me, the biggest flaws were the lack of rhythm (everything happens in very short and abrupt scenes that most of the time fail to tell the story), storytelling (the story of soldiers in Flandes could have been amazing, and you could see that underneath the bad movie, there was a great story) and Viggo's voice (I guess too worried about his castillian accent). There are some scenes, like the one in the boat, where light really was bad, and also some out of focus close-ups (like when Alatriste is waiting to meet Bocanegra hidden behind his hat and raises his head to show his out of focus face).

I liked previous Agustin Diaz Yanes's works, but this time he fails to deliver a good product.

This is a big disappointment since there have been too many advertising marketings and such. I've been expecting that it might probably be one of the best Spanish movie ever. The result was...oh my God I fell asleep in the cinema and was going to leave soon (and this is the first time in my life I fell asleep during the movie) And Viggo, well I really like him in Lord Of The Rings and Hidalgo but in Alatriste, there's something weird and I just felt like his acting were somewhat fake, something in his voice, the way of walking...and the last scene is probably the worse when he just didn't even move for at least 5 minutes before he'd been shot, well I just could't help laughing at its meaningless ending. I truly feel sad to write down this comment but I just feel like I had expected too much. I admit that I haven't yet read the novel of Arturo Perez Reverte and I'm sure that the novel must be a masterpiece. Sadly, the director couldn't fulfill the writer's wish...

One of the most popular figures in modern Spaniard literature is definitely Arturo Pérez-Reverte, who since the late 80s has produced a long string of successful novels touching a wide variety of genres such as adventure, thriller and historical novels. Without a doubt, his most popular character is Alatriste, who originated in the book "El Capitán Alatriste" and has appeared in 5 novels after his debut. Being his response to the lack of treatment of the Spanish Golden Century in history books, "The Adventures of Captain Alatriste" have conquered many fans thanks to its accurate portrayal of the history of Spain and the mix of action, adventure and romance in its narrative. Considering the popularity of the character, it was not a surprise that a movie adaptation began to be considered, however, what is indeed a surprise is the sadly poor quality of the resulting product.

Set in 17th century Spain, "Alatriste" is the story of Diego Alatriste (Viggo Mortensen), an aging soldier who after serving in the Flanders War makes his living working as an assassin for hire. His life has a sudden change when one day a young boy named Iñigo Balboa (Nacho Pérez) arrives to his house with a letter. In the letter Alatriste discovers that Iñigo is the son of Lope De Balboa (Alex O'Dogherty), one of his good friends at Flanders and who asked him to protect Iñigo before dying under the enemy fire. While he knows that his way of life is not the most appropriate for this job, he takes Iñigo under his care, decided to fulfill his promise. The movie chronicles many of the adventures that Alatriste lives in Madrid, including the meeting of the love of his life, his problems at the King's court and specially his often difficult relation with his "adopted son", Iñigo.

The movie was written by director Agustín Díaz Yanes himself, and sadly, this is were things start going wrong for the movie, as Díaz' script is an example of what not to do when adapting a series of books. Instead of focusing on one of the many books to build up the story (or making a new adventure), Díaz Yanes opts for condensing the plots of 5 books into one single script, moving from event to event without giving the proper time to develop the details behind the stories. While this still may sound like a fan's nitpicking, it is actually a major problem in the film, as the script lacks a proper narrative to tie every event in the movie, leaving the feeling of an incomplete work or a lack of care in the development of the screenplay. Without a cohesive narrative, it doesn't matter how good the characters are or how interesting the setting is; the result ends up as boring, and often incoherent.

The terrible quality of the script contrasts enormously with the excellent work of production done in the film, as it is really one of the best and most realist portraits of 17th Century Spain committed to film. While his script is of an awful quality, as a director Díaz Yanes shows a great skill directing actors in complex set pieces, as well as a nice use of Paco Femenia's excellent cinematography and Benjamín Fernández' art direction. Focusing on the characters, Díaz Yanes seems to avoid the traits of epic adventure (odd considering the source novels) in favor of human drama, resulting in an extensive use of closed spaces to tell his film and portray the decadence of Spain in those years. Despite this focus, there are some brilliantly choreographed (by the legendary Bob Anderson) sword fights through the film that help to spice up things from time to time.

Díaz Yanes' best trait is his direction of actors, and in this aspect he doesn't disappoint, getting very good performances from most of his cast. Viggo Mortensen takes the lead role of Alatriste with courage and dignity, and shows his great versatility and talent. While his Spanish has some minor problems, he delivers a convincing performance against all odds. Unax Ugalde plays the adult Iñigo, although he is not nearly as convincing as Mortensen is in his character. The women in the movie are truly the film's best feature, with Elena Anaya and Ariadna Gil delivering bests performances of the movie as the mysterious Ángelica De Alquézar and actress María De Castro respectively. Juan Echanove and Eduardo Noriega have small but important roles as Alatriste's friends, with Echanove making a terrific job portraying poet Francisco De Quevedo.

Considering the many excellent things that "Alatriste" has to offer, the terrible flaws in its script become even more tragic as serve as proof that without a good screenplay the movie simply doesn't work. While by the second act it kind of gets on focus and the problem is somewhat corrected, the story never stops feeling like a series of disjointed vignettes without any connection other than the main characters, as the motifs and reasons for every adventure end up either unknown or are explained on a very superficial way. I know a movie should not be compared to the book it's based on, but in this case it is obvious that Díaz Yanes' mistake was to try to put 5 different books into one movie. This ambition destroys what otherwise could had been the best swashbuckling adventure in many years, as no matter how amazing the movie looks or how good the actors are in their roles, the movie feels simply incomplete.

"The Adventures of Captain Alatriste" are excellent adventure novels, as not only they offer an accurate portrayal of the period, but also have really interesting characters and wonderfully thrilling story lines. Sadly, "Alatriste" the film only keeps that care for historical accuracy as everything else is thrown out of the window by Díaz Yanes. While I'm sure fans of swashbucklers will like it, I'm also sure that it could had been better, a lot better. 5/10

This movie is a deeply disappointing one because it feels like it could have been great and yet it barely achieves mediocre. The acting is great, lead by Viggo Mortenson as the title character. Apparently his accent is off and he sounds strange to Spanish speakers, but since I don't know any Spanish it didn't affect me one way or the other. The cinematography is superb, reminding me of nothing so much as the Spanish renaissance paintings that it seems to be imitating. Occasionally this leads to overly staged scenes, such as the surrender of Breda where everyone poses as they did in Velasquez's famous painting, but more often it achieves a rare level of beauty. The story, or what little I can make of it, is solid if dense. Essentially, the movie gets everything perfect except one thing. The script.

I understand that they were adapting a series of novels but did they have to combine them all into one film? Couldn't they have spread them out some? Even if they never finished the series they could have gotten a few solid pictures out of doing that. As it is the film is a jumbled mess. You never get to understand any of the characters as they simply react to things in ways that don't make sense. Why did Inigo decide to kill his lover's uncle? Why did Alatriste change his mind about marrying his? They don't explain either of these things, and those questions are just the tip of the iceberg. Perhaps someone who read the books will know these answers but you shouldn't have to read the books to understand the movie. Characters come and go without any reasons or motivations. Alatriste meets someone who he seems to get along with, and then later he seems to truly hate him for no reason. Incidentally, there are too many characters to keep track of. Especially since everyone looks alike in those beards.

The other major problem with the writing is in the way events are connected. Scenes follow each other rapidly that have no connection with each other. Again, this all comes from trying to include too much. They jump from Flanders to Madrid, then back to Flanders, then Madrid (But ten years later), then somewhere on the coast, and finally back in Flanders again. At the end of the movie the two main characters are civilians in Madrid and then it suddenly cuts to them in military uniforms with a subtitle reading "Battle of Rocroi, 1643." No explanation is given either to how they got there or why that battle mattered at all. In fact, there is never any context given throughout the film. You get the impression through dialog that Spain's empire is failing but you never understand why or how. Again, Spanish students might know all of this like the back of their hand but nobody who hasn't studied this period will understand any of it. In short, this movie is near perfect except for an absolutely rotten script that ruins everything.