Write descriptive essay about Libertador movie 2013, write an essay of at least 500 words on Libertador, 5 paragraph essay on Libertador, definition essay, descriptive essay, dichotomy essay.
Libertador
Year:
2013
Country:
Spain, Venezuela
Genre:
Drama, Biography, History
IMDB rating:
7.1
Director:
Alberto Arvelo
Édgar Ramírez as Simon Bolivar (as Édgar Ramírez)
Luis Jaspe as Aide de Camp
Dacio Caballero as Soldado irlandes
Jon Bermúdez as Spanish Officer
Marta Benvenuty as Voice Over (as Marta García de Polavieja)
Leandro Arvelo as Fernando
Francisco Denis as Simón Rodriguez
Imanol Arias as Juan Domingo de Monteverde
Jesus Guevara as Messenger
Danny Huston as Torkington
María Valverde as Maria Teresa Bolivar
Juana Acosta as Manuela Sáenz
Alejandro Furth as Urdaneta
Erich Wildpret as Antonio Jose de Sucre
Storyline: Simon Bolivar fought over 100 battles against the Spanish Empire in South America. He rode over 70,000 miles on horseback. His military campaigns covered twice the territory of Alexander the Great. His army never conquered -- it liberated.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
HQ DVD-rip 720x304 px 1410 Mb mpeg4 1662 Kbps avi Download
Reviews
LIBERTATOR: A beautiful historical reconstruction, admirably interpreted
My opinion--

I watched a beautiful historical film about the major events that marked the history of South America. One can say that it is a hagiography on all these events and on the life of Simon Bolivar. This film was just made to make us understand and show us all the events of this period, but of course nobody can exactly restore the state of depression, emotions and fear that all the people involved in all these events of the " And the period has really felt, because in these troubled times, it is always the people who suffer much more than the images suggest, hence the term hagiography, but we still feel very well the soul of the film And all the intensity of the situations of the time. The production of Alberto.Arvelo is very careful and made his film live, he felt and restored the context of the time, to also note an exceptional performance by Edgar Ramirez (Simon Bolivar). We can summarize this way, it is a very good film we do not miss a moment, finally LIBERTADOR is a film to discover
2017-03-11
Impressive and awesome film
I'm Venezuelan, and I went to cinema to watch Libertador with high expectations. I didn't want it this time to be on front of a documentary movie because even with a awesome and rich Venezuelan history, not too much movies have threaten the history in a enjoyable way for young public.

Libertador caught me since the beginning with the excellent plays of Maria Theresa (Maria Valverde) and of course Simon Bolivar (Edgar Ramirez). And later Simon was taking high personality like a snowball down a mountain. I catch the idea Simon was a natural young boy with revolutionary ideas, but at starts, it was just a boy. In my technical analysis about the movie I have to say I loved the photography edition, also the customs used by actors, the landscapes scenes were awesome. Particularly the journey through the snowed mountains was really touching (speaking in a technical and dramatical way) .

In summary, I would recommend you to watch this movie.
2014-08-17
Gran Mariscal de Ayacucho next?
Very good movie. Edgar Ramirez is the best Simon Bolivar since Mariano Alvarez (RIP). It's a movie I would own and watch again and recommend it to anyone that wants to learn about this great man and/or sit and enjoy a movie. The photography and design are superb. I felt that Bolivar's struggles were palpable and moving. They should have made it a longer, two-part movie if you ask me. The only thing that I didn't understand much was the final scene. I guess the director just wanted to get artistic, or give it a little twist. Anyone that has read or studied Bolivar, as any Venezuelan has or should, will know what I'm talking about.

Antonio Jose de Sucre needs a whole movie of his own.
2015-10-02
Liberating
After playing Carlos Edgar Ramirez takes on another historical figure. He's doing a great job again with this one, showing off more sides than one of a man who was very important. In Europe we might not have heard of him, which is why they compare his achievements with those of Alexander the Great. Different times and different possibilities of course are a bit of deal breaker in this comparison. But still, mostly doing positive things, should be acknowledged.

Having said that, we do have more than drama here, but less controversy (if you think Oliver Stones Alexander) in some respects. The fight or war scenes are shot nicely, as is the whole movie. Very good acting and neatly outlined story development help too. Not only for historian buffs, but anyone who loves a good story
2016-02-08
Best historical drama in a long time
This is one of the most interesting historical dramas in recent memory - with particular relevance to the USA's current predicament - albeit our oppressors are global multinational companies who have no conventional nationalistic affiliations. The histories of men like Simon Bolivar and Che Guevara bear much scrutiny for the citizens of the USA today - because they were both born of a privileged society, but were driven by their consciences to work against the established power of their era. The one lesson to be learned by the two is that one must steer a very narrow path between collaboration and revolution to be successful, lest one become the tool of the current establishment or the tool of the establishment to be.

Watching this tempts me to compare and contrast with another of America's much-loved founding fathers, George Washington. If you look at the details of their achievement, for better or worse - one wonders how much of their legacy derives from the fact that although both were born into power and privilege - one ended up the richest North American of the day and the owner of numerous slaves and slave employing interests, and the other ended up dead under suspicious circumstances after having clearly declared himself a true champion of the average person - of any race.
2015-05-20
An EPIC providing ideas to ponder!
This movie with Simon Bolivar as one of the main characters should be compulsory in any high-school. It's an EPIC that provides ideas to ponder. Regardless whether the story is fully true to what happened in those days. Naturally, the dialogues between the characters were written by people that live in our time. Still, I believe that they managed to stick to the spirit of Simon Bolivar and his conviction that South America should not be ruled by an elite group but by the people and that it should be united, just like North America. However, there's a big difference with North America, and I'll leave it to the reader of this review to determine what those differences are for themselves. Just one hint from my own perspective: consider the role of Torkington.

The shootings of South America are beautiful and breathtaking and the dilemmas that Simon is facing are expressed fantastically well in the dialogues he has with himself and the people he encounters during his quest to stay true to himself and those people.

I fully recommend this as "one to watch" (and to think about for yourself and to discuss it with others)!
2017-01-15
Just a bit of knowledge about a great man that perhaps was wrong
Been born in Argentina, Jose de San Martin was the main historical hero and LIBERATOR ; however Simon Bolivar was many times mentioned in History class on their meeting in Guayaquil Ecuador, where Bolivar took over to San Martin's campaign to the north and liberated rest of Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia and somehow Venezuela. It is quite strange that that important meeting is never mention in the movie; as it is the creation of Bolivia in his honor and some details about his dead that do not look too accurate. The Libertador is interesting because it shows you some dark details not explained in school. It has pretty decent production values and very well know actors but the movie is sometimes more interested in the person than the history and sometimes the opposite; so by the end we just learn a very little about Bolivar and other heroes like Sucre.

In brief; worth seeing but not a must
2015-04-17
Could have been better without a pussywhipped actor
The setting and scenery were great. But before I even watched it I saw this Edgar guy acting in it, and I quickly assumed that his main motif in this movie is to show the world that he has sex with women. Probably some sort of twisted mentality of his that he wants to show his childhood friends what he couldn't do back then when everyone was mocking him (my personal opinion).

I judged it that way because I not only saw Carlos, but a couple more of his movies and they are all the same.. a guy doing his role in a movie in addition to wanting to express his sexuality to the audience. Being bare naked in Carlos; the priest who "I has sex with her" in deliver us from evil. Now this.. what a viewer may portray from such an overrated movie is that Simon Bolivar was a pussywhipped moron who failed because his main sights were on women than his revolution.

Other than this troubled actor's involvement in such a film, the production was not bad.. with the exception of several unrealistic events that took place.
2015-07-07
Not all was bad
Although I've heard this movie was around about a year ago, I didn't give it a try until I read somewhere that it was nominated for an Oscar in foreign film category so, I thought that it might worth the time. Well, not so much. Let's beging by saying that the casting of the main character just failed to convince in every possible way. Any one who had ever seen a portrait of Simon Bolivar can appreciate that. The actor looks are way too caribbean for a man who supposedly was born from European anscestors, father and mother both spaniards. The actor matches none of the physical features attributed to the historical figure who was 5 feet tall and weighted around 60 pounds. Watching Reamirez play Bolivar is like watching Adam Sandler playing Bonaparte. You just can't get pass the fact that you are watching a guy who's attempting to play somebody else. The same also happens with other key characters in the plot. On top of that, the acting is quite stiff. Most of the actors, including and specially Ramirez, seem to be reciting the lines in a school play, just rushing through the words without investing any emotions. Being Bolivar the great thinker as history claims he was, it is amusing to notice that the script does not conveys that eloquence and sometimes the dialogs don't even make sense, except for the very few moments in which is obvious the lines are extracted verbatim from historical research and those words result inspiring in their own right and not because the actor manages to awaken the emotions of the spectator. On the technical aspects, I like the photography and scenography; vestuary was nice too, and the effects in general are satisfaying enough. In short, I think you need to be south American and more particularly, a venezuelan national to overlook its many flaws and to watch this film with tender eyes, which is regretful as Bolivar is one of the greatest figures in universal history whose thoughts and actions changed the course of an entire continent and had a huge impact on others. A life story that definitely deserves to be told and known in a more dignified way.
2014-12-24
A Flawed Visual Spectacle to Nineteenth Century South America
Historical drama in Latin American cinema has experienced a comeback in recent years (Morelos, 5 de Mayo, The Conquest) with mostly disastrous results, as the ambition of these projects rarely is met with adequate resources or talent. This film is somewhat of an exception. The most expensive South American film made to date, The Liberator cannot be accused of being unambitious. The 50 million dollar production deserves to be seen if for no other reason than to find out how the money was spent. Venezuelan director Albert Arvelo spared no expense in creating spectacular sets that recreate Madrid, Paris, Bogota, and Caracas, among other cities, and in mobilizing armies of extras to re-stage 19th century battles. The result is convincing. The camera-work and cinematography of Xavi Gimenez (The Machinist, Agora) is equally first class, whether it is drone-shot aerial vistas of the snow-capped Sierra Nevada or hand-held following a fleet of canoes over the Orinoco river. The score, by the phenomenally talented Gustavo Dudamel, elevates the visuals and, while mostly conventional, punctuates orchestral lushness with Amerindian instrumentation much like in Moriccone's The Mission.

If only the script were on the same level. Part biopic and part cinematic history lesson, the film ties to capture almost the entirety of Simon Bolivar's life in under two hours. Instead of choosing a slice of the life of one of the most complex historical figures of the nineteenth century, as Spielberg's Lincoln did effectively, Arvelo foolishly tried to rush us through his entire career, from his time as a young landowner, to a dilettante in Paris, to an almost Moses-like figure liberating an entire continent. Such ambition is nearly impossible to pull off, and what we get is a Wikipedia-like biography on celluloid. We follow Bolivar around without ever understanding motives, emotional or political. The narrative devices are equally problematic. Forced, unnatural dialogue is mixed with shots of Bolivar penning letters while we hear unconvincing voice-overs in Spanish, English and French. As the movie progresses, the less time the director has in explaining the historic or personal issues, and mere minutes are spent in political battles that lasted years. During the last half hour, the film opts for slogans, name-calling and unashamed hero worship.

Edgar Ramirez, who was riveting in Assaya's Carlos, plays the title character and doesn't quite know what to do with the role. He has a screen presence, but he cannot do much with a film has little time for character development. Ramirez is most comfortable in the early scenes, as a sorrowful young widower, but the progression from aristocratic landowner to military commander and towering political leader is unconvincing and he becomes increasingly unlikable. The English banker Torkington (the great Danny Huston), is the only other memorable character, but later in the film is turned into a capitalist-cartoon villain that seems like something out of a propagandist's imagination.

Arvelo, the director, confessed in a Variety interview that "screenwriting is quite possibly the weakest element in Latin American filmmaking." How could I disagree? Still, the accomplishments of the film are undeniable. The film is a visual spectacle, best seen in a large screen, and at the very least left me wanting for someone else to try a real character study of Bolivar.
2015-04-01
Write descriptive essay about Libertador movie 2013, Libertador movie essay, literary essay Libertador, Libertador essay writing, narrative essay, Libertador 500 word essay, argumentative essay Libertador.
×