MovieChat Forums > Salvador (1986) Discussion > Aint that good...spoilers

Aint that good...spoilers

posted 15 years ago by sgraf_x
5 replies | jump to latest

The problem with this is that the conflict is an aside to all the personal melodrama going on with the James Woods character(who is as spasey and annoying as ever). Hes there supposedly as a journalist and a photographer but he barely does any of that. Otherwise hes running around chasing down Maria and her family or hanging out with them or doing stuff with them that really adds nothing to the overall narrative. This is another example of how Stone can go wrong when he isnt focused on telling a story. It just seemed like a lot of meaningless unconnected chaos to me. The story and characters were hard to follow, I didnt know who were the good Salvadorians and who were the bad, James Woods looked as if he had no business holding a camera, James Bulushi was in it for comic relief (WHY?) which was unnecessary for a film of this serious subject matter(the acid scene was juvenile). There were just a lot of stupid characters doing a lot of stupid things and I never did care what happened to any of them especially Woods character (who had a seemingly unending supply of watches to hand out). But I bet he and Stone snorted A LOT of coke while making this film and it shows.

I give 5/10

There is NO Gene for the Human Spirit.

[–] loz-1 15 years ago

Well I'm completely at odds with your take on the film. I found it very emotional, easy to follow, and a riveting account of a true story. If the whole movie had been about Woods taking pictures and writing stories, it would have devalued the principles of the story. The whole thing was about using these (real) characters to convey just how flawed the American foreign policy was at that time. It worked for me, but then each to their own, I guess.

I've been a fool but you know I wouldn't kill for you...

[–] sgraf_x 15 years ago

Have you seen The Killing Fields? I guess once you have you would understand why this film seems trivial to me. But as you say to each his own.

There is NO Gene for the Human Spirit.

[–] loz-1 15 years ago

I haven't actually. It is on my rental list though. Will let you know once I've seen it.

I've been a fool but you know I wouldn't kill for you...

[–] sgraf_x 15 years ago

I hope you enjoy it, as much as one can enjoy something like this, as the subject matter is about the worst side of human nature, oppression and bloodlust.

It is also based on true events and it follows along the same lines as Salvador, journalists reporting on the war as events spin horribly out of control. The difference being it portrays the events of that conflict in a far more sober and reverent manner. Its hard for me not to compare the two films based on that, you'll see what I mean.

There is NO Gene for the Human Spirit.

[–] suz-mal 14 years ago

Yeah, but the views you've expressed, and your reasons for having them show your level of intelligence. Either that, or you just have a problem with James Woods and Oliver Stone, and I guess I can understand that.