Watch For Whom the Bell Tolls For Free

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Best movie ever!

Absolutely Fantastic

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

I am no fan of Ernest Hemingway, finding most of his work to be overwritten macho wish fulfillment, so take this with a grain of salt if you're a Poppa addict. But I found the film to be an overlong bore centering around a leaden Gary Cooper (playing the clichéd embodiment of Hollywood's idea of a romantic soldier of fortune) and a ludicrously miscast blonde Swede Ingrid Bergman as a Spanish freedom fighter. Like most of the movie, Bergman is distractingly gorgeous and the filmmakers' choice to shoot it in opulent Technicolor often undercuts the dramatic weight of the story.Far more convincing than the two leads are Katina Paxnou (who richly deserved the Oscar she won) and Akim Tamiroff as characters grounded with human flaws and inconsistencies that make them compelling, as opposed to the stupefyingly boring Cooper and Bergman, whose only interest comes from the undeniable sexual chemistry that they project. It might have been a perfectly unobjectionable little 1940s adventure film were it not for a script that takes two hours and forty-five minutes to tell a story that frankly isn't very interesting to begin with.Things finally do start to rev up in the second half when the handsome and heroic Cooper finally starts to play out the manly mission that threw him in the midst of the freedom fighters to begin with, but up to then I found my patience weighed down by Cooper and Bergman making goo-goo eyes at each other while Paxnou/Tamiroff & Company bicker amongst one another, often using Hemingway's flowery prose for dialogue that is completely out of step with their characters.If you're an advocate of Hemingway's brand of ultra-masculine romanticism you should probably disregard this review. But if you're a more objective viewer, while the film certainly has its positive aspects (usually when Paxnou or Tamiroff is on the screen), be prepared to mouth the word "overrated" after sitting through its lengthy run-time.

Spanish Civil War, 1930s. Richard Jordan, an American, has joined up with the Republican side. He is given the tough assignment of blowing up a vitally important bridge. Things get complicated when he falls in love... Based on the novel by Ernest Hemingway.OK-ish, but not great. Plot drifts, and the movie is overly long. Some decent editing and this could have been an hour shorter and much more coherent.Despite starring greats Gary Cooper and Ingrid Bergman (whose previous film was Casablanca), the performances are unconvincing. Cooper and Bergman don't seem to gel well. The supporting cast are woeful.I haven't read the book, but I am sure it is better than the movie.

The main characters in this movie are on the side of the bad guys: The Republicans (or Loyalists). The good guys are the Nationalists and Franco. This seems counter to all common knowledge. This is because the (biased) media has told exaggerations (lies) about this era for years. Though the Republicans contains good 'republicans' as we know them--people who want to establish a good constitutional republic; it is really a coalition of republicans, socialist and at least two communist groups, one direct from Russia. The communists are particularly nasty: they use a particular form of torture: they would place prisoners in a small badly constructed cells where they either couldn't stand up or lie down properly: this made them stay awake most of the time in the most excruciating pain. In addition, the Republicans, over the years of the war killed thousands of Catholic priests and burned down many churches. No wonder the poor Catholics were fighting for their lives. (Whether you believe in this faith or not, all certainly believe everyone has the right to practice the religion of their choice.)Then the other side is not so bad as history (and the media) makes it out to be. History has called the Nationalists a bunch of radical fascists. However only ten percent of the Nationalists were official fascists: they were called the Phalangists and were what can be called fascist-lite: they were more like the Italian Fascists. The leader of the Nationalists was General Franco and he was not a fascist. However after the war one could call him a dictator: however, he did not control the economy like a fascist: he let it work on its own. However, he kept politics to one party and had strict control of the media and other sectors: perhaps not ideal, but not utterly evil.Some criticize the Nationalists use of the German Nazis. However, given their dire situation, one could see that they needed some help. In addition, some overly berate the Nazi bombing, including the town of Guernica. However, the Germans really only dived bombed the Republican train depot there--admittedly with some unfortunate collateral damage- -and did NOT obliterate the whole town as some dire socialists (including Picasso) claimed.Read some good history books and find out the truth. Read 'The Last Crusade' by eminent historian Warren H. Carroll, P.H.D. Modern media sources like Wikipedia contains all the right facts: however, more often than not, it is what is left out that hides the basic truth.PS. The same goes for the Bogart character in Casablanca: he also fought for the wrong side. A fine cast of characters: an adulterer (Bogart) and a custom official who took bribes so people can be set free--despicable. In addition, the main character from The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie was sending her kids to fight the right side: the Nationalists (however, her error was sending kids into a fight that wasn't for them and not for sending them to the wrong side.) Same goes for Pan's Labyrinth. If I have to see another movie extolling the evil Republicans I will go crazy. Just goes to show you the evil, socialist bent of Hollywood and some segments of the population of Spain (which should know better.)

This movie made a strong impression on me when I saw it on television at fourteen. Even with two major sequences cut out, it was still a powerful drama. The complete film has been made available for home viewing now, and is even more authentic to Hemingway's story, albeit with some toning down of the earthier elements that the censors wouldn't allow in 1943.The movie is well acted by all involved, with strong central performances from Gary Cooper as the American volunteer, and Ingrid Bergman as the Spanish peasant girl he falls in love with. Especially strong supporting performances are given by Akim Tamiroff as the sullen Pablo, leader of the guerrilla band, and Katina Paxinou as Pilar, the true commander of the group. Tamiroff brings a range of emotions and moods to his character, showing Pablo as variously sly, fearful, drunk, treacherous, but still retaining some of the courage and intelligence that once made him a natural leader. It is a fascinating performance, the slightly comical tone of which never obscures the dangerously unstable nature of Pablo.Katina Paxinou is not only remarkable as Pilar, she becomes the character in such a way that it's impossible to read Hemingway's novel without seeing her every time Pilar speaks. It is the performance of a lifetime, and a good part of the success of the movie depends on it. Pilar is a no nonsense person who sees things clearly and speaks bluntly, sometimes too much so for her listeners. Disillusioned with her former lover Pablo, she can still see what made him a good leader at the beginning of the war. Her speech about what it means to be an ugly woman, but knowing she is beautiful inside, is a tour de force, ending with her sly grin at Robert Jordan and Maria, telling them that when she was younger, she could have seduced Jordan away from Maria, and perhaps even now. Jordan smiles and says he believes it, as Maria blushes. This is cinematic Hemingway at its best. Her other great moment is the recounting in flashback of the killing of the Fascists in a certain town at the beginning of the war. It is one of the most vivid parts of the novel and the film does it full justice.The use of color is good and there is a realistic feeling of the rugged mountains and forests where the fighting takes place. The film is somewhat slow and may try the patience of modern viewers accustomed to faster paced action, but it rewards the viewer able to take it all in and savor each moment.Some familiarity with the history of the Spanish Civil War would be useful to the viewer, but one can appreciate the story without having read the novel. I imagine that over the years, many viewers have been inspired by this movie to read the Hemingway original. In my case, it led to not only an interest in Hemingway's works, but a lifelong fascination with the Spanish Civil War.This is a classic film that every old movie fan should see, whether a Hemingway devotee or not. It is one of the best films to come out of Hollywood during this period of film making.