I often turn to the Time Out Film Guide, to see what they think of films... They got it wrong for this one: "Its garish, vicious action beats Sam Fuller at his own game". Well it does no such thing. This is sub-par Bunuel at best. The first part, set in the little town in Mexico is easily eclipsed by Treasure of the Sierra Madre, a much funnier and tougher film. Just think of the interplay between Bogart, Walter Huston and Tim Holt and grimace at the clunky efforts of Marchal, Vanel and Piccoli. From a John Huston classic, we pass to a whimsical jungle story that Howard Hawks could have told with much better pace and wit (I think of Hatari!). Oh the waste of all these talented people.
Simone Signoret has a thankless part of a prostitute (which she played much better in Dédée d'Anvers), a misconceived part that does not fit in the story very well. Piccoli cannot play a priest and should have known better than to try. He is much better as a libertine--he played Sade in La voie lactée. Gérard Philipe would have been much better as the priest. Marchal is no great shakes but at least fits the part. He reminds me a bit of Stewart Granger. Vanel is somewhat at home as the old prospector; at least he had often played action roles.
Simone Signoret has a thankless part of a prostitute (which she played much better in Dédée d'Anvers), a misconceived part that does not fit in the story very well. Piccoli cannot play a priest and should have known better than to try. He is much better as a libertine--he played Sade in La voie lactée. Gérard Philipe would have been much better as the priest. Marchal is no great shakes but at least fits the part. He reminds me a bit of Stewart Granger. Vanel is somewhat at home as the old prospector; at least he had often played action roles.