Pedro Páramo (1967) User Reviews

Flawless

[mlawrencewyatt · 10/10 · 25 March 2006]

I truly feel that this film is an unsung masterpiece. From the opening credits to the Don's last cry of "Susana," it's a captivating, mysterious, and rich work. It is an epic both dark and profound, exploring a range of human motivations and emotions.

This film, based on the short novel of the same title, opens the flood-gates for the "magical realism" that would afterward fill the Latino arts. I cannot emphasize how well done the mysticism is. This is by no means a "ghost movie," but it's not afraid to use them. One scene in particular is so haunting and powerful it made me absolutely giddy. Our protagonist's visits to various residents of the run-down village are some of my favorite bits of cinema.

Potential "Spoilers" Begin Here:

I felt a common chord in the Don's obsession with Susana and C.F. Kane's nostalgia with "Rosebud" in "Citizen Kane." Both men become so consumed with ambition that they can no longer possess their ideal. Both men long for something so fundamental and simple that they smother it in their quest. Perhaps it is because this ideal *cannot* be possessed. The themes of possession with Susana are clear. She thinks of herself as belonging to Florencio, her father thinks he owns her as both daughter and lover, and of course Pedro Páramo thinks of himself as owner. But can a person own another? Can a man own the careless joys of his childhood?

In Páramo's yearning for the unattainable, he populates and destroys an entire region. And so resonates one of the last lines of the film: "Todos somos hijos de Pedro Páramo!" ("All of us are the children of Pedro Páramo!") But aren't we? Aren't we all the offspring of misled ambition--genetically, nationally, culturally, ethically, or religiously? There is a Pedro Páramo looming somewhere in our origins.

I applaud this film.

Breathtaking

[DhariaLezin · 10/10 · 9 December 2006]

I read the novel when I was around 13 years old and even though I did not entirely understand it by those days, I had the chance to analyze it later on and it became to me a fabulous book full of mystery, sadness, loneliness and yet a lot of Mexican Revolution realism. So as people might imagine I was kind of frightened of watching the movie, because I know that it is not something good to compare a film with a book, but sometimes there is just no way to avoid it, but after this Friday when I had the chance to read an essay about Ignacio López Tarso (Fulgor Sedano in the film), who is a very important actor in Mexico, and that I saw in a theater play when I was a kid, I decided to take the risk and watch it... At the end I could think that was the silliest thing not to watch it before. Not just respects the entire story of Juan Rulfo and keeps extreme similarity to the actual novel, but it is also a beautiful piece of art full of mystery, sadness and loneliness. Velo represents with extreme fidelity a Mexico that was being victim of a Revolution, the town, the costumes, the people, the houses. Each detail is loyal to those times, and the actings to me are awesome. "La Cuarraca" is a real ugly character and you feel like you need to see to some other place but the screen when she is on scene, Susana is fighting against her madness and the reality at the same time and just to look at her face you are able to feel her desperation and her melancholy, There is a point where (spoilers might be here) you cannot actually know if what you are watching the reality itself (if there is one) or another one of the dead bodies talking. You are not able to tell the very moment when Juan Preciado dies but by the other way it is entirely understandable almost at the ending, when he goes to the grave where his mother is and when he understands he died in some part of the journey and then you ask to your self "was it worthless?". There are some little things of the book that you cannot see in the movie but since its realization is so good, I would say they are not really important. I can recommend it to everybody.

Very forgettable movie (the book is better)

[robertrutledge · 4/10 · 20 August 2022]

This movie, based on the novel of the same name by Juan Rolfo, is rather underwhelming. It is a very disappointing rendition of a great book. It has not stood the test of time like the book has and is almost laughable by today's standards.

This is one of countless instances of the book upon which a movie is based being much better than its derivative work. Reading Pedro Páramo is a much more enriching and captivating experience than watching this movie. The acting is sub-par, the casting could be better, and it is overall just a very forgettable movie.

While I am not a huge fan, I have to admit it follows the book fairly closely, which I appreciate. The overarching timeline has been rearranged to make it much more linear, seeing as the book jumps around a lot between different sub-timelines. The setting and costumes are very realistic and believable. The cinematography overall isn't terrible, although there are a lot cliché camera shots implemented that were in style at the time.

My biggest complaint is that the protagonist is never displayed as being dead and buried underground in a coffin where he can overhear the voices of the other dead people buried in Comala, as happens in the book. This is what really makes the book unique and creepy yet intriguing. Yet it is completely absent from this cinematic rendition, making this just another old, mediocre Mexican movie.