A propaganda film made during the Spanish Civil War in support of the Republican government against the rebellion by Gen. Francisco Franco's forces who were backed by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. The film would have been seen by those making it as a documentary.
Ernest Hemingway: The Spanish Earth, Terra di spagna, 西班牙土地
USA
USA
USA intellectuals -- and Joris Ivens -- supporting the Republican army No surprises. Seemed a little slapdash in the execution at several places where nobody -- Dos Passo, Hemingway, Lillian Hellman, etc -- knew quite what words to apply to the images Ivens had provided. "Yeah, I don't read German either..."
Oddly the version I saw had Ernest Hemingway credited in the titles as the narrator but when the film commences the voice was unmistakably Orson Welles. This was a fortunate added bonus when you consider I'd been watching a few of his films at the weekend.
I really have very little to say in terms of a review except to say I take offence at this being labelled propaganda. I know that propaganda is a catch-all term and it doesn't necessarily mean anything negative, but the connotation that propaganda is biased or deliberately misleading has no place in this documentary. It is not propaganda to warn the world against the rise of fascism. Viewing such historical documents today feels particularly…
This documentary made during the Spanish Civil War from the viewpoint of the Republic is rather remarkable. It was the second year of the war and the Republic had its back to the wall as General Franco was closing in on Madrid. The documentary has a feel of neo-realism before there was such a thing as it documents men at war, Madrid under bombardment and a nearby village trying to bring in water from the river to irrigate their fields in order to feed the city. It was written by Ernest Hemingway and John Dos Passos who had both come to report on Spain. Both were very sympathetic to the cause of the Republic in its battle against the creeping…
If you are unfamiliar with the Spanish Civil War, there will be some research needed either before or after watching the film to provide better context, because this is unabashedly one-sided propaganda. People here have already gone into the fact that it's propaganda, but just because it is that doesn't mean it is necessarily good or bad. So is the film itself any good?
First, what are we watching here? This is set up as an examination of an irrigation project in Fuentedueña, the purpose of which is to grow and bring food to Spanish Republican troops on the frontline between Fuentedueña and Madrid. I watched the version where Ernest Hemingway narrates, and it is made clear that the opposing…
A political documentary done by intellectuals. Should have gotten someone from the entertainment business to help them sharpen it because this was utterly dull. Has historic value as Ernest Hemingway was one of the people heavily involved in this film on the Spanish Civil War and you get a lot of footage of the war times.
Joris Ivens, who made a similarly structured documentary called New Earth in 1933, chose to frame the Spanish Civil War as a battle for food. I think this was a genius move, since, like some people here mentioned, very little context is given as to what led to the war and what were the sides involved, but Ivens made very clear to show at least what the objective of the Republicans were: to feed the spanish people
This is quite the soviet m.o. and in all fairness it works due to how instinctive it is. You might know very little about the Spanish Civil War (like me) but you know that it's good when people have food on their tables.…
I watched the Orson Welles-narrated version. I don't really see how it was "too theatrical," as Ivens and Hemingway apparently thought. Stirring visuals.
Given that the film was ostensibly oriented toward the US and the UK, it was interesting to see Ivens and Hemingway — obviously, both very pro-Communist figures — play toward their audience. That is, they almost completely de-politicize the Republican Army (whose politics definitely wouldn't have gone over well in the US) and focus instead on their desire for liberty/the freedom to plow their own land. There's still the rhetoric of fat cat land barons hogging all the wealth if you read between the lines, but it's filtered through a more wide-reaching message. Interesting.
Orson Welles Study: Interlude #1
Like an episode of How to with John Wilson but about the Spanish Civil War.
Overall, pretty dry, and Welles provides narration somewhat sparingly throughout. Of interest for burgeoning Welles-heads, at least in part due to the lore it spawned about the man himself. Hemingway purportedly disliked Welles's first pass at the narration so much that he challenged him to a fist fight over it.
It's also interesting to see (well, *hear*) a young Welles doing the same kind of voice over work that would also pay his bills during his lattermost days as a performer.
YouTube (Welles narration): youtu.be/nX0RseyGo7g
Archive.org (Hemingway narration): archive.org/details/gov.archives.arc.5717241.1
The Spanish Earth is a flawed but fascinating documentary. Depicting the Spanish Civil War in its total immediacy, the film follows, in full support, the movement and mobilization of the Democratically elected Republicans, who were really socialists, against the coup by the military backed Nationalists, who were fascists. Although the film ignores the heroic POUM and glorifies the Stalinists, the film is of great interest due its to real life footage of the war and its importance as a historical document in spite of its didacticism. It also helps that its narration is written by Ernest Hemingway and performed by Orson Wells; icing on the cake so to speak.
This is an interesting piece of documentary film, because of the support for its creation. Produced by a coalition of artists from the 1930's, including Ernest Hemingway and Lillian Hellman(a fact the poster emphasizes), this film was directed by Dutch filmmaker Joris Ivens, filmed in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, and largely intended for US, British and French audiences. This film, although not subtle, never truly states where it stands politically. Rather it focuses mostly on the everyday life and the people who live through the trials of war. Given its audience, this decision was clearly made to play up the pathos of the crisis. This allowed the film to avoid discussing the politics of those it supported, the…
