User Reviews

What I found interesting about The Other Conquest is its ability to tell a story of colonization that relates to many, if not all cultures on some level. It not only tells the story from the point of view of the Spanish, but also from Aztecs that were being conquered. Coming from the Philippines, I have noticed several similarities between our culture, and that of Mexico. Not to mention, both have been conquered by Spain and Catholicism is the predominate religion in both countries.

Topilzin, the main character of the story, represents a conquest for one's identity. He battles between his own cultural beliefs and those instilled upon him by the Spanish invaders. In doing so, he becomes torn between two ideals, which ultimately leads to a compromise of the two. He accepts Christianity, but won't relinquish his own belief system.

In many ways, this story is symbolic for how cultures assimilate other cultures into their own. The Philippines, for example, is a fusion of many cultures. It is a mixture of many beliefs, knowledge, values, and ideas. And yet, they are still able to call it their own.

I would recommend this movie to anyone who is trying to get in touch with their roots. It tells an amazing story of facing adversity and still being able to recognize where you came from.

It took me 10 years to see this film, finally, on Netflix. I am avid about Mexican culture, history and pre-Colombian history but the spirits must have revealed to me that there was no urgency to see this film. I wanted so much to love it.

There are about 70 previous comments about this film and some eloquent and personal connections about race, culture clash and what all. It evidently spoke to some in an harmonic-vibration, viva-la-raza way but I was disappointed.

The Virgin of Gualalupe, mother-goddess (Tonantzin) theme is nothing new. I don't fault the film for playing it again, only for doing it in such an artsy and mystic way. The script began to drag just when the culture conflict could have made this a great movie. It became unrealistic when it could have shown the true conflict the Coluha-Mexica (Aztec) experienced when their own gods deserted them.

And what a lame ending! What was this "miracle" the friar sent for Cortez to see anyway? I replayed it several times to see if the Virgin's eyes had turned brown, or his had turned blue, or if his bruises were roses..nada. Especially with the long, dramatic build-up for the "miracle" scene with the camera pan and the music and all but nada. Just the friar's assertion that the scene somehow depicted the racial harmony that understanding and compassion could bring. The film should somehow have revealed that, not just asserting it with dialogue; especially since it isn't a truth of Mexican history.

Okay, the cinematography and score were great. It got off to a good start. There was some wonderful dialogue, as discussed in other posts: the "They want to take our souls" mis-translation, for example. I don't really quibble, as some have, about the the historical inaccuracies. I personally would rather have seen constructed or generated sets that depicted the original beauty of the pre-Colombian architecture than modern-day ruins.

The film was too easy on the Spanish..they did monstrous things out of greed and soul-saving. Hundreds, maybe thousands, were literally burned at the stake for not forsaking the pagan gods, hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, otherwise died as a consequence of the conquest. It was way easy on the Mexica, tens of thousands were sacrificed to their gods and they all didn't go as willingly as that sexy, naked virgin-babe. Many were children.

I wanted to like this film but I can't even recommend it except to neo-Nahua kooks. It beat all hell out of Apocalypto though.

This film was incredibly well made. The music was fitting for the subject matter. I didn't feel as if anything was heavy handed. Unlike most films it didn't feel as if the filmmakers took a serious subject too seriously. It felt as if the filmmakers did their research the material felt authentic and unembellished. In many ways it felt as if I was watching a very possible situation. Shot for shot as a whole it is a solid flick. Wit that being said I feel it is fair for my to address that my thoughts on religion are that it is only a way to control a populace any populace. So in particular watching a film where the basis of it is religion wasn't all that entertaining for me. This film had the rare occurrence of being a good movie that due to subject matter I won't see again unless I need a place to look for ideas on mise en scene or framing lighting etc. The film did a great job of representing each group in a honest way. I feel there are no devils or angels in this world, Just people with power making decisions over people that don't have the same destructive technology. This film did a great job of keeping the playing field level. It is well worth a watch and even if religion isn't your thing.

La Otra Conquesta is the untold story of the Aztecs and Spaniards. The film is controversial and meaningful. The film perfectly grasps the universal theme of oppression; many cultures can relate. Most of the stories that are heard about this topic tell how the Indians and Spaniards got along and how the Indians willingly gave up their religion, but this film captures history in a different light. In this version, the Spaniards forcefully push their religion on the Indians as shown in a scene where the protagonist is whipped and burned until he believes in the Virgin Mary. The idea of being forced to believe in something we don't want to is not only scary (stripped of freedom) but also seems counter productive. Why would you believe in something that you are being negatively forced to believe in? This idea along with many others is what many people have taken away from the film. Some may not like the ending but I think the ending was perfect for showing the pride and love that Topiltzin had for his culture. He fought for it until the end.

I'm a huge fan of historical movies, so I was looking forward to watch " La Otra Conquista". What can I say? Well-directed, high quality historical movie. Definitely worth watching.

Loved the way Carrasco shows the mental strength of the main character, that was forced to change his beliefs, but didn't want to give up. The pain and suffering in this film are shown perfectly, not too much, but just enough to make you feel sorry for what these people went through. The scene of the ritual (where they cut the heart out) is beautifully filmed, and that really impressed me because it's not easy to film such a death so it will look so special and so precious.

I also appreciate that everything looks so real. I almost felt not only the physical, but the mental pain of the main character. And I felt disgusted by Hernan Cortes and the stubbornness of these people, that force others to believe in what they believe. And this usually doesn't happen to me, I never get so emotionally involved in movies that I watch.

Another important detail for me is the statue of Maria. There is something about the look in her eyes that to me means that she doesn't want this. She is against all this blood, she is against this repression.

And, of course, the roses! People who know history definitely noticed those red roses. That is a 5 second moment in the movie, but pay attention to it, because it has a very deep meaning.

"La Otra Conquista" is simply a beautiful piece of art, and this is what makes it so special. It was not created as a regular Hollywood blockbuster to collect money. It was made to educate people, to show them reality, to remind people about humanity and to show art! This is not a movie for everyone, it's a movie for people that have a heart.

Most of the film is tedious because it doesn't take the issue very seriously, instead, it wants to rely on absurd set-pieces where the Spanish are yelling obscenities at the indians, or symbolic art vignettes.

The acting is torrid, looking like a very dismal and cheap soap opera.

The sets are too well lit, the actors too clean, and it is too sympathetic with the Catholic church, which in actuality at the time of the conquest, was a brutal, oppressive and dominant force with its own army, Inquisition and wealth.

The intentions are there, but there is no drama, no story and no interest for the educated viewer. It might be good for people easily manipulated to tears, or those who don't know about history, but lovers of great film should stay clear except to watch, on "how not to make a film".

La Otra Conquista is a brilliant film directed by Salvador Carrasco. It's rare to find a film like this where it tells the other side of the story, in this case of the Aztecs. Carrasco does not however bore us with a historical documentary styled drama but paints a very honest picture of the conquest. We feel so powerfully about this film because the message is so universal. Whatever background (nationality, race, culture, ideology, etc.) you come from, we have all experience some sort of "conquest", and we have all raised some kind of resistance to such conquest. Topiltzin, the protagonist embodies this resistance and we feel an immediate connection to him. It was very interesting that the actor casted for Topiltzin was actually a dancer and casted for that very reason. It was a risky but very brave choice for Carrasco to cast Damian Delgado as the protagonist rather than a "brand name" actor. Delgado does deliver a memorable performance especially for a first-time actor. One thing I felt that did not quite work was the dialogue. I don't know if it was just the translation, but sometimes I felt the dialogue was very didactic and slow. I do however understand that the reason for this was probably because most of the story was told through the imagery and mise en scene of the scenes. Maybe Carrasco wanted to redirect the attention from what's being said to what's being shown. Overall, the film is beautifully shot, especially on such a tight budget. Carrasco actually commented that the scenes showing the Aztec ruins is actually smack in the center of a very urban city, but the cinematographer was able to cleverly conceal the anachronistic elements behind the ruins. Carrasco also commented that the scenes showing the inside of the ruins were actually shot few years apart but through the flawless editing of the film, it's undetectable.

This film is interesting because not only does it pursue an emotional story during an infamous moment in history, but it also analyzes the values and justifications of religion. I felt this film did a good job in portraying the Aztecs in a manner that does not influence one to believe they are savage or uncivilized, as they are often associated as being. Rather, it focuses on the beauty of preserving one's culture and the savagery behind those trying to strip others of it. It is interesting to note that stereo typically, Native American tribes and Native Americans themselves are often presented to seem weak and malleable. However, The Other Conquest does a good job in defying this stereotype with the strong and relentless main character. Additionally, this film demonstrates the concept that history can never be set in stone. It is open to interpretation, and what we reflect on from the past will only be as accurate as what is recorded.

This movie by Salvador Carrasco show us the other side of the Spanish conquest of Mexico. I did not really like this movie but I do give credit for the movie for trying to show us fusion between the Aztecs and the Spaniards on screen. This movie reminds me of the old and recent war and genocide in my country. When people of my ethnicity in my own country where hunted and killed. The movie was to dry for my taste. I wanted to see more and understand more. I felt that the movie did not explain the violence surrounding the Spanish conquest of Mexico in 1521 nor the loss and horror when the entire cities were destroyed. I think the movie fail to capture a deeper exploration into the historic moment of the fusion between Aztecs and the Spaniards. The end of the film left me confused because the director in a way fails to explain why the film ended they way it did. I mean why does Topiltzin, son of Moctezuma played by Damian Delgado decided to steal the Virgin Mary and then dies with it on top of him? I though that he left the spiritual conquest unexplained. It did not make any sense to me until we discussed it in class. When we talk about the film in class I got to hear that at the ritual, when they where about the sacrifices Topiltzin they made him look at the Virgin Mary. This made him hate her, but his feelings and spiritual belief changed when he started to see the Virgin as something good and a mother figure. This made me connect why he stole and wanted to die in peace next to Virgin Mary that he saw as a mother. If you paid enough attention you could see blood flowed out came from the Virgins wrist not from Topiltzin. You could also see tears from the virgin. This shows that she was in pain of loosing her "child". If we had not talk about this in our class I would not have connected. And this is exactly what I mean, that you do not really get an explanation. I also did not see how this connects with what the story of the film which is the fusion of the two religion. The cast however, did a great job specially the character Topiltzin, son of Moctezuma played by Damian Delgado considering that it was one of his first movies. I also felt that the light and quality of the movie was very poor. It might had been the directors intention or because this was low-budget film.