🎦 Libertador full movie HD download (Alberto Arvelo) - Drama, Biography, History. 🎬
Spain, Venezuela
Drama, Biography, History
IMDB rating:
Alberto Arvelo
Édgar Ramírez as Simon Bolivar (as Édgar Ramírez)
Luis Jaspe as Aide de Camp
Dacio Caballero as Soldado irlandes
Jon Bermúdez as Spanish Officer
Marta Benvenuty as Voice Over (as Marta García de Polavieja)
Leandro Arvelo as Fernando
Francisco Denis as Simón Rodriguez
Imanol Arias as Juan Domingo de Monteverde
Jesus Guevara as Messenger
Danny Huston as Torkington
María Valverde as Maria Teresa Bolivar
Juana Acosta as Manuela Sáenz
Alejandro Furth as Urdaneta
Erich Wildpret as Antonio Jose de Sucre
Storyline: Simon Bolivar fought over 100 battles against the Spanish Empire in South America. He rode over 70,000 miles on horseback. His military campaigns covered twice the territory of Alexander the Great. His army never conquered -- it liberated.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
HQ DVD-rip 720x304 px 1410 Mb mpeg4 1662 Kbps avi Download
Could have been better without a pussywhipped actor
The setting and scenery were great. But before I even watched it I saw this Edgar guy acting in it, and I quickly assumed that his main motif in this movie is to show the world that he has sex with women. Probably some sort of twisted mentality of his that he wants to show his childhood friends what he couldn't do back then when everyone was mocking him (my personal opinion).

I judged it that way because I not only saw Carlos, but a couple more of his movies and they are all the same.. a guy doing his role in a movie in addition to wanting to express his sexuality to the audience. Being bare naked in Carlos; the priest who "I has sex with her" in deliver us from evil. Now this.. what a viewer may portray from such an overrated movie is that Simon Bolivar was a pussywhipped moron who failed because his main sights were on women than his revolution.

Other than this troubled actor's involvement in such a film, the production was not bad.. with the exception of several unrealistic events that took place.
Sweeping and engaging as a film, episodic and disconnected as history
When "2001: A Space Odyssey" came out, some of us spent long hours discussing the meaning of the disjointed ending. Then I read the novel and discovered that the ending made perfect, even banal, sense; it was just that Kubrick had cut away the connecting logic and left us with isolated images. Something similar happens in this attempt to transpose Bolivar's epic struggle to two hours on-screen; incidents appear with no clear reason or subsequent implication. Danny Huston, compelling and charming as always, appears initially as an Englishman whose role seems central, only to disappear for most of the film after a few scenes. And when he does reappear, it is implied (quite counter-historically) that he had something to do with a famous attack on Bolivar's life. Or maybe not, since transitions are not this film's strong point. The memorable Manuela Saenz appears all at once but is never even named and it is only AFTER the attack in question that we hear a brief mention of her courage - with no hint that she in fact may have saved Bolivar's life, earning her the nickname "The Liberator of the Liberator". We briefly see Sucre close-up before he gets lost in the subsequent crowd of faces, so that when news comes of his assassination (with no hint that it was probably one of Bolivar's own officers who arranged it) we see Bolivar upset, but with no clear idea of why (still less that Bolivar supposedly cried out, "They have slain Abel!" foreseeing the impact it would have on the movement's hopes). Basically, if you do not already know much of this story, you may be swept up in the panoramic battles, the personal conflicts and some very erotic moments, but you won't really follow what's going on. If you do know it, you will be frustrated by how key events are given equal weight with some which may not even have happened (notably the end, which corresponds to no documented reality I know of). It does not help that the film lingers early on on what is essentially back story, wasting valuable screen time on what is apparently meant to be character development, but ultimately slows and clutters a story that needs far more delineation. Will you enjoy the film? If you like pageantry and passion, very likely. Will you come away much more informed about important historical events, or a complex figure, than if you had watched a completely fictional costumed drama? Not really.
After playing Carlos Edgar Ramirez takes on another historical figure. He's doing a great job again with this one, showing off more sides than one of a man who was very important. In Europe we might not have heard of him, which is why they compare his achievements with those of Alexander the Great. Different times and different possibilities of course are a bit of deal breaker in this comparison. But still, mostly doing positive things, should be acknowledged.

Having said that, we do have more than drama here, but less controversy (if you think Oliver Stones Alexander) in some respects. The fight or war scenes are shot nicely, as is the whole movie. Very good acting and neatly outlined story development help too. Not only for historian buffs, but anyone who loves a good story
An EPIC providing ideas to ponder!
This movie with Simon Bolivar as one of the main characters should be compulsory in any high-school. It's an EPIC that provides ideas to ponder. Regardless whether the story is fully true to what happened in those days. Naturally, the dialogues between the characters were written by people that live in our time. Still, I believe that they managed to stick to the spirit of Simon Bolivar and his conviction that South America should not be ruled by an elite group but by the people and that it should be united, just like North America. However, there's a big difference with North America, and I'll leave it to the reader of this review to determine what those differences are for themselves. Just one hint from my own perspective: consider the role of Torkington.

The shootings of South America are beautiful and breathtaking and the dilemmas that Simon is facing are expressed fantastically well in the dialogues he has with himself and the people he encounters during his quest to stay true to himself and those people.

I fully recommend this as "one to watch" (and to think about for yourself and to discuss it with others)!
one of films who impress first for the great ambition to present a complex story in its details, nuances and profound senses. than - for the right manner to do it. because it has romanticism, fight scenes, political confrontations, portrait of hero and aspects who defines the vulnerabilities of a man. it is a homage and many idealistic scenes are easy to be criticize. it is a manifesto and the purpose is far to be ignored. but, more important, it is a spectacular work who escapes from the temptation of easy ways. Edgar Ramirez does a credible Bolivar and that is the key to understand the man behind the great leader. a film who impress . not only for the image or the battle scenes, for the idealism and for the coherent story but for the feeling after its end. because it is little more than a romantic picture or a biopic with ambition of blockbuster. it is a story who reminds the books from childhood . and that is enough for ignore the detail than the real Simon Bolivar was more than the hero, his errors and sins and vision about the way to impose his project being more complex than the film presents. but, in fact, it is one of the good points of film - the invitation to discover El Libertador more profound.
Just a bit of knowledge about a great man that perhaps was wrong
Been born in Argentina, Jose de San Martin was the main historical hero and LIBERATOR ; however Simon Bolivar was many times mentioned in History class on their meeting in Guayaquil Ecuador, where Bolivar took over to San Martin's campaign to the north and liberated rest of Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia and somehow Venezuela. It is quite strange that that important meeting is never mention in the movie; as it is the creation of Bolivia in his honor and some details about his dead that do not look too accurate. The Libertador is interesting because it shows you some dark details not explained in school. It has pretty decent production values and very well know actors but the movie is sometimes more interested in the person than the history and sometimes the opposite; so by the end we just learn a very little about Bolivar and other heroes like Sucre.

In brief; worth seeing but not a must
Best historical drama in a long time
This is one of the most interesting historical dramas in recent memory - with particular relevance to the USA's current predicament - albeit our oppressors are global multinational companies who have no conventional nationalistic affiliations. The histories of men like Simon Bolivar and Che Guevara bear much scrutiny for the citizens of the USA today - because they were both born of a privileged society, but were driven by their consciences to work against the established power of their era. The one lesson to be learned by the two is that one must steer a very narrow path between collaboration and revolution to be successful, lest one become the tool of the current establishment or the tool of the establishment to be.

Watching this tempts me to compare and contrast with another of America's much-loved founding fathers, George Washington. If you look at the details of their achievement, for better or worse - one wonders how much of their legacy derives from the fact that although both were born into power and privilege - one ended up the richest North American of the day and the owner of numerous slaves and slave employing interests, and the other ended up dead under suspicious circumstances after having clearly declared himself a true champion of the average person - of any race.
Average propaganda popcorn movie
It's fine. Watch it, particularly if you feel like being told a complex story in childish terms. It will tell you how awesome some people are and how evil others are. But it's nonsense, of course. It's just entertainment.

The movie itself is not at fault in any unique way. It's always been fashionable to produce scripts that use history in order to create a fantasy world. Marketing strategies determine the perspective to adopt and if historical fact gets in the way few will notice.

Still, it provides a point of view, a simplistic one but a contribution nonetheless. If you use it to motive you to dig deeper, power to you. If you don't, well, you will at least be moderately entertained.

LIBERTATOR: A beautiful historical reconstruction, admirably interpreted
My opinion--

I watched a beautiful historical film about the major events that marked the history of South America. One can say that it is a hagiography on all these events and on the life of Simon Bolivar. This film was just made to make us understand and show us all the events of this period, but of course nobody can exactly restore the state of depression, emotions and fear that all the people involved in all these events of the " And the period has really felt, because in these troubled times, it is always the people who suffer much more than the images suggest, hence the term hagiography, but we still feel very well the soul of the film And all the intensity of the situations of the time. The production of Alberto.Arvelo is very careful and made his film live, he felt and restored the context of the time, to also note an exceptional performance by Edgar Ramirez (Simon Bolivar). We can summarize this way, it is a very good film we do not miss a moment, finally LIBERTADOR is a film to discover
📹 Libertador full movie HD download 2013 - Édgar Ramírez, Luis Jaspe, Dacio Caballero, Jon Bermúdez, Marta Benvenuty, Leandro Arvelo, Francisco Denis, Imanol Arias, Jesus Guevara, Danny Huston, María Valverde, Juana Acosta, Alejandro Furth, Erich Wildpret, Marcelo Galván - Spain, Venezuela. 📀