|
WARNING: THERE ARE VIDEOS AND PHOTO GALLERIES ON THIS PAGE AND IT MAY LOAD SLOWLY
It is said that Michael Wincott is an actor who "lives the character" and he himself says, "You have to be careful so you don't make your character dull and predictable. Sometimes you have to bend the script a little". Well, just watch three different movies and you'll see three different characters, but not Michael. He blends in like a chameleon. Mind you, a gorgeous one.
This section of michaelwincott.org delves into some of the memorable characters Michael has so deftly brought to life. There are screen capture photo galleries, Flash videos, and my review of the film.
Spanish nobleman with a short temper and long hair . . . Adrian de Moxica from1492: Conquest of Paradise
|
The videos on this page require a Flash player and you may need to allow Active X controls. These videos were captured from my own DVD.
Click a thumbnail to see a larger image . . . | |||||||
Of Nobles and Natives Review and Commentary by Laura
This review is through the eyes of an anthropologist/archaeologist who specifically studies pre-contact indigenous peoples of the southeastern US and Caribbean. In fact, I wrote a paper on Columbus’ first contact with them and the various oppositions and rebellions he faced during the formative years of the “New World.” That being said, I will share some insight into Adrian de Moxica as well as review 1492: Conquest of Paradise as a cinematically told story of actual events.
First off I must say one of the best elements, and one of the most maligned, of the movie is the outstanding score by Vangelis. Even though film scores should remain mostly invisible and serve as mere accompaniment to the drama at hand, for this large scale story, Vangelis’ music sets a mood and adds depth. The cinematography by Adrian Biddle and the grand vision of director Ridley Scott are of a quality you would expect, but a pretty picture does not always tell a good story. Screenwriter Roselyne Bosch reportedly researched her story for years; however, there are a LOT of errors. These errors and omissions are not just the ones that occur “naturally” when the Hollywood editing machines go to work on a film in order to make a profit. They are the ones made when you try to make a pie from rotten apples.
I won’t go into academic details of Christopher Columbus’ years of effort to convince a basically illiterate world that it was not flat and he could sail to Asia by heading west. His motives, I believe were not the noble ideals Gerard Depardieu’s Columbus expresses. The real Columbus was more about creating a better position for himself through this endeavor. Power and greed drove him more than the desire to “discover a new route to China.” In the film, he is able to convince Queen Isabella to fund his quest. Sigourney Weaver is one of my favorite people and actors, but the choice of her to play this particular historical figure was a poor choice. She tries very hard to be interesting and regal, but the way Isabella is written is just bad. BUT, keep in mind, this story is told through the accounts written by Columbus’ son based on letters and diaries of his father.
So the Italian peasant miraculously convinces royalty to fund his expedition, and he and three tiny ships set out to sea. Mariner and ship-builder, Pinzon, played well by Tcheky Karyo, is on his team. Which is a good thing, since Columbus really had no clue how far they would have to sail to reach Asia. He basically lied his way into the court of Spain and onto those ships. By the way, the real Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria were quite small caravel-type vessels and not the large picturesque ships we see on film. The cramped quarters would have been horrible and in actuality many men died along the way.
The onboard talk of mutiny and the frightening disease and starvation are somewhat downplayed by Bosch and Scott, making for a quite dull beginning. In fact, it is almost an hour into the film before any real action occurs. The spotting of land should be the most dramatic moment; however, for me the moment is lost. Ridley Scott chooses to reveal the land through a sudden clearing of mysterious mist. OOH, AAH. NOT! The landscape we see as the mist clears is a mountainous, Arthur Conan Doyle vision complete with flying parrots, towering palm trees and a rocky shoreline. It is widely believed and documented that the first possible land the three small ships encountered would have been a low sandy spit created from sandbars in the southern Bahamas. Not the mountainous Pacific coast of Costa Rica. I have seen the actual archaeological sites of Columbus’ first village, fort and settlements. This lack of reality sort of lost me.
I was then further dismayed by the portrayal of the amazing Taino. These Caribbean people were among the first to meet the Spaniards. In Washington Irving’s account of the story of the first years of settlement, which was based on actual court and church documents, he tells of the tribes being much less cooperative and much less gullible. Irving’s document also brings to light one of the other flaws in the 1492: Conquest of Paradise, Adrian de Moxica. He was not the only ringleader of the rebellion against Columbus and his brothers, but in fact was a follower.
Michael Wincott’s portrayal of the Spanish nobleman, Adrian de Moxica stands out in the film as is supported by his positive mention in a majority of the reviews. However, the actual man was not as large a part of the equation. The real instigator of rebellion in the West Indies was a man named Roldan, a commoner who started out as a friend of Columbus. Moxica was in effect a political activist. He spoke out about the mistreatment of Indian workers in several letters. He requested nobles be allowed to create and manage their own plantations and mines. He denounced the practices of Columbus’ brothers, who insisted all people work on the same level including the nobles; whilst they themselves remained free of hard labor and took a majority of the profits, slaves and goods.
Roldan was open in his claims of poor management by Columbus’ administration. He, Moxica and other nobles supported the native uprisings, of which there were many. Their visions for the New World were of commerce and colonization, and that required utilizing the local labor pool properly. This is not portrayed in the film. Michael’s Moxica is written and directed as a spoiled, sadistic, lazy noble with no real purpose. His interactions with Columbus on film are intense and well played by both actors. In reality, they rarely spoke or were even on the same island.
Moxica’s wardrobe, as with the entire cast, is elaborate and descriptive. Well done by costume designer Charles Knode, the look of the nobles in Spain and even in the New World is rather appropriate, except for the Queen’s revealing dresses. Who among us can forget Michael all in black on that horse? Yes, the horse brings me to one great compliment of the film; the scene in a native village when the second expedition arrives. Remember, the first expedition did not have animals with them.
As the long black hair of Moxica dances with the long black mane of his Andalusian horse, the natives hide in the forest. An interpreter calls to them, and they shyly approach. A brave warrior dares to reach out and touch the “man-beast.” You see, up to this point in New World history, well actually, up to that point it was prehistory, the indigenous people hadn’t seen anything like a horse. In the Caribbean the largest animals were monkeys and birds. Here is an excerpt from Roselyne Bosch’s actual script. There is a moment of true history portrayed at this point in the film, and for a brief time I was won over again.
Until . . .we see the picturesque, but completely inaccurate village of Isabel. A huge plastered church, tall elegant two-story homes, and a growing cityscape is shown. Well, don’t believe a bit of it. The real main structure was a massive fortification, not a European cathedral. Columbus and his brothers could not produce anything truly valuable for trade, the nobles and even the commoners grew more restless by the day, and right on cue, a hurricane wiped out the idyllic Da Vinci inspired town.
Not before we see the ill-fated rebellion of Moxica and his cousin, Guevera, played by the yummy Arnold Vosloo. Our anti-hero is chased into the jungle, where he elegantly threatens Columbus, “You know what will be said about my death in Spain - - don’t you?” Moxica continues, “You are nothing! Your bastards will never inherit your titles. We are everything. We are immortal!” BTW, I applaud Adrian Biddle again for the close-up during this speech, and Michael’s steadiness. It makes for a more important scene. However, [caution: SPOILER] Adrian de Moxica did not die from a fall/jump from a cliff. Albeit a dramatic film exit, in reality he was hung from the walls of the fort after refusing to confess his crimes. A death too ignominious for the only, “bad guy” portrayed in 1492: Conquest of Paradise.
Indeed things did continue to unravel for Columbus after the death of Moxica. He was replaced as leader by an envoy from Spain, Alonso Bobadilla. [Incidentally, Bobadilla’s account of the misdeeds and mismanagement of the colonies has only recently been fully translated and brings to light even more the fact that Columbus’ brothers were the real villains of the story.] Columbus was sent back to Spain and imprisoned. He was humiliated by the naming of the Americas after a competitor, Amerigo Vespucci. His health failed. He never saw the mainland. He died relatively poor and unknown.
It was many years after his death, and by the efforts of his sons through the very journals and letters this story is based, that Columbus gained the recognition he deserved. He did prove something significant. He did “discover” a new place to be plundered. He did change history. I prefer to think of him the way lovely and amazing Gerard Depardieu portrayed him. A man impressed with the beauty and wonder of the New World and its people, a man determined to learn from the experience rather than profit from it. Alas, Columbus was said to be, “Brilliant yet stubbornly blinded by practicality. Pious and dubious [he kept a harem of 15 Indian girls] as well as thoroughly single-minded.”
Anthropology students are asked to view 1492: Conquest of Paradise despite the inaccuracies and elaborate "Hollywood-ization" of a significant historical event. It is important to show how easily facts can be altered to tell an entertaining story. Sadly, many audiences take to heart what they see on a big screen and never learn the truth.
To read more reviews, visit IMDB. To learn more about the real story, read The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus by Washington Irving.
| ||||||||
