Altamira

Great movie and I am sure it's not completely historically accurate but IT'S NOT A LIE!

It's no Hollywood block buster full of action with massive budget, it is a well made movie with good acting, good scenery & sets, good cinematography with loverly story based on historic fact. Well worth the watch.

Beyond some controversy in the history behind the story, Finding Altamira is, in its own right, a find worthy of celebration.

The cinematography of Jose Luis Alcaine is amazing. One could take almost any frame in this film and hang it on a wall as a work of art. I could have watched this film in mute and enjoyed just the visual majesty of every scene.

After doing work in films like the Spy Kids franchise, Antonio Banderas is developing a reputation, in my mind, as a recognizable actor who brings attention to otherwise obscure movies, not to drive up the budget, but to elevate attention to the art. I would have never watched Automata, had I not been wondering what Antonio Banderas was doing in that movie; only to be wonderfully surprised again. In this movie, I would say that his acting was adequate, but once again, after the Automata experience, I decided to give the movie a chance. I am so glad I did.

My favorite scenes were those involving Rupert Everett (Monsinor) and Golshifteh Farahani (Conchita). The cinematography was almost like watching an oil painting, with barely any movement, yet the tension and intensity of every scene was incredible. Was it sexual? Was it a power struggle? Was is a tug-of-war of morality? I could have watched them all day.

The little girl in the film, Allegra Allen (Maria), as most child actors tend to be, is just too precocious in this movie and the character almost did not work for me. In my opinion, the point of view of the story shifted too much from the child in the beginning, the father in the middle, and the mother at the end. I believe the story would have been better served if the arc of Conchita's story would have remained the focus throughout.

There was an "affair of the heart" storyline which was totally unnecessary, in my opinion, and only included to generate more scenes and conflict for secondary actors. I believe the movie would have been just fine without diving into that part of the story and leaving it as wistful glances between two characters.

The story, whether parts are true or fictionalized, is simple enough and I would suggest, secondary to this film.

You should watch this movie if only for watching how beautiful the craft of movie making can be.

I gave this a seven, because of the historical importance of the Altamira cave paintings. But as film itself goes, it rates a 6. History saves this film. The depiction of the work of the paleolithic art is accurate, though somewhat blurred in its depiction. The background of this film was too drawn out however, to allow for a better rating. It steers to closely to a Hallmark movie, rather than a dramatic historic narrative. To me, when actual historic dialog is lacking, as little as possible should be added to fill in the blanks. I almost stopped watching it due to the tedium of the dialogue. The acting was good. It was probably Banderas's best work since the 13th warrior. He was very believable in the role of Marcelino Sanz de Sautuola. Though his accent still detracts from his performance, even in a Spanish role. Rupert Everett shows once again his great talent. It is sad that his attitude has led to the downfall of his career. The other character actors were somewhat bland but acceptable. As it is the case with any historical film, that teaches as well as entertains, the audience and mankind can only benefit. A must watch for amateur historians.

Real easy to critic it. for the not examplary respect for accuracy of story, for dialogues and for too obvious fight between Church and science. but it has a small significant virtue - it is the right film for the child inside us from the early history lessons, when the teacher spoke about Altamira and Lascaux. for this child, recognosible in the traits of the girl, "Finding Altamira" has virtues of magic. or late answer. the film is far to be great. but it is a decent one, with a good job of Antonio Banderas and Rupert Everett in a surprising role. sure, it could be better. but , maybe, another director and scriptwriter are more inspired.

Marcelino de Sautuola (Antonio Banderas) was a Spanish jurist and amateur archaeologist who owned the land where the Altamira cave was found . As his daughter Maria (as little girl : Allegra Allen and grown-up : Irene Escolar) , nine years old at the time, incidentally noticed that the ceiling was covered by images of bisons . Sautuola then started exploring the caves in 1875. He did not become aware of the paintings, however, until 1879, when Sautuola, having seen similar images engraved on Paleolithic objects displayed at the World Exposition in Paris the year before, rightly assumed that the paintings might also date from the Stone Age. Attempting to expose their discovery to the academic world for that they study the paintings , but he failed . Looking for the truth, Sautuola was the rest of his life fighting to prove that those paintings were real, attempting to restore his innocence from the accusations of falsehood launched against him by scientists , historians , geographers and priests (Rupert Everett) . As Marcelino , his wife Conchita (Golshifteh Farahani) and daugther (later she married into the Botín family of Cantabrian bourgeoisie, the current owners of Banco Santander are Sautuola's descendants) suffering distresses and unfortunes trying to demonstrate the reality of the fabulous paintings .The Altamira cave, now famous for its unique collection of prehistoric art, was well known to local people, but had not been given much attention until in 1868, when it was "discovered" .

Biography about existence and happenings of the man who realized one of the most important discoveries of the 19th : Altamira , Pateolithic paintings . As Marcelino Sanz de Sautuola y de la Pedrueca, in 1868, accidentally discovered Paleolithic paintings with the help of a hunter named Modesto Cubillas inside Altamira's caves, located in Cantabria, north to Spain . The flick concerns about confrontation between science and religion ; and between rationalism and faith . As Sautuola was panned and accused the paintings were made for the own Sautuola, in a effort to get richness . Dealing with his thunderous life when crashed against the skepticism and discredit of all scientists , geographers , and religious people , who claimed that the caves were false .

The picture displays an evocative and imaginative cinematography by José Luis Luis Alcaine who is deemed to be one of the best Spanish cameramen with a long and prestigious artistic career and Almodovar's ordinary cameraman , as he has photographed successes such as ¨Volver¨ , ¨The bad education¨ , ¨The skin I live in¨ , and ¨Women on the verge of a nervous breakdown¨ . He was first cinematographer to use fluorescent tube as "key" lightning in the 1970s . Jose Luis Alcaine thought a theory that the Frank Borzage movie A farewell to the arms (1932) after a story by Ernest Hemingway, was the main and total inspiration for Pablo Picasso in the creation of the "Guernica", one of the most important painting of the 20th century. He believes that several images of a sequence of 5 minutes long showing the exodus of countrymen and soldiers on an infernal rainy night was the inspiration of Pablo Picasso. Furthermore , a willingness almost perfect of the elements of each shot , every sequence , every space . Sensitive and rousing musical score by Mar Knopfler . The yarn was well directed by Hugh Hudson (Chariots of fire , Greystoke , I dreamed of Africa Irresistible, Revolution)

The picture is based on historical events about the discoverer of the Altamira paintings , these are the followings : Marcelino thanks to his daughter Maria , and the hunter Modesto discoverd the notorious caves . He therefore engaged an archaeologist from the University of Madrid to help him in his further work. Professor Juan Vilanova y Piera supported Sautuola's assumptions, and they published their results in 1880, to much public acclaim. But the scientific society was reluctant to accept the presumed antiquity of the paintings . The French specialists, led by their guru Gabriel de Mortillet, were particularly adamant in rejecting the hypothesis of Sautuola and Piera and their findings were loudly ridiculed at the 1880 Prehistorical Congress in Lisbon. Due to the supreme artistic quality, and the exceptional state of conservation of the paintings, Sautuola was even accused of forgery. A fellow countryman maintained that the paintings had been produced by a contemporary artist, on Sautuola's orders. It was not until 1902, when several other findings of prehistoric paintings had served to render the hypothesis of the extreme antiquity of the Altamira-paintings less shocking (and forgery less likely), that the scientific society retracted their opposition to the Spaniards. That year, the towering French archaeologist Émile Cartailhac, who had been one of the leading critics, emphatically admitted his mistake in the famous article, "Mea culpa d'un sceptique", published in the journal L'Anthropologie. Sautuola had died 14 years earlier, and did not live to enjoy the restitution of his honour or the later scientific confirmation of his premonitions. Modern dating techniques have since confirmed that the paintings of the Altamira cave were created over extended periods between 11,000 and 19,000 years ago. For the study of Paleolithic art Sautuola's discoveries must now be considered pivotal.