MovieChat Forums > También la lluvia (2011) Discussion > Historically correct? Columbus

Historically correct? Columbus


First of I really liked the movie.
I was thinking, was it really Columbus who went to Bolivia? I remember they where talking about 1511 in the movie but I think they arrived something like 20 yrs later from central America.
Anyone?

Also the Cross on the Helicopter might be a reference to Santa Cruz (Holy Cross) wich was named this way because the 'new' christian fate brought rain.

reply

Columbus did not have a helicopter.

reply

the indigenous people in bolivia were cheaper, that's why they decided to shot the movie in cochabamba

reply

*** SPOILERS ***

This is a conversation that the director, the producer, and the assistant producer have during the ride to Cochabamba at the beginning of the movie.

The director was against the idea of filming in Bolivia because the natives didn't look like the Tainos that the conquerors found in the Caribbean, but the producer (arguing about budget issues) insisted that natives were natives and nobody would notice the difference.

I think that reflects the ideology of most producers in Hollywood at the time of choosing locations, extras and even actors.

reply

No he never made it to Bolivia. I have just ordered the DVD from Amazon.es but my impression is that they are making a movie in Bolivia in the film but that it may not be set in Bolivia.

reply

The movie most be talking about the Island of Hispaniola, today shared by Haiti and the Dominican Republic. It is In December of 1511, when a Dominican preacher Father Fray Antonio de Montesinos preached his famous and fiery sermon implicating the colonists in the genocide of the Indians.

reply