Disclaimer: This site does not store any files on its server.

Ver Gabo, la creación de Gabriel García Márquez

Gabo, la creación de Gabriel García Márquez is a movie starring Juan Gabriel Vásquez, Isidro Alvarez, and Jon Lee Anderson. 'Gabo, The Magic of Reality' is a story about the incredible power of human imagination, which follows the...

History, Documentary, Biography
Justin Webster
Xavi Ayén, Jon Lee Anderson, Isidro Alvarez, Juan Gabriel Vásquez

All Systems Operational

Product details

Genres History, Documentary, Biography
Director Justin Webster
Writer Justin Webster, Kate Horne
Stars Xavi Ayén, Jon Lee Anderson, Isidro Alvarez, Juan Gabriel Vásquez
Country Colombia, UK, Spain, France, USA
Also Known As Gabriel García Márquez - I krig og kærlighed, Gabo: The Creation of Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Gabo - Il mondo di García Márquez, Gabo, the Magic of Reality, Gabo, la creació de Gabriel García Márquez
Runtime 1 h 30 min
Audio Português  English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles Português  日本語  Čeština  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K

Top reviews

Tuesday, 23 Jun 2020 11:21

First, let me say that I am a big fan of Miguel Gomes. After viewing this documentary, I was almost as much a fan as I was of his books. To say the least, I really enjoyed this film. The director and producer do a wonderful job of adding to the mystery surrounding Gomes' life and his work, while also giving us a glimpse into the man's personal life and personal relationships. The producer's comment about how the film is meant to be a "film of love and loss" is very apt, since the film is also a film of love and loss. At one point, I was actually thinking "why does this have to be about love and loss, and not about Gomes' actual life?" There are so many great questions raised in the film that I thought that I would have been better off leaving it at that. But I wanted to make sure that I got the point. I also thought that there were a few important things that I didn't get. First, and most obviously, was the influence that the Mexican government has had on Gomes' life and work. It's clear that they were very important to him, and that they are still very much important to him. However, I am not entirely sure that the filmmakers got the point. I have no idea what influence the Mexican government has had on Gomes' life and work, or what it was that the producers were trying to get across. That being said, the film is certainly a fascinating look into the life and work of Gomes, and I enjoyed it very much. As a long-time fan of his work, I was very much looking forward to seeing it.
Wednesday, 27 May 2020 07:33

I was surprised at the quality of this documentary, given the subject matter. In one sense it is a technical quality that may be of interest, but it is also a literary quality that is largely lost in the translation of this material. I was interested in what the filmmakers were trying to accomplish, but I didn't get a sense of why they were doing it. Is it about the history of fiction, or is it about the history of the past? In some respects it seems like a straightforward account of the process of telling a story in a modern, mediated environment, and I was left with a sense of wanting to know more about the process, but not being able to do that. The documentary, however, does give a glimpse of the work that goes into producing the fiction. Some of the interviews are brief, and seem to me to be for the benefit of those watching the documentary, and not the viewers. One interviewee, Susan Sontag, is more than happy to talk about her experience as a film critic. I did not find the time to appreciate that she used the adjective "naughty" to describe the film, but it is interesting to hear her comment on that as well. She seemed to be saying that a lot of people do things in films that are meant to be naughty, but she also said that she has found it useful to use a lot of naughty words. I also found it interesting that the film critic's husband and the husband's brother-in-law are the ones who are interviewed. At one point the narrator comments that the movie critic's husband was not able to stay in his marriage after the first time he saw the film, but he says he "did not believe" that his wife would ever give up her husband. I didn't buy that she had a problem with her husband because of the film. Perhaps she was not able to get the film on the table to his liking because of the language barrier. The film critic is apparently really good at this. I didn't find the questions she was asked in the documentary to be interesting. Perhaps I was expecting a better presentation of the film's topic, but I was not satisfied. If you are going to make a film about this topic, it is probably best to go into it with the author's full knowledge, but the filmmakers did not give me that sense of what the work was all about. I suppose the film makers were trying to convey the author's sense of the film, but they failed. Maybe that is the problem. They were trying to convey the author's sense of the film, but they were not able to do that. I am not sure why they had to tell us what the film was about. I think they were trying to make the film as powerful as possible, but I am not sure how they were able to do that. I don't think the film has an easily identifiable shape. I suspect the reason it is not easily identifiable is that it is a rich and complex work. The film makers did a good job at giving us the context, but they failed to give us the shape of the film.

Write a review