The Battle of Chile: Part III

1979 [SPANISH]

Documentary / History

4
IMDb Rating 7.6/10 10 1161 1.2K

Director

Patricio Guzmán Photo
Patricio Guzmán

Top cast

Ernesto Malbran Photo
Ernesto Malbran as Self
Salvador Allende Photo
Salvador Allende as Self
Abilio Fernández Photo
Abilio Fernández as Narrator
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
753.04 MB
1280*720
Spanish 2.0
NR
Subtitles
24 fps
1 hr 22 min
Seeds 3
1.37 GB
1920*1080
Spanish 2.0
NR
Subtitles
24 fps
1 hr 22 min
Seeds 14

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by planktonrules 4 / 10

A far less universal message than in the previous two films.

"The Battle of Chile" consists of three films created using footage that was smuggled out of Chile after the ouster of the Allende regime as a result of a coup d'etat in 1973. The three films all tell a different version of events and so they are NOT films that must be seen in sequence. As for the first two, they made a very persuasive argument against the rightist government that replaced it and emphasized the legitimacy of the Socialist Allende presidency. However, in the third film, the ouster of the Allende government isn't even mentioned and the tone is very different. Whereas in the first two, the coup was to circumvent the wishes of the Chilean people, part three is much more a propaganda piece extolling the virtues of a communist/socialist Chile and a takeover by 'the people'. And, in one portion, the film admits that less than the majority of Chileans want this sort of state and so it is up to the followers of Allende to force this change. As for me, listening to comments which seemed right out of Marx about the evil bourgeoisie, class struggle, the frequent use of the term 'comrades' as well as referring to the right as 'mummies' seemed to lose my interest. Had I only seen part three, I would have thought that the Allende government NEEDED overthrowing! What a difference another focus can bring to the same issue. Now I am not saying that it was good that Allende and thousands of his followers were killed or that the Pinochet regime was wonderful--they were monstrous. What I am saying is that for the average non-communist and person who knows little of history, part three is not a persuasive argument--whereas parts one and two are because they avoid the Marxist rhetoric and focus, instead, on the underhanded way the Allende government was toppled as well as the atrocities of the new government--none of which get mentioned in part three. Overall, part three looks like a communist propaganda piece--and not an especially persuasive one. My advice is to definitely see the first two films first--then, if you feel the need, to see the last.
Reviewed by

Read more IMDb reviews

10 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment