Best movie of this year hands down!

People are voting emotionally.

Fantastic!

Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

Each time I watch a Henry King movie I am trying to find what are the more recent films that were influenced by his work. This should be natural since he has made so many films, but also it is his taste for good literature and his simplicity as well. It is this simplicity, his frankness, his dislike for posture that make his work deeper. There is action, but never plain or shallow - everything is in perfect balance. You cannot just tell this is an action movie or a western or a romance or a historic epic - you say it is a Henry King movie. That is accomplished by his simplicity in style I believe.

An opening shot of Henry King's movie echoes the style of many classic films of the time whose source is literature: wordy introduction of the ever present 'protagonist' of the story, this time it is the magnificent Mount of Kilimanjaro. Soon, however, we face a number of liberties taken with Ernest Hemingway's story and encounter the creative contribution of its director, Henry King, and the screenwriter Casey Robinson. Unlike many films of the early 1950s, SNOWS OF KILIMANJARO sets the tone for the 'in media res' approach with a protagonist and his memories, more to say, reflections on life filled with 'drama, tragedy, love, poetry.' Apart from many artistic and authentic 'sensations' of the movie, including its African locations, its footage of the continent's wilderness (note the hippopotamuses or rhinos), the striking cinematography that the New York Times reviewer Bosley Crowther called "magnificent and exciting," musical score of "rich suggestion" (Crowther), SNOWS OF KILIMANJARO boasts its character, the writer Harry Street played with bravura and vitality by the brilliant Gregory Peck. He is the cream of the movie's entertainment and the center of our attention in spite of many beautiful women that turn up and leave. The "thoughtfully slow exploration of an error filled life" (Ace Black Blog) and the whole reflective power of the story bursts out thanks to Mr Peck.GREGORY PECK: As a former writer to Chicago Tribune, Harry is placed in a situation (position) with plenty to think about. The centerpiece of his (an our) attention in all those reflections are "the flow of romances" (Crowther), the women he knew and the women he actually 'disappointed' Although he is still accompanied by his wife Helen (Susan Hayward), the most significant woman of his life, his memories is Cynthia (Ava Gardner), the woman who embodies "an ode to essential love lost" (Ace Black Blog). No matter to what extent Hemingway loses out to Casey Robinson, the protagonist's relations with the women are explored in an exceptionally modern manner. Harry's "burning temper and melancholy moods" (Crowther) make his an almost neurotic character, more easy to identify with and yet, more reclusive and pathetic at certain moments. He is changeable, wistful, nostalgic, unpredictable, thought provoking. Henry King, having worked with Gregory Peck before, appears to have cast him in one of the very best roles of his life. Although the action goes on slowly at moments, he is magnetic in the role gradually becoming 'a knight questing for Holy Grail.' The true highlights are the scenes with Cynthia.AVA GARDNER: Although the opinions of movie scholars differ on her performance, it appears that she brings in the crucial aspects of her character and the key qualities sought by Harry throughout. In the symbolic 'cigarette scene' (that echoes the most subtle moments of old Hollywood...consider Greta Garbo and John Gilbert in silent classics), this essential 'touch' is manifested, the touch of chemistry between a man and a woman. In her role, Ava Gardner is given considerable freedom in exploring a woman with her own self and she does brilliantly in the task. Their scenes simultaneously stimulate the similarities and and differences between female and male, between her expectations and his expectations...'her normal thing is not his normal thing' In one of the most powerful lines of the film, after she has lost the child, the doctor utters "Don't you, people, talk to each other?" Yet, they are reconciled in the most unpredictable circumstances (here, the ever present anti-war aspect). A great performance.SUPPORTING CAST: Although not much can be said about Hildegard Knef (or rather Hildegarde Nef) except for her looks, Susan Hayward does a fine job in more difficult scenes. She is constantly, like in his mind and so in ours, in the shadow of Ava Gardner's character. However, putting it justly, some of her scenes are played skillfully and memorably. A note must be made of the actor who plays the uncle of Harry not only because his role is crucial in the storyline but also because he utters certain edgy lines not easily forgotten.All things considered, SNOWS OF KILIMANJARO has stood a test of time not so much as a display of some 'visual marvels' but as a reflective classic made convincing by Gregory Peck forever associated with Hemingway's story brought to screen. Enjoying the movie now, I do not wonder its lasting impact on viewers, on my Grandma who saw it half a century ago.

Writer Harry Street (Gregory Peck) lies injured with an infected wound on his leg in the shadow of Mount Kilamanjaro. He awaits for help with his wife Helen (Susan Hayward) by his side as he recalls his past failings and his first love Cynthia Green (Ava Gardner).This was nominated for Best Cinematography for that year. Certainly the widelife filming looks great. With the great actors involved, I had hoped for better. Peck and Hayward have a tough time establishing chemistry. They are in Africa with Peck dying. He's an angry drunk much in keeping with the Ernest Hemingway type character. It's a little bit against type of his usual nice guy persona. They fight more than they show affection. Peck and Hayward's story all happened in the past. All of it moves very slowly. The movie is very static and stiff. It's lucky for the movie that the characters are played by such giant stars. If they shone less brightly, this would truly be not worthwhile at all. As it is, it's nice to see these 3 stars in one movie no matter how good or bad it is.

nice adaptation, inspired cast, beautiful images. but after decades, only thing real important is good intention. because the film seems be long story, too long, about nothing. the rhythm is slow, the gestures - ash of snow. and the feelings is to view a kind of Casablanca. Cizen Kane copy. sure, it is difficult to say than it is bad but it is vapid. or only good instrument to remember great names of cinema. but is it enough ? after its end, the impression is strange. a so praised movie and you are unhappy ? a unique adaptation and you expect more ? a so clever story and you do not a brilliant remark ? it is not reasonable. but, this is truth. old lance. and boring moments. and a lot of good intentions. a trip in past. and, sure, slices of a legendary title.