User Reviews

With a touch of the Hunter Thompsons, Oliver Stone created a quality film about reporter Richard Boyle and his troubles in El Salvador during a civil war that breaks out around him.

Compared to other Stone films, I think this is his best, he has managed to take the true story of Boyle and craft it into a film in which you actually care about the on-screen characters, something he lost later on.

The performances are classic; James Woods, he was clearly on edge and it shows, he produces one of his finest to date. Doc would really have been only a fringe character if it wasn't for the fact he was played by James Belushie in fine form, he fits into the role of the degenerate with ease, he begins as somewhat uptight, but slowly dissolves into the seedy culture of Salvador in contrast to Boyle being ostracised by everyone he deals with.

As with most Stone biopics, there is an element of "you weren't there man!" anger as he unleashed another tirade against the US government and military through this film. You can take that as you like, what I found most fascinating about this film is the similarity to Fear and Loathing, right down to the battered red car they make most of the journey in. I found it fascinating that Boyle could live the kind of story that Thompson made his name creating, the two would make a cracking team, should they not die getting the story, just make it up.

If you're undecided on Olly Stone, but haven't seen this film, give it a try before you decide whether he is an overrated paranoid madman or an impassioned filmmaker with a message in there somewhere if you can get past all the shouting.

'Salvador' is the extremely controversial filmmaker, Oliver Stone's, first film, and is it any surprise it has to do with politics? Yes, pretty much all of Mr. Stone's films have a strong political message in them (for example: JFK, Nixon, Born on the Fourth of July, Natural Born Killers, Heaven & Earth, Wall Street, etc.) His first major film (not counting his dreadfully mediocre low-budget debut horror film 'The Hand), 'Salvador' explores and follows the conflict of military dictatorship and genocide taking place in El Salvador in the year 1980. Although it's a very in-your-face picture and has to do with debatable political hardships, 'Salvador' is a great, powerful and heart wrenching picture that will stay with you a long time after you view it. Even though 'Salvador' is one of Oliver Stone's least famous flicks, it ranks up there with one of his best films.

The movie chronicles the life of real-life photojournalist Rick Boyle (played by James Woods). Boyle's life is falling apart all around him and he's almost completely broke, so he decides to go to El Salvador, to kick it with his best friend, Doctor Rock (played by SNL alumni James Belushi). Boyle and Doc Rock figure El Salvador will be the perfect vacation place, but what they don't realize is that the country going through one of the most violent acts of genocide in world history will effect them. In El Salvador, Boyle meets up with his girlfriend, a native, Maria (Elphidia Carillo), an old friend whose a reporter from Newsday, John Cassady (Carnivale's John Savage), and Cathy Moore, a Catholic nun who works as a lay worker (Cynthia Gibb). While relaxing in the so-called paradise, Boyle begins to realize the atrocities around him and makes a hard decision to try to make a difference, severely risking his life and the lives of the people around him.

'Salvador' isn't a masterpiece, but it's a film of such ferocious power and intensity that it's impossible not to notice. The real life Rick Boyle and Oliver Stone round out a scorching screenplay, and Stone does an awesome job behind the camera. James Woods is magnificent as Boyle, and deserved his Oscar nomination. John Belushi not only provides us with a usual comedic performance, but puts in a lot of dramatic aspects to his character showing that Belushi has more depth than most people realize as an actor. John Savage, post-Deer Hunter, is a pleasure to watch as always, and Independent Spirit Award Nominee Elphidia Carillo, turns in a fine performance as Boyle's love interest. The film also features Michael Murphy as the U.S. ambassador in El Salvador.

When it all is over, 'Salvador' proves to be a great film, but not an excellent one. The film has minor flaws like dragging a little, and sometimes not getting down to the point. It's Stone's first film (second if you count that crap, 'The Hand), and he does a damn fine job with it. If you haven't already, and don't mind a powerhouse of a film, go to your local videostore and rent 'Salvador'. Trust me, you'll like it. Grade: B+

MADE MY TOP 300 LIST AT #238

This movie was overshadowed by Platoon. The connection being that both are from the genius Oliver Stone! And both being released in 1986! Salvador at least as engaging as Platoon, but looking and feeling a lot more raw.

You get the feeling it's a documentary. The camera is in your face! Which is exactly what Oliver Stone wanted you to feel! And who better to represent the audience than a journalist (James Woods)?

Although if you watch the document about making this movie, which is as exciting as the future film itself, you'll appreciate the film a lot more! You will love it a lot more! Watch the movie for it's gritty content and for the fact it's a no holds barred look at a war zone and the depiction of that situation through media and politics!

Going back and watching Salvador makes me realize how long it's been since Oliver Stone has been on his game. How long has it been since he made a film that actually required the audience to think. It's not that he's suddenly become loud and bombastic, it's that he's suddenly stopped doing anything genuinely provocative. Natural Born Killers, for example, is *not* a provocative film. It's a loud and angry and aggressive film. However, the film produced only attacks on the filmmaker (or rather excessive adulation for Stone) and never really stimulated an intelligent national debate. But Salvador, based on the true experiences of photojournalist Rick Boyle, is Stone at his best. It's complicated and full of the mixture of regret, guilt, nostalgia, and outrage that fill the director's landmarks (JFK or Platoon, for example). After all of the violence and horror, it becomes a film about representations of reality and the different reasons for distorting truth.

Rick Boyle (James Woods) is at the end of his rope. He's unemployed, his wife just left him. And he's just been thrown in jail for a litany of driving violations. After getting bailed out by his tubby friend Doctor Rock (James Belushi in the role he was probably born to play), he hops in his unregistered car that he isn't licensed to drive, and he heads south to El Salvador. His only companions are Doctor Jack, his alcohol, and his drugs on a journey that can't help but be likened to the drive to Vegas in Hunter S. Thompson's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. When he arrives in El Salvador, he finds the country torn apart with leftist rebels fleeing to the hills and a country braced for a bloody "democratic" election in which a murderous American puppet general will likely be elected. Boyle tries to use his connections to get a press pass and get one last shot to become a success. This is made easier by the Salvadorian woman who loves him and the ace photographer who lends him a hand (John Savage).

But not everybody in El Salvador is supportive of the loose cannon journalist. There's the colonel who thinks he's a communist, the military attache who's using him for information, and the local military forces who resent the way Boyle depicted them in a previous campaign. The audience is supposed to be disgusted by the way that Boyle treats himself and those he loves, but there's one important fact that's repeated over and over: Boyle was the last journalist out of Cambodia. We know that he stayed to help save people. And it's just a matter of time before he becomes even more personally invested in what's happening in Central America. And that's when things go really crazy.

The world of photojournalism depicted in the film is one step from public relations and sometimes not even that. Boyle's major supported among the military leaders is a general about whom Boyle had written a glowing profile. Boyle is also able to curry favor by showing his pictures to American military leaders before trying to publish them. The question that comes up, of course, is why are the pictures being taken at all and how can anybody ever know the truth of any war. Journalists, like everybody else, get caught up in their surroundings. Boyle may be supporting the right side in El Salvador, but he admits to having favored Pol Pot for a brief period years earlier. The difference between canonizing a truly noble leader (like the assassinated Archbishop Romero) and elevating a genocidal lunatic is a small one. Salvador calls into question how American audiences can ever know who to trust in a media covered war. On one hand we have Pauline Axelrod (Valerie Wildman) appearing on air because she's pretty and blond even though she just accepts the official statements as truth. Then there's also Savage's journalist who's willing to do anything to get the perfect shot, to create an image that shows both the conflict and the reasons behind it in a single frame. Idealism and self preservation are competing instincts.

The film is pure Stone. The battle sequences are tense and tightly edited and the dialogue (which Stone cowrote with Rick Boyle) is rippingly good, for the most part. Then again, its misogyny is almost worn as a gold star, female characters are, as always, Madonnas or whores, and a rape scene is fairly exploitative. Also in a conversation between Boyle and a conservative US Colonel, Stone unpacks entirely too much of his personal ideology in a series of monologues. The message of the film, about not wanted to create another Vietnam and liberalism not being the same as Communism is much too literally articulated.

The film basically hinges on Woods's wonderful performance. His typical manic energy perfectly fits his character's earliest incarnation, but as Boyle becomes more troubled by what he sees around him, Woods's performance becomes deeper, richer, and more internalized. The rest of the cast has less to do and thus can't really be blamed for not standing out. Belushi's Doctor Jack has "Fictitious Composite Character" written all over him. Basically we watch as his story arc goes in opposite directions from Woods's at all times.

Salvador is perhaps the only film to ever express nostalgia for Jimmy Carter. I like that. I like that it's challenging, dogmatic, but rarely insults my intelligence by saying things that I already know. This is a very fine 8/10 film.

The cinematic equivalent of being busted in the chops over and over again until you can only fall, this, along with his TALK RADIO, is Oliver Stone's masterpiece.

It is one of the most driven dramas I have ever witnessed, a work propelled by anger, a burning sense of justice and fiery humanism. It depicts a corrupt, murdering regime with savage focus and makes no dramatic concessions to the incendiary material.

Financed slightly outside the Hollywood system, it boasts a dozen extraordinary performances and a brand of camera-work (by Stone regular Robert Richardson) that expertly marries documentary-style coverage to classic composition.

SALVADOR has so much to say, but it concludes having not said it all because it hasn't the time.

It's quite incredible.

Salvador is Oliver's Stone's best movie. This was a low budget movie and the last one Stone made before Platoon. This is a guerilla movie in the true sense of the work. A movie made about a guerilla revolt in El Salvador and one American journalist's story during that revolution; and made on in a guerilla style with a lot of hand-helded shots and local Mexican atmosphere and actors. James Wood and Jim Belushi are excellent. Except for the politics and an acid trip scene, this film is very gritty and real. Now it does have a frat boy road trip aspect, but that only adds a comic touch that is almost endearing at times. Set against the brutality of the civil war of El Salvador, the comedy helps keep the movie from being overly harsh and pedantic, which Mr. Stone tends to want to lean towards in portraying the politics of the time and place. Thankfully Mr. Stone is more interesting in entertaining then preaching in this movie, and with the excellent acting accomplishes this goal.

Before i watched this movie i knew nothing about the troubles in El Salvador.This opened my eyes to the rein of terror that went on there ( And still does as far as i know). Salvador is a very Graphic movie that does not shirk on showing the bloodshed and trauma suffered. It is a superb debut movie by Oliver Stone which only became a taster of things to come.I enjoyed this film even though the subject matter was fairly heavy not to mention politically complex. 7 out of 10

Compelling civil war drama by Oliver Stone with a great James Woods (as well as a great Jim Belushi). Stone's best films have always been his highly political ones, and this is no exception. Brutal, realistic portrayal of the conflict in El Salvador and America's implications. This is one to re-discover by film fans as it seems to have fallen a bit into obscurity over the years. Highly recommended: 8 stars out of 10.

In case you're interested in more underrated masterpieces, here's some of my favorites:

imdb.com/list/ls070242495

James Woods stars as a photographer who faces the cruel and punishing effects of civil war and social injustice on the people of El Salvador. A visually stunning film from Oliver Stone that forces you to examine the U.S. role in other countries. 7 of 10

It's 1980. Richard Boyle (James Woods) is a rundown independent journalist. He is desperate to leave San Francisco to go to El Salvador for the action. His buddy Doctor Rock (James Belushi) bails him out of jail and together they take a drug filled drive down to San Salvador. Major Mzx Casanova (Tony Plana) and his henchman (Juan Fernández) leads the military fanatics. Richard has connections from a previous right-wing article. He tries to reconnect with girlfriend Maria and helpful nun Cathy Moore (Cynthia Gibb). They join reporter John Cassady (John Savage). The new Ronald Reagan government is concerned about communist infiltration. The big networks aren't getting the real story. He gets involved with the guerrillas who want to tell their stories to the outside world and the government wants the pictures he takes. Filmmaker Oliver Stone lays out his political views. It's a cross between gonzo journalism and human rights abuses of central America. It's compelling by itself but it's James Woods' manic performance that puts it over the top. His energetic acting matches the chaotic political thriller.

This is considered to be Oliver Stone's best film but I disagree , PLATOON is the best film helmed by Stone but SALVADOR is probably a fair way behind it . Unlike PLATOON which was a heartfelt movie mirroring the director's own experiences in Vietnam it's slightly difficult to connect with the characters . They're cynical and hedonistic to start with but improve as people as the film continues making the movie a slightly too obvious redemption plot , not helped with some Catholic imagery

James Woods plays journalist Richard Boyle . Perfect casting by Stone which got Woods his first and last Oscar nomination for Best Actor . Woods has always been superb at playing intense , manic dangerous characters and excels at playing someone who suffers from a borderline narcissistic personality disorder who continually tells the world that whilst Sydney Schanberg was picking up his Purlitzer Prize ( See THE KILLING FIELDS ) he was the last journalist out of Cambodia . It's also interesting that Boyle's main motive for going to El Salvador is that it costs a mere $50 a month to live there whilst whores and drugs are easy to come by . Of course all this changes when Boyle gets caught up in events and becomes a crusader against human rights abuses by the right wing government

The one main problem can be accused off from a moral viewpoint is one of moral equivalence . Alex Cox criticised the film where Boyle sees left wing guerrillas executing captured troops and cries that one side is as bad as the other according to Cox . I can't recall Boyle saying that but my own problem with moral equivalence is at the start of the film where Boyle self righteously proclaims he broke a story about " IRA suspects getting tortured by the Brits in Belfast " Is there any connection between the Irish troubles and what goes on in central America ? To be fair to Stone he does point out the American establishment's fear of El Salvador coming under the Soviet sphere of influence . And if Stone didn't have a deserved or otherwise reputation as a Hollywood liberal would people nitpick the film so much ?

One thing about Stone's direction is how restrained it is in relation to his later work . There's a directorial technique called " Intensified continuity " which in laymans terms is MTV style film making . Stone took this to new heights ( Or possibly depths depending on your view ) with JFK and NATURAL BORN KILLERS . Here however the camera work is disciplined with no OTT flourish and Stone thankfully lets the performances , plotting and dialogue carry the film which whilst an effective political drama doesn't carry the emotional wallop of PLATOON

I must admit I love the first 90 minutes, the last half hour was a bit sad and hard to watch otherwise masterpiece! James Woods and James Belushi were incredible although I have seen Belushi as more of a comedic roles so this was odd to me. Oliver Stone is among my favorite directors ever - His films are masterful in most cases.

Woods is a grungy, near penniless, third-rate photo journalist who thinks there could be some money made by heading to chaotic El Salvador and getting some pics. Belushi tags along and after barely crossing the border, have guns shoved in their face and nearly get killed. Woods has many connections everywhere it seems, and gets he and Belushi out of trouble...for a short while. The film mostly plays this way, as Woods becomes more daring in trying to get his job done, only to be nearly killed, but rescued by an acquaintance in the warring area. Despite the plot description on the video box, a lot of time is spent on things not related to it. A couple examples would be the carousing by the two leads, as they live for their beer and drone on about conquering a certain anatomical part of female virgins. Also, El Salvador is not even reached until 40 minutes into the film. But when they stick to the gritty stuff, the job gets done pretty well. The film's all over the place at times, but the performance of Woods, as with any of his films, makes up for it. He's not as dynamic as in other works ("Cop", "The Boost"), but still delivers as usual. Belushi, in a rare dramatic role, is the only other one of note, doing a fine job. Woods always outshines even great actors, making them look mediocre, but the others here are just horrid. The gay-ish blonde guy with the sweater tied around his neck, or the mustachioed man with the cigar, have crap line delivery. Fortunately they're not on screen too much. The oddest thing is that Tony Plana, who played Major Max, followed this up with such a tiny part as the demento prison guard in "Born in East L.A."(?). This is the only one Stone's movies that I remotely liked, and you can tell it served as a precursor to "Platoon", which he did after this. But if you're like me and love Woods, that is your sole reason for renting this. Based on actual experiences by Richard Boyle (Woods' character), who somehow survived and was able to share it all.

As a Salvadorian, it is an offense to watch this movie. I am a big fan of Oliver Stone, but sometimes it is evident that Stone gets carried away with emotion and his political views create too much bias; especially in this film. Stone fails to capture the essence of the conflict and most important to capture the reality of the situation. He portrays and depicts the right wing as terrorists while failing to show that the left guerrillas were even worse in their actions. The left guerrillas destroyed the country and everything that was good about it. The guerrillas enrolled child soldiers and spread hatred among Salvadorians. Stone failed to show how the right wing actually tried to help a country divided by a communist movement occurring across a Latin American level. Most important, what truly is offensive is the assassination of Monseñor Romero. This is so false, since Monseñor was shot by a sniper who nobody ever saw or knew who it was. Also, to this day nobody knows who is responsible for this assassination. This is a good film in the sense of fiction, because James Woods and Belushi give out an excellent performance. But this movie does not depict the reality of the situation at all. Please do not use it as a way of educating people about the war in El Salvador, because this is nothing like it. This is pure fiction and plus it is all shot in Mexico. To be fair I enjoy the acting but the movie should have never been called "Salvador", because it has nothing to do with the real conflict. Do not be misguided or fooled by Stone's leftist tendency. I have much respect for Mr. Stone but here he just shows how he really is an advocate for the modern socialist movement.

Having seen this movie more than ten times, over the last decade and one half, it as taken on many shades of meaning, but it continues to show how the more things change the more they stay the same. The reporter's sense of gathering news seems to be one of self-sacrifice and a search for truth however, the director shows how the American reporter possesses a quixotic sense of right and wrong that is overwhelmed by self-interest and self-indulgence not unlike the American public. He is unable to report with the clarity of a John Reed. Other points of interest are the visuals of the local life of peasants, who just want to live. They are shown to be no different than the peasants of Chile or Vietnam. Contrasting this life is the ruling elite that manipulates the meaning of the simple needs of the peasants into an ideology that threatens the middle class and the business interests that exploit the resources of this third world country. When the environment becomes so intolerable that the peasants begin to revolt, the forces of the ruling elite call on the American military might to help quell the rebellion. Here we discover the atrocities that become the daily part of life and bring the audience emotions out of its dispassionate viewpoint into one that feels the helplessness of a beaten people.

It seems to me that the director was more into making a movie than selling tickets. For this we are grateful. This movie is as fresh with insight and meaning as it was when it was released. Dr. Zim Robert

After seeing Salvador, here's one more place I don't want to visit. Screen writing great Stone, who makes reads so interesting, has made that abundantly. Although it has a crammed feel of story, one can't shy their away from the intensity this movies brings. The only reason I didn't see this at the cinema, was I had seen The Killing Fields a year before, where I thought like that excellent film, this was gonna be just like it,, but there's a lot of nice little things here, that make it different from that. I actually like this movie better than Platoon. James Woods is at his acting best, as a womanizing loser, once famous journalist Richard Boyle, who cons and weasels his way through life (the dangling coin on the string inserted in into the payphone slot I loved). He's a reckless sort with outstanding fines, and a much due rent. Now his Italian girlfriend's taken off back to her home town. His best friend has just bailed him out. He's in the doghouse too. Where do they head: El Salvador. Director Stone doesn't hold back on frank images, some moments will truly disturb viewers, two I won't mention, another one involves the rape and murder of some missionary girls, which I do say touched the gulliver. Boyle rekindling an old relationship, with a young Salvadorian girl marries her and tries to get her out of the country, where her fate lies in the end of the movie, I guess. All actors deliver top floor performances, Belushi as Dr Rock, the always wonderful John Savage as a budding award winning photographer John Cassidy, Tony Plana as the discreetly and corrupt Major Max, though I really didn't think Michael Murphy was that good as the ambassador, putting too little into his performance, where too Juan Fernandez was hauntingly scary as Smiling death. Salvador had some terrifying moments, a lot as Wood's fate was concerned. It's a scary place, and one place to stay well clear of. Opening soundtrack by Giorgio Moroder.

In one of the many indictments of US-foreign policy, we get hit right where it hurts. Richard Boyle (James Woods) is a journalist with little direction in life in 1980. So, he and his friend Doctor Rock (Jim Belushi) drive down to El Salvador. But they never could have gotten prepared for what they were about to see there. As leftist rebels are battling the US-backed military junta, the death squads move across the country slaughtering civilians. To crown it all, Boyle even witnesses the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero, a champion of the country's poor, at the hands of Roberto D'Aubuisson's thugs. It seems that the only person whom Richard can trust is peasant Maria (Elpidia Carrillo).

"Salvador" obviously brings up the issue of journalism, especially in time of war. I read that there was some controversy about the portrayal of Boyle - some people claim that the movie lionizes him too much - but such arguments miss the movie's point. It was looking at the most vicious form of US-foreign policy, which continues in places like Colombia. Obviously, Oliver Stone likes to make politically charged movies, but this may be his best, alongside "JFK".

A strange irony to the movie is James Woods himself. His role in this movie suggests that he long held left-wing political views. Then, he became a September 12th Republican: a leftist who shifted to the right after September 11, 2001. Does he even still acknowledge this movie, or what it portrays? For more information about the US-backed regimes in El Salvador and the rest of Latin America, you can read three books: "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn, "What Uncle Sam Really Wants" by Noam Chomsky, and "The CIA's Greatest Hits" by Mark Zepezauer.

Salvador is an early Oliver Stone film, which required overcoming many production hurdles, lying and cheating to complete filming, and committing fraud for additional money (all admitted by Stone in the commentary.)

It was underrated during its brief theatrical release, although James Woods earned and deserved his Best Actor nomination as a press photographer who goes to El Salvador, accompanied by Jim Belushi, to make some money photographing the political mess and killings there, including the murder of nuns and a priest. ("Romero" is a movie about the priest).

Based on "real events" and "real people" like all Stone movies, some license has been taken, also as in all Stone movies.

Political viewpoints aside, the movie pulls no punches in showing the atrocities of war. If you are squeamish about seeing dead bodies, burning bodies and bloody bodies, then you will have to look away on occasion. As in real life, there is some sex and swearing.

The DVD extras, including Stone's commentary, deleted scenes, and cast interviews and clips, are very interesting as well.

You ought to see this movie if for no other reason than to watch James Woods' great performance. He plays a journalist who's days of glory and prestige have long begun to wane. His sidekick throughout the movie is Dr. Rock, a has-been DJ, drug-and-booze soaked, prone to whining and ill-health, but who provides much of the movie's comic relief. The spend most of the movie chasing stories that never get written, drinking, gobbling drugs, and dodging bullets....

Yes, this movie has a decidedly left-wing political message. And yes,it is bumptiously, clumsily delivered--with the grace and insight of an 18-year-old college radical a little too full of himself. The action speaks for itself--dead bodies everywhere, the American military hovering nearby constantly. But just in case we don't get it, the characters lecture us with familiar left vs. right themes, crow with indignation, and denounce the military characters, who are one-dimensional and disgusting. U.S. involvement is simplified far too much. To his credit, though, Stone does not try to sanitize the leftist guerillas, who we see are as brutal as the regime they are fighting. (And just in case we don't get THAT--despite seeing them shoot captured soldiers in the head, calmly and methodically--Woods starts screaming, "You're just as bad as they are!" Well, duh!)

Another problem is that we learn very little about El Salvador beyond the violence and pretty much constant whoring around of the American characters. Since setting is so important to this movie, a little more development in this area would have been useful...Since Woods' character had been there before, at least some of this could have been conveyed through flashback. But as things stand, we have very little idea of what sort of culture actually is at stake.

Still, the drama is compelling, the characters engaging (sordid, but engaging!), the performances great. If Stone handles the politics ham-handedly, he manages to introduce moments of comedy--very human comedy--in a story that is wrought with despair. Belushi is a riot as the kvetching Dr. Rock, who unwittingly comes along for the ride from San Francisco to El Salvador (he thinks they're going to Guatamala), and finds himself being brutalized by Salvadoran military, police, infected by the water (and prostitutes)...generally having a rought time of it. Woods is a scream, too, when he tries to rehabilitate himself for his love, a young mother half his age. His scene in the confessional is very funny.

Somehow, Wood's Boyle manages to find himself a part of the major Salvadoran revolutionary moments that are now familiar to us here in the U.S. Archbishop Romero, for instance, is assassinated right in front of him, just after Boyle has reveived Holy Communion from him. Also, Boyle is a close friend of the Catholic lay worker who was raped and killed with the nuns on the way back to San Salvador.

Despite some of the clumsiness, this movie has a great deal of energy, and anyone who REALLY wants to see James Woods act cannot miss this. Political dramas fail when it compells characters to act woodenly, or unbelieveably (see "The Contender" for an example of this). "Salvador" remains a human drama first, and political expostulation second...See it.

Many filmmakers are afraid to speak out on difficult, controversial issues, for fear of driving away audiences and risking their profits. Not Oliver Stone. If he has a viewpoint on a much-debated issue, he says it as he sees it, no holds barred. The Kennedy assassination. Media violence. Watergate. Vietnam. As far as he's concerned, all these topics, and more, are fair game for his personal cinematic treatment. He may be accused of overdramatizing, of taking liberties with the facts, but no one can say he's uninteresting. "Salvador" is an important turning point in his career, the start of a line of films that established his place in motion picture history.

Oliver Stone's chosen target: the role the United States plays in the affairs of third-world countries. Based upon the real-life experiences of journalist Richard Boyle, The film unapologetically criticizes our actions in El Salvador. It states that the U.S. aided and abetted a bloody revolution to support its own interests. Stone takes a very dim view of our military officials, portraying them as brutish and short-sighted at best. Although its politics caused some to dismiss it as left-wing propaganda, Stone paid no heed; just the opposite--he revels in the controversy his work generates in its wake. The film is to be commended for not compromising its views.

What really drives the movie is the James Woods performance. At first glance, he seems to be little more than a sleazy, opportunistic reporter. In truth, that is just what he is...up to a point. However, his experiences prove a major wake-up call. Only then does he attempt to stand up for what he believes in. Compared to the devious U.S. officials, he's an innocent. Woods makes the transition believable, giving his character an unexpected humanity. Not only that, but he actually puts a dash of humor in an otherwise grim tale. His interplay with James Belushi is a joy to watch, and the infamous confessional scene is pretty damn funny.

"Salvador" is not a perfect film; Stone's usual tendency to spell everything out for the viewer manifests itself on several occasions. The midsection tends to lag, and the John Savage character is sorely underused. Finally, the director's difficulty in dealing with women is frequently evident. Nonetheless, it's worth at least one viewing. Even if you disagree with its politics, it cannot be denied that the human drama is, by turns, searing, hilarious, sobering...and unexpectedly moving.

*** (out of ****)

Released by Hemdale Film Corp.

If you walked into a room halfway through Salvador there would certainly be no prizes for guessing that it is an Oliver Stone movie. Even though I'm a big fan of his, this film has the look and feel of many of the films that he made throughout the eighties and nineties.

I do totally agree with those people who've criticised Salvador for trying to be both a movie about hedonistic debauchery (a la Fear and Lathing in Las Vegas) and a serious exposition of an actual series of (very serious) events. Jim Belushi's character never really looks at home in the movie (and, of course, that's one of the main jokes - Richard Boyle's selfishness more or less ruins Dr. Rock's life and turns him into a deranged 'tic tac' drinking wino) and the comic elements don't really work. This is possibly due to the fact that Belushi wasn't happy with the film or with his co-star (an admission he makes on the recently released DVD version), but it might also be the fact that he (and his brother) are/were extremely limited actors.

However James Woods suits the role of the Richard Boyle, an intensely conceited asshole if ever there was one, absolutely perfectly, and he is equally convincing when bull****ing local officials in pigeon Spanish and when breaking down in frustration due to American inaction over the worsening political situation in El Salvador.

I don't want to get into a debate about the truthfulness of the movie to the events it depicts, but the character of Major Max should definitely be addressed. As another person has already commented on this board - Major Max is little more than a caricature. This much is certainly true. But the guy he was based on, Jose Napoleon Duarte, WAS a thoroughly nasty piece of work. Yes, he may have been the first 'civilian' to be elected to the junta government, but to say that he was 'democratically elected' is being rather economical with the truth. The film does tend to lump the government in with the army and the death squads all too often, but this is not a complete fabrication by any means, considering the grip that the army had on government even after Duarte's subsequent re-election in 1984. Bear in mind that this film was also being shot while a number of those who masterminded the death squads were still in power. The DVD version contains the hilarious revelation that Stone and Boyle tricked the Salvadorian government into lending them their army and resources by making them think they were making a pro-junta propaganda piece.

The best point I think Oliver Stone makes with Salvador is that it is dangerous and unfair to denounce anyone who takes up arms against their government with a legitimate grievance as a godless communist. The FMLN guerillas were not sponsored by the Russians and they got little assistance from Cuba. Besides, if they were intent on destroying the Salvadorian state then why have they taken an active part in the democratic process since the fall of the junta? The lazy and ugly paranoia of the Reagan administration was perfectly illustrated by Stone's inclusion of a rambling speech by ol' Ronnie where he lists a number of continents (continents, not countries!) that he saw as possibly conspiring to attack America.

My only beef with the movie is Woods' ludricrously idealistic speech right at the end about what it means to be an American. The speech is proceeded by one of the most incisive criticisms of American foreign policy ever in a Hollywood movie, so to first say that America has opposed free speech across the world and then to sing the virtues of the 'land of the brave' just doesn't make sense.

Anyone in possession of a conscience who would like to know more about the oppresiveness of the outside world but who doesn't know where to start, should definitely watch Salvador.

Salvador is your better then average film, mainly because of James Woods' wonderful performance. The film is a little preachy and unfair with its politics, and the pace of the film could use some serious work, but it is a compelling drama nonetheless.

Where to begin? I watched this on its theatrical run and a few times over the years. 'Salvador' doesn't stand up well to history. Indeed, Oliver Stone's characterization of El Salvador's Civil War is on the wrong side of history. This, given the complete failure of Marxist regimes all over planet as well as the suffering inflicted on citizens in Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba. So, it would seem that human rights abuses by the Right were justified as a remedy to the spread of Marxist/Leninist/Socialism.

Stone and Boyle don't even make an effort to portray the situation in a fair manner. The Right in "Salavador" are all brutal thugs who rape and torture women, children and even nuns. The Left are organic, high-minded indigenous heroes who live off the land in the mountains. Of course, they scounge for their own primitive firearms and never ever receive help from Nicaragua and Cuba Marxist regimes. Again, in hindsight, we know this is all BS.

The film itself is filled with silly and sometimes ridiculous premises. Boyle, our protagonist is a down on his luck photo journalist but a good guy at heart. He drives from San Francisco to El Salvador with his fat slob buddy in tow. Why in the world was this character even in the film? James Beluschi is not funny in the least, he's basically just an annoyance that does nothing for the film. He smokes weed openly in one of the world's most dangerous environments,....and we're meant to sympathize? Absurd. Boyle's tacked on romance with a local woman further complicates things. I realize we're meant to sympathize with him, but he's so stupid, constantly drunk, stoned, disheveled, etc.

The various characters involved in the story are overly simplistic, either they sympathize with the rebels or you support the murderous, evil right wing para military fascists. There are no shades of gray.

The ethos of this film is basically that of a sophomore Poly Sci major at Cal Berkeley, based on feel good egalitarianism and complete ignorance of the dire real world consequences at hand. Its truly ironic that the rightwing asshole American military advisor, that we're meant to despise was completely right and justified. Allowing another Marxist Soviet style dictatorship in El Salvador simply could not be allowed in 1981.

This film is laughable in 2018, but it gets an extra star for X's frontman John Doe's cameo and Cynthia Gibb, who is adorable.