Despite its narrative problems, Greenaway gives us a movie pleasant to the human eye that will surely please the director's fans and those who seek more style than substance.

Many good visuals, but overdone.

After a failed attempt to make a movie in Hollywood, Sergei Eisenstein travels to Mexico to make a film under the auspices of Upton Sinclair. While in Mexico, he has a sexual awakening and a love affair with his Mexican guide Palomino. I like Greenaway, but I can't say this one really worked for me. I don't think it's fair to say that Einsenstein's blossoming homosexuality is the only topic that Greenaway is interested in, but it's the only topic that really seems to take any form. Other topics come up, but they are really treated in a sketchy manner (you are well over an hour into the film before you realize that he's been in Mexico for over 8 months). I don't mind the film, but a nearly 2 hour running time seems really excessive.

Peter Greenaway isn't a storyteller so much as a painter. The movie's strength is its aesthetics and should be enjoyed for that.

It's a bummer that the return of Peter Greenaway is not a better film. This movie will wear thin quickly -- even for film geeks like myself. This is an organized mess. Greenaway is clearly having fun. Too bad he didn't include his audience in this twisted celebration.

There's a lot of flash and glitz and glam with little substance, though maybe, sometimes, the presentation is enough on its own. If you're looking for any insight into Eisenstein's time in Mexico, this unfortunately isn't the movie for you- while it's chalk full of facts, it never goes further than flat out listing timeline information. And that almost works because it's such a bizarre and interesting timeline of events. Eisenstein's fascination with Mexico is fascinating, as is his hidden homosexuality and his explicit drawings; and I'm sure the footage he shot would have been if this movie had even vaguely touched upon it. But the movie gets lost in his affair and never really lets go until it over stays its welcome and gets forcefully shut down- aka following exactly Eisenstein's own route in Mexico. Greenaway, to me, is the poor man's Ken Russell without the truly arresting visuals and thoughtful symbolism. But then again, if he had backed off on the constant bombardment of different special effects and wide angle lenses, the movie might have been a real stinker.

The film starts out really energized and incredibly entertaining before slowing down and getting a bit more serious, after which it's not nearly as much fun, although it never ceases to be damn good. I love the style of the movie especially in terms of its cinematography and editing. I don't know if it was the intention but it almost seems to be paying homage in its own way to the use of montage that Eisenstein made famous and is best known for. Elmer Bäck delivers a damn good performance in the film, as does everyone, although it's blatantly obvious from his accent that he's in fact Finnish, not Russian. 8,5/10

cinegeek.de Welche Bedeutung hat Eisenstein überhaupt noch für normale Kinogänger? Diese Frage hat sich Peter Greenaway bestimmt gestellt, als er die Reise des russischen Filmemachers nach Mexiko verfilmte. Greenaway interessieren aber weniger die intellektuellen und künstlerischen Aspekte von Eisensteins Produktion von Que Viva Mexico!, den er 1930 inszenierte (wobei der Film unvollendet blieb). Das Augenmerk des Briten liegt darauf, dass der schwule Eisenstein endlich mit 33 seine Jungfräulichkeit verlor. Greenaway, der Maler, der sich zum Filmemacher und Liebling der Avantgarde wandelte, hat seit etwa 25 Jahren keinen wirklich guten Film mehr gemacht. Die Enttäuschung von Eisenstein in Guanajuato überrascht deshalb nicht. Greenaway ist gefangen in dem Missverständnis, "postmodern" bedeutet "wunderlich". Selbst bei Sujets, die Ernsthaftigkeit erfordern, ist Greenaway dazu nicht in der Lage. Sein Film erwähnt zwar die Klassiker Eisensteins, belässt es aber dabei, sie kurz einzublenden. Genauso verhält es sich mit den Auftritten von Diego Rivera und Frida Kahlo. Eisenstein jedenfalls, verzieht sich lieber in sein Hotelzimmer, um zu strippen und einen Dialog mit seinem Penis zu führen. Greenaway ist bekannt dafür, dass Scheisse und Pisse eine Rolle in seinem Kino spielen. Verstörte das früher, wirkt es hier wie eine Marotte des Regisseurs. Die zentrale Frage lautet dagegen: Wie lange wird es dauern bis Eisenstein mit seinem Liebhaber im Bett landet? Ich habe Interviews gesehen, in denen Greenaway mit intellektuellen Aussagen zu eben diesem Film punktet. Eisensteins Lust, bei Greenaway wird sie zu professoralem Unterricht. Zweifellos hatten die starken Farben in Mexiko, das grelle Licht oder der Totenkult des Landes Einfluss auf Eisensteins Filme. Greenaway reduziert all das zu dummen Spässen und ist befangen in Klischees. Wir nehmen nichts mit, kein Verständnis für Mexiko und keine Liebe für die Kultur. Genauso erfahren wir nichts über Eisenstein und Que Viva Mexico! mehr auf cinegeek.de

Wow, quite an experience, visually and the story that opens before us. The main actors are wonderful, the camera work and settings are over the top. Want to see more from the is director.

The film's hyperactivity ultimately wears you down. Is it possible to give a movie Ritalin? "Eisenstein in Guanajuato" makes you want to try.

Greenaway succesfully combines his style and Eisenstein's to marvelously tell this story. However I don't he did it effectively or that this story is even worth telling.

Peter Greenaway's continuous wild & reckless theatrical-style.