User Reviews

I had to watch it for a class project and it's possibly the worst movie 've ever watched (and i've watched awful things) technically it doesn't worth a s*** and the plot is a "version" of Franco's life, totally and absolutely fascist, from the beginning to the end. You could think that it would be interesting from the historical point of view, but it's only a one side version of the history, and we've seen too much of that side during 40 years, i don't agree with that version at all but for disgrace, in Spain, some people still thinks like that, and tries to make everyone to think this. And if not, well you can imaging how many people had to go out of the country with Franco, so, would you like to had to do that? what would you do if your brother makes you to travel to another country just because you have a different point of view?? so if you want to take a siesta, or a headache, watch it. but please, DON'T Believe IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reading some of the comments about this truly awful and pathetic piece of fascist apology, I was considerably shocked.

'Raza', written by the dictator Franco himself, is nearly a Freudian reconstruction of the Franco family history mixed with a really difficult to stand glorification of the fascist, falangist version, symbolism. Nevertheless, one has to admit that the screenplay has splendid, unintentionated, humor moments (the comments about the almogaveres are really one of those moments to be present in any compilation of absurdities).

Even recognizing that Saenz de Heredia was a good director, in the technical way of speaking, he was not Leni Riefenstahl. More than sixty years later this film just can be look as an interesting piece of archelogy.

The film was written by Franco a military dictator who's "crusade" left 2 million deaths. It is his equivalent of Mein Kampf and filmed as fascist propaganda

When you watch this movie, or read other users comments, please bear in mind the true history of the Spanish civil war.

The 30's started with the end of the 7 year military dictatorship by Primo de Rivera who failed to solve the numerous social and economic problems. The king, Alfonso VII, left on voluntary exile as he recognized the lack of support from the majority of the Spanish society.

What followed was the reinstatement of the Spanish democracy, bear in mind the first Spanish constitution was written in 1812. The initial elections where won by the left, however after less than 2 years the various problems led to elections being called again and a coalition of right wing parties won the majority but it was just as unsuccessful as the left wing government.

The republic, as the Spanish democracy was called, tried to tackle the different social and economic problems, among which we have the dominance of the countryside by landlords and the army overburdened by an excess of officers. The Catholic church was also blamed for preaching conservative thought at a time when deep reforms where necessary. The republic, being secular, endeavored to curtail the power of the church in government areas, particularly public education and cut on subsidies.

They were turbulent times. There was a military upraising that failed and was later followed by a general strike and workers revolt that failed too. In the meantime a strong Anarquist movement hand grown in industrial Barcelona. The communist where a political minority, the left being mainly represented by the Socialist party. On the other side of the political spectrum the Spanish Falange, akin to the Nazi party, was a minority.

The military organized another coup, this time with the involvement of the highest generals and the uprising was immediately backed by the Falange, the landowners, the church and conservatives. However the upraising failed in the main cities and industrial areas, it succeeded only in conservative rural areas. This was mainly due to the government giving weapons to labour unions and left wing parties who were organized and quick to respond to the military coup. In Barcelona the Anarquists used their new power to carry out their political agenda, an Anarquist revolution. The communist party surprised everyone by how well organized and pragmatic they were, forming one of the few truly effective fighting forces.

In the meantime, Franco, with the support of the Italian and German fascist leaders who sent troops, equipment and in particular planes, managed to get the trained and experience north African troops from Morocco, moors included, into the peninsula, even though the Navy remained loyal to the Republic.

Great Britain however, in their appeasement policy towards Hitler, did not support the republic as it would mean fighting Hitler, and convinced France to follow suit and established an embargo. The USA washed its hands too, but did not stop Texaco from supplying Franco with all the necessary oil, including that which had been paid by the republic. Only Communist Russia agreed to support the republic, in particular by selling arms and sending training instructors. This support from Russia and the exemplary discipline of the communist led many to join them and they grew significantly during the civil war to became an important party, though the left wing conservatives where still the majority.

In the meantime up to 150.000 people from all over the world came to fight fascism in Spain in what was later considered a prelude to the Second world war. The Lincon brigade was mainly US citizens, but there was also the Garibaldi (Italians) and a German brigade which surprised many who where used to being dive bombed by the Luftwafe; remember Picasso's masterpiece "el Guernica".

The initial chaos had seen citizens taking arms and different labour unions being responsible for the defense as the remaining army was not trusted much. However, with time the Republic managed to organize a new army and take back control from the unions. The Anarquists in Barcelona resisted, as it would be the end of their revolution and for a few weeks fighting went on in Barcelona.

The republic did not control enough rural areas to feed the population, and the economic embargo led to extreme food rationing and the lack of arms supplies and experienced troops meant its army was not effective enough to fight back and only managed to slowdown the revolt and successfully defend Madrid, which never fell.

Franco, who had come to power after the accidental death of the coup leaders and the success of its African troops, had an effective combat force and arms supply. Inch by inch they gained control of the country in a 3 year civil war that left 2 million dead.

The war was very bloody, at a time where people thought ideologies could solve the worlds problems. Though Great Britain gained mining rights as a result of their lack of support to the Republic, they and France would pay dearly when a couple of years later Hitler changed his attention to them, and it was only thanks to the 20 million dead Russians that he was defeated.

In my opinion, though Franco turned out to be a benevolent dictator, he did not outdo all the damaged done by the war, and only after his death, with a democracy, has Spain realized its true economic and social potential.

For more information please go to wikipedia.

Have you ever seen a Commmunist movie? Have you ever seen a Nazi movie? If you say "yes" for one of this questions, then you know what you will watch if you rent or buy "RAZA". The movie was directed by the impersonal director of the Franco´s fascist and dictatorial regime Sainz de Heredia, who was cousin of one of the most important ideological men of the only legal party in those times: Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera. The movie is glorify tale about military men against democratic men in Spanish Civil War times. If you don´t know the result of that war: Franco won the war with Hitler´s help, and wrote this movie in 1940 when he was Dictator in chief in Spain. The movie is so bad, that you laugh a lot in some scenes: The Father of the protagonists speaking about death in battlefield: "It´s a honor!! It´s wonderful die for your country!!". The Father, later, dies fighting against United States of America... and dies with a big smile in his face. All a movie of fascist glorification: The democratics are portrayed like bad people, that kill the priests, and steals the bread...

I say you once more time... DON´T SEE THIS BAD MOVIE!!! YOU COULD BECAME A NAZI AFTER THAT... OR DIE OF LAUGHING ATTACK!!

In the early 40s, Franco looked at Hitler or Mussolini as his guides... he wanted to achieve the same that his allies during the Spanish civil war have attained in their own countries. Franco also wanted his own Riefenstahl-like propaganda. So this film tries to be that, filled with the distorted and Manichean view of reality that was the rule in Spain under Franco's rule. The film has some historical interest, not for historical facts, but for the people interested in fascist propaganda during the 40s. It might shed some light into the simple-minded view of the world of the Spanish dictator, who was responsible for the script. The facts shown here are post war half-trues and lies, typical "history written by the victors"

For years I wanted to take a look at this movie, curious by all the mythology that has been built around it. I have laughed a lot with certain reviewer who compares this monumental and infantile piece of trash to Triumph of the Will, as if giving himself some credit as a movie-cultured buff. I have seen Riefenstahl's film two or three times, and I admire her unquestionable talent as a filmmaker. In fact, Olympiad is one of my favourite films for its visual beauty and choreographic editing.

Now, about this jewel here... The story is so laughable that not even the illustrious screenwriter Mr Franco -I wonder why he used a phony name in the credits: was he afraid of his own censors perhaps?- would ever believe it. It is curious to see Alfredo Mayo -one of the best Spanish supporting actors of all time- wasting his talents in this filth. But since he made another two Franco propaganda films around that time, I guess he was an acolyte. Fortunately, a few decades later he would work with Carlos Saura, leaving at least a few good, respectable films behind him to be remembered for.

Not a bad film in the technical features, well shooted and with some good acting, mostly from José Nieto in the role of Pedro Churruca Jr (the bad brother later redeemed by doing treason to his previous comrades and returning to the "right" track).

Sáenz de Heredia was a good director, one of the top names of Spanish cinema, and He has much better pictures than this one.

Anyway, the script (based on a novel written by Franco) is very partial, and depicts the enemy as bloody thirsty avengers who want to destroy everything that is "good" and "pure" (to be fair the rebel side, commanded by Franco, killed at least as much people as the other - and possibly more - during the war, and when the war was over, the dictatorship created by Franco continued to killing people from the prisons for another ten years! So when you see Raza try to put things in their right terms. This is a movie made from the winner's point of view, so you better don't take the political side too seriously if you want to understand the real situation of Spain in the last years of the 19th century and the first forty years of the 20th.

First of all, I want to clear up something: I love Britain. I love the British people. In many aspects, I feel British. (You could put the music from "West Side Story" to this affirmation: "I feel British, oh so British..."). I´m a citizen of the world. But I cannot help feeling indignant when someone tries to pull my leg, as some British character like pseudo-historian Paul Preston or so is attempting to do.

I don´t want to be boring, but I must insist about my age. I was born in 1919, so I DO know the era that "Raza" deals with. Everything that the film says is true, although it is presented in a very mild and benevolent way. The pursuit against the Catholic church is true. The hate of militiamen towards priests, monks, nuns and Catholic people in general is true. The shootings in the red zone (and the word "red" is not offensive - the left-wingers called themselves that way) are true. (For a better information, I recommend the books written about the subject by the former member of the GRAPO Pío Moa.) Believe me, I DO KNOW SOMETHING.

I want to set the record straight: I don´t like to speak badly about ANYONE, but the Truth is my best friend and I must be faithful to it. The thing is that we are talking about a film. I´m completely against Communism and that doesn´t prevent me from liking "Potemkin". I´m not a Nazi, but I like "Triumph Of The Will". And "Potemkin", judging by what I have read about the subject, is very inaccurate from a historical point of view; "Raza" isn´t. It is a no-nonsense picture. But most of all it´s a very good movie: the actors are wonderful (particularly Ana Mariscal - what a woman!), the direction is impeccable and the semi-documentary tone of the whole work is successful. I´ll say it again: the assassination of the monks on the beach is among the best cinematic scenes I have ever seen, and I cry every time I watch it. Because, unfortunately, that was only (sorry to say) too true. The fact that I´m a certain age doesn´t make me dodder or drivel, thank God.

Other films, like "La Caza", "Furtivos" or "El Espíritu De La Colmena", have tried to tell a different story, but the degree of success is uneasy: "La Caza" (one of whose leading actors, by the way, is the great Alfredo Mayo, the protagonist of "Raza") is a good film (maybe the best film of Carlos Saura, which is not saying much), but it´s not a film about the war, but rather about the aftermath of the war, and it doesn´t reflect at all a reality; those facts didn´t exist in the 60s (or, at least, they were not a general attitude). And as for "Furtivos" or "El Espíritu De La Colmena", they also depict a society later than the war (not the war itself, and still less the pre-war) and, for all their fame and prizes, they are (from a strictly cinematographic and non-political point of view) small pieces of blatant rubbish.

Before I say goodbye, I must stress something: hate is not a good advisor. And profanities and obscene language are no good, especially when headed for someone who is dead and therefore cannot defend himself. Please, let´s calm down a little bit. May people read good books and learn the truth. I hope that, as in Charles Laughton´s great film "Night Of The Hunter", love ends up defeating hate. God bless you.

Very interesting work to know the point of view of spanish national ideology. Franco supposedly wrote the script of this mediocre film. Indispensable to understand certain things of the Spanish Civil War.

Absoluty awful. Pure fascism

The movie was filmed when Spain, after the Civil War, was suffering a brutal genocide carried out by the victorious fascist and dictatorial side. And this movie is one of the first attempts to justify that genocide.

In any civilized country, after a civil war, there are amnesties and agreements in order to rebuild the country. That did not happen in Spain: the fascist dictator Francisco Franco, author of the pseudonymous novel, decided that it was necessary to exterminate all the republican, democratic and constitutional side survivors. This Spanish sad history period is known outside Spain as "The White Terror". In fact, Spain is the second country in the world with more mass graves. Those were years of forced labor camps, mass executions in villages, abuses and tortures, not to mention rotten justice and politics. How to justify all this postwar barbarism in the years to come? Starting with this movie.

This film represents, in a not very disguised way, an attempt to justify the unjustifiable, while fascist values are extolled.

The characters are linear, mono-neuronal. Or white or black. Villains or angels. Of course, the opposites to the fascist regime represent the perfidious, evil and demonic characters.

Nobody should be surprised about the simplicity of the script. The genocidal dictator Francisco Franco was not exactly a brilliant person, apart from being uneducated and suffering from delusions of grandeur. He could be considered one of the most awkward military men in history. And the script is hand in hand with his intelligence: ridiculously simple and tendentious, wich, in the film, is reflected with declamatory dialogues and rigid performances.

Some years later, Spain became an ally of the United States. During the talks it was evident that it was necessary to erase the all the traces of genocide and crimes. A Ministry of Information and Tourism was created (euphemism of the Ministry of Censorship) and, as you can see by reading some user reviews, it worked. Many Spaniards are unaware of the genocide that occurred in Spain after the civil war. Some Spaniards swallowed fascist propaganda. And a few ignorant or mean Spaniards consider this movie/pamphlet an art masterwrok.

The political and judicial corruption, as well as some executions, lasted until the end of the dictatorship, in 1975, but the lies, the pain remain, as this eyesore film remains, considered the greatest disgrace of Spanish cinema.

And now I ask you: Would you watch a plain simple film based on a novel and script by Adolf itler justifying the Holocaust and extolling nazism? It's the same case.

Although perhaps this film helps you understand why the Francoism direct heirs, actually in government, refuse again and again to investigate the crimes of the Franco's fascist and genocide dictatorial regime and help the families of the victims to find the remains of their loved ones in the common graves.

This film has been mercilessly and unfairly ignored because of their ideological content and its historical and cinematographic values have been scandalously overlooked or dismissed. I think that its quality is excellent (take, for example, the scene of the murder of the priests on the beach, with that overwhelming view of the corpses softly caressed by the sea waves) and that (like in most of the films about the Civil War shot in Spain during the post-war years) what you see in it is enormously mild in comparison with all that really happened during that nefarious political period we know as the Second Spanish Republic. Sáenz De Heredia (one of the greatest and most shamefully under-under-under-underrated film directors in cinema history) proved once more that he was perfectly capable of telling a story as it must be told, and besides he surrounded himself with some of the best actors of the time, such as the wonderful Alfredo Mayo (the scene of his failed "shooting" is simply memorable), the beautiful and splendid Blanca De Silos, the equally good José Nieto, Raúl Cancio and the rest, but, most of all, I´d like to dedicate a special mention to that fabulous, gorgeous, intelligent, multi-faceted and talented woman that was the late Ana Mariscal (actress, writer, director and probably the sexiest spot-by-the-mouth artiste that there has ever been apart from Anne Francis), whose real-life brother, Luis Arroyo, plays the role of Jaime Churruca, the young murdered priest. Both the original book (written by Generalissimo Franco with the pseudonymous Jaime De Andrade) and the movie are small but truthful and REAL pieces of history and their quality is first-rate. Don´t let yourself influence by political or ideological prejudices: just see it and learn the truth, and keep on learning it afterwards. I beg you!

This great film is truly a labor of love, produced against all odds and despite many setbacks. It has been heavily censored, maligned, and attacked by powerful, racist groups operating throughout the world who hate the Spanish people. These groups attack this film because they fear that those who watch it will get a clear picture of what actually transpired in Spain during the criminal, anti-Spanish, pro-Soviet "Republic" surreptitiously imposed upon the Spanish nation in 1931.

Every open-minded, independent-thinking citizen will enjoy watching this film and learning to better appreciate the terrible sufferings Marxist barbarism inflicted on Spain before, during, and after the tyrannical, Godless "Republic." The film also demonstrates the need for the widely supported Crusade of 1936, which brought about the complete liberation of Spain from the claws of totalitarian Communism in April of 1939.

Regrettably, the film does NOT have great technical quality, but what can you expect from a film produced in 1942? Nevertheless, the viewer will appreciate the many artistic and historical qualities of this great Spanish film. Those who want the CENSORED and DEFAMED side of the Spanish Civil War story will undoubtedly appreciate "RAZA," a film thought to have been lost, but discovered in a film library in 1993.

RAZA is refreshing and revealing for those who sincerely believe that the truth always sets us free. I highly recommend it!

a great work by the spanish Saenz de Heredia.

a truly history about spanish civil war ( a fight against communism). Franco wrote the screenplay . The picture is in the style of "They died with their boots on"

fernando alonso barahona

autor de "Biografía del cine español" , "Antropología del cine "

To my way of thinking, nothing seems more inappropriate and inconsistent than labelling "Raza" as laughable or as a simple political pamphlet. OK, Sáenz De Heredia was no Leni Riefenstahl - and, in my humble opinion, and with all due respects to Riefenstahl and her work, he didn´t need to. Some people try to scrutinize each and every corner of both Generalissimo Franco´s book and Sáenz De Heredia´s film in a frantic search for data which can be degrading and negative to Franco without ever noticing a little bit of light, a little bit of ideals or at least something that is not mean or ridiculous. For most of these people, the great concepts that provide the backbone of the life of a military man - country, honour, sacrifice, ideals, etc. - are hollow and old-fashioned words without any value in these so-called modern times. That´s the characteristic point of view of the "progressive" who don´t know what to do or say when they get to the power or expose their alternative.

Those who think that this is a pro-Nazi film should notice that there isn´t any allusion to Hitler or the Nazism in the whole context of the movie (apart from the fact that they seem to be completely unaware of: Franco clipped Hitler´s wings when the latter tried to introduce his army in Spain). The Council of Spanishness took charge of the production of the picture and entrusted its direction to one of the best film directors in the history of cinema, José Luis Sáenz De Heredia, who was, effectively, cousin of the Founder of the Falange, José Antonio Primo De Rivera, but I don´t think this is a discrediting to make a movie, is it? Franco chose him from several directors and let him work with absolute freedom. The film was an outstanding success in those years of remarkable patriotism that followed the end of the Spanish Civil War. The greatest actors of the era were in it: Alfredo Mayo and the extraordinary Ana Mariscal were the leading performers alongside José Nieto, Blanca De Silos, Raúl Cancio and a terrific Julio Rey in the brief but pivotal role of the father.

"Raza" (both the novel and the film) must be placed in their time. And for their time they were what they had to be. The cinematic rubbish perpetrated by Ken Loach and Vicente Aranda ("Land And Freedom" and "Libertarias", respectively), about the heroic anarchist conscripts of the other side, seem much more grievous to me, who, as a war veteran born in 1919, lived that era. The purpose of "Raza" was to explain to the whole Spanish people the real history of a third of the century and many people believed in it because they had lived the history that way. So the film, seen with hindsight, is not anachronistic or ridiculous; it reflects perfectly the ideas and the feelings than made millions of Spaniards vibrate at that time. (Is there anything preposterous in the fact that a military man considers that dying for his country is something beautiful? Do the people of these days have the slightest idea of who the Almogavars were?).

The Churrucas, the family depicted in the film, is not Franco´s real family. The leading male character, José (Alfredo Mayo) is a frustrated sailor and an infantry officer with a brilliant career, but his adventures during the Second Republic and the Civil War don´t have anything to do with Franco himself. The antagonist, Pedro (José Nieto) may have some element that reminds us of Ramón Franco, but it is not a portrait of Franco´s younger brother, who was anything but an intellectual. Anyone who knows accurately Franco´s biography is perfectly aware that this is not an autobiographical work, but a labour of love which must not inspire us with despise but be considered a reliable portrait of a forgotten Spain that nevertheless is a part of historical memory and roots. (By the way: do you think it´s laughable to see how a whole group of monks are murdered by the sea? These things really happened, believe it or not.)

The film, as a work, is magnetic; one of my favourite sequences is that of the front near Bilbao, when Capt. Echeverría (Raúl Cancio) is about to desert to see his wife and children but his brother-in-law, José Churruca, arrives in time to avoid it. And I like very much the scene in which José gets to arrive to the National zone after having been shot and presumed dead (there were more than one of those cases in the war), especially the moment in which we see a beautiful woman dressed as a man, who has had to pose as a male to be able to fight for what she believes in. (I think there is a sexy element in that segment.) And I like very much the scene of Pedro´s sacrifice and any scene Ana Mariscal is in.

If this film had been made in the United States and its action took place during the World War II, it would be considered more or less a masterpiece. But as it was made in Spain during Franco´s regime, it has necessarily to be a turkey. That´s the way it goes!

Propaganda isn't bad. Nor is it necessarily deceitful. Disregard the foolish reviews here, steeped in ignorance (apparently incapable of distinguishing between old shirt syndicalists, National Catholic crusaders, and Italian fascists) and brainwashed by the (ironically enough) deceitful propaganda narrative of the communists and globalists. Everyone who gave this movie a 1 out of 10 decided pre-emptively that they hated the movie and everyone in it and what it stands for. They've a right to hate, of course, but that doesn't mean they're right. Criticism against the United States? Yes. The Roman salute in a National Catholic application? Yes. Vindictive condemnation of the communists, Freemasons, and occult globalists that have spat at and hated Christ and His Church? Yes -this movie dares to tread where others dare not whisper. What's more is, as an original expression of the Spanish State it was created in, it reveals and presents the authentic sentiments and philosophies of National Catholicism -NOT fascism, NOT national socialism, and absolutely NOT syndicalism- standing as a shimmering beacon of truth against the tides of lies and falsehood spun about Spain and her people since 1978. People hate them either because they hate God or because they believe what they have been told to believe. The architects of that revisionist history, those who put the socialists in the heroic light, know that their narrative would fall apart if things like this were ever allowed to see the light of day. And for those who claim that syndicalism was the watchword: anyone who knows the ideologies of the parties knows that if Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera or his ideas had survived, they would have been rivals to National Catholicism in Spain. The Phalanx could only be allowed to survive as a servant to Spain, not the other way round.