Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Brightlyme i know i wasted 90 mins of my life.

Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

BigLaxFan94 I liked this film because it I think it was an accurate portrayal of how Pancho led his folks against the evils of the American government. I believe that Pancho was a hero because he fought for the rights and freedoms of the Mexican people. You can say that he was like a first class freedom fighter. That's just putting it lightly but the point is that he stood up and fought the United States tooth and nail because he hated what was happening to the Mexicans! I believe that Uncle Sam was trying to turn Mexico into another state but Pancho would have NO PART OF THAT! As far as I know, he simply wanted Mexico to be remain free, on its own and as far away from American influence as possible. Of course, that was a daunting task, even for Pancho. Others who've seen this film may beg to differ. They may look at Pancho as a villain who betrayed the Mexican people. But since I can only speak for myself, I think he fought FOR the people and NOT against them. If he fought against them, then trust me, the Americans wouldn't have gone after him to kill him. Furthermore he wouldn't have made so many enemies like the way he did throughout his tenure.But..... however........ this is why I gave this one a 7 out of 10.

hankhanks12345 I was only mildly interested in this movie when it came on HBO, but decided to watch it anyway. I was glad I did. I wouldn't call this a "great film" but it's certainly interesting, and portrayed a person and time that is not often depicted in mainstream movies.Antonio Banderas is in the tabloids a lot for a variety of reasons, and because of that it's easy to forget that he's actually a very good actor - something he demonstrates well in this film. The casting of "Panch Villa" is critical to the success of this film, and Banderas is able to create a character that is both full of bravado and yet, in certain ways, vulnerable too.One of the central themes of the movie is the ability of people to look at actual events or history as "entertainment," which makes this film sound like a boring lecture on the bad effects of modernity. However it's not at all.Parts of "And Starring" were a little draggy, but overall I enjoyed the movie and recommend it.

BirdmanT7 This was a film based on true events that you can actually happened between 1912-1916 during the Mexican Revolution. You can check it right here at IMDb just type Pancho Villa and see the results; there four short films were made where Pancho Villa starred as himself, but good luck finding those films. I sure like to see those and see how closeto the truth this film was. Over all this was a very impressive film for an HBO TV film, Antonnio Banderas did a great job, even thought he didn't look anything like Villa who was a short and small stature of a man and he actually looked a lot more like the actor "Damián Alcázar" who plays "Gen. Rodolfo Fierro" in this film; there is a close resemblance if you see the pictures of Villa and after all Alcazar is a real Mexican compare to Banderas who is from Spain. Both the photography and location of this film was just perfect, especially the photography and the great choice of location to be able to shoot in Mexico with a great cast of real Mexican extras who really added so much authenticity and depth to this film. Its really a pity Hollywood doesn't do more historical films like this, this film was only about the deal Villa made with Hollywood to shoot his revolution and yet there is so much more to be made into a film such as the Mexican revolution and history of Pancho Villa and Emiliano Zapata who changed the course of History in Mexico. Maybe one day people like Robert Rodriguez who some how gets so much money handed to them to make dumb films like "once upton in Mexico" (which was the most dumbest and awful film I have ever seen) decide to look into their own history and find there is so much more to be depicted for the younger generation of Mexicans who have never even heard of Pancho Villa.

Charles Herold (cherold) I was intrigued by the idea that revolutionary Pancho Villa appeared in one of the world's first docu-dramas, but not much was done with the idea. This movie could have been a satire of Hollywood's version of the truth or it could have brought Pancho Villa to life, but the movie does a little of one, a little of the other, but suffers from insisting on focusing on Thayer. Thayer comes across as too nice to fill the role of villain in a satire and too intelligent to play the role of a dupe, and he only sees Villa from the outside, unable to bring any insight to the character. There are interesting moments scattered here and there throughout the movie, and while it's bland it's watchable, I guess, but I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Although I will say, Alan Arkin was terrific in a small but colorful role.