It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

At a time when most of America was idealizing the rain forrests and its inhabitants in films (i.e. "The Emerald Forrest"), this movie gave a harsh, gritty and unapologetic view of "the situation on the ground" living among the indigenous people of the Amazon. It contrasts the lives and motivations of a group of N. American fundamentalist missionaries sent to the Amazon to convert the locals, with the concept of the world and humanity from the point of view of the indigenous inhabitants forced to encounter these "new" people; both of whom are ultimately used and/or discarded by the ever-encroaching settlers and prospectors with the tacit blessing of the government. At times a bit cliché (the "love scene" between Darryl Hannah and Berringer as a prime example) and at others very inappropriate (there were scenes with minors that could have been dealt with using far more subtlety and in much better taste) the film does a good job overall in showing there simply is no room for wistful romanticism about the current situation in the Amazon basin.

Led by the director of "Kiss of the Spider Woman" and starring an amazing cast, this epic of three hours goes to show something that some of us might have seen in another film. Better and shorter than "At Play in the Fields of the Lord", the awarded "The Mission" (1986) presented the conflict between Portuguese and Spanish explorers in the 18th Century for the control of lands in the Brazil-Paraguay areas and in the middle of all that there was the Catholic Church trying to convert the Indians who lived there, trying to save their innocent souls from hell. And there was also the ones who saw in these natives a way to explore their hard work, and many of these natives were killed simply because they refused to be part of this; they had their lifestyle and didn't need to contribute for the so-called progress brought by the white man. Babenco takes this premise and brings into the 20th Century; so, instead of European nations taking over the land there's corrupt businessmen who want to kill the natives to take their gold and the rubber that's present on the land. Their salvation is on the hands of American missionaries (John Lithgow, Daryl Hannah, Kathy Bates and Aidan Quinn) who are teaching the Catholicism to them; and a former mercenary (Tom Berenger) who is Half-Indian, and he decides to join the natives after being accepted by them as being a god that came out of the sky (after an incident where he jumped from his plane using a parachute).And do you think those missionaries learned the lesson about letting the Indians preserve their own culture instead of "planting" new concepts on their heads? Of course not! What makes this epic different from Roland Joffe's classic is not only the period both stories occur but also that in this film we have time to hear what the Indians have to say about the white man, that aspect was left out in 1986 film which caused some controversial to the film. Here, the tribe that was supposed to be destroyed by Berenger's character is completely opposed to relations with the missionaries, believing they bring diseases to their community (and they're right). However, if giving voice to the Indians was a good aspect that diverged from "The Mission" this film couldn't touch its greatness in terms of quality of the performances and the story, that goes overlong, with too much time to present to us how different the cultures are, that sort of thing made for the audience to relate with the missionary couple (Bates and Quinn) and their son (Niilo Kivirinta) trying to get used to the jungle. Joffé's film is a great History lesson; this one is a pure adventure.There's a sense that the film tries to please its audience so much but it doesn't work all so well with some spectacular sequences, the good music by Zbigniew Preisner and the stellar cast. The latter only having good performances from Tom Waits and the always excellent Nelson Xavier who plays a priest who understands better than anyone what happens in this danger zone. The famous stars from this, well, they act too much and you can't trust them while playing those characters. There's times when you see their faces and you'll go "Oh, it's that guy from that other movie!" They simply don't disappear into the character.I enjoyed this film because of its story and its message of learn to respect other cultures that aren't evolved like ours. Not to mention that even in its three hours the movie never gets boring, never gets uninteresting and actually goes quite fast.Problematic, flawed and not much full or rich in its content, "At Play in the Fields of the Lord" even with all these troubles, manages to be a visually beautiful film that deserves some recognition. Watch it more for its entertainment purposes than for its political and artistic contexts. 9/10

I viewed this on cable 3 years ago when seeing that it was going to be shown the same night I saw the ad. I had heard of this film,briefly,but never knew what it was about. After watching from start to finish I can honestly say,bravo! Bravo for it's fine acting,it's scenery and it's truthful depiction of life as the Native's know it.Every actor,including the young extras,does a superb job. Cathy Bates' performance was the stuff Oscar wins are made from. John Lithgow (5 years before 3rd Rock From The Sun) reminds us why he was a movie actor first,before doing a series.Some folks,I know,have trouble or are uncomfortable with the nudity shown in the film. In this day and age it takes a smart,responsible parent to explain the reasons for this being in the film to any child watching. If your concerns are that great,you should wait until your child is older to see this.If you want to be honest as you can,the best thing you can say is,"that's just how things are where those tribal people live". There's a great difference ladies & gentlemen between what's shown here and straight out child exploitation for devious purposes.The scenes depict how the young boy in the movie wants to fit in with the other boys (as we all want to fit in with others here at home)in his new jungle home. Since this is their custom there,the boy does this to be "one of them" and not be felt an outcast.In my own personal view,anyone who has a problem with "simple,non--sexual" nudity,has no right calling themselves "grown-up".Once again,if you view this with your children,be fully ready to explain things they may not understand. Otherwise,let them grow up a little and then maybe you can all watch this masterpiece together.(END)

This is one of my all time favorite films. There are many sad underpinnings to this film and it is difficult to watch without crying. Still, while I highly recommend it, the truth of its subject on missionary attempts to save the souls of "so called" savages often makes me sick! The self righteous who think nothing of destroying cultures in the name of their god is a sad tale but true. It has been going on for centuries and still happens today. On another sad note, I have been trying to buy the DVD for over 5 years and it's still not available. Can anyone tell me why you can buy garbage on DVD everyday of the week and yet an outstanding film with superb directing, acting, scenery and story has not been transferred to digital?