Surprisingly incoherent and boring

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Blistering performances.

Christopher Columbus (Georges Corraface) is searching for support of his mission of exploration. He is certain of one sea connecting Europe to Marco Polo's discovery. The Portugese rejects him. King Ferdinand (Tom Selleck) and Queen Isabella (Rachel Ward) of Spain want to spread Christianity. Beatriz (Catherine Zeta-Jones) falls for Columbus. Inquisitor Father Tomas de Torquemada (Marlon Brando) interrogates him and his quest is rejected for countering religious doctrine. After getting royal acceptance, Columbus is able to convince doubting sailors and Martin Pinzon (Robert Davi) to support the voyage. Columbus faces sabotage, deprivation, brutality, and native revolt.The story is fit for a historical drama. There are good bits and pieces but the overall is not that good. It looks inferior. This came out around the same time as "1492: Conquest of Paradise". Neither are terribly good movies but at least 1492 has the look of an epic. Tom Selleck has no business playing the Spanish king. He's basically Magnum, P.I. with a jewel bedazzled coat. It's laughable. By comparison, Marlon Brando is nowhere near as bad. Georges Corraface is functional but he isn't the biggest name. There are a couple of familiar faces like Zeta-Jones and Benicio Del Toro. There is limitation to the intensity. This is not quite good enough.

My god, this Columbus kicks ass! Look, he's not apologizing! Look, he is not glorifying Islam! Look, he's not lamenting the evil of white people! Look, he's not a whimpering, deceitful wretch!In other words, this film is nothing like Ridley Scott's politically correct pile of rubbish about the discovery of America.This Columbus is confident, unapologetic, full of spirit. He does not weep and doubt himself in every scene. He's not a confused, indecisive fat git. Nor is he an evil murderer. He represents the spirit of Europe. He feels proud just as the filmmakers want us to feel proud of being Europeans. That's why I give it ten stars. On purely artistic grounds, it's no great achievement, despite its budget and solid cast.

Corny, goofy, and with some of the worst non-acting you ever saw: It doesn't get much worse than Tom Selleck as an effete fop. Try and hear him say "Por-too-gahl" without busting out laughing.Or Rachel Ward playing Queen Isabela as a shallow minded slut who gives Columbus money because she was horny for him. Seriously, this film claims that! Try and reconcile that with the real life history: Isabella was a sharp, powerful queen who presided over the uniting of her nation, and one of the most devout Catholics to ever be on the throne. There's good reason she's called Isabela La Catolica and the Defender of the Faith.And Columbus as a supposed charming rake? (Actually this actor comes across as a conceited ass in love with his own reflection.)Oh yeah, and showing his wife as a hot young thing...Columbus married a widow older than him, for her money.Please! Columbus was a driven, obsessed religious fanatic who thought the world was coming to an end in hislifetime, a believer in The End Times who thought he would play a role in Arrmageddon.Which, of course, is the worst thing the film does. It whitewashes genocide, doesn't show Columbus as the man who killed at least 800,000 Taino Indians, chopping off hand if they didn't give him enough gold, handing over Indian girls for his soldiers to rape as rewards for jobs well done, feeding Indian bodies to his dogs, and personally raping Indian women and enslaving both Indians and Africans. And he went to prison in Spain, for falsely imprisoning and torturing Spaniards.Skip this travesty and see the far better films, Surviving Columbus or Columbus Didn't Discover Us. And unlike this sanitized fiction, these two films are the truth. And you can find them for free on Youtube.

I had a wonderful time watching this film. I know it's considered by some to be inferior in comparison to the more lofty Conquest of Paradise, but I just can't help liking it. I'd rather watch Christopher Columbus: The Discovery over The Conquest of Paradise any time. It's a swashbuckling high-adventure movie with plenty of panache. Perhaps that wasn't what many expected from a Columbus movie, but it works for me. One previous reviewer said it seemed like something Erol Flynn would have starred in. I agree. I first approached this flick as an entertaining tall-tale in the tradition of classic adventure/pirate films and greatly enjoyed The Discovery.