Add a Review

  • Though ideal for a family audience, the tale is perhaps too slow to entice most young people today. No car chases. No sex. No unwarranted violence. It takes place in Spain at the end of an era where noble thoughts and deeds were rewarded instead of scoffed. It will bore the less cultured, who may find it laughable. Still, anyone not presented this story, especially in the way it is told here, is cheated. It is worth the experience, and I beg you to give it a chance to steal your heart as it did mine. Don Quixote 2000 is filled with humor and soul; a rare gem in today's violent and amoral cinema.

    Yes I know this was made for television. Still, it should be seen as a work of art, and a presentation of wondrous acting. It cannot be put in the same category with reruns of Starsky and Hutch. This version of Don Quixote has the makings of a classic.

    Of the many retellings of this story, this latest version for the new millennium is perhaps the most heartfelt and moving. The casting is extraordinary. John Lithgow was born for this role. He has repeatedly proven himself worthy for the part of a man of noble virtue and undying spirit, with eyes simultaneously clouded by dreams and crystalized in truth. Lithgow has proven himself worthy of the role of a man seen mad by those around him, while showing the audience he is more sane in what his heart and mind reveal. From Garp to Solomon, every day of learning for this actor has been working up to this performance, and he is still a powerful talent showing no signs of waning.

    This is not an easy role to perform. It takes someone with both Shakespearean and modern experience in acting. For it is very easy to present this character two-dimensionally as a madman, and to do so cheapens the role and the audience, as well as the actor. Lithgow rises to this challenge superbly. The tale of Don Quixote is not a tale of a mad man. It is the tale of a man crawling in a desert of mediocrity. His disillusionment is like that of a man crawling through a landscape of sand, reaching for mirages just at the horizon. He craves the sustenance of chivalry and adventure just as a man dying of thirst craves for water. He has drunk the glory of the library, and his mind seeks more adventure than can be found between the covers of a book. THIS is what the actor must reveal to his audience for this role to breathe true life. Quixote thirsts for knowledge, history, and rebirth of humanity, and prays to God that it be found in each one of us. This is the tale of the Last True Renaissance Man. Lithgow presents Quixote to us like a rare jewel in a golden crown, placed delicately upon a velvet pillow. He kneels before us and begs us to take the crown, and revel in the grandness and sadness of this most noble soul. His eyes! Lithgow's performance is so real and filled with emotion, humor, and wisdom. His eyes twinkle and awe at the true majesty of life and thought. We insult his honor as an actor and a gentleman were we to turn away.

    Hoskins is by contrast equally well-cast in his role as a simple man of simple ways and means, who falls into the disillusionment of Quixote's world. He does so willingly, and perhaps for the first time in all presentations of this story, we see a performance that does not put into question why Sancho tarries along with this alleged madman. He does so for the hope of a reward, but in the end he does so for the love and friendship of a comrade. For this role it would have been easy for Hoskins to coast and not show us more than the surface, but like Lithgow, Hoskins is an actor of rare breed. Seeing these two great talents working together is a cherished experience, not to be missed.

    The tale is always a painful one to experience, because we all long for a fulfillment of our dreams. Quixote does not listen to the naysayers surrounding them. He takes the bull by the horns, and stares down windmills in a way that we all wish we had to courage to share.

    It is slow. The pacing of this film is the weak link. The cinematography is point and click. The special effects revealing what Quixote sees are often unnecessary, and the apparent limitations of financial budgeting to the visual and auditory aspects of the presentation make it less than it could have been. However, this allows us to revel in the performance of the leads and supporting cast, which is where the true magic of this production lay. I have seen this story told with more exuberance and energy, but never have I seen it told so lovingly, like a mother wiping the sweat from a fevered baby's face. I strongly recommend this for family viewing. In a world where children's fare is rare to find, even the most conservative and religious among society could find no fault in this film.
  • rboon334558 February 2007
    This is a visually sumptuous film which treats its central characters with a gentle quirky humour that never completely destroys their dignity and humanity.It is an almost impossible task to reduce Cervantes classic novel to film, but I doubt if there will be a better attempt. The success is primarily due to the outstanding performances of John Lithgow as the Don and Bob Hoskins as Pancho Sanza and John Mortimer's script. Lithgow's Don has a dignified strength which balances his over active imagination while Hoskins tongue in cheek interpretation owes much to the human weaknesses that so many of us share.It took a little while for the film to gain pace but as compensation this adult production had an imaginative energy that brought to mind Shakespeare's Twelfth Night and a Midsummer Night's Dream-it was indeed a good "Knight's" entertainment!Not for the action film addict but willingly suspend your disbelief and connive with its reality as the Duke eventually did and you will certainly enjoy.
  • I wasnt surprised of John Lithgow's brilliant performance in this movie, because just as I heard that he's starring I understood right away that he'd be a perfect Don Quixote. There is a TINY little bit of Dick Solomon in him, if you pay close attention, you might notice it, and I think that's why the directors invited him for this role. Bob Hoskins is also a perfect Sancho, the whole character of his here (as well as Lithgow's) is as it was classically presented to us in books and pictures. Although he has a thick british accent, although he has no problems changing it, he speaks with it through the movie which is kind of unusual for a spanish man. :) Anyway, Mr. Lithgow, if youre reading this, I want you to know that youre the most perfect Don Quixote Ive ever seen on the movie screen!
  • Robert Halmi has made his living since the mid-1990s by making big-budget miniseries based on classic stories that focus on lavish, spectacular special effects. Most of the ones I have seen ("Merlin," "Alice in Wonderland," "A Christmas Carol") were good, though one ("Animal Farm") was pretty bad. Halmi's latest project, "Don Quixote," does not have especially great special effects, but that in no way detracts from the film's enjoyment. Both hilarious and even somewhat touching, this adaptation of Cervantes' famous tale of the madman who fancies himself a knight errant is highly entertaining and fun to watch. John Lithgow is fine as the Man of La Mancha himself, and most of his encounters with supposed giants and other enemies are very funny. Bob Hoskins, as his sidekick Sancho Panza, is hilarious. And plus, we have the beautiful Vanessa Williams to perk things up every now and then as Quixote's fantasy lady, Dulcinea. Yes, most of the Spanish characters speak in British or American accents, but does it really matter? Nothing, not even the lack of brilliant effects, make this film any less entertaning or enjoyable.
  • Don Quixote has notoriously defied attempts to film it. This is a solid little TV version. There's a decent script by John Mortimer - though he does make it a bit too much about old age - and good performances by Bob Hoskins as Sancho and, particularly, John Lithgow as Don Quixote. Lithgow is credited as producer; this was clearly a labour of love for him and he gives his all in portraying a complex and difficult character. But the film needs something else - either more of the book's broad comedy, or more magic. It's just a little too wistful and bland - it captures Don Quixote's sadness but not his force. Makes you regret that Terry Gilliam failed to complete his version, it should have been just his bag.
  • John Lithgow was brilliant most of the time although occasionally reverting to the typecast zany character he has so often played. The Don Quixote he portrays is, however, mostly spot on and that is refreshing if not unusual for a well established and well known novel character entering the screen. Bob Hoskins and Isabella Rossellini, on the other hand, disappointed. Bob Hoskins for humoring his master rather than simplemindedly conforming to the new world order, something which he did almost instantaneously by the end. Isabella Rossellini simply performed poorly thus disappointing simply for not living up to what could be expected.

    The effects were generally poor. Not that they need to be extravagant and cutting edge but because they were either poorly made or simply failed to convey any real meaning. In fact, corny.

    All in all an enjoyable Don Quixote in believable settings which, of course, Spain would have to be. Fairly true to the book. A lot is missing but that which is there is pretty precise and kudos for that. What astonished me the most was John Lithgow's likeness to the Wilhelm Marstrand (1810-1873: http://www.cwquijote.com/Mundo_Quijote/Pintura/Paginas%202/Pintura_Marstrand.html) highly praised illustrations of my copy of the book. Illustrations I have always found quite amusing.

    • Thomas Nielsen
  • Who would have thought John Lithgow would make such a great Don Quixote? He and the rest of the cast of this TV version are simply amazing. One of the best all-around jobs of acting by a cast I've seen in any movie. Plus, its the #2 selling story of all time after the Bible- can only get 1 better than that. All that said, there are some flaws in this TV version that are rather annoying. The most annoying of which is the "Ride off to the Sun" scene. I thought the way it was produced was completely wrong. And while the movie in general had good effects, that part's effects stunk. Also, the movie moves very slow at times. I gave it a 6/10, but without that one major mistake it would probably be about an 8.
  • gestes11 April 2000
    John Lithgow as Don Quixote is probably one of the best matchings that the film industry has ever had (ranks right up there with Jack Nicholson as The Joker). That, the scenery of La Mancha, and keeping things close to "true-to-story" are the only good things of the movie. Bob Hoskins did a decent job as Sancho, but his British accent ruined the effect. Also doing a decent job with her role was Vanessa Williams as Dulcinea, but again they should have found someone with more Castillian looks and accent. The Duke and Duchess wore clothing that did not fit the time to which the story took place. Don Quixote's adventures were well done and the special effects didn't ruin the movie as I had feared, but several well-known adventures, such as a fight with a caged lion, were noticeably missing. This makes me wish the movie was a two-part four-hour mini series. It is worth watching, but as with any story, the book is better.
  • I have just seen this movie and it was absolutely brilliant. The scenery, the actors the story which is pretty similar to the original Servantes book. John Lithgow is fabulous as the don, sometimes funny sometimes very serious and sometimes extremely shy. You cannot help but listen to him and you believe him more than the family who tell that the don has only dreams. When the prince and his wife (the beautiful - just like her mother - Isabella) make fun of him you can really hate them and want to help Quixote and Pansa. John Lithgow has played not just with his body but with his eyes too. His eyes. At the end he has practically no lines he just look at us and it is perfect. It was a beautiful story with a talented, real actors. Don't miss is if you like films that touch you heart and soul. I give 10 stars.
  • I should identify that I've never read Miguel Cervantes's novel about the man from La Mancha who fancies himself a knight-errant. But even so, Peter Yates's adaptation of "Don Quixote" is still a pleasant romp. John Lithgow plays the title character in pursuit of adventure, with Bob Hoskins as his naive but loyal squire Sancho Panza. Despite Quixote's obvious delusions, he never gives up his vivacity and love of adventure. Also starring Isabella Rossellini and Vanessa Williams. More recently, Terry Gilliam tried to make his own movie version, but production collapsed after less than a week.

    By the way, you might have seen the name also spelled Quijote. That's because the X spelling was the original version (which was pronounced kee-SHOH-tay), but then Castilian replaced a lot of X's with J's, and the SH sound got replaced with an H sound.
  • geof_5827 February 2010
    American and British luvvies have fun in southern Spain. I don't know what the Spanish think about this: The greatest work of Spanish literature turned into a Holy-Pinewood romp. The British actors got there doubtless by Easyjet, but although Lithgow is good at muting his American accent some of the others sound like they have strayed in from a beach in California. Still, one mustn't turn one's nose up at this. It is amusing even if camped-up in places. The terrible thing is it shows how just how unfortunate it was that Terry Gilliam's version got washed away. Here's a suggestion to people who enjoyed this film: read the book; and if your patience doesn't extend to this listen to the Jacques Brel version of the musical. This captures some of the pathos of the origin.
  • I am a big fan of John Lithgow, and this film is NO exception. his acting the part of a half insane old man was wonderful and that is not easy to do. i also love the way the made this classic story come to heart and they brought it out wonderfully with a great cast and good actors. the way it was made was acurate and was with the times. It just got me more that all the other don quixote movies out there, this one is unique and is really quite fun to watch for all ages. Bob hoskins, who also did a fabulous job on Hook, as well did a class act in Don Quixote. i just loved his character and how he humored the old man. i would definetly give this one an 8.
  • I really wanted to love this movie because of the classic it is based on, but I don't. I give this movie high points for accurately displaying the character. However, the movie itself wasn't quite good enough. I struggled to find a reason to actually care about Don Quixote and never was able to let myself like Sancho. Don Quixote's actions seemed more annoying and drawn out than comical or interesting. Giving the audience a good reason to like the characters and actually care about them should have been the filmmaker's primary goal. Unfortunately, it wasn't. The movie gave some tidbits such as when Don gave the children all of his money, but it never gave a solid reason to like him up front. I didn't hate the movie after watching it, and I did finish it, but I would never recommend it. Also, the visual effects were not that great. I could have easily forgiven that if the overall quality was better, but it really stuck out like a sore thumb when combined with my lack of interest in the movie.
  • (2000) Don Quixote COMEDY ADVENTURE

    Made-For-tv from Hallmark adapted from the novel by Miguel de Cervantes y Saavedra, about a delusional senile old man, and as a result of reading many mythical fantasy story books, and he's played by John Lithgow also credited as "co-executive producer" he consistently believes himself to be a knight fighting dragons and wizards. For almost two whole hours viewers get to share his illusions about his fantasies which he thinks are real as opposed to what's not there. I like John Lithgow and Bob Hoskins as actors but this film doesn't do anything for them. Vanessa Williams and Isabella Rossellini also stars as she plays "The Duchess.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I THOUGHT THIS MOVIE WAS GREAT! This movie is one of the few movies that actually stick to the book, with only a few minor changes! The movie is about Alonso Quixada, an old gentleman who loves reading about chivalry. The books of chivalry change his mind, so he escapes from his home to become a knight-errant, despite his niece and housekeeper's pleas to keep him at home. Alonso, who has renamed himself Don Quixote de la Mancha, takes Sancho Panza, his neighbor, as a squire. Together, Don Quixote on his horse and Sancho Panza jauntily riding on his donkey, encounter many adventures. For example, once, Don Quixote mistakes windmills to be giants. When he rushes towards the "giant" and is about to strike "the giant," despite Sancho's saying that it is just a windmill, his breath is knocked out of him. When he sees that the giant is really a windmill, he blames and curses the "great magician 'Malfatto'" who is really made up in his mind. While this is happening, Quixote's friends, the curate and the barber, his niece, and his housekeeper seek for ways to make Quixote realize his foolishness. The curate enlists the help of his nephew, Sampson Currasco, to help him cure Don Quixote of his foolishness. Sampson sets out to find Don Quixote and bring him back to his senses. The first time, he pretends to be a knight and tries to win a joust with him. However, Sampson loses. After Don Quixote wins, he sets out for the palace of the Duke and Duchess. There, he is entertained by them. However, he is merely a joke to them. The Duke and Duchess play many jokes on them. One day, the "knight of the mirrors," Sampson Currasco, demands to have a joust with Don Quixote. The terms are that if Quixote loses, he will have to return to his hometown and have no more adventures. However, if Quixote wins, the "knight of the mirrors's" fate is in his hands. This time, Sampson wins, and Don Quixote returns to his hometown. There, he lives until he dies peacefully.

    The casting of this movie was great. All the actors portrayed the characters very well. John Lithgow was very able in portraying Don Quixote, and so was Bob Hoskins as the potbellied Sancho Panza. I must say that Amelia Warner as Don Quixote's niece was my favorite character. Amelia's beauty and heartfelt acting really made a spark to her character.

    All in all, I give this movie a 10+. This movie is really one of the best, and I liked the fact that it sticked to the book really well. Enjoy the movie!
  • kirtil-11 May 2002
    If you are looking for stunning special effects and mind twisting turn out of events go watch something else. If what you want is to see beautifully portrayed characters with great actors and a nice heart warming story don't miss this. Even Vanessa Williams is great in this.
  • El Ingenioso Hidalgo Don Quijote de La Mancha and El Ingenioso Caballero Don Quijote de La Mancha are Spanish epic novels by Miguel de Cervantes, published in two parts, in 1605 and 1615. The tales of knights and adventures, far away from reality, create a version open to the imagination, giving space for everyone to create their own reality, like children in a fairy tale. John Lithgow as Don Quixote is one of the best matches that the film had and the magic is on, with endearing almost cartoonist effects, is a rare gem in today's violent boring-drama amoral CGI cinema. Enchanting retelling odd tale of a work of art, and a presentation of success due to the outstanding cast performances. Since it came out I have seen it several times and hope to see it again.
  • This is a handsome retelling of the odd tale about a man who wishes to be a knight in a time that has no use for knights. It is a fable about the desire to dream and use the imagination -- the desire to go beyond the bounds set by society.

    The cast is very good. Lithgow plays the sometimes-mad and sometimes-sane title character as a cross between a tragic figure and an over-the-top 3RD ROCK FROM THE SUN zany. Hoskins, despite his accent which seems totally out of place, is very amusing as the faithful sidekick Sancho.

    We all have giants, wizards, and windmills in our lives. Don Quixote is just able to see them better than most of us.
  • selt8628 February 2002
    I watched this in Spanish class, and I thought it was a very fun movie. It is very accurate (with a few minor changes) to the actual Cervantes novels, "El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha." John Lithgow plays Don Quixote very well, but Sancho could have used a better accent (Spanish not Scottish). And besides a few strange parts, it is a great movie to watch and time flies. I gave it 9/10.
  • wolflady-7725223 September 2022
    This was a fun movie. I am s foreign language teacher and wanted to show this to my students as we are learning about Hispanic history and literature however, I could not as there are sex scenes in the movie I was not aware of. There is no rating to warn against this. Unfortunately I had to turn the movie off because of such scenes. Could have been a good movie for the students to learn without such scenes. Am disappointed as I like the cast. Other than that I it was a good movie. I will have to watch and be more careful from now on about the ratings on the movies. I plan to watch the movie on my own later in full to enjoy it and see how it ends.
  • Alonso Quixano eats dinner with the Mayor once a month, walks to church once a week and is shaved by the barber every other day. He longs for more than this and it is his love for the tales of knights and adventures that sees him rename himself as Don Quixote and set out with sidekick Sancho Panza, to whom he has promised an island. Promising his love to the beautiful maid Aldonza (who he has renamed Dulchinea), Quixote sets out for four years of adventure, to spread his fame and prove himself worthy of the hand of Dulchinea.

    I wasn't sure quite to expect from this film. Primary in my thoughts was the fact that the source material is one of those things that is difficult to bring to film – and indeed I have recently seen the documentary on Gilliam's failed attempt to do so. That this was a TVM with a cast more famous recently for their television work, a director whose best work is behind him and a writer famous for Rumpole of the Bailey. All this conspired to suggest that what I would watch would be little more than a very slight romp for everyone involved in the south of Spain. To some degree this is true but I actually enjoyed the film more than I expected.

    Which is not the same as saying it is brilliant (as many have done here). Rather I found the film to be too long and deliberate, which did rather leave the material exposed as wanting. At its core I did find that the world of fantasy and aspiration around Quixote was pretty engaging for stretches of the film but it frustrated me the way that it seemed in no rush to really go anywhere. Had it had more depth and complexity in the characters then this might have been worth it, but as it was it left too much to the actors and didn't really bring up people beyond the obvious narrative development thereof. This was a shame because the performances were actually pretty good and deserved more to work with. Lithgow is the best example of what I mean. He gets the mix of madness and hope just right, producing a figure that is fun and engaging at the same time. However without the material to work with, he is left working as hard as he can but superficially – nothing wrong with that in itself but as the time runs on it does wear thin. Hoskins is similar – he is fun but his one-note turn does run out of steam with a lot of the film left to go. Rossellini and Williams are not that great and sort of drift around the edges, with the rest of the support doing so-so work.

    The direction is solid if not spectacular – perhaps showing a lack of imagination across the material as he tends to go for the easy effect when it comes. The use of southern Spain is a good choice and does give the film a sense of place that helps cover up for other faults. Overall then this was better than I expected but still not a great telling. It lacks complexity and plays a straight bat throughout – which becomes more and more of a problem as the overly-long running time exposes the weaknesses.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I will begin with a short digression: Though the book was published in two parts, the first in 1605 and the second in 1615, the story is by nature episodic and some episodes may have been published in the 1500's in periodicals. In Spain, as with most of Europe, these misadventures were the source of much derisive laughter and even disdain for the knight. The author encouraged this attitude -- at least in the beginning. Cervantes noticed his readers' reactions and noticed his imitators who wrote their own episodes for the knight-errant. He may have thought that the readers are missing part of this. I'm sure he thought his imitators were humiliating the knight far too much. This is supported by the second part of the book where the author has apparently changed in his view -- in fact their might be a slight hint of admiration for Uncle Alonso. There is the charm! Could this character have changed or even educated his own author? You decide. End digression.

    An ageing Spanish gentleman, Alonso Quixano, has an extreme fondness for books of chivalry. He read books of chivalry every waking hour. He liked them. He thought about them. Then he acted on them. He sold some land for funding and went to see his neighbor Sancho Panza, a peasant. After some prodding he was able to talk Sancho into being his squire and accompanying him on a quest. Alonso would change his name to Don Quixote de La Mancha, a knight-errant.

    First on the list is getting knighted. After all, one cannot knight oneself. This will be quite a task since the last knight in Spain was at least 120 years earlier and the feudal system has relaxed a bit since the eleventh century. However Uncle Alonso gets knighted as easily and quickly as if it was done every Saturday morning at the local convenience store.

    They have barely begun their journey, and not knighted yet, when they come upon some giants blocking their way. The noble knight immediately charges on faithful Rocinante, his horse, with lance lowered toward the villains. Of course the giants are really windmills and the arms are really the blades of the windmill. The lance is caught in one of the windmill blades and the knight is taken high in the air. ...Well, I can't tell whole story can I.

    The scenery and sets are beautiful and the cast is first rate. The ending is very close to the book. The book's ending is not like Man of La Mancha, the musical. That's all I can say about it or you'll hate me. Keep in mind that this is a founding work of Western Literature and one of the first novels. Cervantes was about seventeen years older than Shakespeare. Jousting anyone?
  • A touching story of a man and his dreams. Everyone else is trying to destroy the happiness he has... all his books (a library full) they say are causing him to have his "dreams", so they burn them all (all the books he has gathered over the years), and then seal the library off... a very touching movie... John Lithgow really breaks out of the character from 3rd Rock from the Sun... if you get the chance, record it... it's a great, CLASSIC film...
  • Dulcinea played by a black actress(nothing against Vanessa L Williams) The Duchess playing a foreign game(nothing against croquet) Costumes from the 19th century(nothing against a limited production design) Foreign accents(well, i don't care about accents, but that's another point to add) Etc. That sort of things proves the grade of fidelity of this project and make the spanish audience extremely esceptical about the result: There's absolutely no heart in it. I waited two hours to see the great Isabella Rossellini, but she is wasted with such a tiny role, although she solves it as a good professional. Finally I have to say Peter Yates' direction is stylish and elegant at times, good acting and an excellent score by Richard Hartly( I bought the CD!)
  • With his history of bizarro histrionics from "Buckaroo Banzai" to "3rd rock from the sun" John Lithgow would seem a plausible choice to play Miguel de Cervantes' impossible dreamer. Yet, he still somehow manages to overplay this larger than life character (he'll probably win an Emmy anyway.)

    Because it's from the producers of "The 10th kingdom" it comes loaded with cheesy F/X (e.g., windmills literally morph into giants) but that doesn't make it any more special.