The movie Alive (1993), while emotionally impactful, takes significant liberties with the truth of the 1972 Andes plane crash and the subsequent ordeal of the Uruguayan rugby team. While accurately portraying the central events of the crash and the group’s descent into desperation, it simplifies characters, exaggerates specific incidents, and downplays certain crucial survival strategies employed by the survivors.
The Andes Disaster: A Cinematic vs. Historical Perspective
Alive attempts to capture the unimaginable horror and resilience displayed by the 45 passengers aboard Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571. The film, based on Piers Paul Read’s book Alive: The Story of the Andes Survivors, focuses on the crash itself, the harsh environmental conditions, the difficult decision to resort to anthropophagy (cannibalism) for survival, and the eventual rescue of 16 survivors after 72 agonizing days. However, to enhance dramatic effect and streamline the narrative, the film deviates from historical accuracy in several key areas. These deviations, while perhaps understandable from a cinematic perspective, can create a misleading impression of the survivors’ experiences and the choices they made.
Character Portrayals and Simplified Narratives
One of the most significant areas of divergence lies in the character portrayals. The film condenses the complex personalities and relationships within the group, often portraying individuals as archetypes rather than nuanced human beings. While certain individuals like Nando Parrado and Roberto Canessa, who ultimately made the perilous trek to seek help, are highlighted, the contributions of others are often minimized or omitted entirely. Furthermore, the film sometimes conflates or invents conflicts between survivors for dramatic tension, creating a skewed perception of the group’s dynamics. The reality was far more intricate, involving delicate negotiations, shifting alliances, and shared responsibilities for survival.
Exaggerations and Omissions
The film also exaggerates certain events for dramatic effect. The avalanche scene, for instance, is depicted with more ferocity and destruction than documented by survivors. While the avalanche was undoubtedly a devastating blow, the film amplifies its impact to heighten the sense of peril. Conversely, the film often downplays or omits crucial details that contributed to the survivors’ ability to endure. The survivors’ ingenuity in constructing makeshift tools, their organized rationing system, and their collective efforts in melting snow for water are often overlooked or given insufficient attention. The film frequently focuses on the sensational aspect of cannibalism, while minimizing the broader context of their desperate struggle for survival in a hostile environment.
The Ethical and Social Dimensions of Survival
The decision to resort to cannibalism is understandably the most controversial aspect of the Andes survival story. The film Alive attempts to depict the moral and psychological anguish associated with this choice, but it often simplifies the complex ethical considerations involved. The survivors, faced with starvation and the near certainty of death, ultimately agreed to consume the bodies of the deceased passengers, justifying their decision as a means of survival and honoring the sacrifice of the fallen. This decision was made after intense deliberation, prayer, and a profound sense of desperation. The film, while acknowledging the internal conflict, sometimes portrays the decision as more spontaneous and less carefully considered than it actually was.
The Importance of Faith and Leadership
While often underplayed in the film, faith played a significant role in the survivors’ ability to cope with their ordeal. Many of the survivors were devout Catholics, and their faith provided them with a source of comfort, strength, and purpose during their darkest hours. The film alludes to this, but it doesn’t fully capture the depth of their religious convictions and the role it played in sustaining their hope.
Furthermore, the film often focuses on the individual heroism of Parrado and Canessa, while overlooking the importance of collective leadership within the group. Several individuals stepped forward to provide guidance, support, and organization, contributing to the group’s overall resilience. These leadership roles were often fluid and informal, but they were essential in maintaining morale and ensuring the group’s survival.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
FAQ 1: How long were the survivors stranded in the Andes?
The survivors were stranded in the Andes Mountains for 72 days, from October 13, 1972, when the plane crashed, to December 22, 1972, when the last survivors were rescued.
FAQ 2: Did all the survivors agree to cannibalism?
No. While a consensus was eventually reached, there was initial resistance and moral debate among the survivors regarding the consumption of the deceased. It was a decision made out of sheer desperation after exhausting all other options for sustenance.
FAQ 3: How accurate is the avalanche scene in the movie?
The avalanche scene in Alive is exaggerated for dramatic effect. While an avalanche did occur and claimed more lives, the film portrays it as more destructive and immediate than documented by the survivors.
FAQ 4: Was the crash really caused by pilot error?
The official investigation concluded that the crash was caused by a combination of pilot error and poor visibility due to weather conditions. The pilot miscalculated their position and descended prematurely, leading to the collision with the mountainside.
FAQ 5: How far did Nando Parrado and Roberto Canessa walk to find help?
Nando Parrado and Roberto Canessa trekked for approximately 10 days and covered around 38 miles (61 kilometers) across the treacherous Andes Mountains to reach Chile and find help.
FAQ 6: Did the survivors have any medical training?
Yes. Roberto Canessa was a medical student, and his knowledge proved invaluable in treating injuries, amputating infected limbs, and providing basic medical care to the other survivors.
FAQ 7: What did the survivors use to melt snow for water?
The survivors used metal pieces from the wreckage and even sunglasses to focus the sun’s rays and melt snow for drinking water. They also developed a system of collecting snow and melting it inside the plane’s fuselage.
FAQ 8: How did the survivors communicate with the outside world before the rescue?
The survivors found a functional transistor radio in the wreckage. They were able to receive news broadcasts and eventually learned that the search for them had been called off.
FAQ 9: What happened to the bodies of the deceased passengers?
The survivors made a pact that whoever died would be used as sustenance by the others. The remaining bodies were eventually buried near the crash site by the survivors before their rescue.
FAQ 10: Did the survivors face legal repercussions for their cannibalism?
No. The survivors were never prosecuted for their actions. The Uruguayan authorities and the Catholic Church recognized the extreme circumstances and understood that their actions were necessary for survival.
FAQ 11: Where is the crash site located today?
The crash site is located in a remote area of the Andes Mountains between Argentina and Chile, near the Tinguiririca Volcano. It is a difficult and dangerous place to access.
FAQ 12: What lasting impact did the Andes survival story have on the survivors?
The experience profoundly impacted the survivors, shaping their perspectives on life, death, and the human capacity for resilience. They have become symbols of hope and determination, sharing their story to inspire others to overcome adversity. Many have dedicated their lives to helping others and promoting human connection.
Conclusion
Alive, while a compelling cinematic rendition of the Andes survival story, should be viewed with a critical eye. While it captures the essence of the tragedy and the survivors’ desperate struggle, it takes liberties with the truth for dramatic effect. By understanding the deviations from historical accuracy, viewers can gain a more nuanced and accurate appreciation of the extraordinary resilience, courage, and complex ethical dilemmas faced by the survivors of the Andes plane crash. The true story of the Andes survivors is far more compelling and nuanced than any film adaptation can fully capture.