This movie was made at the outset of WWII, under Roosevelt's "good neighbor" policy, aimed at winning Latin America's hearts and minds against the rising threat of fascism. There was strong sympathy at the time throughout the region for the Axis powers, specially for Franco, who was percieved by many as waging war against godless, priest-murdering communism. Roosevelt would have none of that.
What better story, then, than that of Benito Juárez, the destitute-born president who saved democracy fighting against French foreign rule from autocrat Louis Napoleon III's interventing troops and puppet regime in mid XIX century Mexico. A great politically-correct history lesson, tailor-made for the current menacing times. However, Hollywood had serious second thoughts about this film being made, most of them regarding Juárez himself.
Screenwriter Aeneas Mackenzie thought the movie wouldn't sell because Juárez's indian features resembled "a pithecantropus" while Maximilian and Carlotta were young, white and handsome. American audiences would have difficulty seeing the doomed couple as "bad guys", much less rooting for such an ugly hero. Not only that, Don Benito was rabidly anticlerical, a liberal freemason who took on the pope and nationalized all Church properties; Catholics at the box office wouldn't like that either. Warner Bros then hired a young John Huston to ammend the script: Juárez would carry a portrait of Lincoln at all times to make him more amiable, the Church would be written off, replaced by some imaginary "landowners", and Louis Napoleon's evilness would be emphasized by dark, contrasted, horror-movie-like lighting.
Even so the movie didn't do well, neither in the States nor in Mexico. There it was premiered in a gala screening at the Bellas Artes Palace, a rare honor for any film even today. The sequence where the American ambassador warns Napoleon against defying the Monroe Doctrine was suppressed altogether, and the finale, where Juárez apologizes to Maximilian at his coffin, drew loud protests from the audience. Mexican critics tore the film apart in their reviews, calling it a Hollywood sugarcoated version of Mexican history (it is) and an affront to national pride (it is not). In that sense, the movie's best intentions clearly backfired.
But is the movie that bad? Well, yes and no: it's your average Hollywood period romance. Wonderful sets and costumes but lots of preachy dialogue and not much historical truth. Then again, not many pictures at the time cared about those things. Bette Davis does an interesting Carlotta, Muni is a deadpan bore, and Claude Rains -as usual- steals the show (as Napoleon III). Oddly enough, the film had an influence on another quite different movie. Director Terence Young liked William Dieterle's filmmaking so much, he borrowed for 'Dr. No' the scene where Juárez is shown for the first time: one just sees his back while he speaks, and when someone asks his name, he turns around and says: "Juárez", giving him an air of mystery and awe. Young introduced his movie's main character the same way: you only see his hands playing cards at the casino table, then a gorgeous girl asks his name, the camera goes up and... voila!, a classic is born: "Bond, James Bond". Thank Juárez, Benito Juárez, for that one.
Benito Who?