Skip to main content

I don’t like fighting at all. I try not to do too much of it.

Cuba
(1979)

(SPOILERS) Cuba-based movies don’t have a great track record at the box office, unless Bad Boys II counts. I guess The Godfather Part II does qualify. Steven Soderbergh, who could later speak to box office bombs revolving around Castro’s revolution, called Richard Lester’s Cuba fascinating but flawed. Which is generous of him.

Soderbergh particularly rated its “refusal to play to the idea of a war-torn romance. An absolute refusal to be sentimental or easy about anything”. But an area he cites as bucking trends is really symptomatic of a movie that doesn’t know what it wants to be. At any rate, if Charles Wood knew when writing the screenplay, it didn’t translate to Richard Lester when he was directing it. Soderbergh’s take is that viewers didn’t like the romance plotline, but viewers simply weren’t interested full stop.

Lester’s idea was to “portray an impression of the moment one regime was replaced by the next”, and there are elements that succeed in this regard. But they fail to coalesce in the way great movies with multiple plot strands do. Most successful is probably Chris Sarandon’s alcoholic, profligate son of Walter Gottell’s (alias General Gogol) rum and cigar factory owner (that’s original). There’s a young punk rebel out to kill him (and later Sean). Denholm Elliot’s a smuggler, but his inclusion only ever feels like an afterthought. Jack Weston’s curiously named Gutman is interested in investing in the factory. Martin Balsam is the delusional general, Hector Elizondo (looking very young) his sympathetic and smarter captain.

And marching through all this, with absolutely nothing dynamic to do, is Sean Connery. Ostensibly, his mercenary and former major Robert Dapes has been brought in to train the Cuban army, but he’s (a) too late and (b) spends most of the proceedings standing around like a lemon, or growling at Brooke Adams for spurning his advances. She’s Sarandon’s husband and an old flame of Connery’s. Or should that be young flame (“I was a silly girl of fifteen” she tells him of her first meeting. It’s alright, though; Sean thought she was seventeen). 

The main reason this fizzles isn’t due to the anti-romance nature of Cuba; it’s that there’s zero chemistry between the two of them, and Adams just isn’t lead material. Sean’s baffled by it all. So are we. You kind of understand why Sarandon (who is terrific) is getting pissed all the time.

Does Cuba reveal much about revolutions or more specifically this one? It offers superficial snapshots of why the revolt is taking place, of corrupt police with (literal) suitcases full of money, but for a movie accused of being pro-the revolution, it’s remarkably slack about giving this side any weight. There's the occasional glib slice of wisdom ("You'll only defeat someone like Castro if you're right") which only adds to the feeling Lester's lens is very peripheral, even towards the central characters. Nothing ends up suggestive of substance or insight; even the escalation, as various folks attempt to flee, lacks much in the way of suspense. Sean gets in a tank. And then he gets out of it again. His best moments are some earlier put-downs of the general he’s there to help (for a pronounced mercenary, he seems to do everything he can not to get paid).

Also notable for Roger Lloyd-Pack and David Rappaport, both as Cubans, Cuba represented something of a nadir for Connery’s 70s, a rough patch as persistent as pal Michael Caine’s (although, in both cases, there are glittering jewels in there too). He was about to turn the corner. As was Lester, with the Salkinds coming calling once again. This time to take over Superman II.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

That’s what people call necromancer’s weather.

The Changes (1975) This adaptation of Peter Dickinson’s novel trilogy carries a degree of cult nostalgia cachet due to it being one of those more “adult” 1970s children’s serials (see also The Children of the Stones , The Owl Service ). I was too young to see it on its initial screening – or at any rate, too young to remember it – but it’s easy to see why it lingered in the minds of those who did. Well, the first episode, anyway. Not for nothing is The Changes seen as a precursor to The Survivors in the rural apocalypse sub-genre – see also the decidedly nastier No Blade of Grass – as following a fairly gripping opener, it drifts off into the realm of plodding travelogue.

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.