Reviews & Ratings for
Beyond the Limit More at IMDbPro »The Honorary Consul (original title)

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Index

9 reviews in total

---

11 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
One of the better Graham Greene adaptations, 17 October 2004

Author: TrevorAclea from London, England

The Honorary Consul/Beyond the Limit has an especially low reputation in the US, mainly because of the antipathy many feel to Richard Gere, but it's one of the best Graham Greene adaptations to date, and infinitely more successful than Philip Noyce's disappointing version of The Quiet American (which explores similar themes) with it's over-rated and rather lazily mechanical star-turn from Michael Caine. By contrast, Caine here is staggeringly good, totally inhabiting the character's flaws without 'giving a performance' - here he's inside the drunken Charlie Fortnum's skin completely and doesn't need to act. Gere certainly offers him better support than the disastrous Brendan Fraser, managing an acceptable English accent and capturing the character's emotional apathy. Bob Hoskins is also on top understated form as the local police chief, avoiding turning him into Senor Haroldo Shand and coming up with an amiably sympathetic but dangerous presence that owes nothing to his usual stock-in-trade characters.

The irony of timing of seeing a film about a fictional British hostage no-one wants back in the week after a real-life British hostage his government didn't want back was murdered in Iraq only occurred to me later. There are similarities (Caine's character even has a much-younger foreign wife while the Americans here also put pressure on the British government not to act), but being a Graham Greene story this is much more concerned with moral responsibility, lapsed Catholicism and, ultimately, an act of forgiveness that sees the film's nominally weakest and most compromised character emerge as it's strongest. Well directed by John Mackenzie with superb photography by Phil Meheux that compliment each other to give a convincing sense of everyday life in a military dictatorship, it's highly recommended despite the low IMDb rating.

---

9 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Subtle approach to be appreciated, 4 October 1999
Author: James Christopher Wierzbicki (filmbuff-31) from Salida, California, U.S.A.

This is a mildly interesting picture for viewers who like a hint of subtlety to spice their viewing experience. The problem is that this film also contains quite a lot of uneven action and performances.

The action is based upon a book by Graham Greene, a morality tale in which Greene shows how a seemingly mild injustice leads to catastrophic consequences for an apparently innocent man. The movie details the relationship between Dr. Plarr and the British "Honorary Consul" and the consul's wife. The movie, true to the original author's intent, makes this relationship central to the plot development. Greene wants to show how this relationship reveals a tragic flaw in his protagonist. On this level the movie succeeds, but there are too many loose ends in the plot and some lackluster performances. In the final analysis, though it starts nobly, the movie does not accomplish what it set out to do: i.e., bring a faithful adap- tation of Graham Greene to the big screen. It does not do justice to the subtle, thoughtful perspective of Greene's novel.

Dr. Plarr, played by Richard Gere, certainly is the amoral character Greene intended him to be. But this role, as directed in this movie, appears to be a vehicle for Richard Gere. It is drawn in the mold of movies that Gere had worked on at that time. These include movies such as "American Gigolo" and "Breathless." To turn the character of Dr. Plarr into a showcase for Richard Gere represents a totally inappropriate intrusion of the director into the story's subject matter.

To make matters worse, Gere plays his role mechanically, without passion, almost as though he were reading his lines directly from the script or sleepwalking through them. He is emotionally uninvolved in his character.

The revolutionaries in the picture are similarly unengaging characters. One has a hard time seeing how anyone could support their cause. This is chiefly because the movie does not do a satisfactory job of explaining who or what the group is fighting against. As a result, it is not clear with any accuracy just what the group is fighting for. The movie resorts to cliches here. We are supposed to believe that a Latin American dictator has been committing atrocities, but what effective recourse the revolutionaries have against him is never fully explained. The action that follows becomes muddled and the the motivations of the characters confused.

The one character who is neither confused nor mechanical is the honorary consul, played by Michael Caine in an outstanding per- formance. Charley Fortnum first comes across as a boozing has-been, but in the end, he is the voice of reason and humanity in the face of an insane, inhuman mess. His is also the voice of mercy in the picture.

"Beyond the Limit" may not be as thoughtfully developed as it should be, but it is interesting to see the film's producers try to convey the important moral message of the original novel. I give it two stars.

---

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
My brief review of the film, 25 July 2005
Author: sol- from Perth, Australia

Intriguing music and lighting choices with some good camera movement and angles keep this film relatively interesting on an audio and visual level. However, they do not compensate for the film having quite a limited story of just a lightly developed romance during political unrest. There are political themes and morality issues in it, however they are not too well explained. It is also far too slowly paced, dragging between the story action. It is not a bad film though, and it is arguably interesting to watch… however it misses the mark for greatness. Despite Caine and Hoskins receiving BAFTA nominations for their roles, it is Gere who delivers the most effectively.

---

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
The competent adaptation, 14 June 2003

Author: paul2001sw-1 (paul2001sw@yahoo.co.uk) from Saffron Walden, UK

Competent adaptation of a typical Graham Greene story, a tale of dilemma, forgiveness and redemption in a quasi-fascist South America. Direction and acting are both ordinary, though Michael Caine and Richard Gere are at least well cast; Bob Hoskins (an Argentinian policeman!) less so. Always interesting, but strangely subdued: Greene packs a greater moral punch on the page.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Consul decent enough movie but no classic, 27 December 2010

Author: mark-whait from United Kingdom

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is an average pot-boiler from the Graham Greene novel, and although it was better than I originally remembered when watching it again recently, it certainly isn't at all memorable. That said, there are some welcome production values and the cast are worth watching. It's essentially a Richard Gere vehicle - at least in terms of the American market, and he plays an English-born Paraguayan called Dr Eduardo Plarr. Gere is an intriguing actor, or at least certainly was in the eighties. Bear in mind this performance came just a year on from his breakthrough role in An Officer And A Gentleman and you can still see the raw, almost nervous tension in his execution, and he certainly favours the minimalist approach. It's almost as if he's determined to become more than the beefcake Hollywood obviously wants him to be. Despite this assumption, however, Gere still has the obligatory love making scenes although I'm convinced when he first beds Elpidia Carrillo's character Clara, his helpful grunts are way out of sync with his theatrical pelvic thrusts. If Gere does seem to be a little uncomfortable in front of camera, then it's probably because in most scenes (the bedroom ones aside of course) he is either facing Michael Caine or Bob Hoskins. In his position, I think I would have stayed as quiet as possible, and it must have been a daunting scenario for the then 34 year old just fresh from box office success. His accent as well is all over the place. At times there is a distinct English twang to it, but then it slips into Amercian and even flirts with South American when faced with scenes with the locals. Bob Hoskins, of course, shows everyone how it should be done. Hoskins has never been afraid to take on any accent, and here he is the local chief of police, with successful results. Some critics have said that Hoskins was miscast in this film, but I strongly disagree. His demeanour throughout and the convincing accent I think contribute to an all round excellent pitch, although this is probably helped by the comfort of teaming up with director John Mackenzie again, just four years on from The Long Good Friday. The reason I think that Hoskins is so convincing here is that as he is, in physical terms, not the tallest actor on screen, he nevertheless carries weight because of his position and the corruptibility it potentially brings with it. And then there is Michael Caine. Yet again, Caine is playing a drunk, whose only passion in life seems to be the whisky bottle. As already explained earlier, Caine's legendary depiction of 'drunks' was peerless in the eighties. As an exercise in this very matter, I looked into how many 'drunk' roles he has played, and counted post-Zulu, no less than seven (I am counting Last Orders as many of the scenes were set at closing time in a pub). The best scene in this entire movie comes when Caine is at the wheel of his car whilst the US Ambassador (George Belanger) has stopped to take in the local scenic backdrops. He looks up aghast when spotting Caine sipping from a hip flask. Realising he has been rumbled, Caine swiftly raises a coke bottle to his lips within seconds, expertly switching beverages in the same take and without a blip. Ironically, this scene also has great resonance regarding the second part of the movie. I think the film is also pitched right at 102 minutes. Any longer and the plot would have become drawn out and the audience would fidget. Not a classic then, but a decent enough attempt by all concerned.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Badly miscast Gere but Caine makes amends, 29 November 2010

Author: Bjorn (jbjorns) from Iceland

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There's a solid film here lurking about but it never quite surfaces. It's based on a Graham Greene novel (that I haven't read) and it deals with an English/Paraguayan doctor, Eduardo Plarr, (Gere) who gets involved in a conspiracy to kidnap an American Ambassador in Argentina. However a mix-up occurs and the rebels accidentally kidnap a (somewhat worthless) British Honarary Consul, Charley Fortnum, (Caine) who's a friend of the good doctor. Then there's also the fact that Plarr is having an affair with Fortnum's wife.

This is probably meant to be a morality tale about loyalty and the price you pay for truly believing in something. At times this looks like quite a fascinating film. It deals (in parts) with freedom fighters who are badly treated by inhuman officials and shows some truly harrowing scenes of torture and human humiliation.

Then there are some truly humane segments involving Fortnum's relationship with his ex-prostitute wife. A man whose life is nothing to brag about, Fortnum never-the-less truly loves a scarred individual with all his heart and accepts whatever pleasure he can muster out of his existence. A heavy drinker (and an embarrassment to his fellow countrymen), it becomes clear how worthless he's truly perceived when no attempt is made to rescue his life when he's accidentally captured by Paraguyan rebels.

It's here that Plarr is meant to be given a greater character feature than previously displayed as he seems to be the only one who actually appreciates Fortnum for the good (but somewhat flawed) person he is. The problem lies in the fact that Gere's performance (and his character) is beyond redemption by that point and his actions in the final third are wholly unbelievable and un-characteristic. His ultimate sacrifice in the end doesn't ring true and therefore doesn't have the intended impact as I'm guessing the highly praised novel does.

But to be fair to Gere; he's miserably miscast here. Fresh from his stint (and an impeccable performance) in "Breathless", he maybe wanted to try out more serious material and therefore chose this project. His performance here isn't any good, his British accent comes and goes at a whim and he still looks like Julian Kay (his character from "American Gigolo") only posing as a doctor in a foreign country. His presence in the film is it's real downfall. A big indicator of this is how the film was advertised as a sexy Gere feature (with pointless graphic sex scenes) and stupidly retitled as "Beyond the Limit" to hide it's true dramatic origins and promote is as a thriller; which it really isn't.

But still; "The Honorary Consul" does have it's quiet moments. Michael Caine gives a terrific performance in the title role and his character is very human, tragic and earnest. He's flawed (and who isn't?) but he's got a good sense of what really counts and Caine's performance is the reason why this film isn't a failure. The scenes where Fortnum discusses his wife with Plarr, his reasons for taking her as his wife and, at the end, his reasons for wanting the baby which isn't even his, are the film's strong points and I don't even think that's what director John McKenzie was going for; it just happened with a great performance and a solid core material.

In the end; "The Honorary Consul" goes down as a disappointment but a somewhat fascinating one as it could have been really good.

---

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Surpassingly mis-cast film, 1 February 2010
Author: tireless_crank from Maryland

It was difficult to watch this film because of the miscasting of Richard Gere who seems at last partially anesthesthetized through the entire movie. There is not one bit of passion in his manner or his speech and, whenever he is on the screen, there is a hole through which all tension drains. Bob Hoskins is not a convincing Latin at all, neither in accent nor in manner. Better casting in these two parts would have improved this film immeasurably.

An interesting, semi-error shows many of the main characters sweating through their shirts. In tropic and sub-tropic regions, locals have heat adapted well enough so that they sweat almost unnoticeably in normal conditions and thus can appear crisp and unruffled in temperatures where those of us from more temperate climates sweat like water buffalo.

---

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
The Competent Adaptation, 10 June 2003

Author: paul2001sw-1 (paul2001sw@yahoo.co.uk) from Saffron Walden, UK

Competent adaptation of a typical Graham Greene story, a tale of moral dilemma, forgiveness and redemption in a quasi-fascist South America. Direction and acting are ordinary, although Michael Caine and Richard Gere are at least well cast; Bob Hoskins (an Argentinian policeman!) less so. Not badly done, but slightly detached; Greene packs a bigger punch on the page.

---

Gere passer may pass or waste your time, 19 February 2013

Author: PeterMitchell-506-564364 from Australia

Believe this, I have watched this so many times, but in part. I could spout off lines in Christopher Hampton's script, at the click of a finger. I love the settings for this movie in which Gere, an English spoken doctor, falls for a newly married young woman, Clara (Elpidia Carrillo) who is earlier seen as the whore working at this seedy bar that doubles as a cat house. She's married to the honorary Consul (Caine) unaware of the affair that has sparked between friend and wife. At the start, Gere, just arriving in town, helps another guy escort a drunk Caine from one bar to infamous cat house one. It's here he sets eyes on Clara. The sex scenes are quite hot as passions run high, but Gere has trouble from the other side, involving his past, where two old friends, (one a much younger Joquian Almedia) approach him, with a kidnapping plot to snatch a consul, in return for their fellow South American prisoners to be released. Only problem is, they snatch Caine instead, not a real consul, an honorary consul. Gere, maddened by the idiocy of the mates, remains loyal. Gere's father too, is one of those prisoners, as Gere is innocently led to believe. Caine's actor mate, Bob Hoskins, plays a cop, trying to help Gere track down his old man. One scene has Gere going off at him, when they arrest 250 mentally unsound people under his care and put them temporarily in prison, but Hoskins mellows him. Gere's fate at the end of the this, where the strong arm of the law closes in, was tragic, I must say. His not so badly portrayed doctor, is a sympathetic, goodhearted and likable character. But the heavyweights are Caine, who plays drunk so good and being funny too about it, where no nonsense Hoskins is solid. Elpidia is just pretty scenery really. But really there's something too brief about whole affair of the story here, despite it's good screenplay, and really it's just a passable, but involving drama + those couple of sex scenes. And near it's end too, some of the scenes are quite dark, they disjoint the action. But Gere too is a bit of a bastard in the bedroom, paying the now married Clara cash for her services as if she was still working. Also when going up to Gere's apartment, is her first tome, riding in an elevator. I liked the way Gere wore his jealousy well too, really at the sheer fact, Caine loves her. There's a lot of good scenes to find in the movie and Paul's McCartney's Brazilian intro theme was just beautiful and melodic, as it was soothing. For Gere fans, do put this different and quite enjoyable one one on your list.

---

---

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
External reviews	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user reviews	Your vote history