A British mercenary arrives in pre-Revolution Cuba to help train General Batista's Army against Castro's guerrillas while he also romances a former lover now married to an unscrupulous plantation owner.
In a Scandinavian country, national security chief Colonel Tahlvik is tasked to rescue the passengers of a high-jacked British airliner while the British Ambassador is being held hostage at his residence by another terrorist team.
Influential Arab diplomat becomes the target of numerous assassination attempts, after he announces his plan to make peace with Israel by letting them join the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (O.P.E.C.).
Richard C. Sarafian
England, 1850s. A master criminal aims to rob a train of a large sum of gold. Security is incredibly tight and the task seems an impossible one. However, he has a plan and just the right people to carry it out.
A satire of American news reporting, covert agencies, and political system. The theft of two suitcase sized nuclear weapons, and their sale to a terrorist group, leads television newsman ... See full summary »
Tyrannical, but ailing, tycoon Charles Richmond becomes very fond of his attractive Italian nurse, Maria. The nurse, in turn, falls in love with Charles' ne'er-do-well nephew Anthony, who plots ways to gain control of his uncle's fortune.
In the late 1950s, a British hireling is sent to Cuba to train Batista's army. They must be trained to fight Castro's army. While there, the Brit encounters an old love, who is married. While Castro's army wins more and more, their love revives.Written by
R. Kessen <email@example.com>
The storyline of this movie and Havana (1990) have been remarked as being noticeably similar. See more »
While Battista is watching a 16mm version of "Horror of Dracula" sequences are shown out of context. The scenes showing Christopher Lee's legs and hands disintegrating are shown prior to his hand-to-hand fight with Cushing. See more »
Lester's most under-appreciated misunderstood film and also his funniest
Perhaps the reason I like this film so much is because I don't, normally, like the cinema of Richard Lester. I've always found it too frenetic to be funny and too fragmented to be involving on any human level. However, CUBA is, arguably, the most misunderstood picture to close out the decade of the 70s. It is a brilliant visual satire of a society in total materialistic collapse with every character in the picture (save the white knight James Bond figure played by Sean Connery who is rendered completely ineffectual by the chaos that is tumbling down upon him)is literally on the take. What is extraordinary here is that the mise-en-scene is as visually dazzling and stylistically coherent CAPTURING chaos as it is satirically barbed, subtle and consistently ingenious. You really have to WATCH this movie. There's always something inventive and extremely droll going on around the edges. The supporting cast of Jack Weston, Hector Elizondo, Walter Godell, Martin Balsam, Chris Sarandon, Denholm Elliott and Alexandro Rey (unrecognizable)was flawlessly assembled but because the film doesn't ANNOUNCE its satirical intentions and Lester refuses to telegraph his gags and put anything in the center of the frame, most people came away from the picture pooh-faced. Well, there is one other problem with CUBA and Lester has to take the brunt of the responsibility for it which is, in his corrosively ebullient fervor (and perhaps because, as a director he never responded to women very much), he left poor, ultra-lovely Brooke Adams out to dry as a character. It's clear that he has nothing but contempt for the "Casablanca" aspect of the story involving her and Connery but he should have done a better job disguising the fact. I think Connery is terrific in his role making the pathos of his Gable-like flawed hero comical and deeply affecting. Lester was even more successful in JUGGERNAUT satirizing a genre while squeezing the maximum thrills out of it at the same time. CUBA doesn't work successfully on both levels in the way that JUGGERNAUT does. But it is the most impressively detailed and dynamically precise cinematic rendering of what the last days of a politically corrupt regime looks like - as it goes into free-fall - that a mainstream commercial film maker has ever given us.
3 of 3 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this