A Man of Action is a biopic of Spanish bank robber/counterfeiter/anarchist Lucio Urtubia. Set primarily in the 60s and 70s, this movie attempts to get the viewer to empathise with Urtubia who is presented as a 'modern day Robin Hood' combined with activist, intent on 'bringing down the system' - most notably American style capitalism.
If you want a taste of the political angle, Che Guevara is portrayed in the movie as some sort of superstar.
As backstory, Urtubia is given motive for his actions via a childhood experience of a local bank refusing to give him a loan to buy morphine for his ailing father. How heartless and cruel of the local bank manager to do his job and protect local people's hard-earned money.
Did Urtubia's family not have any friends that could assist them? Instead of attempting to rob the bank, wouldn't it have made more sense to appropriate some morphine directly? Bad decisions fuel drama, but they are less effective at generating empathy for a character.
To be fair to Urtubia, he was also fleeing the fascist dictatorship present in Spain at the time, so in context his extremism is perhaps more forgivable.
For me, the best thing about Urtubia was, unlike many contemporary anarchists and activists, he actually built things that people can appreciate.
He worked as an ordinary builder for most of his life. He also gave away a large portion of the money he stole, although the movie doesn't expand much on who or what this money was intended for ('the cause'). It also suggests that he and his team kept a third of the proceeds for themselves - which seems to go against the real life Urtubia's comments that he never personally profited and hence 'wasn't really a thief'.
The film presents him as impetuous, naive, and rather simple, but resourceful and with decent intentions. I would suggest he was also utterly deluded. He should've stuck to the day job.
As for the movie in general, it's average in all departments. There's some interesting period detail and the pace is well handled. It's watchable, but hopefully not too many viewers will find it 'inspiring'.
If you want a taste of the political angle, Che Guevara is portrayed in the movie as some sort of superstar.
As backstory, Urtubia is given motive for his actions via a childhood experience of a local bank refusing to give him a loan to buy morphine for his ailing father. How heartless and cruel of the local bank manager to do his job and protect local people's hard-earned money.
Did Urtubia's family not have any friends that could assist them? Instead of attempting to rob the bank, wouldn't it have made more sense to appropriate some morphine directly? Bad decisions fuel drama, but they are less effective at generating empathy for a character.
To be fair to Urtubia, he was also fleeing the fascist dictatorship present in Spain at the time, so in context his extremism is perhaps more forgivable.
For me, the best thing about Urtubia was, unlike many contemporary anarchists and activists, he actually built things that people can appreciate.
He worked as an ordinary builder for most of his life. He also gave away a large portion of the money he stole, although the movie doesn't expand much on who or what this money was intended for ('the cause'). It also suggests that he and his team kept a third of the proceeds for themselves - which seems to go against the real life Urtubia's comments that he never personally profited and hence 'wasn't really a thief'.
The film presents him as impetuous, naive, and rather simple, but resourceful and with decent intentions. I would suggest he was also utterly deluded. He should've stuck to the day job.
As for the movie in general, it's average in all departments. There's some interesting period detail and the pace is well handled. It's watchable, but hopefully not too many viewers will find it 'inspiring'.