Le consul honoraire

Richard Gere plays Dr. Eduardo Plarr, an Anglo-Paraguayan doctor who unwittingly gets entangled in the kidnapping plot of an American consul by a novice group of Paraguayan rebels in exchange for ten of their imprisoned comrades. The plan goes awry as the rebels mistakenly kidnap his new friend instead - Charley Fortnum (Michael Caine), a British honorary consul who happens to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Complicating the matter, the doctor falls head over heels in love with Charley's young wife, Clara (Elpidia Carrillo) - an ex-prostitute who has the same feelings toward him. Meanwhile, the police have tracked down the rebels hide-out and are closing in. With his life at stake, Plarr is forced to decide between betraying his love or friendship.

Sounds interesting, right? Sadly, it is not. The main problem is that the characters are not likable. Gere's character is a doctor who lusts after his friend's wife. Caine's is a heavy drinker who often creates problems than solves them while Carrillo's is a fickle-minded woman who can't decide who is best for her life.

The title itself "The Honorary Consul" does not fit into the main plot, which is more about Gere's character than Caine's. Even less fitting is the alternate US title "Beyond the Limit".

This is one of three John Mackenzie's films that I have watched and also the most unconvincing because of its tepid performances, contrived plot and ending, and lackluster direction. Only for Gere's or Caine's die-hard fans.

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.

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.

Emotive political, drama, thriller set in the border between Argentina, Paraguay dealing with a twisted love story and an intrigue behind. It is set during the rule of cruel right wing military dictatorships commanded by Alfredo Stroessner in Paraguay and General Videla in Argentina. It concerns a doctor called Eduardo : Richard Gere , he is a half-English and half-Paraguay man who becomes involved with the revolutionary guerrilla : A. Martinez , and a former priest played by Joaquin de Almeida. He returns to work in the little town of Corrientes . Eduardo quickly starts forming new acquaintance such as the English honorary consul : Michael Caine , he is a drunk man married to a beautiful Argentinian wife , an ex-whore : Elpidia Carrillo. Then Eduardo seduces her and both of whom fall in love .Things go wrong when Eduardo is asked for help the rebels to kidnap the US Ambassador to force the Paraguayan Junta release political inmates , including Eduardo's father.

Entertaning but cold and slow film with a central theme, a triangular romance and political details about South American dictatorships in which a doctor eventually must confront moral conflicts and the complex relationship with an alcoholic consul , at the same time the dirty war , tortures, kidnap, political upheaval and riots take place . Passable acting by Richard Gere as an England/Paraguay doctor who has a passionate as well as risked affaire and excellent Michael Caine as the cynical older diplomat who befriends to him while disagree over politics and about an attractive young latina girl, the newcomer Elpidia Carrillo . But the film relies heavily on the relation between the protagonist and his lover that reaches some strong problems connected with the alcoholic honorary consul .This is the second and worst rendition based on the prestigious novel by Graham Greene , first and the best was The Quiet Man 1958 by Joseph L Mankiewicz with Michael Redgrave , Audie Murphy, Giorgia Moll , Claude Dauphin , Bruce Cabot and third retelling was The Quiet Man 2002 by Phillip Noyce with Brendan Fraser , Thi Hai , Tzi Ma, Rade Serbedzija and Michael Caine himself. And this second version by John McKenzie written by Christopher Hampton who also wrote the 2002 remake , it boasts a nice cast with special mention for Bo Hoskins as a brutal Colonel who pursues and tortures rebels . It displays an atmospheric cinematography by Phil Meheux , though a perfectly remastering being absolutely necessary. And an evocative musical score by Stanley Myers , including South American sounds .

The motion picture was regular but profesionally directed by John Mckenzie , being nominated for two Bafta Film Awards . John was an expert on thriller and drama such as Blue heat, Ruby , The infiltrator , The innocent , A hinge of freedom, Act of vengeance , Quicksand , Made , Voyage , When sky falls , Aldrich Ames traitor within . His greatest hits were Long god friday and Fourth protocol . Rating : 6 . Average but passable and acceptable. The picture will appeal to Richard Gere and Michael Caine fans

..

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.