Un Anglais sous les tropiques

A Good Man in Africa is a parody of Africa. The action takes place in an imaginary African country, Kinjaja. The movie centres around Morgan Leafy, a British diplomat and a gigolo who wants countless damsels. Morgan isn't a memorable character, he can't be a role model, but the character does develop throughout the movie.

One flaw of the movie is false advertisement. On the DVD cover we see Sean Connery in the front plan, on another DVD cover we don't even see Morgan. Even the description doesn't mention Morgan; this is made to make us believe that Sean Connery plays a major role, but he doesn't. He plays a white doctor, Alex Murray, a doctor at the local hospital. Needless to say, Connery is the best actor in the movie. He's there only for about 10 minutes in total. And yet he has a major role? Very cheap strategy.

A Good Man in Africa has light, subtle humour, it may not be funny, but it's original. As I've said before, it's a parody of Africa, politics in Africa, the African man himself and the white man trying to fit in. Mildly racist, mildly funny, overall - decent.

Final Score: 2.5/5 or 5/10

This movie was tolerable - I sat through it all, but it wouldn't have been missed at all if I'd never seen it. The antics of the British High Commission are almost (but not quite) laughable, and the Poms must have been a bit miffed that their embassy was mainly staffed by Aussies and Yanks with weak accents. In any case, the idea definitely held promise, it just didn't eventuate. Fortunately it was only 90 mins. long. Sean Connery puts in a tolerable performance but all too little, too late for this film. Even the lovely Joanne Whalley doesn't help. In all, don't bother, but if you must, there are worse things you could do.

A quite interesting comedy about the British aristocrats in a newly-independent country of Africa. Colin Friels does a very decent job as the Mr. Leafy, the first secretary of British High Comissioner. So does Sean Connery. The screenplay has a very smart satirical flavor in it with fine sense of humor regarding royal formalities, sexual clichés and even venereal diseases.

But the main problem of the movie is perhaps its ending. The ending is quite abrupt and the scene thereafter is surprisingly mundane. In fact, I don't get the idea behind all that stuff. I haven't read the original novel but seems like now I want to check it out.

I have never read a William Boyd book but after having seen this movie, I have a mind to look out for them. A Good Man in Africa felt pretty much how I imagined a Tom Sharpe novel would appear on screen, farcical, riotous, uproarious and hilarious. Except there was something important missing in the film. There were a some very good scenes which showed up the farce to excellent effect. The unfortunate intervention of a tropical disease into the evening's entertainment, the unequal game of golf, the fitting for the Santa outfit, the corpse removal, the shower scene, the flight from disgruntled locals are just some examples of the farce. Friels' diplomat is at the heart of each embarrassment and he is charming in a very understated way, but he seems as bemused by his role as he is by events that unfurl around him.

Friels' supporting cast is also pretty mixed, John Lithgow, Diana Rigg and Sean Connery are amongst the best and they seem to have more fun than Friels does in his role and this is not just because Friels is hard done by as the 'put-upon' embassy attache. The belly laughs expected of a good farce do not materialise although there is plenty to chuckle about and think on. However, for the chuckles alone the film is well worth seeing, now let us see how the book compares.

This film was on late night, mid week BBC television ,last week and I found it fairly easy going in general. It wasn't complicated at all although in some ways it attempted to be so due to the sex subplots involving British diplomat Colin Friels (who also bears a passing resemblance to Ewan MacGregor strangely enough). Those subplots of course came second to the themes of corruption, incompetence and confusion which I have to say reign supreme in Africa. The seemingly intelligent, progressive leader is actually corrupt to the core and is well played by Louis Gossett I thought.

The film also took a somewhat farcical view of African culture and politics which is completely over exagerrated but funny nonetheless. For example, the names and words of certain things amused me, like 'newly independent' Kinjanja for example. The local currency was the 'jan-jan' (?), the capital city was unpronouncable, and the locals believe in a god of thunder called 'Shango' which in a way becomes the driving force of the plot and causes our hero Friels all sorts of amusing moments. If struck by lightning, the victim also had to be 'cleansed' by a 'ju-ju' man??!!! True, the locals are portrayed as simple, god fearing, useless idiots which is something of a Euro-stereotype of Africans in general it has to be said. But the British diplomats, played by Friels and Lithgow, are also given rough treatment......they bend over backwards for a corrupt leader, can't deal with local politics, are xenophobic and bumblingly incompetent. But from these situations I did draw a certain degree of amusement, if only due to the fact that I lived in southern africa for over ten years and some of the stereotypes and mishaps were classic Africa.

Some good looking female actors also help the film along although the likes of Diana Rigg are under-used. Connery puts in a forgetful performance but both Friels and Lithgow are entertaining. The sticky atmosphere also comes through as does the general hurly burly life of a foreign diplomat in Africa..........I'll give it 6.5/10, easy going and good for a few laughs.