Un homme d'action

Lucio Urtubia Jiménez was born in 1931 in Cascante, a small town in Navarra in the north of Spain. He lived most of his life in Paris. He was a legendary bank robber, not interested in personal enrichment; the proceedings of his heists were used in attempting to bring down Francisco Franco's fascist regime and thereby free Spain.

He was an admirer of the Cuban revolution and other liberation movements and he tried (unsuccessfully) to interest Che Guevara in a scheme to bring down the US economy by circulating counterfeit dollars. He was instrumental in the capture of Klaus Barbie in Bolivia and in helping Black Panthers to flee the USA, which put him on the CIA's crosshairs.

Opinions about Urtubia vary, He rated high among his fellow anti-Franco fighters. One of them, Albert Boadella, whom Urtubia helped escape Spain defined him as "a Quixote tilting not at windmills but at real enemies." Unsurprisingly, the French police took a dim view of him as "a criminal mastermind pulling the strings of an international criminal organization." However, he had many admirers and friends on France such as Albert Camus and André Breton.

His most celebrated exploit was in 1977. With the help of master engravers he forged and circulated 20 million worth of Citibank travellers checks. Initially, Citibank tried to force the French police to make an example of Urtubia. However, the plan was too sophisticated for either the police or Citibank and they were forced to capitulate. Urtubia escaped with a short sentence and a substantial take which he distributed among guerrilla groups. Superficially one could compare Urtubia with Robin Hood, However, the latter only led a showy but ineffectual revolt against a few corrupt lords, while Urtubia dealt a lot more successfully with the real villains.

I liked this movie. It takes some liberties with the facts and the point of view is somewhat naive and hero worshipping; the psychology of the characters is not really touched or developed. But the final result is positive. Excellent acting, direction and cinematography.

The first word to come to mind after finishing the movie is decent. That might not be the desirable outcome of anybody's moviemaking, but we've all seen much worse. The story is loosely based on a real person, anarchist and rebel Lucio Urtubia. We follow back and forth his path for 40 years. Nobody seems to like banks anymore, so in my book if anyone can make fools of bankers, more power to them. Unfortunately, the ultimate price is always paid by people like us, nickeled and dimed to death by them. And when all the dishonesty and greed catches up with them, we save them with generous bailouts. Decent movie, workmanlike, predictable, but not much more.

I liked this movie. It caught my interest and I set my phone down. It's a movie about a gentleman who put it to the man and walked away from it scarred by life but still able to make the world a better place. It makes me want to question my limited world view and cheer for the philosophy of an anarchist.

It makes me want to get the book now and look up the biographical account of the characters. Loosely based on a.true story,

This is not an action movie more of a drama, love story, so pour a glass of wine , relax and enjoy.. I don't post or do reviews often and typically look for movies with a 6.0 IMDB rating or better to watch.thus I have this movie 7.0.

This is my first time ever to come across a very interesting figure--Lucio Urtubia--and his exploits. His story is fascinating and the movie brings to the screen what is known about the man to a large extent. It's acknowledged however, that what it shown is not true one hundred percent. Still, by and large, it's out of the ordinary.

Someone has remarked that the movie lacks depth considering the rich material that is at the disposal of the makers. Yet, it's good enough considering it's running time.

The central point of Urtubia's story is how he succeeds in challenging the biggest American bank and in outwitting it in an extremely creative way. He didn't give up when an earlier plan fails to take off. What's also significant is his association albeit brief with a legendary anarchist--Quico Sabate. Their association brings out their contrasting anarchist approaches to dealing with the banking establishment. But both agree that what they're doing is not robbing banks but expropriating on behalf of poor people.

All told it's a satisfying viewing experience. Juan Jose Ballesta does a good job portraying Urtubia. Luis Callejo, Miki Esparbe and Liah O'Prey provide able support.

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'.