Il gioco degli avvoltoi

A complete pile of hooey! This is one of the most muddled movies you'll ever see. None of the plot makes any sense, characters come and go without rhyme nor reason (in fact Roundtree is killed at one point and then appears again a few scenes later - and he isn't playing Jesus!). The biggest disappointment is reserved for fans of La Collins - she makes a tiny cameo appearance moments before the end, for no good reason, then the film finishes. Audience breathes a sigh of relief.

Convoluted plot concerns SAF expatriate (Harris) whose loyalty to his homeland begins to cloud his business affairs leading to a near-fatal brush with the self-described 'freedom fighter' Gideon (Roundtree), himself dedicating his service to the emancipation of Rhodesia. Despite the two men's attempts to galvanise their respective side's strategic position in the increasingly bloody conflict, they each lament the heavy human toll it inflicts on their countrymen, beginning to question the end-game and (somewhat prophetically) whether the future state can endure its violent past.

Director Fargo's plot requires serious concentration to follow, suffering too many impassioned political commentaries, and a complex array of characters whose sole purpose is to achieve martyrdom in the name of their respective cause.

Aside from the main protagonists, Denholm Elliott plays a shrewd, hard-drinking PI, Ken Gampu a militant ZANU officer who unlike Roundtree's more sophisticated approach, willingly accepts collateral damage as a price of the conflict, and sultry Joan Collins shows up for dinner and cocktails every 20 mins or so to lighten the mood. Ray Milland is also on-hand in a recurring role as a covert investor of the arms trading affair.

As other reviewers have remarked, the scenery is pleasant, the soundtrack is contemporary and catchy, and the international cast has considerable depth. If only the myriad sub-plots could've been condensed, the ingredients are there for a much more coherent film.

With a cast that includes the likes of Richard Harris, Richard Roundtree, Ray Milland, Joan Collins and Denholm Elliott, you would expect A Game For Vultures to be a pretty bankable success. Would all those talented stars sign up if the script was a load of old rubbish? Surely not. Add to that the plot, which concerns itself with sanctions-busting and freedom-fighting in 1970s Rhodesia, and you'd expect a film with a level of gritty realism and political topicality. It is sad to report, then, that A Game For Vultures is an absolutely disastrous film which misfires in every conceivable department.

In 1970s Rhodesia, black freedom-fighters - dubbed "terrorists" by the white leaders - are busily ambushing the white soldiers on patrol. One such man, Gideon Marunga (Richard Roundtree), is nearly killed when a routine ambush goes wrong and results in several deaths and casualties on both sides. Meanwhile, back in Britain, sanctions-buster David Swansey (Richard Harris) is hired to smuggle some helicopters into Rhodesia to aid the white government in their fight against the black revolutionaries. A Rhodesian by birth, Swansey is determined to support the whites as they struggle to retain control in Rhodesia, even though the rest of the world has imposed crippling sanctions on his nation. Also cast into the mix is unscrupulous business tycoon Colonel Brettle (Ray Milland), who finances Swansey's plans, and crusading journalist Larry Prescott (Sven Bertil Taube), who desperately wants to expose Swansey's illegal activities in the press.

A Game For Vultures is rather confused and heavy-handed. It gets far too plot-heavy for its own good and the result, in all honesty, is a deadly bore. Ironically, the opening fifteen minutes are actually quite good (it's an extended action sequence featuring an ambush which goes bloodily awry), but as soon as the sequence is over the film begins to nose-dive. Richard Harris here contends with probably the weakest role of his career (it's NOT his worst film, but certainly his most bored and subdued performance ever), while supporting stalwarts like Ray Milland, Sven Bertil Taube and Denholm Elliott are wasted too. Even Joan Collins - included primarily just for sex appeal in a male-dominated story - fails to add any sparkle to the proceedings. James Fargo directs rather lethargically, making the plot unbearably hard-to-follow on the one hand while over-simplifying the racial themes on the other. I won't be watching A Game For Vultures again and, if you value your time, I'd suggest that you shouldn't even bother with it in the first place!

This film essentially involves two men on the opposite side of a civil war. The first man, "David Swansey" (Richard Harris) is working with the government of Rhodesia and attempting to circumvent trade restrictions imposed upon it by the United Nations. The other man, "Gideon Marunga" (Richard Roundtree) is fighting for independence from Rhodesia's apartheid government. Yet even though both of these men are on opposing sides they each have concerns. For example, David realizes that he is on the wrong side of history and that eventually Rhodesia will lose this war. Gideon, on the other hand, is devoted to the cause but recognizes that the people he has allied himself with don't share his sense of justice and morality. As a result, he witnesses the murder and rape of priests, missionaries and school teachers with particular revulsion. Yet even though they have never met, what the two of them don't realize is that eventually their paths will cross--and this will have an immediate impact upon both of them. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was a rather mediocre war-drama due in large part because neither of these characters inspired much interest and the film lacked a coherent plot. That said, although I didn't think this was a bad film necessarily, considering the solid cast it should have been much better and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Average.

I think this movie is far better than the ratings it has received here would suggest. Personally I did not find the plot overly complicated or hard to follow and the dialogue and action are well executed.

However I can imagine many probably found a political slant to the movie which was distasteful, and that may have impacted their opinion of the movie and influenced the tone of their subsequent comments. I could not help but notice that the preponderance of nasty violent acts depicted were committed by the black freedom fighters / terrorists, rather than the white oppressors. So it lacked balance in that regard.

But despite that, I think it builds up an unusually well rounded and nuanced picture of the suffering that it does depict, from the front line protagonists and guilty background conspirators, to predicament those who are only trying to get by and survive, yet are unable to avoid being dragged into the conflict, to the innocent children, with no choices to make, who are caught in the middle.

Of the two protagonists, Richard Roundtree goes on the longer moral journey, his confidence and belief in his cause slowly undermined and eaten away each time he witnesses the death of a different category of collateral individual. While for Richard Harris the consequences of his actions remain largely abstract until the final big action scene of the movie, when he quickly catches up.

Richard Harris' performance is more charming than usual and he manages to put off being conflicted until the final scenes. Richard Roundtree (Shaft) relishes a rare international outing. Joan Collins, Albe Parsons and Jana Cilliers all look good. Ray Milland, Denholm Elliott, Sven-Bertle Taube and Tony Osba (McLaren from Porridge) all add to the quality of the production, but I most enjoyed the performance of Ken Gampu as the fearsome "Sixpence".

Both leads learn to give greater weight to the human cost of the war the more they come to experience it for themselves, but in the end does it make any difference?

So in conclusion, I think it works well as a "general" anti-war movie, but not so well as a balanced view of the specific war it depicts. All people will fight to be free, unfortunately for the people of Zimbabwe so far they have only succeeded in replacing one oppressor with another.