A Man of 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.

Despite the interesting premise, the plot fell flat after the intriguing opening sequence. The story starts in 1962, with main character Lucio Urtubia and girlfriend reaching the Paris airport with a bag full of cash. Costumes and set look spot on and the audience is left wondering what will happen next, since the police is in hot pursuit.

There follows the first annoying flashback to 20 years previously, in Spain with teenage Lucio attempting and failing his first bank robbery to help his sick father. Move forward 10 years and Lucio is in Paris, joining his sister and working as a builder. On his construction site, Lucio meets some anarchists who introduce him to the doctrine and Lucio decides to "expropriate" bank money to help comrades in need, with the help of more skilled anarchist robber Quico.

At this stage the timeline starts to get muddles, with Lucio meeting Anne, the love of his life, robbing banks and eventually getting caught and incarcerated, then out again for another round that includes falsifying banknotes and finally printing fake travellers cheques.

The actor playing Lucio looks much older than a twenty-something in the section taking place in 1952 and still much older than girlfriend Anne, even 10 years later. Also, he's not a particularly good actor and seems to be sleepwalking through the movie. Most un-engaging, gets a couple of stars for costumes and sets.

No pun intended - but I'll add one: you gotta cheque yourself, before you wreck your(home) self ... ah well. I can do this all day ... Captain Greece that is if you even care. But back to the point or rather the movie. Real life stories can be good - but they can also make some viewers roll their eyes ... not in a good way - also if you are thinking of anything other than annoyed, those are your thoughts and your thoughts alone.

Sorry for that, but I am certain some people have a dirty mind - shame on them. Talking of dirty ... what about dirty money? What about banks, who have too much of it? I mean it is mostly the money of workers ... but they play with it ... and they are insured ... so it is ok to .. no, do not even think about it! Especially because you'll get in prison ... which is a possibility for the main characters here ... since they are based on real people, you may already know their story.

Let's say you don't - I didn't ... and the movie was really well thought of ... and edited. Very well acted too ... and the suspense of it ... great too. Will not make my top 20 list - but it was an interesting and entertaining watch ... especially with the real life factor included ... credits reveal more ... well a bit more! It is not a documentary after all ...

"A Man of Action" is an amazing crime drama.

This movie is an amazing character study. It shows an important revolution time period that happened in history and how it affected individual people. The class divide, coming of the corporates, America being a super power, all these topics were discussed very effectively. The writing is awesome, the detailing of the characters and the events was very interesting. Juan jose ballesta gives an amazing performance, he amazingly portrays the characters fire to bring change in the world, and also different stages in his life.

The movie demands your complete attention to enjoy it thoroughly, and it has its pace. So, if you love slow burning biographical crime dramas, give this a try.

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'.