I'll be the first to admit, I love history and international politics. That's the primary factor that drew me to THIRTEEN DAYS. Yes, since Kevin Costner was in it, I figured JFK would be lionized (and he was). No poolside parties in this picture. The situation is extreme.
The most glaring distraction away from this motion picture, is Costner's Harvard-inspired, jackhammer-to-the-skull accent. The fact that it fades in and out does not help.
The portrayals by virtually a whole troupe of players is exceptional, with Steven Culp as RFK, the standout. Michael Fairman was excellent as Adlai Stevenson (uncredited role no less!). THIRTEEN DAYS explores the certain factions within the US government, and tactics used to address the crisis. There is little or no action sequences to speak of, yet through a well written script, there is a great deal of tension.
What would have made THIRTEEN DAYS more interesting, would have been the exploration of the reasoning and motivations for the Soviets to place missiles in Cuba. Was it over Berlin? Was it over our missiles aimed directly at them from Turkey? I'm sure Premier Khruschev didn't provide Cuba with this kind of heavy duty equipment on a whim. With access to people near Khruschev (of those times) easier during these times, this would have balanced the film out. His son became a US citizen not too long ago.
Why not present both sides? The only people who present only one side (as the Soviet government did many times in its past), is indicative of those who have something to hide. Why not show both sides playing global chess? It would have made for a more resoundingly fair minded film.
THIRTEEN DAYS is recommendable and good in spots, it just should have been better.
The most glaring distraction away from this motion picture, is Costner's Harvard-inspired, jackhammer-to-the-skull accent. The fact that it fades in and out does not help.
The portrayals by virtually a whole troupe of players is exceptional, with Steven Culp as RFK, the standout. Michael Fairman was excellent as Adlai Stevenson (uncredited role no less!). THIRTEEN DAYS explores the certain factions within the US government, and tactics used to address the crisis. There is little or no action sequences to speak of, yet through a well written script, there is a great deal of tension.
What would have made THIRTEEN DAYS more interesting, would have been the exploration of the reasoning and motivations for the Soviets to place missiles in Cuba. Was it over Berlin? Was it over our missiles aimed directly at them from Turkey? I'm sure Premier Khruschev didn't provide Cuba with this kind of heavy duty equipment on a whim. With access to people near Khruschev (of those times) easier during these times, this would have balanced the film out. His son became a US citizen not too long ago.
Why not present both sides? The only people who present only one side (as the Soviet government did many times in its past), is indicative of those who have something to hide. Why not show both sides playing global chess? It would have made for a more resoundingly fair minded film.
THIRTEEN DAYS is recommendable and good in spots, it just should have been better.