Pride, passion and the sum of all the forces acting on the body. Spanish lice, Captain. They wouldn't dare bite an Englishman.
The film takes place in Spain in 1810, in the midst of a guerilla-guerrilla struggle against the invading Napoleonic army. The retreating Spanish troops, unable to pull a huge gun behind them, throw it from the nearest cliff. However, this unique wall-biting gun is a real hunt: the French dream of getting it, as well as their rivals, the British, the allies of the Spaniards. The British even send their naval officer Anthony to bring the gun to Santander. However, the guerrillas, who became the owners of the abandoned guns and are led by the brave warrior Miguel, have other plans: to go first to their native Avila to drive out the hated enemy. Anthony has no choice but to agree. And he did not lose, for on a long journey, dotted with difficulties and adventures, he met his love in the face of the sultry beauty Juana.
The picture of Kramer, based on the novel by S. S. Forester “The Gun”, was called in a very Spanish spirit – “Pride and Passion”. Pride (and hatred) forces Juana to fight the French invaders shoulder to shoulder with not the most intelligent, but recklessly brave compatriot Miguel. Passion leads her into the arms of an English stranger, cold-blooded and prudent. How to sit on two chairs, how to warm up between two lights? One man reproaches Juana for cohabiting with the unloved, and the second for thinking too much. When she dances flamenco (imho, the best I've seen on screen in two hours), one looks at her with jealousy and the other with admiration. Yes, not a giant cannon is the heroine of the film, although serious intrigues are also weaving around it.
The downside of the picture is too much timekeeping. It seems that the actors are famous, and the plot is win-win, but still looks long and boring. Take at least Sergio Leone: for some reason, his camera can circle around the main characters preparing for the fight for several minutes, and the viewer is not bored at all, because all these minutes he is in wild tension. Or the same Cary Grant, but Hitchcock: again a game of peepers - but a sea of suspense. And in Kramer, Grant fights with knives: in theory, the spirit should be breathtaking, and no. I want to get back to the gun as soon as possible. Or Sophia Loren. The conclusion is that a long film can be (a) intense, (b) meditative, (c) informative, (d) boring.
Of course, you can argue: but the story of a difficult love triangle is revealed slowly and tastefully. But for a banal melodrama, there's a lot of war. The story of Juana’s tossing between an old friend and an attractive stranger might have lost a little bit in scope, but it wouldn’t have made it any less clear. And the viewer would not have to, like a heroine, toss between love and war.
However, despite the minor nitpicking, "Pride and Passion" is quite not bad and worthy of one view. I suggest you look, and then arm yourself with pencil and paper, and see if Anthony was right about the various efforts he made in lifting and lowering the gun down the hill. Even if you don’t like the movie, remember Newton’s laws and axis projections. And you can give an example of the need to know physics in real life.