User Reviews

In 1962, the world stood on the brink of World War III for "Thirteen Days," a 2000 film starring Kevin Costner, Bruce Greenwood, Steven Culp and Dylan Baker, with direction by Roger Donaldson. The story concerns the "Cuban Missile Crisis," when the U.S. discovered that the Soviets had placed missiles aimed at the U.S. in Cuba.

As someone who remembers the situation well, watching this was a profound experience in more ways than one. A good deal of dialogue was taken from actual Presidential transcripts, which made watching it even more impressive. Looking at it from today's eyes, "Thirteen Days" is a knockout.

Donaldson focuses the film right where it should be - in the White House and in conference rooms, giving us only the subplot of Kenny O'Donnell's family life. For those posters who commented that O'Donnell was perhaps not a real person, yes, he was. It's impossible for me to believe that with a film that goes into so much detail and strove to be so factual, someone thought there was a made-up character. Try Google next time. Ken O'Donnell headed up Kennedy's presidential campaign and was appointed his Special Assistant when Kennedy won the White House. He was the most powerful of the President's advisers.

Several things become clear about the goings-on at the White House in 1962: None of the military leaders thought the Kennedy administration belonged in the White House; if it had been up to the military leaders, the situation would have caused World War III; JFK turned himself into a pretzel in order to pursue a diplomatic solution to the potential conflict. Though discouraged almost at every turn, JFK still would not allow the shooting to begin, pushing instead for an embargo against Cuba.

There is plenty of tension and excitement in this film. One of the best scenes is Commander Eckerd (Christopher Lawford) and his team low-flying over Cuba taking photos, and a U-2 pilot trying to avoid missiles chasing him. But most of the tension and excitement takes place in the meetings as the President and RFK struggle for answers and play for time. The mix is therefore ideal: drama, some aerial excitement, and a little humor as Adlai Stevenson gets the better of the Russians in an OAS meeting.

There's also a look at the reaction of the country - also very accurate. Yes, people piled into church, cleared the grocery shelves of everything, and stocked fallout shelters. We all watched the President on television. In fact, as he talked, my mother thought he was about to declare war. It was a terrifying time.

Kenny O'Donnell's role in all of this may have been somewhat exaggerated to make it a palatable role for Kevin Costner. Costner does okay in the part. Boston accents are very difficult to do without them sounding put on. It's very difficult to do accents in general and make them organic to the character. A few have succeeded: Anne Bancroft in "The Miracle Worker," Paul Newman in "Somebody Up There Likes Me," little Natalie Wood in "Tomorrow is Forever," Travolta in "Saturday Night Fever," and of course there are others. Jane Seymour and Joan Collins can easily pull off being Americans. All British actors can do a southern accent, since the southern accent started off as a British accent. Costner lays it on too thick and it's a distraction. But he certainly isn't bad in the role.

The casting people merely wanted to suggest JFK and RFK. In Steven Culp, they found a young actor with similar features to RFK. He does an effective job, given that it's tough going to portray such a famous person. The most successful in the film is Bruce Greenwood as JFK, who tries to keep the accent from overpowering the dialogue. In the President's television speech, I'm sure he imitated JFK's every single inflection and pause, and it's perfect. His JFK is a listener, very dependent on his brother's advice, and one who takes the burdens of the country on his shoulders like a cross. One of the posters here mentioned something to the effect that "we are led to believe that JFK leaned heavily on his advisors" as if this is a negative. Of course he did. Of course any President does or should. The final decisions belonged to him, and he had to be sure of all of the ramifications. Only an idiot doesn't hear every single opinion of value before he decides to launch World War III.

The camaraderie between RFK, JFK, and O'Donnell is as unmistakable as their arguments and frustrations.

Thirteen months after the Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK would be dead and O'Donnell would be riding behind him in the Secret Service Car. After a particularly tough meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, O'Donnell insists that JFK sit for a minute, and JFK finally does. Worn out and not sleeping well, he laments about being President. "I just thought there would be more good days." In the end, we - and he - would have settled for just MORE days.

The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis seen through the eyes of President assistant Kenny O'Donnell (Kevin Costner who hands perfectly the role )as trusted confidante and with significance importance of Robert Kennedy ( Steven Culp who bears remarkable resemblance )and of course President John F . Kennedy ( a solid Bruce Greenwood ) . This interesting film widely develops the Cuban Missile Crisis that was a confrontation between the Soviet Union, Cuba and the United States in October 1962, during the Cold War. The picture is packed with suspense , drama , historical deeds and is quite entertaining . It's correctly based on facts and the few sacrifices of accuracy are realized in the sense of of dramatic license . The motion picture is very well directed by Roger Donaldson who formerly worked with Costner in another suspenseful movie and also plenty of political intrigue titled ¨No way out (87) ¨ .

Adding more details over the widely depicted on the movie the events happened of the following manner : In September 1962, the Cuban and Soviet governments began to surreptitiously build bases in Cuba for a number of medium- and intermediate-range ballistic nuclear missiles (MRBMs and IRBMs) with the ability to strike most of the continental United States. This action was subsequent to the 1958 deployment of Thor IRBMs in the UK and Jupiter IRBMs to Italy and Turkey in 1961; more than 100 U.S.-built missiles having the capability to strike Moscow with nuclear warheads. On October 14, 1962, a United States U-2 photo-reconnaissance plane captured photographic proof of Soviet missile bases under construction in Cuba.The ensuing crisis ranks with the Berlin Blockade as one of the major confrontations of the Cold War and is generally regarded as the moment in which the Cold War came closest to turning into a nuclear conflict .The US President ( Bruce Greenwood) , Attorney General Robert Kennedy (Steven Culp ),State Secretary Robert McNamara ( Dylan Baker ) and his military staff ( Bill Smitrovich , Ed Lauter , James Karen , Len Cariou) and general Curtis LeMay (Kevin Conway ) considered attacking Cuba via air and sea and settled on a "quarantine" of Cuba. The U.S. announced that it would not permit offensive weapons to be delivered to Cuba and demanded that the Soviets dismantle the missile bases already under construction or completed in Cuba and remove all offensive weapons. The Kennedy administration held a slim hope that the Kremlin would agree to their demands, and expected a military confrontation. On the Soviet end, Nikita Khrushchev wrote Kennedy that his quarantine of "navigation in international waters and air space to constitute an act of aggression propelling humankind into the abyss of a world nuclear-missile war." Fidel Castro encouraged Khrushchev to launch a preemptive first-strike nuclear attack on the U.S. The Soviets publicly balked at the U.S. demands, but in secret back-channel communications initiated a proposal to resolve the crisis. The confrontation ended on October 28, 1962 when President John F. Kennedy and United Nations Secretary-General U Thant reached an agreement with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev to dismantle the offensive weapons and return them to the Soviet Union, subject to United Nations verification, in exchange for an agreement by the United States to never invade Cuba. The Soviets removed the missile systems and their support equipment, loading them onto eight Soviet ships from November 5–9. A month later, on December 5 and 6, the Soviet IL-28 bombers were loaded onto three Soviet ships and shipped back to Russia. The quarantine was formally ended previously on November 20, 1962. As a secret part of the agreement, all US-built Thor and Jupiter IRBMs deployed in Europe were deactivated by September 1963.The Cuban Missile Crisis spurred the creation of the Hotline Agreement and the Moscow-Washington hot line, a direct communications link between Moscow and Washington .

Shown through the eyes of presidential aide Kenneth P. O'Donnell (Kevin Costner), we see the inner workings of President John F. Kennedy (Bruce Greenwood) and his closest advisors as they try and find the best way to end a potentially devastating showdown with the U.S.S.R. In October of 1962, the U.S., during a regular mission photographing Cuba, spotted a missile buildup by the Russians. The missiles were powerful enough to kill 80 million Americans with only 5 minutes of warning time. President Kennedy had to decide quickly what action to take. With his trusted aide Kenny O'Donnell and his brother Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy (Steven Culp), and others such as Robert McNamara, Adlai Stevenson, McGeorge Bundy, Dean Acheson, Dean Rusk, and many more, Kennedy needed to figure out the best course of action. If he allowed the Russians to aim these missiles at the U.S., the United States would be placed in a potentially deadly situation. If Kennedy allowed the military to attack the missiles and destroy them, what would Russia do as a response? If he waited too long, would Russia simply attack the U.S.? If he backed down and agreed to take down U.S. missiles in Turkey, would the U.S. then look weak to the rest of the world? For such a young President, Kennedy had a lot of tough decisions to make, in a short amount of time, with the world hanging in the balance.

I wasn't alive during the Cuban Missile Crisis as it occurred, so seeing Thirteen Days was like having a history lesson at the same time as having great entertainment. Even though I knew that we didn't end up in World War III, there were a lot of things I didn't know. I won't go into any of the specifics, but I never fully understood how close we came to destroying the planet. The tensions of the time were brought out successfully by director Roger Donaldson. You could see and feel the sweat on all the major players as each minute ticked by. Bruce Greenwood did a tremendous job as the young President Kennedy, showing how Kennedy was strong enough to stand by his morals and values, even as his most trusted advisors were urging him to go to war. At the same time, Greenwood was able to portray Kennedy as someone who needed help and was able to turn to his brother for guidance. Kevin Costner did a good job as Kennedy's presidential aide. I especially liked his boston accent. Costner was a strong personality that worked well with Greenwood and Steven Culp. I believed that the three of them were friends for 15 years and that they trusted each other with their own lives. Other acting standouts to me were Dylan Baker as Robert McNamara and Michael Fairman as Adlai Stevenson.

Even running at almost two and a half hours, I was always at the edge of my seat, wondering what was going to happen next. Like I said before, I wasn't even born yet, nor was it something I ever learned about in school, so I had no idea what was going to happen. It was nice being able to get deep inside the mind of these important people during this crucial time. Of course, I have no idea if what was said during these meetings was actually said in real life, but I'd like to believe that at least the outcomes of the meetings were true. I'm a big fan of these kinds of dramatic films based on real life events. While being entertaining, they also have the ability to teach you about history. Reading about these situations in books isn't nearly as enjoyable as being able to watch them on screen. I think screenwriter David Self did a great job of bringing these real life events to life on the big screen. He made it historical but didn't bore you with too much talk or information. Along with Donaldson, he gave you what you needed to know, and let the actors bring you into the action.

So overall, I thought Thirteen Days was a great film. Well acted, well directed, well written, nice musical score and very entertaining throughout. And if you happen to learn something along the way like I did, then even better.

The fact of JFK's assassination, and especially the highly mysterious circumstances surrounding it, has resulted in a very distinct historical niche being carved around him. However, the majority of written examinations have concerned his assassination. The man's presidency, short though it was, was fraught with fascinating events and, both in literature and in film, they remain frustratingly under-examined. Which is why "Thirteen Days" is such a treat.

What the film essentially does is offer us a clearly partly-fictionalised but fairly true to the events account of the thirteen days of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. It's a fascinating close-up on a fascinating man, who might have been a truly great president if he had gotten a proper chance. Of course, the filmic portrayal of JFK may be just a tad overly sympathetic, and the treatment of the military a tad overly harsh, and the importance of Kenny O'Donnell, played by Kevin Costner, is probably exaggerated, but these are minor quibbles. What this film really does is show us just how complicated and multi-faceted was the problem of Russian nuclear missiles being installed in Cuba. Not only did the president have to face the dim and distant threat of a faceless Russian bureaucracy, he had to deal with the multiple and conflicting options constantly being advanced to him, the dangers posed by certain special interests in military and intelligence and the popular opinion of the American people. The repercussions of any number of different courses of action were almost unthinkable. Tilting the hand seemingly in the American favour in one place, say in Cuba, would destabilise another danger zone, such as Berlin. Despite the fact that we all know how the events played out in the end, it can't be denied that this film keeps adding to the tension constantly, occasionally letting off a little and then piling on a whole lot more. It's a wonderful portrayal.

At its core, however, the film is an intelligent study of the ultimately paralysing effects of power, and the stark horror of mutual destruction as made possible by the harnessing of atomic power. The discovery of nuclear fission reactions has forever changed the face of warfare, because there now exists an ultimate solution so terrible it is almost beyond contemplation. In the comparatively safer times in which we now live, it is easy to forget how possible, perhaps even likely, the threat of nuclear war. America was then, and remains now, the most powerful nation on the planet, and yet a single wrong move could have ended all that, and at the cost of millions of innocent lives. Bearing the weight of decisions which could cost so much must have been a horrible burden to Kennedy, and, if nothing else, we should thank our lucky stars that he didn't buckle under the multifarious pressures placed on him. This film is a tribute to reason over hotheadedness, and peace over war. We should not forget the lessons that time has to impart, and if this represents a way to remember, then everyone ought to watch it.

Thirteen Days brings back the good old fashioned (and I mean good) nailbiter film here and even if you know history (thus knowing the outcome), there is still some good stuff here. Things that might've not been known to the average American back then now are revealed in thrilling tension that is only slightly eased by Kevin Costner who doesn't need to really be there (and has a stronger JFK accent that JFK does in this movie). The look at the Cuban missle crisis here is the heart of the movie and it works pretty good. Not great but good, and if your looking for a historical thriller, this is the one for the season. B+

I served aboard the USS Joseph P. Kennedy which was depicted in the film. The Kennedy was the ship that boarded the Marcula in the waters off the Bahamas. The Kennedy, now part of Battleship cove in Fall River, Ma., actually played herself in the film. The actual boarding was not as quite dramatic as depicted in the movie.

The boarding party for instance did not wear dress white uniforms and the Marcula was more of a "rust bucket" than depicted in the movie. Although the 5 inch guns were aimed at the vessel, I don't recall a shot being fired.

As far as the movie is concerned I though it gave a rather accurate accounting of the circumstances that surrounded this time in history with a few embellishment's that are purely thrown in as theatrical license.

I'm showing the film now to my history seniors so felt obliged to comment on it. Whilst the film is undeniably gripping as a political thriller, it takes considerable liberties with historical facts, thereby compromising its value as an educational resource on this critical period in Cold War history.

One of the most glaring inaccuracies in the film is the exaggerated role of Kenneth O'Donnell, played by Kevin Costner. O'Donnell, who was a special assistant to President Kennedy, is portrayed as an influential figure in the crisis, often present in high-level meetings and even influencing the President's decisions. In reality, O'Donnell was not a key player in the crisis management and was largely uninvolved in the ExComm meetings, which were attended by experts in foreign policy and military strategy. The film's focus on O'Donnell seems to be a deliberate attempt to create a relatable character for the audience, but it distorts the historical record and minimises the roles of pivotal figures like Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara and Secretary of State Dean Rusk.

Another point of contention is the film's portrayal of President Kennedy, played by Bruce Greenwood. While the film does capture Kennedy's calm and rational demeanor, it fails to delve into the complexities of his decision-making process. The President is shown as almost unilaterally steering the United States away from military action, whereas, in reality, he was under immense pressure from his military advisors to authorize an airstrike against Soviet missile sites in Cuba. The film simplifies the intricate discussions and debates that took place among the ExComm members, reducing them to a binary choice between war and peace.

Furthermore, the Soviet perspective is conspicuously absent from the narrative. The film does not delve into the motivations of Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev or explore the geopolitical considerations that led the Soviet Union to place missiles in Cuba. This omission perpetuates a one-sided view of the crisis and fails to provide a nuanced understanding of the complex interplay of factors that averted a nuclear catastrophe.

The film also glosses over the role of backchannel communications between the United States and the Soviet Union, which were crucial in resolving the crisis. The secret correspondence between Attorney General Robert Kennedy and Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin played a significant role in reaching a peaceful resolution, yet this is scarcely mentioned in the film.

So whilst "Thirteen Days" succeeds as a suspenseful dramatisation of a critical moment in history, it falls short as an accurate representation of the events it depicts. The film takes liberties with historical facts, exaggerates the roles of certain individuals, and omits key aspects of the crisis, thereby providing a skewed understanding of the Cuban Missile Crisis. As such, it should be viewed as a piece of historical fiction rather than a reliable educational resource.

My site- Tracesofevil com.

I watched this movie today with a number of students from my International Politics class, and from the standpoint of a politics professor, this film was absolutely extraordinary. This is a movie about the development of foreign policy in a crisis; it spells out with brilliant detail the decision-making process of JFK's inner circle, the tension between the Executive Office of the President and the Departments of State and Defense, and the attempts by the Military Industrial Complex (namely the Joint Chiefs) to undermine the diplomatic approaches favored by the president. It highlights the conflict between military standard operating procedures ("rules of engagement") and the better judgment/common sense of right-thinking human beings. It hints at conspiracies to (later) depose and otherwise get rid of both Kennedy and Khruschev from within for what turned out to be a very unpopular resolution with the hardliners on both sides. I especially like that the movie acknowledged the humanity of the individual decision-makers without getting too Capra-esquire or preachy.

I can see why this film hasn't been a great commercial success. It is not your standard big studio fare. It's quite cerebral, and although it has some exciting pre-conflict scenes, it's not a "war film". (It reminds me a bit of "Three Kings" in that regard- both films were, in my opinion, mis-marketed. They both seemed to target the younger male action crowd, when both movies are really made for a more intellectual audience.) I liked how the Soviets were not cartoonishly vilified, as is common in a lot of Cold War era films. They were shown to be somewhat calculating and strategic, but not irrational or more importantly, inhuman. In fact, one of the most fascinating parts of the film is the revelation that both sides lack information as to the other side's true intentions. It was this uncertainty that back in October 1962, could have led to the end of civilization as we know it.

The acting was solid (Steven Culp was very, very good as Robert Kennedy- so good, in fact, that I'm afraid he'll have a hard time getting cast in the future. There was audible gasp in the audience when he came on the screen and WAS Bobby). Coaster's accent was actually annoying (as an earlier reviewer noted), but it's forgivable in light of the moving, somewhat understated performance he turns in. It is the directing that takes the cake, however. From the moment the chain of events was set in motion, the tension does NOT let up. It actually feels like you are back in 1962 living through the events of those two weeks- honestly, there was nary a moment to relax until the resolution was wrought. I recommend this film especially strongly to high school and college age students who are too young to have any Cold War memory, as well as to those who lived through the era and may have forgotten what it felt like to come this close.

I had assumed that this film was going to be just another Kennedy hagiography. But really, JFK came off as less decisive, and somewhat unsure of himself. In fact, it made it look like Kenny O'Donnell saved the world. Costner and the rest of the no-name cast did OK. About Costner's Boston accent; at least he tried. Not everyone can be Meryl Streep. I'm a Southerner, so if he murdered the accent, I cannot tell. But it would seem silly for a movie about all these Bostonians to have characters that all sound like they're from Nebraska or California. It'd be a little like those films with Arnold Schwarzenegger playing an (native-born) American. The action scenes with the planes and ships were well-done. But overall, I'd say this movie is not as good as "The Missiles of October". Grade: C-

Poor Kevin Costner. I get the feeling that he just can't win no matter what he does. He gets slammed for being in films and not using an appropriate accent. Need we look any further than 'Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves'? When he does use an accurate accent, as he does in 'Thirteen Days,' he gets slammed for trying to elevate his game to a playing field dominated by more well liked method actors. I've heard an argument before that he should just stick to making westerns since, allegedly, they're the only films that he does well. Many would immediately argue that 'Wyatt Earp' cancels out 'Dances With Wolves.' I argue instead that people are just too hard on Kevin Costner and 'Thirteen Days' is a very good example of why he deserves a bit of a break.

'Thirteen Days' was the fastest two and a half hours that I've sat through in a long time. The film was absolutely engrossing and very tense. Everyone knows what happens (or should be able to infer it since we'd all be dead right now if things hadn't worked out so well) but the writing and direction deserve great credit. They were able to transfer the tension from the historical situation and bring it to the screen with electricity. I think it works brilliantly well for two main reasons: 1. The viewer may know what is going to happen, but the characters don't. They are stressed, terrified and at the breaking point. One wrong move and the whole world is obliterated. If that isn't good drama, I don't know what is. 2. The film makers very wisely resisted the impulse to try and show things from the Soviet point of view. The strength of the film is the peril of the situation and the terror of not knowing what the other guy is trying to do. By filming from solely an American perspective and keeping both the characters and audience in the dark, this character driven movie excels.

A second brilliant strategy employed by the film makers was in the casting. With the exception of Costner, there are no real stars. Instead there are more reliable, hard-working and chameleon-like character actors. Len Cariou, Dylan Baker, Stephen Culp, and Bruce Greenwood are just a small sampling. Greenwood plays JFK and excellently plays a man desperate for peace but surrounded by calls for swift military action. He sees the bigger picture where others don't, but may not be able to navigate the smaller picture without help. Dylan Baker is a doppelganger and his performance as McNamara is spot on.

Highly recommended.

It's amazing to see just how close we were to a nuclear war. Whilst poetic license will clearly have been taken with the script, it's quite clear that the world was clearly on the brink of nuclear war during the Cuba missile crisis. Had events taken a slightly different course many of the people on this site wouldn't have been born and those that were would have lived in a very different world.

Like most films based on real events this film has got to make up for the fact that most viewers will know the ultimate outcome. The good thing with this film is that most viewers will not know the detail, so quite a few of the scenes do retain an element of surprise. All the leads put in a sound performance, but it's the story itself that makes this a good film. 8/10.

Basically this movie is a great history lesson. If you want to know more about the cold war and the Cuba missile crisis in particular this is a perfect medium for you to start with. The movie is quite detailed and accurate even though of course some moments and characters have been 'over-dramatized' for the good of the movie and its flow and emotions.

Even though you already know from start till finish how this movie is going to end, it still is a tense movie to watch. The story is build up well and makes the movie really interesting and compelling to follow. It perfectly captures the tension of the whole crisis and really makes you realize how close the world actually came to a WW III. It makes us aware of the fact that those 13 days in history should always be remembered and used as a lesson for the entire world now and forever. It's too bad that the movie becomes a bit too moralistic at times, especially toward the ending.

Bruce Greenwood doesn't really look like JFK but he's a good actor, so he becomes believable enough in his role trough his acting skills. Steven Culp really does look like Robert Kennedy and on top of that he also is a great actor. I wasn't always happy with Kevin Costner performance but overall he did an acceptable job. There are some weaker moments which involves his character but I more blame those moments to the at times too moralistic written script.

A bit of a disappointing aspect of the whole movie is its style. Roger Donaldson at times tries to be over-artistic and mixes the movie with black & white and color images. Perhaps he tried to copy Oliver Stone's style? Who knows. The cinematography was also disappointingly standard but thankfully the good editing saved this a little. Also the musical score by Trevor Jones is surprisingly solid.

Overall it's a very good political movie that has some great tense and important moments in it and also works great as a history lesson.

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Considering that the Cuban missile crisis has already been pretty picked over dramatically (there was also a good early TV-movie, "The Missiles of October"), and that the movie is mostly talking heads, this docudrama manages to whip up quite a lot of nail-biting tension in its two and a half hours. Its prime pleasure is seeing '60s icons humanized: JFK, RFK, Adlai Stevenson, and even Dean Rusk are presented as smart, responsible, thoughtful men who must agonize over the veracity of the information they're being confronted with and struggling to come up with a suitable response. (Today's neocon bunch undoubtedly would have escalated to full war in a heartbeat, and we probably wouldn't be here.) They lose their tempers, they despair, they disagree, but they're genuine statesmen, and colossuses compared to what politicians have become. As are the media: Walter Cronkite, in actual footage, shows a class and dignity unknown on today's airwaves or Web pages. Costner has been criticized for his faux-Boston accent, but I found it true enough, and anyway, many of his best moments are silent: He does a lot of acting with his eyes. It actually helps that Bruce Greenwood doesn't look much like JFK: It helps viewers concentrate on the man rather than the icon. I suppose the dramatization is a bit sanctimonious: The script is unambiguously on the side of religion and "traditional family values," and Roger Donaldson keeps inserting footage of nuclear explosions, as if we couldn't remember what all the fuss is about. But it's a handsome and stirring account of crafty, wise political diplomacy, the likes of which we may not again see in our lifetimes.

There are two major aspects of this movie that I reviled: 1.) It is pure propaganda, just for the sake of creating "good guys and bad guys". I am surprised that Hollywood, in the year 2000, produced such a re-visitation of a 1950's way of thinking. The movie did not, for one second, admit that the U.S. had medium range nuclear missiles in W. Germany, aimed at Russia and had a similar strike time reaction-window as that which had the U.S. government tearing their hair out and running around like sissies. How do we think the Russians must have felt?! Now, today, the U.S. missiles are in Poland... 500 miles closer to Russia!! This movie is so one-sided that I would have thought it was manufactured by the Department of Defense or the U.S. Marines. It is abyssymal and inexcuseable. The second facet of Thirteen Days that I found unacceptable (and made it unwatchable, for me)was Kevin Costner's crazy, warped, overdone accent. Now, I was born and raised in Boston. I spent the first 50 years of my life there, beginning in 1957. I have never hear anyone speak like Costner did in this picture. It is as though he was trying to do "President Kennedy times two". If I were the person playing JFK in the picture, I would have turned to Kostner at one point and said, "Why are you talking like that? Are you trying to mock me?" Evidentally, Kostner figured he was the star of the movie and did everything he could to attract attention to himself. honestly, his "accent" is the biggest direction gaffe I have ever seen in a movie. It was just insane.

This is an outstanding re-telling of the Cuban Missile Crisis. The weakest part of the movie of course is Kevin Costner who wisely cast himself in the part of presidential assistant Kenny O'Donnell rather than take on the JFK role. In order to give Costner a lot to do they make Kenny O'Donnell out to be a sort of behind-the-scenes king-maker rather than the office gofer that he probably really was. But it was a clever device to get the audience into the inner workings of the Kennedy White House without making JFK or RFK the lead character. The scenes that work best are when O'Donnell is the fly-on-the-wall sitting in at Cabinet meetings and meetings with the Joint Chiefs and letting the real decision-makers and advisers talk.

Much of the real JFK Cabinet discussions were recorded or transcribed for history and so I'm sure that much of the dialog for those scenes is what the principals really said. The movie is a tremendous look at crisis management and decision-making under extreme pressure.

The military leaders are made out to be the semi-villains in this movie, pushing JFK to attack Cuba and launch WWIII and at some points seeming to even disobey or skirt his orders. When watching the movie I kept remembering that JFK was the youngest man ever elected president and that he was only 45 yrs old when this happened. Most of his Cabinet and all of the Joint Chiefs were much older than him and that tension comes across as the older men seem to barely be able to hold back their condescending attitudes towards the young president.

With the exception of Costner, the acting in this movie is first rate and Bruce Greenwood as JFK was certainly deserving of Oscar consideration. It is always hard for an actor to play a historical figure like JFK who is more legend now than man. Greenwood wisely does not try to mimic JFK's accent but he does get inside the character and you can see JFK thinking his way through the crisis with nothing less than future of the entire human race riding on his decisions. Steven Culp was outstanding as well as RFK, perfectly mimicking RFK's mannerisms and way of speaking but again, getting inside the character so we can really see the man rather than just an impersonation. The success of the entire movie depending on Greenwood and Culp nailing their parts and they did so terrifically.

Viewers might be interested in finding a copy of "Missiles of October" which was a TV-movie in the 1970s and done much like a stage play. William Devane played JFK and Martin Sheen RFK. The movie also gave much screen time to the Kruschev character.

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.

"Thirteen Days" is a powerful and gripping movie. Actually, I'm not sure if 'powerful' is a strong enough word to describe it. I was immediately sucked in and, in fact, the only time reality came back to me during the entire movie was when my friend, who'd fallen asleep, suddenly jumped up wide awake at the roar of the jets... When the movie let out, everyone was yawning and stretching and in some way or another, complaining.

Not me, I was pumped up and ready to go talk about it to someone, I didn't care who, for hours and hours. Who cares if it was 'thirteen days long' or if Kevin Costner's accent was a little annoying? Admit it, the movie was about as good as movie's get. The acting was perfect (I believe Bruce Greenwood should at least get a Best Actor nomination, possibly Culp, too, for Supporting Actor), and the script... man, did somebody put some time into that script! Not only was it historically accurate (to the best of my knowledge anyway) but it was heart-warming and witty and was full of those "great lines" that people will memorize and repeat over and over for many years to come. My favorite part, however, is just a shot of Kevin Costner coming home. He gets out of his car, and instead of going inside his house, he turns and looks at his street, his neighborhood, his world... I hate saying more than I should, but if you've seen the movie you know what I'm talking about. The emotion that is shown in that scene... it gives me chills just thinking about it.

This film is intelligent, and beautiful, and 'powerful.' Believe me, if you see this movie, you'll not soon forget it...

Although he doesn't appear it, Kevin Costner was at the time of this filming -- and perhaps even today -- mentally disabled, and he does an amazing turn as a mentally disabled Kenneth O'Donnell, personal assistant to the Kennedy's in various roles, a capable man who in actual history was more of a "fly on the wall," during these issues. Costner's interpretation of O'Donnell with a strange speech impediment was an artistic choice I scratched my head over, but Kevin Costner did all those salacious things a person has to do to achieve his station (it was nice knowing you, Meritocracy). Anytime there is a story of unbelievable circumstances, you usually have someone with which the audience can identify (think Lois Lane in Superman), so I think the unskilled screenwriter made Simple Jack Costner that character. Watching his performance, I wondered if they were casting this, and Costner was jumping up and down, saying, "I want to play Kennedy! I want that role! Listen -- listen ... I been wathing The Simpsons. The mayor of Springfield is patterned after Jack Kennedy! CHOW-DAH! Say it, Frenchie! CHOWWWW_DAH! See, I can do it!" But he can't. It's not just the accent; if Costner is trying to play angry or threatening, he makes you erupt into laughter. Bruce Greenwood and Steven Culp? That's where it gets impressive. Greenwood doesn't forget John Kennedy's physical pain from war injuries, and both know the limits of their accent performance. There is an old saying in acting: "If you're doing an accent, you're acting the accent," not the character, but Greenwood and Culp probably ran around talking like that, recording themselves and correcting, because the performance bears that out.

The choices of the screenwriter are horrible, With steadicam, we could have just been in the rooms where this took place. We didn't need O'Donnell, but O'Donnell's son was an investor in the film or the production company, I forgot which. The photography of this film holds to the standard of a made-for-TV movie, but the inclusion of polished-up, actual historical footage is noteworthy while blending seemlessly into the overall film.

This is a film -- look, if you have a Sunday afternoon to kill, and you love history, this is your movie. It's a movie your dad would watch on AMC or something and say, "Yeah, that movie was alright." It gives you American good guys and Russkie bad guys. That made me wish there was a version from the Soviet perspective I could show you guys. That would be funny as hell.

This is The Godfather of political thrillers. Magnificent! Until the final frames - when JFK addresses the White House staff - I expected another critical problem to emerge. These `wrinkles' kept me perched on the edge of my seat. I was naïve and 11 at the time. This is a movie not to be missed.

The President's Special Assistant (Kenny O'Donnell aka Kevin Costner) tells the story. He connects you intimately to the Kennedy White House, the early 60s military machinery … balanced against faith and family. Every emotion kicks into gear over the course of the film. At the end of the day, you're thankful the man in the oval office was a smart fellow. We need smart people in that office.

There's a thing called `heart' sprinkled liberally throughout. Performances are thoroughly believable, as though this is unfolding here and now. Greenwood and Culp are plausible Kennedy brothers after all their predecessors, a tough job given the liberal supply of Kennedy film. Your heart pours out for the insiders who knew how close the world came to the brink. Then please, join me in becoming a little cynical about the government's `world safety' report veracity going forward. Thirteen Days shows you why the government, the press, and the people need to be in constant check and balance to be effective.

A football metaphor weaves effectively through the film, though the teams are cliquish at best. Ex-Harvard quarterback Kenny O'Donnell now serves as a linebacker for the Kennedy team. He's an insider; close … a (near-family) friend. In a crisis, loyalty and teamwork to America's quarterback (JFK) is the prescription for sanity. War zealots surround and abound. Someone needs the cooler head – to be the wiser man – in a world where warfare is being redefined with weapons of annihilation.

Minutia: There's always something for a fanatic like me. I spotted a bowl of Post's fruity Pebbles cereal at the O'Donnell breakfast table in the closing minutes. I don't think these had been invented yet. The thing is: If I have to dig `that deep' to find flaws with the film's presentation quality, it's a pretty darned good. I am sure there are historical flaws, but this is close enough for government work.

I'm still naïve, but no longer 11 years old. Movies have to be well made / well told to satisfy. An entertainment adventure you will enjoy no matter your age, gender, race, religion or political persuasions. It rates 9 out of 10 possible points. But unlike its Godfather intensity, I hope there's never a sequel to this one.

In the 1960's few realized how close the world came to Nuclear Winter. Even today, with all the resources at hand, fewer care who prevented the Third World War. One thing is certain, America was enormously fortunate to have had as President of the United States, John F. Kennedy (Bruce Greenwood) during those nearly fatal "13 Days." As the thinking man's president, Mr. Kennedy was lucky to have in his cabinet men of intellect and reason. His main confident was his younger brother, Robert Kennedy (Steven Culp) who proved invaluable as Attorney General. When the world learned of the Nuclear threat ninety miles away, Kennedy came to rely heavily on his political adviser Kenny O'Donald (Kevin Costner) who displayed cautious insight and prudent judgment in critical moments which could have proved disastrous had the Joint Chiefs of Staff gotten their way. Further, Kennedy was definitely fortunate to have selected as his ambassador to the United Nations, Adlai Stevenson (Michael Fairman) who stood toe to toe with Russian's Valerian Zorin (Oleg Vidov) and did not back down. The film is dramatic and terrifyingly accurate with dated Black and White footage and actual verbal scripts from hidden recordings from the oval office. What we know today is; had the Administration followed the prodding of the military, they would have initiated the Third World War as the Russian military in Cuba, actually had short range Atomic warheads at their disposal. This is a frightening film for rational people. ****

In this dramatization of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, President Kennedy must deal with Soviet aggression as tension mounts. Although the historical event has built-in suspense, the filmmakers manage to sap the excitement to some extent by rambling on too long and lingering too much on uninteresting details. The main problem is that the focus is not on Kennedy, but on O'Donnell, the cabinet member played by Costner whose importance in the crisis is exaggerated in this account. To make matters worse, Costner sports a laughable and horribly distracting Boston accent. Culp is also a bit too mannered as RFK. Greenwood, on the other hand, gives a finely understated performance as Kennedy.

"Thirteen Days" is a gripping, intelligent, moving political thriller of the kind which is all too rarely made in the US any more.

You may be thinking, "Do I want to watch this? How can I get involved in the plot? After all, we all know how the Cuban missile crisis ended -- neither Kennedy nor Krushchev dropped the bomb." That's what I thought. I thought a movie whose suspense hinges on whether or not the bomb will be dropped would bore me, given that I know how events turned out.

The movie is well made, though, and I was gripped by it from the first scene. I really was on the edge of my seat.

So, yes, even though these are historical events, the film is highly suspenseful.

It has more to offer than suspense, though, something very important in these waning days of George Bush Jr.'s second administration.

The film depicts the most powerful men in the world struggling NOT to flex their power.

They have the bomb -- and they don't want to drop it. They have evidence that America's arch enemy, the Soviet Union, has weapons of mass destruction a few miles off America's shores, in Cuba -- and they don't want to invade Cuba and overthrow Castro.

They could bomb the missile sites in Cuba, but they don't want to, because they know that that would turn world opinion against the US.

They stayed up late at night worrying about any American fighting men whose lives their actions might imperil. They stayed up late at night worrying about any innocent civilians in Cuba who might be collateral damage.

You get the picture. These men are depicted as the opposites of George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, et al, who wanted to use America's power to destroy, world opinion, and casualties, be damned.

Every scene in this movie is an education in how power can be used to restrain itself.

Too, there is a behind the scenes look at how advisers, the joint chiefs of staff, and cabinet secretaries jockey for position and work, by hook or by crook, to advance their point of view. There are a couple of really interesting screaming matches.

There are similar hints at what was going on in the Kremlin at this same time. There are spies and counter spies, and analysts trying to figure out who is in charge in Russia by, for example, analyzing letters the White House is receiving -- did Krushchev write these letters? Or has there been a coup? The film is full of eye candy. There is archival film footage of aircraft carriers, submarines, missiles, rockets, planes ... if you are an ordnance nut, this is the film for you. There are, of course, recreations of all those hot fashions, the skinny ties and pastel dresses, men and women wore in those days.

The cast is great. Bruce Greenwood and Steven Kulp look a bit like JFK and RFK, but don't have their charisma. (Who does?) Dylan Baker is especially good as Robert McNamara. Kevin Costner is Kevin Costner, which, for those of us who like Kevin Costner, is a good thing. His accent is a bit wobbly, but I forgot about it after a while, I was so involved with the movie.

At the end of the movie, one of the very powerful men whose work we have been following breaks down in tears. I did, as well, appreciating how much this movie stimulated me to think, and moved me, as well.

Strongly recommended.

It was a solid enough movie, good story, good acting...but incredibly slow and boring. Not enough intensity anywhere to keep your mind from straying. If I had seen this in the theaters perhaps I'd have felt better about it, but watching it at home was kind of a snooze fest.

Frankly, I regard "13 days" more like a high-end television movie than a serious docudrama. It is a very American product; viewers unaccustomed to the clichés of standard Hollywood filmography are going to have a hard time swallowing the extremes of overdramatization saturating every single scene of the film. Everything is boosted up to keep the spectator on the edge indefinitely, which may appear as a merit to the American public but easily relapses in cheapness and bad taste to those used to a more thoughtful approach.

The way the story and the characters are developed is also standard Hollywood fare, with the black-and-white presentation of Kennedy as a national hero soundly rooted in the values of family, motherland and hard work, who regards his office as the highest duty and finally overcomes the warmongering ambitions of the generals.

Looks like being cynical, or simply realistic, is not allowed in American mainstream productions.

Even worst, the director makes no attempt to convey a picture of the political situation underlying the crisis, or to offer (even for a moment) the viewpoint of the Soviets and the Cubans. On the contrary, the first half an hour suggests the idea that the United States were the victim of an unprovoked, unilateral aggression. This is junk history. The reasons why the Soviets deployed the missiles in Cuba were 1) to retaliate for the US deployment of about one hundred nuclear missiles in Turkey and 2) to protect Cuba, after the CIA-orchestrated landing at the Bay of Pigs and while the US were practicing invasion forces as a show of strength on islands in the Caribbean. This was perfectly known to the Kennedy administration, and certainly must have played a large part in the conversations on how to deal with the crisis.

As a blockbuster "13 days" may have its merits, but as a serious historical movie it has a long way to go.