Can't understand the hype

Rating: 4/10 (26 June 2015)

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.