Deterrence (2000)

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Ever had the feeling that life is just one long B-movie ? Well, thanks to a certain inflammatory rhetoric adopted by the Forty-Fifth Leader of the Free World during the summer of his first year in office, this particular low-budget production was on the brink of becoming one of the first fulfilled apocalyptic prophecies outside the Book of Revelation. Indeed, as two legendary Jewish sages of the Sixties famously sang, "the words of the prophets are written on the subway walls" - or, in this case, inscribed on celluloid. A rather dark and ironic twist on the age-old adage of life imitating art. "Make America Afraid Again" - and drag the rest of humanity along for the ride, while you're at it. As it currently stands, the review-page counts about eighty entries, all stemming from before the above-mentioned event(s) even took place, roughly half of which are rather harsh, basically trashing the film as being somewhat implausible, to say the very least. I sincerely wonder whether these reviewers (whose fairness, astute and intelligent observations, depth of insight, and power of perception I in no way doubt, by the way) still feel the same way today, in light of everything that came to pass in the meantime on the world's political stage.

Often you have to suspend disbelief in order for a cinematic story to work and I think I'm right in saying all screen writing gurus agree you're allowed to get away with one implausibility/coincidence in your story . In DETTERENCE this would probably mean that the Iraqis would be able to mobilize their entire armed forces without the Americans noticing , allowing the president to trapped in a diner during a snowstorm . I'd be the first to admit that this takes some swallowing but if you watch a film too closely then very few films you see will ever work so let's ignore the unlikeliness of it Unfortunately what happens next is that the audience become more and more aware of factual errors and implausibilities throughout the running time . We're told that Iraq " has sent three divisions ...half a million men into Kuwait " I'm fairly certain that in military circles a division is composed of 8,000 to 10,000 troops not 133,000 as stated here . The President decides to nuke Iraq but since Iraq also has nuclear weapons there's a danger of a nuclear counterstrike . This is the main stumbling block with DETERRENCE because it's impossible to believe the Iraqi regime would ever be allowed to posses such an arsenal . And if that leaves you scratching your head wait till it's revealed at the end that America and France were responsible for supplying the Iraqis with the bomb " so that Iraq wouldn't be able to manufacture its own nuclear deterrent " ! Let me think , America and France will supply Iraq with nuclear warheads and a delivery system so that the Iraqis won't manufacture their own weapons of mass destruction . When you've got something as ridiculously illogical as that in your screenplay then it's easy to miss other factual errors like a B-2 bomber being confused with a F-111 , Baghdad having a population of 12 million people or stock footage of Baghdad being in the center of the Pacific ocean as it's destroyed by a 100 megaton bomb I'm sure writer/director Rod Lurie originally conceived this story for the stage . It's impossible to watch this thinking it's a cinematic movie and alas Lurie has written his characters as stereotypes such as the hick redneck , the angry blackman etc . It's not helped either that the cast give far from compelling performances . Hutton may be excused for slapping his head too often because that's how I reacted to the unconvincing dialogue while Kevin Pollack doesn't come across as being very presidential but that is the point - his character isn't supposed to be presidential at all . But there's far better , more realistic movies similar to this like FAIL SAFE which was made during the cold war where the premise was so compelling because it was frighteningly realistic . Realistic isn't an adjective I can use for DETERRENCE

I enjoyed the drama much more than the pedantry. It can be argued that only the certifiable would favor starting a nuclear war. Stanley Kubrick made that clear in STRANGELOVE. At the end, Pollock finally lit his soggy cigar: Is this a veiled reference to Curtis LeMay, another short, cigarred warrior, considered psychotic by many? I must comment on Lurie's statement in the Director's Commentary that nuking Japan, according to historians, was unnecessary, and that the casualty projection (@ one million) rate in an invasion was a cynical overstatement. That may be politically correct and VERY Hollywood, but it fails to consider the condition of our own armed forces and the nation. We, too, were exhausted. It has been said that Admiral Halsey, following the Okinawa invasion, did not think that he could fight any longer and wanted to resign. And he was a pretty tough cookie. I suggest the Mr. Lurie might have been less white whine and brie preachy.

Today, this film feels incredibly untimely due to 9/11. This movie was however made in the Lewinsky-stained days of the 90's. Regardless of the filmmaker's original intent, this film can be viewed as a pseudo-Bradburyian peek into the psyche of the Presidency. A hard-line political drama, few films compare to what it attempts (but largely fails at). It at times seems overwhelmingly unbelievable, but one needs to remember that these are events that even today would have taken place in an alternate dimension -- an alternate future. With that in mind, I recommend all those following US foreign policy to take a look at this film. It is by no means fantastic, but it at least provides those with some knowledge of the American political system some entertainment on slow news days.