MamaGravity good back-story, and good acting

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Hitchcoc I came home from school one day and my mother said, "We may be at war!" The standoff between the Kennedys and Nikita Krueschev as missiles were on their way to Cuba is one of the single most dramatic events we have ever faced. It could have easily led to annihilation. The casting in this made for television event is outstanding. Each of the actors must have been honored to play the real life characters, because they hit the ball solidly. William Devane and Martin Sheen are wonderful as the Kennedys. We have to remember that while our leaders have an obligation to us, these men were filled with fear and trepidation. Howard de Silva makes a terrific Russian premier as the volatile Krueschev. But what works the best is a tension that is palpable throughout. I don't know if there has ever been a more outstanding portrayal of real events done in any form. If you ever get a chance to see this, don't miss it.

Charles McGrew Generally very good, but "kennedy-friendly", that is, JFK comes out the consumate crisis-manager, when in reality nobody was in control of events (JFK and Khrushchev truly were "sleepwalking through history").To be fair to the makers of the film, the script is based on available documents in 1974. Nowadays, we know that Kennedy explicitly traded existing US bases in Turkey for the USSR bases in Cuba -- something that was denied for years -- and that the Russians had tactical nuclear weapons in Cuba to defend against invasion; which would have immediately turned into a direct confrontation into the nuclear realm. In reality, the Cuban Missile Crisis seems to have been "won" (narrowly) by the Soviets -- although Khrushchev's career didn't survive it (but Castro's certainly did :-)Wonderful work by William Devane as JFK (Martin Sheen as RFK has a little more trouble with the accent, but the two of them portray the personalities of the two men very well), but perhaps the best portrayal of all is Howard da Silva as Nikita Khrushchev. Very nice casting choices (and performances) for pretty much every player. Long, but thorough.

jacksflicks Some have berated the "The Missiles of October" for being over-long. Nonsense! (One genius who complained did, however, like the performance of "Marin Short". Sounds like a 12 year-old. Hey, maybe he is!) It would have been over-long if it were a boring story with boring performances. But "The Missiles of October" is neither. The story is, of course, riveting, whether you were around during the early sixties or not. And the performances - the guy who cast the three main characters, JFK (William Devane), RFK (Martin Sheen) and Khrushchev (Howard Da Silva), should have got an Emmy. Martin Sheen may have over-done Bobby Kennedy a bit, but it should be noted, that RFK's "Kennedy accent" was much thicker than JFK's, almost to the point of self-caricature.Nor is the film "dated," as another reviewer would have it. The TV claustrophobic atmosphere is in perfect keeping with the tight, closed, suffocating tension which actually existed in the real situation. The crisis did not occur out of doors, or in halls - it occurred in a few rooms. "The Missiles of October" possesses the hallmark of classic drama: though you may know how it ends, you want to watch it again and again.

Murby This movie is a long 2 and 1/2 hours! It hardly had any war-type action. However, the saving grace is the great performances of William Devane as Kennedy and Marin Short also does a great job. If your interested in American history during the Cuban Missle Crisis, this is your movie!