LouHomey From my favorite movies..

SanEat A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

Casey Duggan It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Rodrigo Amaro In Richard Brooks's "Wrong Is Right" technological advances made everything looks so different that even wrong things are right things. There's no heroes, no villains, no good guy and no bad guy, there's only situations and reactions to it. Here a famous reporter and adventurer named Patrick Hale (Sean Connery) has many news to cover but he got involved into a strange and dangerous deal, an conspiracy where Palestinian, Israelis, and Americans got in: the robbery of 2 nuclear weapons. The good thing: He's one of the guys (or at least that's the general idea we have of him after all some media reporters are impartial, always on the side of the public). In this conspiracy everything happens: an CIA female agent disguised as journalist was killed in a terrorist attack; the American president (George Grizzard) is on campaign trying his second term; crazy generals are trying to bring the nuclear devices back; and there's lots of mystery in the sudden deaths of a Arab king who hears voices; Patrick's chief (Robert Webber) is desperate for all kinds news because everything to him is about getting higher TV ratings; and other many characters and situations. This is satire film disguised as political thriller with some awkward comedy moments. It fires up in all directions and that's why I think this movie didn't reach an larger audience. It's comedy moments aren't too funny, and his thriller scenes has lack of fear or danger enough so that we can care about the characters. But his political views are very great, way ahead of its time, and many of the things portrayed here seems to be like a future's darker prophecy. In the end of 1970's and beginning of the 1980's many countries suffered with the Oil crisis, and Arab extremists started all kinds of terrorism exploding airplanes, Bomberman and stuff like that. Everything similar was showed here and more: by the end of the movie when the bombs are found in what place did the Americans found it? In the top of the World Trade Center! This film was released in 1982 way before of the attacks on the towers in 1993 and 2001 (relax, nothing happened with the towers in the movie). And all the consequences of the aftermath were repeated by George W. Bush, invade the country responsible for the threats or attacks (if you look with caution you might discover that Iraq/Afghanistan wars are mixed here in only one context, make the parallels). In this part the movie focuses on political views: If it's good to the country it's allowed (quote of some character about killing in the name of the country). There's more: Criticism of what is ethical or not on journalism can be seen (Connery makes a very good and ironical speech about paying a terrorist millions of dollars to make an exclusive interview). Sadly, by the time when all these critical and sharp visions appear on the screen it's too late for some viewers because director and writer Richard Brooks took too long to develop a story presenting so many characters and it's very confusing to go along the journey. But if you insist you might enjoy it. The only real funny things is: Connery's performance in some moments. His charismatic character is so enjoyable, charming and critical on the events surrounding him and someone with a good idea could make a TV show with him presenting the news in a intelligent and funny way better than this movie. He has some qualities that remind me of Waldo, the guy of that cartoon who travels around the world (Where's Waldo now?). By the way the whole cast is good (it includes names like Dean Stockwell, Leslie Nielsen, Katharine Ross, G.D.Spradlin, John Saxon, Jennifer Jason Leigh). The other funny thing is the visual effects, this was funny back in 1982 and it's even more funnier now. Every time I saw a Bomberman exploding on the attacks against the American president (there's lot of Bomberwoman here) I started to laugh because the explosions were so fake, nothing blast it off, it was ridiculous, pathetic, this special effects are so lame and corny that you laugh easily. As a comedy it doesn't work well, as a dramatic thriller there's some good enjoyable parts but its political-media-personal attacks work really well. Watch it if you can! 7/10

davegrenfell I'd never heard of this, then found out it's the man with the deadly lens, which I'd heard of but not seen. Connery's presence drove me to buy it, and it's not good. It wants to be a sort of cross between Dr Strangelove and Mash, but it just isn't that funny, unless you find the name General Wombat (?) funny. It comes across as a flat 70s thriller until the last ten minutes, when it springs to life. There are many, many flat scenes in the Whitehouse between the president and his aides which don't work. It's almost as if the initial cut was too long, and the first half was edited down to get to the whole nuclear bomb ransom storyline and the suicide bomber attacks, which i think are meant to be played for laughs, but again, aren't that funny. The location filming is excellent but the studio stuff looks like cheap TV. I could not believe the man responsible for Key Largo, Crossfire and Elmer Gantry did this. Only laugh: Connery throws away his wig before putting on his helmet and jumping out of a plane. It makes Never say Never again look like genius.

mischarp Although this film is rather coarsely made by todays standards, the subject matter still makes it eminently watchable. It is a black comedy set in the time of much turmoil in the world about oil and its power over people in tandem with the idea that news these days leans toward its being a form of entertainment. The satire is biting and has all of the subtlety of a sledgehammer. It is a very "tongue in cheek" film with a "no holds barred" comedic bent. More of a "slash and burn" type of film making. Sean Connery is Patrick Hale a roving international news reporter, think Christiane Amanpour with a sex change operation. The movie has all of characters which might come out of todays news headlines. There is a funny little joke near the end that Connery tells on himself-not to be missed.

bdbrancati I have been talking about this movie since I saw it in the early '80's. It has always been a scary look into the future which has now arrived. George Bush standing squarely behind something that was done behind his back without his knowledge. Sell our ports to the Arabs. Why stop at the ports? George says it's okay, we're keeping the whiskey. He's not a big wine drinker.But seriously, if the President is kept in the dark and is still willing to rubber-stamp as okay the misadventures of his nefarious underlings and Congress is left out of the loop, how secure can an American feel?This movie was reviewed poorly in it's time. Some called it far-fetched, unrealistic and anti-government. I always thought it was a not so subtle warning that has been largely ignored. It's time is now. [ 2006 ]