This has always been one of my favourite near-WWIII films — it is, in fact, the last one made before the fall of the USSR — and though I found the relationship between the two bomber pilots is bit OTT, I think the rest of it, including the utter stupidity and rabid warmongering of those at the top, has been made even more believable by the current crop of clowns running the world into the ground. And James Earl Jones gives the best farewell salute in cinema.
I've always enjoyed this one, partly for the b-movie feel. The succession breakdown is fascinating, especially with the president's unknown status. The suddenness of the attack, too, coming without the usual Cold War crisis build-up, is interesting.
I think that, if you read the original book, you might have a slightly different opinion. In the book, the Soviet premier is pressured by hard-liners to approve a limited strike on the US, and clearly signals that the Soviets will accept a reciprocal amount of damage. This makes the basic premise quite a bit more plausible than the idea that separatists magiced up some IRBMs from somewhere. The novel also does (IMHO) a better job of exploring the idea that a given crew might not all agree to execute their EWO, and that, in the presence of redundant NC3 pathways, even active disagreement might not work-- the only way to stop an escalation order might be to kill the guy giving it.
Loved this post! I rewatched the movie a year or so ago after reading Jacobsen’s “A Scenario” … I liked it realizing it took liberties … understanding low quality of actual movie making. I like to think decision makers at all levels will be clear headed but ultimately I am in the camp that once nuclear war starts it ends with total destruction. I did order the book the movie was based off of so appreciate sharing that. As always, so value your content!
This has always been one of my favourite near-WWIII films — it is, in fact, the last one made before the fall of the USSR — and though I found the relationship between the two bomber pilots is bit OTT, I think the rest of it, including the utter stupidity and rabid warmongering of those at the top, has been made even more believable by the current crop of clowns running the world into the ground. And James Earl Jones gives the best farewell salute in cinema.
Just how many times did James Earl Jones fight World War III, anyway?
I've always enjoyed this one, partly for the b-movie feel. The succession breakdown is fascinating, especially with the president's unknown status. The suddenness of the attack, too, coming without the usual Cold War crisis build-up, is interesting.
I think that, if you read the original book, you might have a slightly different opinion. In the book, the Soviet premier is pressured by hard-liners to approve a limited strike on the US, and clearly signals that the Soviets will accept a reciprocal amount of damage. This makes the basic premise quite a bit more plausible than the idea that separatists magiced up some IRBMs from somewhere. The novel also does (IMHO) a better job of exploring the idea that a given crew might not all agree to execute their EWO, and that, in the presence of redundant NC3 pathways, even active disagreement might not work-- the only way to stop an escalation order might be to kill the guy giving it.
Your comment about it not being the worst nuclear crisis film made me wonder — what is the worst?
As usual Alex, your post timing on this subject has been impeccable.
And they *badly* confuse the various aircraft/mission codenames...
Loved this post! I rewatched the movie a year or so ago after reading Jacobsen’s “A Scenario” … I liked it realizing it took liberties … understanding low quality of actual movie making. I like to think decision makers at all levels will be clear headed but ultimately I am in the camp that once nuclear war starts it ends with total destruction. I did order the book the movie was based off of so appreciate sharing that. As always, so value your content!