Fail Safe (2000)

To me, this movie is perfection.

Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

It is a performances centric movie

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

A computer malfunction triggers the transmission of nuclear attack codes to a United States bomber squadron to nuke Moscow. It's up to the shrewd and diplomatic President (superbly played with conviction and authority by Richard Dreyfuss), his advisers, and various military leaders to avert a major catastrophe. Director Stephen Frears, working from a taut, smart, and gripping script by Walter Bernstein, relates the riveting story at a swift pace, generates a tremendous amount of nerve-rattling suspense, astutely nails the paranoia of the 60's Cold War era, and maintains a serious tone throughout. Moreover, Frears warrants extra praise for telling the still relevant narrative in an admirably economical straightforward manner and sustaining an uncompromisingly tough sensibility that stays fiercely true to itself right to the devastating downbeat end. The sterling acting by the top-rate cast keeps everything humming: George Clooney as genial and dutiful fighter pilot Col. Jack Grady, Hank Azaria as the coldly pragmatic Prof. Groeteschele, Noah Wyle as eager translator Buck, Harvey Keitel as the conflicted Brig. Gen. Warren Black, Brian Dennehy as the bluff, no-nonsense Gen. Brogan, John Diehl as the ramrod Col. Cascio, Don Cheadle as by-the-book fighter co-pilot Lt. Jimmy Pierce, Sam Elliott as the hearty Congressman Raskob, James Cromwell as the cagey Gordon Knapp, and Norman Lloyd as the sly Defense Secretary Swenson. The total absence of any music and John A. Alonzo's sharp black and white cinematography gives this picture a strong sense of stark documentary-like realism. A real on the money harrowing and effective nail-biter.

Very, very good! Also interesting id the idea to film it live, so it is basically a theatrical piece... A good screenplay, great acting and a gripping premise!The only reason it doesn't get a higher grade is because it is basically a copy of older films, films which have been done better in the past by both Sidney Lumet (also called 'Fail Safe') and Stanley Kubrick ('Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb')...All in all, this movie was fun to watch and maybe this 'rerun' is a great opportunity for the younger generation that hasn't seen the original movies to become familiar with the subject.

Everything can happen on live television from TV anchors losing their temper over a subject or a mistake performed by someone in the crew; funny things happening behind cameras; and the most common a tragic event filmed just in the moment shocking many of us. What would you think of a film broadcast Live on TV, almost like a play where actors perform in the moment with the possibility of making mistakes, forget their lines and all that? "Fail Safe" remake of the 1964 classic starring Henry Fonda and Walter Matthau was the example I'm mentioning and it was filmed live in 2000 starring a great ensemble cast featuring names like Richard Dreyfuss, George Clooney, Harvey Keitel, Brian Dennehy, James Cromwell, Don Cheadle, Sam Elliott, John Diehl and Noah Wyle. It might be an awkward experience now that is available on DVD, it's gonna look like there's nothing exceptional except for being a good movie (better than the original I must say) because you won't notice that it was something performed live. Those who watched while it was happening in front of their faces must have loved the idea. One of the funny and troubled aspects of filming live is the use of actors in many different sets at a time e.g. Harvey Keitel had to run from one set to another in order to have his performance captured in time. The concept behind the scenes must have been very difficult, with many rehearsals along with a complex text that didn't make it easy on the actors, not to mention the whole crew behind this project and their almost impossible tasks. But in the end it all works great!Beautifully filmed in a HD camera in black and white by the wonderful cinematographer John A. Alonzo and directed by the great creator of "Dangerous Liasons" Stephen Frears, "Fail Safe" is a story set during the Cold War with the nuclear hysteria among Americans and Soviets (not based on a true story though). The biggest event here happens when a American Military plane invades the Soviet Union accidentally after receiving orders of attacking the communists but this order was a fail delivered by the new computer system on board of the plane. And worst than this is the fact that the military on the plane can't answer to the American President (Richard Dreyfuss) and or their own superiors simply because their voices can be faked, they think that this could be a false warning. So in this chaos the military crew believes in the lie and doesn't trust the truth. If the plot sound familiar it is. It is "Doctor Strangelove" but without the funny jokes. In case you don't know this but "Fail Safe" (the one directed by Sidney Lumet) and Kubrick's film were released in the same year and by the same distributor which caused a clash between these two films and the rest is history, Kubrick film was acclaimed and Lumet's dramatic story was something laughable at the time. So don't expect humor and too much cleverness in this film, it is a more serious approach of the mass hysteria caused by possible attacks with atomic bombs during the bitter days of Cold War.I really wish that the idea of TV movies being broadcast live become something more recurring. After all this experience was great, every actors were wonderful with no exceptions (Dreyfuss and Dennehy were outstanding) and it was very well made. 10/10

Previous comment says comparing this to the '64 film should not be considered, and for good reason. It pales in comparison. The fact that it was live did not help me get interested in the least. I felt I was watching actors playing roles. Not that it was their fault that Henry Fonda was unavailable, but I never felt I was watching the President. I felt I was watching Richard Dreyfus playing the President. Why would Clooney remake this? Did he think he could do it better? Did he think the story needed to be retold? The Cold War ended 20 years ago and such a situation today seems completely implausible. Contrarily, the impeccable timeliness of the original kept you riveted. If the viewer, unlike me, is somehow able to remain seated throughout this whole production, there is little doubt they will ever sit through it a second time.