SparkMore n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

SeeQuant Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

philosopherjack In its two unsubtle references to Franz Kafka, Stanley Kramer's The Domino Principle seemingly means to impress on us the immensity of what its protagonist finds himself within - a network of such reach and influence and connection that any attempt at defiance or assertion of free will is doomed to failure. But the effect, if anything, would be instead to point out the relative artistic blandness of Kramer's film; how the character's dilemma largely fails to illuminate anything meaningful about power and connection, or about our own natures, at least not in the way it intends to. Gene Hackman plays Tucker, languishing in prison with at least fifteen years left on his murder sentence; the unnamed organization, fronted by Richard Widmark's Tagge, offers him freedom, a well-funded new identity, and a resurrected relationship with his wife (Candice Bergen), all in return for unspecified services to be performed later (given that the movie starts off by flashing the term "Assassination" on the screen in several languages, the services will be obvious to the viewer at least). It might seem like a simple narrative weakness that of all the available stooges in all the country's prisons, the organization chose in Tucker just about the most contrary, uncooperative subject imaginable. On the other hand, that points to the most intriguing sub-textual question - if these guys (they're mostly although not exclusively guys) are so powerful, shouldn't their control on things be tighter, removing the need for such expensive, drawn-out convolutions? In this sense the movie resonates against incomprehensible contemporary theories of the "deep state" and the like, which mainly serve as rather plaintive assertions of (if not disguised wishes for) dark underlying order, even as all the evidence only suggests we're being dragged into increasing global chaos and erosion. Kramer's direction is perhaps a little more fluid than his sticky reputation suggests, leaving aside the thumping quasi-sermon at the start, but given such fanciful underpinnings it's all doomed from the first narrative domino.

gridoon2018 Not one of the classics of its subgenre (the political paranoia thriller), but still a solid film with a superb Hackman, a top-notch supporting cast (Richard Widmark exudes oily authority with just a smile), good cinematography, and plot twists (not all of them plausible). The scene where Hackman observes from a plane a bomb being planted inside Widmark's car is terrific. A very 1970s film - right down to its pessimistic ending. **1/2 out of 4.

dirtydealers People are being too hard on the film. Sometimes we should just sit back and enjoy the story without attempting to "review" it.The whole thing comes together when Hackman decides not to pull the trigger but his target still goes down. Then the fun begins as everyone about him also "go down".Just think JFK and all the people associated in any way with his assassination, who's lives ended abruptly and in questionable ways and you'll appreciate what is implied in this film.I think it's an excellent interpretation of what may well have occurred. Though the EXACT story line my not have been followed (hindsight here after reading Jim Maars "Crossfire") but it's what is implied that is of interest.I'd love to get a copy of it to view it again. In light of what is known today, The Domino Principle is right on.

Valentin T Mocanu The greatest games of Kasparov or Fischer can be a mess for a total rookie. This is a great movie. There is no special agency involved in the plot. This is the clue! This is a PRIVATE plot, built as a PRIVATE enterprise. This is a self-destructive and a self organized plot. As a conclusion, the scenario described the perfect professional plot: private, self –organized, self-destructive, with no trace at the end. Anyone can be behind the plot: a smart "director" with some money. All can be done just by delegation. The "director" must be just trigger. If the normal viewer cannot see the essence of the plot in the explicit sequences of the movie, a real plot has fewer chances to be discovered. All the actors' performances are well done , with some special mention for Gene Hackman and Mickey Rooney.