Tacticalin An absolute waste of money

2freensel I saw this movie before reading any reviews, and I thought it was very funny. I was very surprised to see the overwhelmingly negative reviews this film received from critics.

Megamind To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Tin_ear This is an unusual film in that the satire is razor sharp and doesn't age a bit, but the film doesn't work at all. There are a few decent gags, but the film is ragged and not terribly funny. The movie doesn't know whether its wants to be a comedy, a serious drama, a caper, or an action flick. And it doesn't do any of them that well, which is a shame because the film had a lot of potential. Instead Connery pretty much plays the lead role as a kind of pseudo-James Bond, or Mike Wallace on steroids. I'm not sure if the tone of the film was an artistic decision or a corporate one. You'd think they'd go the Kubrick route not The Pink Panther direction. But maybe the filmmakers were trying to avoid precisely that comparison. I'd love to ask Richard Brooks just that. An interesting and long-forgotten novelty, it's watchable solely for curiosity's sake. But heck, even a mediocre Connery movie is worth your time...except Highlander II.

lost-in-limbo What you're about to read is confidential. Well actually it's not, its show-business. This sorely forgotten 80s feature "Wrong is Right" is a scathingly windswept satirical pot-shot on the political scene and the influence of the media's technology manipulation on portraying that. Sean Connery plays Patrick Hale an international TV commentator who gets caught up in the thick of it, when he takes on a story involving spies, nuclear bombs, suicidal terrorists, arm-dealers, the CIA and an American president on an election campaign. It's very smarting, but bombastically all over-the-place and knotty. Where it's humour is sharp, cynical and to the point, if gloomy in its resolution of who's really using who. The cast is a strong one to boot. Connery cruises through the role, but it's an outstanding support cast which steals the show. John Saxon, Henry Silva, Robert Conrad, G.D. Spradlin, George Grizzard (who's perfectly cast as the president of America), Katherine Ross, Hardy Kruger, Leslie Nelson and Dean Stockwell add to the biting entertainment. Director Richard Brooks hectically keeps this circus of conspiracies ticking along, adding numerous big-scale actions to this intrusively whirlwind crusade."If it's good for America, it can't be wrong".

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 ]

Joseph Harder I wish this movie was more readily available..it IS prophetic.I saw it nearly twenty years ago and have never forgotten it.Connery puts in one of his best performances as the cynical, jaded, journalist.I would urge all students of US foreign policy to rent-and analyze-this film