Matthew Kresal Based on the bestselling novel by thriller writer Fredrick Forsyth, The Fourth Protocol stands out as one of the last of the breed of Cold War spy thrillers. Set amongst the issues of 1980's Cold War tensions, the film is the story of a KGB plot to detonate an atomic bomb in the UK near a US Air Force base, causing the deterioration of NATO as a result if UK security services don't stop it first. With good performances and a fine script that make up for some of the films shortcomings, The Fourth Protocol is a good example of the Cold War spy thriller.The films has good performances throughout. The cast is led by Micahel Caine and Pierce Brosnan. Caine is British agent John Preston, a bit of a loose cannon himself, who stumbles upon the plot and has to face his superiors skepticism before he can stop the plot. Brosnan is KGB agent Valeri Petrofsky who, masquerading as James Ross, is the man with the atomic bomb. The supporting cast is like a whose who of fine character actors including Joanna Cassidy, Ned Beatty, Julian Glover, Michael Gough, Ray McAnally and Ian Richardson. Sadly the actors playing Russian characters struggle with their accents at times but for the most part the performances work and help the film rather then hinder it. For the most part the film has good production values. The direction of John Mackenzie, coupled with the cinematography of Phil Meheux, the production design of Allan Cameron and the costumes of Tiny Nicholls mean the the film has a very realistic feel to it. For the most part the editing of Graham Walker helps as well, especially in the sequence where the bomb is assembled by the Brosnan and Cassidy characters. Unfortunately there's moments where the editing is rather hap-hazard with scenes of Petrofsky on his motorcycle, then packing his car, then on his motorcycle again. Another example is the sequences involving the McWhirter couple (played by Matt Frewer and Betsy Brantley) with Petrofsky which, while a fault of the script admittedly, should have been cut from the film as they serve no purpose and slow down the film's pace. Even with the issues with the film's editing, the production values hold up well.The film also has a fine script as well. Frederick Forsyth adapts his own best-selling novel, with help from writers George Axelrod and Richard Burridge. The script remains fairly faithful to the original novel though there are some significant differences (such as the amount of time spent investigating soviet agent Jan Marais at the beginning for example). This helps the film plot wise as it focuses the film more on the tense build-up to the possible detonation of an atomic bomb on British soil. The film nicely contrasts the arrival of the bomb's components from Petrofsky's side with Preston's attempts to derail the plot. The script also reveals a world of crosses, double-crosses and triple-crosses as the plot keeps getting more and more complicated as it goes on. The result is a well-written thriller.With good performances, good production values and a well-written script from noted thriller Fredrick Forsyth, The Fourth Protocol is a good example of the Cold War spy thriller. Even with editing issues, the film is a well-paced and tense story of Cold War intrigue and a story of how things might have bee. Even more surprising is that despite its being entrenched in 1980's Cold War politics the films dealing with the on-going threat of nuclear terrorism means it has relevance over two decades later. Thus the film remains a tense, if somewhat dated, thriller.

barney_holmes The British style might be mistaken for raw or badly made here, when the film merely lacks the ultra stylised form of Hollywood. A fine piece of work with messages that would be easily missed, but it's not a "message" film and stands up as a thriller as well.I especially liked the scenes between the lead character, played by Michael Caine and his son. His son answers "me!" when asked who is winning his war game. He "plays the game" with his father of looking through a list of suspects on a computer. The suggestions are clear when John Preston (Michael Caine) say's "it's all a game to you" to the political "players" at the end of the film.

bobstruckyard some comments on this film have stated that there are unnecessary killings of agents or witnesses, this is done to show the politics of the film and how there must be no trace back to those who planned the operation, whilst also portraying that petrofsky is a lethal killer, and as Caine says in the film "the best". A great story, and very believable, spies that remain hidden from each other and no excruciating scene where the bad guy reveals his plot to the good guy. Would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the operation had turned out differently, or the ending for that matter!Of course one of the best things about this film is the acting as previously stated by other people. Caine brings his character to life and is very believable in the role of John Preston, the agent who cares, and will "bend" the rules to make sure things get down. Brosnan is similarly good, his character will stop at nothing to complete his mission, he is a stone cold killer and this is portrayed well, he doesn't let anything get in the way of the mission.All in all a very good little film, much better than some of the tripe we get from Hollywood and with one of the finest British casts i've seen in some time.

Draculas_guest I wouldn't consider this movie a "classic" or even particularly "great", but for some reason I really enjoy watching this film. I haven't read the book, however I used to own "The Fourth Protocol" computer game for the Commodore 64, and was vaguely familiar with the basic storyline.I can't pinpoint what exactly it is I like about this movie, but I did enjoy seeing Michael Caine as a British agent tracking down the nuclear bomb. I could probably watch a whole series of films based around his character. I also liked some of the other characters and I think it had a good cast of actors. The workings of government agents was very compelling to watch, but it was good to see that the film wasn't overwhelmed by ridiculous gadgets and stuck to the drama involved.The 80's technology in the film also had an element of nostalgia about it. This film reminds me of a bygone age of the BBC Micro and Ford transit vans. In fact, I love watching the film just to see the various parts of England as well.I liked the fact that its a rather 'quiet' movie, but I do think it needed to be re-edited. Some parts of the film just skimmed through major plot developments without giving them time to breath, and other times the film would show a character hopping from various locations in England without giving a sense of the travelling in between. Watching this film would give the impression that England is only about 10 miles wide! Some elements of the film really needed to be fleshed out a bit more.This isn't the sort of movie I would go to a cinema to see, its more of a "Friday night in" movie that I would watch on TV. I would only recommend it to someone if they were die-hard fans of this genre.