bkoganbing Times might be right for a critical reassessment of Wrong Is Right. Made during the Reagan era a lot of history has happened subsequently and Richard Brooks may have been a prophet just as Paddy Chayefsky was in Network. The topper may be the election of our current president.Sean Connery whose international stardom didn't quite guarantee the box office returns for Wrong Is Right that the producers hoped for plays a cynical newscaster an observer on the scene of some history making events.All starting with the spiritual revelations of Ron Moody playing the monarch of a desert middle eastern kingdom who gets some mystical revelations about starting a holy war. To do so he purchases a pair of suitcase nukes from arms dealer Hardy Kruger and makes alliance with a Mid Eastern terrorist Henry Silva.There's a presidential election involved as incumbent George Grizzard tries to show himself as tough as the office demands, especially those demands voiced by former President Leslie Nielsen who is trying to do a Grover Cleveland and return to the White House. The Twin Towers of New York actually play a role here so a faithful remake isn't possible. The end is right out of Duck Soup. Besides those mentioned I enjoyed Rosalind Cash as the Vice President, G.D. Spradlin as the harassed CIA head, and Robert Conrad with the Dickensian name of General Wombat.He and Connery share the climax in an ending superb and sublime.This one is a sleeper, check it out.

flackjacket First of all, several have said this was a dark comedy/political satire. Sorry I just don't see any humor at all in this movie. None whatsoever. I came across it when it was recently broadcast on TV. My first thought was, that it was a low budget made for TV movie from the 70's. Mainly because it had the same level of directing and editing as The Six Million Dollar Man.My second thought was, how did all these big name stars get roped into a such a low budget movie with such a bad script and poor directing. The President's war room set is a bunch of desks that look like they were purchased at Staples during a 10% off sale, with chrome phones from Spencer's Gifts. But even with a better set, the editing is so disoriented and choppy it would still be unwatchableSecondly, there's many claiming this movie was somehow prophetic. As if the writers somehow saw into the future. Well these reviewers are either too young to know or don't remember what was common knowledge the year this film was made. The best selling book, "The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence" was published in 1974, eight years before this film. Terrorist had been threatening to strike American and Israel since the late 60's. Hence the plot.So it's not like the writers magically divined what would happen in the future, they were going off things that were already common knowledge at the time. The operations of the CIA, the terrorist's threats, the back room operations of the Executive Branch aren't something that suddenly happened on 9/11. It was something everyone knew about years before this film was made.Overall, it's like watching a low-budget made for TV movie from the 70's. An overly long episode of "It takes A Thief" or "I Spy". There is no humor, dark or light, nor any satire. The directing, sets, editing and story line are so bad, that no amount of big name actors could pull it out of the toilet.

Matthew Kresal Some films are truly ahead of their time. The 1982 satire Wrong Is Right is such a film. Though deemed unbelievable when first released nearly three decades ago its satire of TV news being driven more by entertainment then facts, Islamic terrorists seeks nuclear weapons and international intrigue makes it even more relevant today. In short it's a satire for today from yesterday.The film features a fine cast. Sean Connery stars as Patrick Hale, a globe trotting TV reporter who uncovers the story of a life time. Connery shows off a considerable talent for doing black comedy throughout and comes across well as a cynical reporter who ends up virtually being the voice of reason towards the films end. George Grizzard (as the President), Rosalind Cash (as the Vice-Pesident), Robert Webber (as the CIA director) and Dean Stockwell (as the President's chief of staff) come across well as various government officials caught up in the crisis while in the midst of a presidential election. There's also Robert Conrad as the trigger happy General Wombat in charge of the counter terrorism task force in a performance perhaps a bit too reminiscent of George C. Scott in Doctor Strangelove. Facing off against them are the terrorists lead by Rafeeq (Henry Silva) and Leslie Nielsen as a proto-George W. Bush presidential candidate twenty years before the fact. That's not forgetting either Kathrine Ross as Sally Black or Hardy Kruger as a European arms dealer as both have small but important roles in the films. All together they make for a fine cast for this satire.It's the satire and script that really makes this film stand out. Inspired by or loosely based on. depending on your choice of phrase, Charles McCarry's 1979 novel The Better Angels which like the film was deemed unbelievable at the time it originally came out. But the film would prove to be eerily prophetic of the world more then two decades later. Terrorists blow up airplanes without warning, a wealthy Middle-Eastern nation seeks to buy nuclear weapons for terrorists and suicide bombers blow themselves up with no warning may have been unbelievable thirty years ago but are practically ripped from the headlines of today. Plus things such as Leslie Nielsen's presidential candidate Mallory who, as not just played by Nielsen but written as well, could easily be mistaken for a satire of George W. Bush if the film hadn't been made in the 1980's but sometime in the last ten years. Yet all the while the film plays not so much as a satire but as a thriller as Hale explores the worlds of his own TV companies bias, government conspiracies, election year politics and Islamic terrorism. But the film works because of its heavy topics rather then despite them because it exposes the sheer absurdities that lies at the heart of it all. While the technology and fashions are those of the early 1980's the film could easily have been released, as the opening of the film states, in the time between now and later.Armed with a fine cast and an excellent satire/thriller script, Wrong Is Right stands out nearly three decades after its original release. With its plot of TV news being driven more by entertainment then facts, Islamic terrorists seeks nuclear weapons and international intrigue it's hard to believe that a film from thirty years ago could speak so much more about the decades after it was originally released. But this film does and it would appear to have much more effect now then it has ever had. Wrong Is Right is a satire for today from nearly three decades.

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