Politics and Hollywood–Fail Safe

Next week is election week, and what better time than now to write about films that have somewhat influenced America’s political process? It’s no secret that Hollywood loves politics. I mean take a look at the wannabe’s like Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and others voicing their opinions. I don’t agree with them, but that’s what makes our country great–public debate. And let’s not forget how one great classic actor became our president, Ronald Reagan. Hollywood is not just scandals. Movies, actors, directors have affected and still do, America’s political process. It’s a dangerous line to walk. Well, what I mean is, we must be careful about forming our political opinions solely on what an actor may opine or a director’s opinion about how things should be in his or her utopian world. We must separate fact from fiction and make sound decisions.

On that note, I begin with Sidney Lumet’s, “Fail Safe,” (1964). If you’ve ever seen “Dr. Strangelove,” it’s pretty much the same, but without the comedy. “Fail Safe” made within a year of “Dr. Strangelove” and at the height of the cold war was no laughing matter. It was a time when people were afraid of nuclear war with Russia. Many built bomb shelters on their properties.

Due to a mechanical error six U.S. bombers are accidentally ordered to head towards Moscow. One of which has nukes and is ordered to drop its load. America’s president (Henry Fonda) along with military and congressional leaders scramble to deal with the mess. Emotions among these men run high. Everyone has their own opinion of how to correct this most stupid mistake. Some are so stressed, understandably, that they break down, and snap. Ultimately the hard decision falls on the president. He decides to try to convince Russia it was all an error—the ultimate sacrifice. This decision has a heavy price tag.

The movie is suspenseful and absorbing. Filmed in black and white makes it all the more chilling. You will be glued to the TV until the end. Walter Mattheu’s role as a civilian adviser is brilliant and unforgettable. I will never see Larry Hagman the same after seeing him in the role as the president’s translator. The movie does not have the “feel good,” typical endings. It was a sobering, and solemn look at what could happen should some mechanical error occur in a world where countries are stacked with nukes. The hard decisions our government leaders would have to face should something like this occur is unspeakable.

Although this is a movie, just a movie, you can’t help but think, can this happen? At the very end of the movie there is a disclaimer stating that something like this could not happen; it mentions the government’s checks and balances. But I am sure that people in that day had their doubts. The movie is over 40 years old, but it still makes you wonder about a world with nukes. The movie made the president look somewhat confused initially and very nervous. The fact that he only had a translator with him in the room when negotiating with Russia sent chills down my spine. Where are the advisors? I thought.

The military seemed strong, but powerless in the face of disaster. The civilian advisor wanted blood, not sacrifice; he wanted the US’s full power unleashed on the enemy. You can see how opinions can be formed on one’s mind when viewing a political movie such as this one. So Hollywood will always make films that can influence politics.

In closing all I have to say is this, the movie is 40 years old, but nukes are still an issue today. And in my humble opinion our enemies although smaller than Russia, are a lot more audacious. If nukes were to be in the hands of a rogue nation, as we are facing today in nations like Korea, and Iran—then we have “failed” to be “safe.”