JJ79 Blog

Released: October 7, 1964
Director: Sidney Lumet

*****

Good, old fashioned paranoia. That's what Fail-Safe

deals in. Why is it "good" paranoia? Because of the no win situation the American President (Henry Fonda) is thrust into when an early warning computer system mistakenly sends bombers to take out Moscow. Because there is an atmosphere of distrust between the Americans and Soviets...and indeed within each group. Because, for every "out" the characters try to take, another problem springs up. Whether it be jet fuel, standard operating procedure or the desire to avert all out war, these people are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Told from the vantage point of Americans in different sectors of the government-the President, the Pentagon, military command-Fail-Safe morphs from an everyday thriller to something we don't expect, especially the last move the president has left. We know the bombing run is a mistake and everything possible has been done to recall the planes, but it isn't enough. Not for the Russians, who think this is a "my bad"-type of action designed to take out Moscow and absolve the US of any responsibility.

One of the best things about the film is we never expect the eventual outcome. The good guys always find ways out of their current predicament, manage to save the world and ferment a deeper understanding between different cultures. As much as they try here, it can't happen because of the mutual distrust between all the parties. Could a deal be hammered out if they were sitting face to face? Is there another option besides the only one left? What does this teach us? On the latter, it's a distrust of computers and a strong lesson for the ability of people to make informed decisions. If the bomber captain had not been trained for radio blackout, could he have been recalled? But I've said too much already.

When people don't trust one another, this is what happens. Long conversations, frayed nerves, people at each other's throats. And death. Without so much as showing an explosion, the president describes what will happen when the bombs get dropped on Moscow: phones melting, people dying, the sound of the bombers in the air. It's a particularly well done moment in the film, forcing the audience to think about the stakes. Obviously, there are more subplots with hawks and doves and one peculiarly out of place sequence with an army officer. But to give them all away or to talk about them in any context would ruin what is a solid piece of work from everyone involved. Especially the ending.

(spout.com)