SnoopyStyle
Russian general massacres his troops, steals nuclear warheads from a transport train, and hides the evidence by setting off one warhead. Russian says it's an accident. White House nuclear expert Dr. Julia Kelly (Nicole Kidman) is sure that the bomb is detonated deliberately by terrorists and Special Operations Colonel Thomas Devoe (George Clooney) interrupts with an opinion that this is actually a robbery. The two have to work together to track down the missing nukes with the help of the Russian counterpart Dimitri Vertikoff (Armin Mueller-Stahl).This is basically a movie running on tracks. There is no originality. The villains are too interchangeable and not very compelling. It needs a big name to be the big bad. The investigation doesn't have enough tension. It tries to be a bit funny with Clooney camping it up a little. There is some action but it's not spectacular.
mihnerts
Well, the 5.9 average doesn't do justice to this movie. The truth is that 'The Peacemaker' is a masterpiece and the reason is simple: it's captivating, thrilling and engages the human mind without relying on cgi effects but on masterfully directed subtle action scenes. I do not want to analyze it more because if I do I will miss the point. I will only say this: in many reviews we can read that it's a decent film and has nothing new to offer to the genre... In reality this is the exceptional thing about this film: it takes common place material, used again and again, and transforms them to something brilliant. This is one definition for the word masterpiece on cinema! I loved it!
FlashCallahan
Two trains crash somewhere in Russia, one carrying a nuclear payload.A nuclear explosion follows the crash and the world is on alert...However, White House nuclear expert Dr. Julia Kelly doesn't think it was an accident.Special Operations Intelligence Officer Colonel Thomas Devoe doesn't think so either. Together they must unravel a conspiracy that goes from Europe to New York, to stop a terrorist who has no demands...before Out of Sight made Clooney officially the coolest man on the planet, he was the one from ER who seemed desperate to be a huge movie star.A few of his movies, including this one, were so high profile, but so poorly received and average at the box office.It's because they seem so unique with the synopsis, but the execution is so average. Here Clooney has a bit of a swagger wearing white trousers and smirking at Kidman, who justs gets in a fluster every now and again.Sounds like the perfect recipe for a romantic comedy. But this is about Nuclear Weapons going missing. And the film drags in places.One of dreamworks first releases, it does have its moments. The car chase is quite good, and a siege on a bridge is visually impressive, as is the claustrophobic feel of the final act.But for a film that is over two hours long, these really seem few and far between, when the rest of the time we are treated to heated debate.The two stars are good, and you can tell Clooney will be big, It's a good job he met Soderbergh though. Heaven knows what would have happened to his career otherwise.
charles000
I was particularly interested in this film because I was curious how Hollywood would treat this type of scenario, and of course, anything with Nicole Kidman in it has to be at least somewhat entertaining. I actually worked for DOE, in the national labs at Berkeley and also Los Alomos, a number of years ago, and a consequence of such have become quite familiar with nuclear ordnance in its myriad forms, including the so-called "suitcase nukes" that both the former Soviet Union & the USA have developed.Make no mistake, these types of miniaturized nuclear devices do exist, including from decommissioned MRV ballistic missiles and the like. The concept of nuclear warheads, slipping into the wrong hands does very much exist, although in current times this may more likely come from Pakistan, or any variety of "rogue" states who could acquire such through third party brokers. As a side note, any of these types of nuclear devices do require periodic "refurbishing", the details of which I won't elaborate on, but after a certain length of time, the capacity for thermo-nuclear detonation does diminish.Having said all that, does the film realistically portray any of this actually translating into a potential situation? Well . . . not exactly, but I think it's interesting that at least the concept was presented in a not overly ridiculous fashion. Sadly, with tremendous irony, I noted the twin trade towers in several of the background scenes. How odd it is that history often unfolds in the least expected ways. It was, after all, not a miniaturized nuke that was the greatest act of terrorism and evil ever perpetrated on US citizens, but rather planes filled with people . . . and boxcutters as the weaponry of terror.Was the film entertaining? Yes. Could it have been done better? Not sure if I have a qualified answer, but it certainly could have been done much worse.A bit dated? Perhaps . . . but I still think it's worth the time to watch, and contemplate.
AD
