Watch Deterrence For Free

Good movie but grossly overrated

Good concept, poorly executed.

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

As for a movie, technically, it was great.Well written script, that started very innocently and quickly snowballed into a nightmare. It is strange that the entire movie was shot on one stage... the diner... but yet at the same time sent you around the world.Acting was good and believable with even a bit of humor sprinkled in.The thought that ordinary every-day citizens could sit over the President's shoulder in the middle of a crises is interesting. Which ones of us have never said.... "If I were there, I would have told the President this or that"? So the movie was was technically well done.After watching it today I have a sick feeling in my stomach. Although well done, it was very irresponsible. The U.S. drops a nuclear bomb on a city, destroying it and it's citizens. Though some discomfort with the decision is shown by the President, ultimately he is made out to be some sort of hero. Don't get me wrong... I feel that some sort of retaliation would be in order... but the use of nuclear weapons as a preemptive strike is something that can never be done by a peaceful civilization. And to make a movie about it... that in many ways glorifies it... is irresponsible.I think it interesting that this movie was made almost 10 years ago. Where since a President (George W. Bush) was faced with a similar crises, (9-11) and chose to deal with it, without nuclear weapons. To sum it up... an interesting movie, that was well done, but was horrifically irresponsible, and should have never been made. I will copy and paste this over to the forums, as I am sure some will want to reply.

I was pretty shocked when I saw the overall IMDb rating and the negative user comments. Considering the "one set" limitation - you have to have some pretty good character / dialogue to maintain interest - and I thought the film kept up just the right amount of tension until the truly shocking end - see recent events in Iraq.I thought the whole point was that the US was threatened during the re-election phase of a President out to prove his metal - Pollack was brilliant.Its set in a Diner so that the President is FORCED to listen to Joe and Joanna Public - likewise they get to see the inhuman pressures put upon the person in that Office.Who cares if the bloody B2 looked like an F17 or whatever the bloody plane is supposed to be THAT AIN'T GONNA RUIN THE MOVIE - it was made on a shoestring and is a great example of how to make a substantial picture without spending millions of dollars. It gains gravity from the storyline rather than an A list cast. A strong, gripping film that seems to have grown in relevance over the years.

A very strange, ill-directed mess. Starts in black and white, for no evident reason. It includes a waitress character who's supposedly French-Canadian but sounds more like a, oh, Romanian or something. The basic plot -- a presidential candidate marooned in a diner during a Colorado snow storm, finding himself the unexpected commander in chief dealing with a sudden war in Iraq -- is nonsensical and absurd.The acting is appalling throughout -- actors doing the job for the paycheque, under the direction of a hack.This would have been a bad made-for-TV movie.It's an utterly terrible attempt at satire, which turns out a foolish mess.Avoid this crap if you can.

I enjoyed the drama much more than the pedantry. It can be argued that only the certifiable would favor starting a nuclear war. Stanley Kubrick made that clear in STRANGELOVE. At the end, Pollock finally lit his soggy cigar: Is this a veiled reference to Curtis LeMay, another short, cigarred warrior, considered psychotic by many? I must comment on Lurie's statement in the Director's Commentary that nuking Japan, according to historians, was unnecessary, and that the casualty projection (@ one million) rate in an invasion was a cynical overstatement. That may be politically correct and VERY Hollywood, but it fails to consider the condition of our own armed forces and the nation. We, too, were exhausted. It has been said that Admiral Halsey, following the Okinawa invasion, did not think that he could fight any longer and wanted to resign. And he was a pretty tough cookie. I suggest the Mr. Lurie might have been less white whine and brie preachy.