Watch The Peacemaker For Free
The Peacemaker
When a train carrying atomic warheads mysteriously crashes in the former Soviet Union, a nuclear specialist discovers the accident is really part of a plot to cover up the theft of the weapons. Assigned to help her recover the missing bombs is a crack Special Forces Colonel.
Release : | 1997 |
Rating : | 6 |
Studio : | DreamWorks Pictures, |
Crew : | Art Department Coordinator, Assistant Art Director, |
Cast : | George Clooney Nicole Kidman Marcel Iureș Aleksandr Baluev Rene Medvešek |
Genre : | Action Thriller |
Watch Trailer
Cast List
Related Movies
Reviews
everything you have heard about this movie is true.
The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.
The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.
Watching it is like watching the spectacle of a class clown at their best: you laugh at their jokes, instigate their defiance, and "ooooh" when they get in trouble.
A by-the-numbers actioner with good production values but a lame story. Kidman's character is an in-over-her-head analyst who is saved from her womanly weakness over and over by lanky, devil-may- care scallywag Clooney. Really, it's a ridiculously demeaning portrayal of a woman with authority, and Kidman adds not a whit of irony to her role.The plodding pace drains the energy from Hollywood's best-quality visuals and stunt work. Clooney's charm isn't enough to offset the wooden performances by those around him. Everybody marches in lock step through a series of ever more unlikely developments, toward a conclusion that can't come a minute too soon.This movie reflects its producers' contempt for its audience by giving us the clichés and stereotypes we've seen a hundred times before, and not a whit of originality to offset them. It takes a special kind of cynicism to waste this much money and talent, but director Mimi Leder is down to the job.
Made in 1997, although very much relevant in today's world, The Peacemaker stars George Clooney and Nicole Kidman in this action thriller revolving around potential terrorist attacks in New York. The film takes us to a variety of countries as our two leads hunt down the men responsible for selling nuclear warheads to those hell bent on causing pain and disruption to a country they feel is responsible for destroying their families lives.The Peacemaker opens with a brilliant opening sequence where a corrupt Russian General steals nine nuclear war heads from a train transporting them across the country. In an attempt to cover up their actions they set off one of the bombs in the process, killing up to 15,000 people. The cover up however is not successful and Lt Tom Devoe (Clooney) sees straight through the smoke screen, and upon briefing the acting adviser Dr Julia Kelly (Kidman) the two dart off across the World on the trail of the missing warheads, both using very opposite techniques to find their answers. From Vienna to Eastern Europe to New York City, Clooney and Kidman do all they can to prevent one of the biggest disasters to occur in western civilisation.For starters there is nothing particularly original about this film. The premise is a slight variation on something we have seen so many times before. The problem with this is in the writing where included throughout are several clichéd moment that we have seen in many films of the same era. For example we have the typical cursing every time something bad is said or a gun is fired, we have the typical screaming sidekick teamed up with the unfazed hard man (Kidman and Clooney), and as well we have the run 'with only ten seconds to spare' and jump as the bomb explodes in the background, as a matter of fact we have that twice. It is a slight shame really considering the opening sequence is very well done, but the pacing there on in just drags until the next set piece which is then followed again by slow pacing before the next set piece. This can only be a fault in the writing where we are literally given all the stereotypes of this type of film in one two hour block. The best part about the writing is the B story involving a diplomat who has an agenda for his deadly act. The story is dripped in slowly at the beginning and then brought to the forefront for the final act. It is the best part about the story as it is something slightly different than your typical Russian baddie plot; however it isn't particularly the norm that a B story actually completely overtakes the main plot of a film for the final thirty minutes of it. It makes the opening ninety minutes feel a little clunky and shows how weak the main plot actually is.Some of these issues could be down to the direction, which although not entirely bad does seem a little flat. Mimi Leder does manage to get a decent performance from Clooney but Kidman doesn't seem out of her comfort zone. The opening sequence is very well directed, and the music really adds to the drama, but the other action sequences seem pretty lifeless, especially the chase scene through the streets of Vienna. Also something that was heavily noticed whilst watching was the amount of time taken to chase this man throughout New York without the bomb going off when he had put a time limit on the bomb for a much shorter amount of time. Put it this way an entire third act which is about twenty minutes of screen time told us it was only about seven minutes in their world. It was definitely not plausible and there is a way they could have got over this.The film isn't entirely bad but there is enough wrong with it to make it not particularly good. The tired clichés really take over after such a promising start to proceedings. The film could have, and probably should have, been better but the lifeless way in which the story was told, and the dull action sequences, really hindered the possibilities the film could have had. The music was one of the standout points, composed by Hans Zimmer, and from knowing his work in this day and age it is very obviously his work and the soundtrack booms over every tiny piece of action, unfortunately the action fails to live up to the score. I can't particularly say I was disappointed with this film as the opening scene was definitely one I was pleased to have seen, the thing is I could have happily turned it off after the opening twenty minutes and have ended up seeing a much better film.2 / 5For more reviews: www.tolli-movieworld.blogspot.com
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.
The main problem with this movie is the notion of a Bosnian Serb as a nuclear terrorist, especially in the United States. There's just no historical basis for it. If he was just a madman acting alone, driven to madness by the death of his daughter, it might have made a little more sense, but he had organized help in the movie. The notion of any kind of organized Bosnian Serb terrorist attack against the U.N., also resulting in the deaths of large numbers of American citizens, flies in the face of historical reality. If the terrorists had been suicidal Islamist terrorists, it would have actually been a bit more believable, at least from a historical standpoint, although certainly offensive to some. This movie is deeply flawed, from a political perspective, and ultimately comes across as a piece of political propaganda.