Das vierte Protokoll

Usually we get treated to one type of spy movie these days. This type is made up of good looking young agents with all sorts of high tech weapons and gear. There are beautiful women who are just lining up to sleep with the good guy. The Fourth Protocol is not one of these movies and thank goodness! It is one of the most realistic cold war spy movies out there. Despite it's age(1987) it is relevant to today's world. There is nuclear terrorism and real looking spies. Michael Cain plays a British agent and is too busy looking for Russian spies to be sexing up fine Russian female agents. In fact he has a family. He is excellent as the seasoned agent who uses his mind and not gadgets to track down the Russian spy played by Pierce Brosnan. For those of you who saw Brosnan in Tailor of Panama and found it refreshing to see him play a creep secret agent will be in for a real treat in The Fourth Protocol. Brosnan plays Petrofsky, a young hot shot KGB agent who tries to slice and dice his way to the top. I mean Petrofsky is a flat out cold blooded killer. He makes the guy in Tailor of Panama look like a saint. He has a conscience but he doesn't let it get in the way of his mission to explode a nuclear weapon on a US Air Force base in Great Britain in order to make it look like the US had a nuclear accident. Petrofsky was the right man for the job he would blow up two or three thousand people just like that. If he wasn't a KGB agent, he could surely find work as a serial killer.

The story moves along quickly and sometimes a bit too quickly. However it doesn't detract from the movie. The movie looks more like a cop movie in the way the investigation unfolds. When they finally find out what's going on there is a good action sequence that doesn't go over the top. It just serves the purpose in this movie. Other things I liked was the scene where they constructed the bomb.

I would recommend this one to anyone who likes spy movies and are tired of the James Bond rigmarole.

Rayvyn

I was quite surprised to see that this movie got a 5.9 rating. I think that it's a lot better than that. Brosnan is good, the plot is sufficiently tricky to be interesting, and Caine delivers the kind of reliable, excellent performance that you can count on (at least when the movie isn't total junk -- he only seems to phone it in when the movie is entirely hopeless). The ending is a little abrupt, but I can't find any fault with it other than that. (The cast is uniformly strong, too.) Maybe people underrate the movie because the movie is low-budget. It looks like a British TV-movie, and maybe it was, but I find it easy to get past the production values when the acting is good.

I've seen it twice, and it holds up to a second viewing.

some comments on this film have stated that there are unnecessary killings of agents or witnesses, this is done to show the politics of the film and how there must be no trace back to those who planned the operation, whilst also portraying that petrofsky is a lethal killer, and as Caine says in the film "the best". A great story, and very believable, spies that remain hidden from each other and no excruciating scene where the bad guy reveals his plot to the good guy. Would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the operation had turned out differently, or the ending for that matter!

Of course one of the best things about this film is the acting as previously stated by other people. Caine brings his character to life and is very believable in the role of John Preston, the agent who cares, and will "bend" the rules to make sure things get down. Brosnan is similarly good, his character will stop at nothing to complete his mission, he is a stone cold killer and this is portrayed well, he doesn't let anything get in the way of the mission.

All in all a very good little film, much better than some of the tripe we get from Hollywood and with one of the finest British casts i've seen in some time.

Rogue spies try to undermine the Fourth Protocol, which is a secret agreement between the USA, Britain and Russia to cease smuggling nuclear weapons into their respective countries. A Soviet agent is sent to the UK to stage a nuclear accident that could be blamed on the Americans and set off a chain reaction of events to unbalance this stand-off.

The Fourth Protocol is based on a novel written by Frederick Forsyth. I have never read it but have read others by this author. His style focuses on the intricate detail of the spy/politics of his thrillers, while his characters contrastingly always seem to be really cardboard, with very little recognisably human about them. With this in mind it's not too surprising that The Day of the Jackal was his most successful book, seeing as the very blankness of the central character was an actual important plot point. But usually this weakness in characterisation is more noticeable. The Fourth Protocol is a quite typical Forsyth spy thriller, in that it has a fairly detailed plot and paper thin characters. Michael Caine phones it in as a Harry Palmer type spy who doesn't play by the rules. It's a quite weak and clichéd character and to be honest Caine doesn't bring much to the table with this one. Pierce Brosnan, on the other hand, is pretty good as the cold Soviet killer. Like in Day of the Jackal, it's this villain who is the more interesting when set alongside the dull heroes, meaning that its actually the bad guy whom we want to succeed, which I'm sure could not have exactly been the original intention. Unlike Caine, Brosnan is playing against type and certainly makes better work of what he is given and is certainly the best thing about the movie. On the whole, this is a pretty standard spy film, with nothing very distinctive about it. Despite its generic nature, it is quite enjoyable though.

I wouldn't consider this movie a "classic" or even particularly "great", but for some reason I really enjoy watching this film. I haven't read the book, however I used to own "The Fourth Protocol" computer game for the Commodore 64, and was vaguely familiar with the basic storyline.

I can't pinpoint what exactly it is I like about this movie, but I did enjoy seeing Michael Caine as a British agent tracking down the nuclear bomb. I could probably watch a whole series of films based around his character. I also liked some of the other characters and I think it had a good cast of actors. The workings of government agents was very compelling to watch, but it was good to see that the film wasn't overwhelmed by ridiculous gadgets and stuck to the drama involved.

The 80's technology in the film also had an element of nostalgia about it. This film reminds me of a bygone age of the BBC Micro and Ford transit vans. In fact, I love watching the film just to see the various parts of England as well.

I liked the fact that its a rather 'quiet' movie, but I do think it needed to be re-edited. Some parts of the film just skimmed through major plot developments without giving them time to breath, and other times the film would show a character hopping from various locations in England without giving a sense of the travelling in between. Watching this film would give the impression that England is only about 10 miles wide! Some elements of the film really needed to be fleshed out a bit more.

This isn't the sort of movie I would go to a cinema to see, its more of a "Friday night in" movie that I would watch on TV. I would only recommend it to someone if they were die-hard fans of this genre.