The Enemy Within

You need to see Seven Days in May before seeing this movie or before posting an opinion on it. This movie is really a poor remake of it. The former occurs in a tense cold-war America and the Black & White photography adds to the eerie feel. (Black and White, just like the general sees things.) If after seeing the original, you wish to compare, then see this one. I made the mistake of viewing this first, and then I enjoyed the original less than I should have. I guess the only positive difference that this movie added to the story is that the high-stakes players were not all white men in "The Enemy Within" with other characters in predictable roles. The Enemy within has women and black men in high positions. It also wraps a family around the main character to make him elicit more empathy. Every actor in this made-for-HBO thriller needs to be forgiven for needing a paycheck.

I have seen the original Seven Days in May no fewer than 15 times. I know, I need to get a life. However, the original cast of Lancaster, Douglas, March, Gardner, Houseman, Duggan, etc. was pure magic. The tension was palpable,and the chemistry was awesome.

That being said, The Enemy Within was a light, or lite, version of the original. Could there be more of a mis-casting than putting poor old Jason Robards as the Joint Chiefs Chairman. He looked like he had oatmeal drooling on his bib. Don't get me wrong, he was a very fine actor, and perhaps he could have pulled it off when he was twenty or thirty years younger.

The rest of the cast with the exception of the sultry Dana Delaney was weak. The plot was John Kerryesque nuanced. The ending was farcical.

I enjoy the idea of remaking fine older movies. Perhaps George Clooney can pull it off, as he did with the remake of Failsafe. However, The Enemy Within comes across as a poor man version of a classic thriller.

If humankind ever evolved to the point where godlike feats were remotely possible, we'd be in big trouble, but the first order of business would no doubt be to go back to the garden of Eden and remake everything. Not that it needed remaking. Just for the challenge. And the paycheck.

I am not usually so sassy about remakes -- actors have got to eat, agents have to make deals, the maw that is cable TV needs to be fed -- but this one gets under my craw.

The original wasn't merely good, it wasn't merely great, it was perfect, it was so good that the original A-B rolls should have been sent directly to a film museum instead of merely being stored. The original had some of the best performance on record from three of the best actors of all time - I am talking Lancaster, Douglas and March. And writing by Serling. I mean, it does not get any better than that.

But try telling THAT to the clowns behind this production. In fairness it is not all bad. Whitaker has achieved in his career what some like to call "journeyman" status, he can take almost any role and make it real. Waterston was a delight to watch then, still is now. And Dana Delaney, well, let's just say that the high watermark of her career might just be her Lois Lane voice, and leave it at that.

But here is thing, and this should be a cautionary tale for other producers whose reach exceeds their grasp. Even before you started production on THE ENEMY WITHIN, the odds, the probabilities, the Sigmas, of making this equal to or better than the original were slim and none. And Slim had just left the building.

So kind viewer you have a clear choice. Watch this for passable entertainment.

Or track down the original for the film experience of a lifetime.

Up to you.

A tepid updated remake of John Frankenheimer's 'Seven Days In May' with even for cable television has that television movie sheen about it despite a starry cast.

Colonel Casey (Forest Whitaker) discovers his boss, General Lloyd (Jason Robards) with the Secretary of Defence Charles Potter (Josef Sommer) plan to remove President William Foster (Sam Waterston) from office and replace him with Vice President Kelly, who is more willing to increase defence spending. They wish to initiate constitutional somersaults to make the move less like a coup.

Colonel Casey only has days to get sufficient evidence to protect the president and gets help from the Russians.

The problem here is the president is so weakly presented. The Attorney General is killed and he launches no forensic investigation.

On the other hand General Lloyd and Charles Potter are a charmless bunch of fascists who make Richard Nixon look like a pussycat. There was no way people were going to follow them.

The film was well acted by Forest Whitaker but lacked drama and tension.

Most remakes of an already successful movie are bound to be faulted for their alleged pale-by-comparisons that are all too common when comparing two movies . But since I have copies of both , I'd like to give my support for this updated remake .While it may be faulted for lacking some of the ingredients of the original , it should be commended for adding some components that the original did not have . In the original, Jiggs Casey apparently has no family but does have a somewhat platonic relationship with the former lover of the turncoat general . In the remake , Colonel Casey(whatever happened to "Jiggs", LOL ?) has a son that he is trying(somewhat unsuccessfully) to connect with . His son figures in one of the more dramatic scenes involving a Russian Agent . The VP is murdered along with a female employee of the WH staff . Although there are no meetings in parking garages or plots to kidnap the POTUS at a secluded lake there are plenty of suspenseful moments . I did feel that too much of the original dialogue was inserted in the sequel that didn't fit in with the remake as well as it did original . But overall, I thought this movie was worth looking at . It should be looked on as an update rather than a cheap rip off of the original .