O Homem com a Lente Mortal

Reporter Sean Connery is hot on the trail of a terrorist seeking nuclear weapons. He's tracked by the CIA and other governmental agencies as well as various media outlets. Everyone manipulates everyone and in the end you're left wondering if there is anyone we can trust either in government or in the media.

When first released the film was a seemingly over the top spoof of the media and the governments uneasy relationship. No one could believe that this film was even remotely connected to reality and so they ignored it. I saw this film in a completely empty theater back in 1982. I was all alone and my laughter filled the theater. I thought it was a wicked spoof that took things, like the British Whoops Apocalypse, to a possible but uncomfortable conclusion.

After a run on cable this film dropped off the face of the earth and I didn't see it again until 1991 when I rented it during the first Iraq War. The film suddenly was very relevant and despite the fact that the jokes were funny, I couldn't laugh very much because what happened in the film was mirrored by reality.

Now, 22 years later, film comes out on DVD as the world is even closer to the type of things that happen in the film. Its still funny, and even more uncomfortable.

If you can take a film thats a black comedy that has slightly dated in some ways, but remains right on target with whats going on in the world see this film. Its simply a funny movie thats going to make you see things a little bit differently.

Wrong Is Right (1982)

Plot In A Paragraph: The theft of two suitcase sized nuclear weapons, and their sale to a terrorist group, leads TV Newsman Patrick Hale (Connery) on an international chase to track them down, and uncover the twisting maze of apparent involvement of US Government agencies.

This is a movie that does not know what it wants to be. It's more than a bit of a mess. It tries to be a political satire, nuclear disaster movie, a paranoid thriller and it fails at being any.

It's not without its moments Leslie Nielsen advising the president by saying "Hit them hard, hit them with everything you got!! Just don't hit those oil wells" and seeing Connery take off his toupee and toss it to one side is another highlight. How many leading men would have the balls to do that?? Connery was never bothered by his hair, and whilst he never wore one away from the cameras, he wore hair pieces in some movies and didn't in others. An admirable trait, that he is that comfortable with himself.

Where it succeeds is being eerily accurate about future events. Islamic terrorism, media bias, reality television and government conspiracy. Connery remains as watchable as always but these are two of his worse hours. Released about 20 years to soon, the movie totally went over the heads of the audiences and flopped so badly in America, the studio changed the title in other markets to The Man With The Deadly Lens and ordered new artwork to make it look more like a Bond movie.

Wrong Is Right grossed $3 million at the domestic box office.

My wife and I viewed this movie this weekend....having NO idea what the plot would be as we bought the video in a bundle at a garage sale. We were absolutely stunned as the plot unfolded to the similarities contained in the 9/11 tragedy. We even heard Bin Laden's name mentioned! I have written one other review for IMDB.... I have no idea whether you will print this comment or not....but I HAD to mention it. This movie will NOW chill the marrow of your bones. It was meant to be a comedy. Thank you for letting me release this... I had to say SOMETHING to somebody! God bless America!

WRONG IS RIGHT was not marketed right when it came out in 1982 and was due to fail. The movie ad tag lines called it "Dr. Strangelove for the 80's," which was a lame attempt to encapsulate a dark comedy by referring to another classic dark comedy, which also dealt with nuclear bombs. I think people were put off by that and because it was two years after the Iranian Hostage Crisis, people didn't want a dark comedy about the Middle East. I loved it in 1982, I love it even more today, because in large part, it was right, wrong is right was right.

HOWEVER, it predicted so much of what has happened in the world since, that it is so prophetic as to be scary. I won't say anything from the movie, but if you watch it and realize when it was made, it's incredible and shows the true genius of those who made it.

Sean Connery leads a cast which is superb.

You have to remember, this was before CNN became the go to news channel.

Enjoy.

This is not Richard Brooks at his best as a movie-maker, but it is a powerful political film, with a great script (written by Brooks)which was wrongly (wrong is right?) dismissed as a "satire" and "comedy" in the early eighties. It is now seen in a very different light, as the whole plot seems to describe the events around the 9/11 attack and the war against terror, Afghanistan and Iraq. Brooks was the last American "cinema author": he wrote, produced and directed many of his works, including several world-class classics. This deserves to be seen as Brook's political testament, and one to be seriously considered and discussed. Why has this movie not been aggressively distributed right after 9/11? The answer might be in the story itself, which is now mixing story and history.