Review of The Peacemaker (1997) by Callen F — 02 Mar 2011

With as many action movies that emphasize emotional connection with the protagonist, which includes contrived two dimensional withdraws, and compromising professional integrity so that we can be assured that they are human, how much really goes wrong with this movie? For starters, the story isn't developing on anything innovative.

Systemic Cold War directives, terrorist motives, and corruptive espionage. Leaching on the front of this review, cut-out characters delivering their own ideas to add viscosity to the plot at points, and of course allow it to broaden and flow through at others.

As the plot moves through, we aren't really taken into the mind of anything real intricate for an adversary, and we aren't given more than a mentioning of the main character's backing. The action scenes that sustain this plot are discrete instead of with endurance, and we are given convenience to move to and fro along them each time.

You know what? The more I say is wrong with this movie is just adding to what I liked about it when I saw it. Next I might tell you that the characters only spend two hours not getting us confused with romantic sub-plots, and that we might only know of any differences by the end.

They probably haven't known each other much longer than we have them. This movie isn't trying to be much, and I think it couldn't do it any better. Instead of a single contradicting hero, we get the role split up in discrete measurements, with the conscience being formally educated, and the go to guy risen in rank with balls to spare.

Neither one of them needs to learn from one another as much as just trust experienced know-how and ability, and do their own job. At one point for two hours we feel that George Clooney's character cares about something other than his job, and at one point of the two hours, we learn that Nicole Kidman's character cares about something other than her life, which is her job, which is everyone else's lives.

They both happen to respectfully acknowledge each other's position as the movie moves. In fact, the only person that the movie tries to relate you to is the villain. That is the villain you don't know or care about, and why should we know about a guy only we can relate to, and why are we supposed to care about a guy that has everything done for him by the starting of the climax? Because it's realistic.

At least those two sentiments are, and everything in between is the whole Cold War dashboard that, at this film's time, has only been lighting up for like seven to eight years. In the end, I feel a nuclear threat followed through as well as this does deserves a two hour run time for its effort, and we shouldn't be lead to believe that authority is so sincerely rounded, or that villains are so emotionally and professionally dependent.