Okay, tapeheads, let’s rewind to a weird corner of the video store shelves, probably tucked somewhere between a dusty Chuck Norris flick and a forgotten sci-fi oddity. Remember stumbling across those covers that just screamed 80s intrigue, maybe featuring a big star looking intense against a backdrop of global chaos? That’s the vibe of 1982’s Wrong Is Right (sometimes found under the more straightforward, but less fun, title The Man with the Deadly Lens), a head-scratching, often cynical, and strangely fascinating political satire/thriller starring none other than Sean Connery. Finding this one felt like unearthing a slightly bent, off-kilter transmission from the peak of Cold War paranoia.
### Connery Unleashed in Media Mayhem
Forget Bond for a second. Here, Sean Connery plays Patrick Hale, a superstar TV news correspondent who seems to have a direct line to world leaders, terrorists, and anyone else involved in global skullduggery. He zips around the globe, camera crew in tow, getting scoops that make Walter Cronkite look like he’s reporting on local bake sales. The plot? Hoo boy. It involves stolen suitcase nukes, a radical Arab leader (Henry Silva chewing scenery gloriously), conspiracies within the US government, a twitchy President (George Grizzard), a hilariously gung-ho general (Robert Conrad), and the ever-present threat of World War III being triggered by, well, pretty much anything.
It’s a dense, almost chaotic narrative, adapted from Charles McCarry's novel "The Better Angels" by the film’s director, the legendary Richard Brooks. Now, Brooks was a heavyweight – the man gave us searing dramas like In Cold Blood (1967) and Elmer Gantry (1960). Seeing his name attached to something this… frantic… feels surprising. It’s clear he was aiming for sharp satire about media manipulation and political absurdity, themes that feel startlingly relevant today. You watch Hale manipulating situations for the camera, feeding the 24/7 news beast, and you can’t help but think of our current media landscape. Maybe Brooks was onto something, even if the execution sometimes feels like juggling chainsaws.
### A Time Capsule of Paranoia (and Familiar Faces)
Part of the fun of watching Wrong Is Right now is spotting the incredible cast orbiting Connery. You’ve got Katharine Ross as a potential political player, the always reliable John Saxon, and even Leslie Nielsen playing it completely straight as the CIA Director! This was years before his Naked Gun transformation, and seeing him deliver lines about national security without a hint of irony is a trip in itself. It’s a classic example of that early 80s tendency to stuff thrillers with recognizable faces.
The film tries to blend biting satire with genuine thriller elements, and honestly, the mix is sometimes jarring. One minute you're chuckling at the absurdity of a situation, the next there's a tense standoff or a discussion about nuclear annihilation. It didn't quite land with audiences or critics back in '82, struggling at the box office against its hefty $16 million budget (that's over $50 million today – quite a sum for something this quirky!). Perhaps it was just too cynical, too messy for its time. You needed a specific kind of mood lighting – probably the flickering glow of a CRT late at night – to fully appreciate its strange brew.
### Pre-CG Intensity
While not a wall-to-wall action fest, the thriller moments have that distinct early-80s grit. When tensions flare or potential violence erupts, it feels grounded in a way that modern, slicker productions often miss. There's a certain weight to the proceedings, a feeling that things could genuinely spiral out of control. Any explosions or moments of chaos rely on practical effects, giving them a tangible, slightly dangerous edge. Remember how real those brief flashes of violence felt back then, before digital trickery smoothed everything over? Wrong Is Right captures that feeling, even if its main weapon is dialogue and paranoia rather than constant gunfire. The climax, involving the desperate hunt for those suitcase nukes, generates some real, old-school suspense. It’s less about spectacle and more about the sweaty-palmed fear of the ticking clock.
One retro fun fact: Richard Brooks apparently clashed with the studio over the film's bleak and satirical tone, which might explain some of its unevenness. They likely wanted a more straightforward Connery thriller, while Brooks was aiming for something closer to Dr. Strangelove filtered through the lens of network news. The result is this fascinating hybrid that doesn't quite fit neatly into any box.
### Is Right Still Wrong (Or Is It Worth a Watch)?
Wrong Is Right is definitely a product of its time – the Cold War anxieties, the slightly clunky pacing, the specific look and feel of early 80s political thrillers. The satire can be heavy-handed, and the plot occasionally ties itself in knots. But Connery is magnetic, effortlessly commanding the screen as the morally ambiguous Hale. The core ideas about media power and political theater are sharper and more resonant now than they likely were upon release. It’s the kind of film that sparks conversation, even if that conversation is mostly "What exactly did we just watch?"
It’s not a hidden masterpiece, perhaps, but it’s far from forgettable. For fans of Connery venturing outside Bond, political conspiracy flicks, or just delightfully strange artifacts from the VHS era, this one offers a unique, if bumpy, ride.
Rating: 6/10 - Flawed and tonally chaotic, yes, but Connery's star power, the surprisingly prescient themes about media saturation, and its sheer early-80s oddity make it a fascinating curio worth digging out of the archives.
Final Take: A tangled, cynical snapshot of Cold War fears and media madness, Wrong Is Right feels like a broadcast from a parallel, slightly crazier 1982 – definitely worth a spin if you stumble across a decent tape and are prepared for its peculiar wavelength.