Seven Days in May [DVD]

I recently re-watched this movie after buying the blu ray, and I was reminded of what a good, taut, suspenseful political thriller it is. But it's also interesting to see what a definite product of its time it was. This film was made hard on the heels of the Cuban Missile Crisis, at the very height of the Cold War. Today, that seems like ancient history to a lot of people -- perhaps even to some of the people who lived through it. For those of us born after the baby boomer generation, nuclear weapons have been a fact for our entire lives. It's easy to lose sight of what a new and horrifying development they were for people back in the mid-century era, and how large they loomed in everyone's consciousness. We've lived with their existence now for almost three quarters of a century, and perhaps that has made us complacent in a way that people back in the sixties were not, when the specter of nuclear annihilation had only been around for a few short years. So it's natural that the plot to this movie should revolve around the threat of nuclear weapons, and the idea of a disarmament treaty, especially given that the script was written by Rod Serling. Just think how many episodes of the original "Twilight Zone" were about a nuclear apocalypse, the threat of a nuclear apocalypse, or the aftermath of a nuclear apocalypse (e.g. "The Shelter," "Two," "Third from the Sun," "One More Pallbearer," "The Old Man in the Cave," "Probe 7 Over and Out," "Time Enough At Last"), or remember the ending to the original "Planet of the Apes," (whose script was also written by Serling), with its famous twist ending, where Charlton Heston's stranded astronaut, Taylor, discovers he's been back on Earth the whole time -- an Earth where the apes displaced us because we pushed the button and blew ourselves back to the stone age. There was a real, pervading sense in those days, when nuclear weapons were new and gave us a capability that we'd never had before -- to wipe out human civilization, and perhaps the human species itself in one horrifying spasm -- that it was virtually INEVITABLE we'd destroy ourselves, given our warlike history. All it would take would be one catastrophic mistake -- and we are a species prone to making those. Three quarters of a century have given us a perspective they didn't have then. We know today that as terrifying as it was, Mutual Assured Destruction DID actually work! The Cold War ended, and as close as we got to the brink, we didn't go over it, because ultimately, we weren't suicidal and neither were the Soviets or the Red Chinese. This is not to say all danger is passed, but today the threat can realistically be assessed as significantly less grave than it was during the mid-twentieth century.But this movie was made back when the threat was quite new, and seemed quite dire, and as I said, the plot revolves around the struggle between two factions, one who believes deterrence is the only answer, and the other, which believes that only disarmament would end the danger. (Spoilers ahead!) Frederic March plays U.S. President Jordan Lyman, a believer in disarmament. He is absolutely convinced of the inevitability of nuclear war if both sides don't disarm, and signs a treaty to eliminate the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Burt Lancaster plays Air Force General James Matoon Scott, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and a well-known and very popular war hero, who believes the opposite: that disarmament is inexcusably naïve; that the Soviets, who have a long history of breaking treaties, cannot be trusted to honor this one; that once America scraps its arsenal, but the Soviets keep theirs, then war would indeed be inevitable, but so also would total defeat. (I have to say personally, that I agree with the second premise: disarmament and disarmament treaties have a poor track record -- the democracies voluntarily disarmed between the two world wars, and signed disarmament treaties [e.g. the Washington Naval Treaty], but the dictatorships armed themselves and made war against enemies who looked weak and unwilling to fight. The ancient Romans got it right all those centuries ago: si vis pacem para bellum.) General Scott is so convinced of the sheer folly of Lyman's course, that he resolves to seize control of the government. Caught in the middle is Scott's aide, marine colonel "Jiggs" Casey, who fully agrees with Scott's assessment of the folly of disarmament, but is repelled at the thought of overthrowing the legitimately elected government of the United States and installing a military junta. Casey realizes, correctly, that it's a cure far worse than the disease. It would mean throwing away the rule of law, and the political stability and peaceful transfer of power that the U.S. has enjoyed for two centuries, and would entail the U.S. becoming just another banana republic, with all the corruption and political instability that would bring. It could lead to a government as repressive and authoritarian as that of the Soviets. So, despite his misgivings about Lyman's policy, Casey works to uncover and thwart the conspiracy before the coup d'état can take place.This is a great movie, with superb direction and pacing, outstanding performances from a stellar cast, and a great, suspenseful story, and finally, is a superb window to the dangers and concerns of the Cold War era. It comes highly recommended.

Funny, I've liked this movie for years, never knew it would come true. I'm sorry to say that but it's true. The guy we have is not looking out for American interest. This movie is political and entertaining. Do yourself a favor, watch it.

Maybe when JFK read the book, he glimpsed the future. The movie is well done with Rod Sterling writing the script

This is a classic movie of political events that were ... or almost could have been. Recent dirty discoveries from the Biden administration era have revealed what a banana republic USA really is. Obviously, there is nothing new under the sun!---Fredric March plays the role of the old President in an excellent, convincing manner and Burt Lancaster also does a great job as the younger, blood-chilling and cynical revolting officer. Kirk Douglas, on the other hand, is a complete stone-face, as always. The man was all jaw, but I suppose it wasn't his fault. His son Michael did not (fortunately) inherit the stony features of his great dad – and also became a good actor in his own right.---This same story was also made into an HBO mini-production for TV, where Sam Waterston played the President.

There is a plot to take over the government of the United States by the Joint Chiefs if Staff. The movie then moves through the events leading up to intended coup. The message of the film is that we really don’t think it can happen here.This is one of the best films addressing issues during the Cold War. Something of an all star cast for the time. There are no special effects, musical numbers or comedy. This is serious human drama where the fate of United States hangs in the balance. All of the actors give outstanding performances. Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas Show why the are leading men of the time and are dominating in the film.But the people who give the film depth and make it unforgettable are Fredric March, Edmond O’Brien, Ava Gardner, Martin Balsam, George Mcready, Andrew Dugan, and Whit Bissell. They are not famous with today’s moviegoers but their faces are recognizable. The performance of Fredric March as the President makes the movie. His acting seems so natural and effortless that we believe he is the President. He goes from quiet confidence at the beginning, to feeling all is lost, to alone confronting the traitors. It is obvious why he was nominated for Oscars in the past and won for best actor. This is one his last films.Edmond O’Brien, another Oscar winner, is brilliant as a hard drinking no nonsense senator from Georgia. He can be charming to his friends and fiery with rage to his enemies. He won’t back down to anyone threatening the President.This is an actors film. It was filmed in black and white in 1964. Many younger people won’t want to watch it because it’s not in color. That is unfortunate. Those of us who grew up before color television and were raised on black and white movies of the 1940’s and 1950’s may sometimes wish the old classics were in high definition color. But we look past that and enjoy the films that let us see great actors of long ago who were masters of their craft.

Based on the novel by Knebel & Bailey, with a screenplay by Rod Serling (YES, Rod of The Twilight Zone) this movie keeps you on the edge of your seat. The acting is superb. The set pieces are stunning. And the ending leaves you with more questions than answers. Highly recommend.

Saw this movie 40 years ago and thought it was one to be watched over and over through the years.