Home
search
more | tips
IMDb > The Enemy Within (1994) (TV) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
The Enemy Within (1994) (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 15 comments in total 

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Doomed by Poor Characterization, 29 April 2002
Author: Tarasicodissa from Pennsylvania

This was a very inferior remake of "Seven Days in May".

What dooms it from the outset was Jason Robards' characterization of General Lloyd (Scott). It is central to the credibility of the plot that this is a knife fight between an unpopular dovish president whom most of the country fears has endangered America by his disarmament treaty and his charismatic hawkish Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In the original "Seven Days in May" General Scott is a national war hero whom millions of Americans idolize and who, if the election were held today, would win in a landslide. Jimmy Carter vs Douglas MacArthur. For the concept of a military coup to be credible there has to be a national security crisis pitting an unusually weak president against an unusually powerful general.

The original "Seven Days in May" had Burt Lancaster, an actor of enormous virile magnetism playing General Scott. You can see him as the kind of heroic man on horseback a frightened nation would turn to for salvation. You can see him as the kind of man who could seduce a nation into "Well, why don't we set aside the Constitution just this once. I won't tell if you won't tell."

This film's General Lloyd was a charisma-challenged snarling fascist whom no one would follow off a sinking ship. It is impossible to imagine him commanding the support of millions of Americans which is what you would have to do if you plan on ruling the country after shooting your way into the White House.

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Piece of Garbage remake of a classic, 10 January 2000
Author: Brendan3 from New York City

This is a terrible, dumbed down, remake of John Frankenheimer's SEVEN DAYS IN MAY with Forest Whitaker in the Kirk Douglas role and Jason Robards in the Burt Lancaster role. The story follows the assistant to the commander of the joint chiefs of staff as he uncovers a plot to overthrow the government. Neither Whitaker nor Robards seem comfortable in their uniforms or seem to understand their roles as officers. The insultingly simplified plot is spoon fed to the audience and delivered with inane dialog. Unlike the original, none of the plot makes a damn bit of sense and the final resolution is so unbelievable that it seems a fitting end to this mess. It's as if a first grader saw the first film and typed out his own version.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Unusually decent HBO redo from their Clinton Liberal days, 25 August 2008
Author: rixrex from United States

The mid-1990s were HBO's heyday as Clintonesque liberals and they took it upon themselves to present this sort of viewpoint in nearly all of their productions. This one is no exception.

It's saved by the fact that it's a tremendously literate story from the great screenwriter Rod Serling, and it has Forrest Whitaker in top form. The typical HBO heavy-handed preachiness is kept to a minimum here and the intrigue is maximized, of course with some rather tough to fathom plot maneuvers concerning the Soviets, in this case as allies of a sort.

It's not as fine a film as the original Seven Days in May, but it's not a waste either and it's always good to see Whitaker in his usual good form with Sam Waterston doing more subtly nuanced acting than he's allowed to do on Law & Order.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Seven Days In May Light, 18 February 2007
5/10
Author: hmgcpa52 from United States

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.

Was the above comment useful to you?

You think this is implausible?, 26 February 2009
8/10
Author: myother

Really? Take a look at the measures Bush has taken in the last few years to expand the powers of the presidency with no checks by the legislative or judicial branches, spying on American citizens, etc. and tell me this can't happen here. Exactly who was deceiving Secretary Powell about Sadam and his nuclear readiness - Santa Claus? If you think vast conspiracy for personal gain and/or power cannot happen here, get you head out of the sand.

Forest Whitaker did a great job and was completely believable is this role - dedicated to his country and in disbelief that his hero could possibly be involved in such a conspiracy.

This movie is more relevant now, perhaps, than in 1994. I think it deserves another run on TV.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
see Seven days in may, 7 March 2007
5/10
Author: jeffab from United States

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.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
Dramatic, Intriguing and Suspenseful, 24 December 2005
8/10
Author: Findlay Osborn from Australia

Dramatic, Intriguing and Suspenseful, "The Enemy Within" is an excellent political thriller that will appeal to anyone who can think outside the norm. While I haven't seen the original "Seven Days in May", I think that the comments that this movie it is poorly cast and acted are very much mistaken as the actors do the intriguing plot and thrilling scenarios, more than justice. Forest Whitaker is especially good in his role as Colonel Casey and does an outstanding job in bringing a sense of realism and authenticity to his character. Don't let the negative comments put you off, "The Enemy Within" is a great movie that will have your heart pounding and mind thinking.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
Great Actors, Actresses and Direction, in a Political Thriller With Lots of Action, 27 October 2003
8/10
Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Colonel Casey (Forest Whitaker) discovers a coup d´etat leaded by General Lloyd (Jason Robards). He makes contact with the President of USA, William Forster (Sam Masterston) through his secretary Betsy (Dana Delany). The have just a couple of day to resolve a serious situation against the legality of their political system. I have this movie for many years, but the theme did not attract me. Yesterday I decided to watch it and what a surprise: a great TV movie. The cast is excellent, and the direction is sharp, in a political thriller with lots of action. I confess that I have never seen John Frankenheimer's `Seven Days In May', but I believe that the viewer will not be disappointed with this remake. My vote is eight.

Was the above comment useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
No Seven Days In May But Still An Above Average TV Film, 5 January 2007
7/10
Author: Matthew Kresal from United States

The Enemy Within is a well-done remake of one of my favorite films Seven Days In May. While of course not as good as the 1964 classic this film still packs quite a punch despite being too briskly paced and lacking Rod Serling's script.

Forest Witiker does well as Colonel Cassey though he is a little hard to watch at times. Sam Waterston does well as the Southern President and its a shame we don't see more of him. Dana Delaney really doesn't add much to the film but she plays a necessary role in the film. And of Jason Robards does well as the villain of the film as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General R. Pendleton Lloyd.

While there are numerous subplots removed and some added (though the Russians weren't really needed in this film) the film still manages to be true to the classic's plot. The script manages to convey a sense of urgency in the story and the revelations are revealed in a nice manor. The film has a little bit of action in it and these scenes are mostly unnecessary but they don't hurt the film very much.

Overall The Enemy Within is a better then average made for TV movie. As I wrote this film is not in the same caliber as the original film, it still manages to present a frightening and all-too possible scenario. A nice little suspense film to pass your time with and it's nothing more and nothing less then that.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
It could happen here, 16 August 2006
10/10
Author: spacestevie from United States

The thing about this movie being implausible is not a very good comment. The truth about this movie is that it could happen in America and probably has come close to happening several times in the past. What this movie says is that anything can happen and how fragile democracy in America truly is. We don't really appreciate something until it is lost. I hope that we do not have to experience the events of this movie to truly appreciate it. What has happened recently in America only goes to prove that the movie has a point. What is really scary is what would happen when the president is in on it. The movie really gives you something to think about.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Plot keywords Main details
Your user comments Your vote history