reevaluation after 40 years

Rating: 6/10 (5 April 2007)

This movie is still funny, and represents a better quality film than was produced during this era. I saw this movie in the theaters when it first came out, and had views similar to the majority of comments at the time.
Two years later, I was a pilot in SAC, and was very familiar with the real system, including the two man policy, and the procedures involved in starting nuclear war.
But one doesn't have to know anything that comes close to personal experience with the complex systems in place. My complaints, too numerous to mention make me rely on one very funny scene where Peter Sellers is trying to call the President on the pay phone. Nobody has to be familiar with a complicated system, to know that the scene is a cartoon of real life, and not a satire worthy of various awards this film earned. Keenen Wynn's character, an Army Colonel has been sent under force of arms to get the commander in contact with the President. Why then, did Wynn's character act as if the Deputy would not suffice, knowing that Hayden's character had committed suicide? And did Kubric do such little research as to be under the impression that a British Officer could act as a Deputy, when NO foreign officers were allowed access to nuclear control It was funny seeing Sellers trying to place a call to the President from one of those antiquated pay phones. It was also funny seeing Wynn blowing up the Coke machine to get change. But how many films have we seen where Colonels go around without several subordinates carrying various means of communications,especially if the boss back at the Capital wants to learn what's going on- IMDIATELY if not SOONER. Whether it was fast runners,carrier pigeons, or radio; we do not see anything of the kind. This one scene makes part of the film a cartoon, not worthy of any award, because it not well crafted. The scene violates what everyone who has ever seen a war film knows. Its not any different than a cartoon character being blown up in one shot, and coming together in the next shot. It's ludricrous, and admittedly funny, but that's OK for cartoons, not for award winning films. Satire should be a bit more subtle. "No Fighting in the War Room" is an example of Kubric's genius, and would deserve a 10 had the film refrained from caricatures and preaching.
War is not funny, and at times, it is ludicrous. It is a worthy subject of satire and ridicule. And in the proper context, it can be funny. But when a film strays into being a platform for preaching propaganda, its no longer entertainment or serious.
Plan "R" was a complete fiction. B-52's had numerous radios, and were in constant contact with various command posts throughout the world. Since refueling was necessary in order for the B-52's to reach their targets, the B-52's could not have reached their targets. Aircraft carrying nukes on actual missions had been discontinued when this movie was made. The accident in Spain, where 4 weapons were lost during a air-refueling accident caused political reality to end the practice.(Nobody was killed, except the SAC crew members, and no bombs went nuclear). Nobody was killed by any nuclear accident by either side in the 50 years of the cold war. Read history to learn the truth.
Why hasn't someone made a a "funny" movie about fanatics seeking control of nukes?