The Fourth Protocol (1987) User Reviews

absorbing thriller

[hbs · 8/10 · 27 July 1999]

I was quite surprised to see that this movie got a 5.9 rating. I think that it's a lot better than that. Brosnan is good, the plot is sufficiently tricky to be interesting, and Caine delivers the kind of reliable, excellent performance that you can count on (at least when the movie isn't total junk -- he only seems to phone it in when the movie is entirely hopeless). The ending is a little abrupt, but I can't find any fault with it other than that. (The cast is uniformly strong, too.) Maybe people underrate the movie because the movie is low-budget. It looks like a British TV-movie, and maybe it was, but I find it easy to get past the production values when the acting is good.

I've seen it twice, and it holds up to a second viewing.

Well done and realistic spy thriller!

[Rayvyn · 8/10 · 8 July 2002]

Usually we get treated to one type of spy movie these days. This type is made up of good looking young agents with all sorts of high tech weapons and gear. There are beautiful women who are just lining up to sleep with the good guy. The Fourth Protocol is not one of these movies and thank goodness! It is one of the most realistic cold war spy movies out there. Despite it's age(1987) it is relevant to today's world. There is nuclear terrorism and real looking spies. Michael Cain plays a British agent and is too busy looking for Russian spies to be sexing up fine Russian female agents. In fact he has a family. He is excellent as the seasoned agent who uses his mind and not gadgets to track down the Russian spy played by Pierce Brosnan. For those of you who saw Brosnan in Tailor of Panama and found it refreshing to see him play a creep secret agent will be in for a real treat in The Fourth Protocol. Brosnan plays Petrofsky, a young hot shot KGB agent who tries to slice and dice his way to the top. I mean Petrofsky is a flat out cold blooded killer. He makes the guy in Tailor of Panama look like a saint. He has a conscience but he doesn't let it get in the way of his mission to explode a nuclear weapon on a US Air Force base in Great Britain in order to make it look like the US had a nuclear accident. Petrofsky was the right man for the job he would blow up two or three thousand people just like that. If he wasn't a KGB agent, he could surely find work as a serial killer.

The story moves along quickly and sometimes a bit too quickly. However it doesn't detract from the movie. The movie looks more like a cop movie in the way the investigation unfolds. When they finally find out what's going on there is a good action sequence that doesn't go over the top. It just serves the purpose in this movie. Other things I liked was the scene where they constructed the bomb.

I would recommend this one to anyone who likes spy movies and are tired of the James Bond rigmarole.

Rayvyn

Good But Predictable

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 19 May 2004]

Frederick Forsyth is one of the greatest thriller writers to have picked up a pen with THE DEVIL`S ALTERNATIVE probably his best book concerning Ukrainian dissidents , a hijacked supertanker , a Kremlin power struggle and a hero who`s a middle aged Scotsman . Sean Connery would have been perfect but many Forsyth novels probably wouldn`t make good movies since the plots are complex and there`s often a myriad of characters with long back stories , information overload on how the KGB operate etc . THE FOURTH PROTOCOL unlike THE DEVIL`S ALTERNATIVE has a fairly simplistic plot which makes it an ideal story to be adapated into a screenplay but there`s a drawback - The story is predictable

!!!! MILD SPOILERS !!!!

THE FOURTH PROTOCOL centres around a nasty Soviet plot to win the cold war by exploding an atomic bomb at an American base making it look like an accident caused by the Americans leading to unilateral nuclear disarmament and the break up of NATO leaving those dastardly commies to invade Europe . The plot had actually been used before in the James Bond movie OCTOPUSSY and in many ways this does feel like a mind bending spy movie with Harry Palmer ( Michael Caine ) taking on communist traitor James Bond ( Peirce Brosnan ) , bizarre to say the least but as strange as it seems it is somewhat compelling , even though the climax is very predictable with the good guy trying to stop the bad guy detonating the bomb

There are a few problems with the screenplay though . We have several scenes that don`t really add anything to the plot like the scene where Caine`s character smacks a couple of skin heads . Very admirable though it adds nothing to either plot or character development since we know he`s already a good guy , no need to prove it . I also couldn`t help noticing a rather ridiculous scene where the baddie decides to cut the throat of a possible witness , wouldn`t this draw attention to himself ? Wouldn`t the victim`s blood splatter all over his clothes ? And why would the witness need to be killed ? It`s not like he`s going to run to police and say " I tried to get off with a man in the gents toilets and I saw him recieve a radio from an airline pilot . He must be a KGB agent or something "

Like most Forsyth stories there`s a lot of characters ( Maybe too many ) and they`re played by familiar British character actors but few of them make an impact with the exception of Ian Richardson and Anton Rodgers who both appear in the best scene of the movie where an intelligence chief confronts a traitor . If you think acting is a doddle think how you`d react if a director said to you " Okay , you play a dogmatic patriot , you`d do anything to stop the world being over run by communist tyranny and you`ve done your level best to stop this happening . But then this character has found you out and worse he`s just told you that you`ve been helping these nasty evil reds all along " how would you play the scene ? Richardson and Rodgers are superb in this scene even if it doesn`t really have anything to do with the main plot

A fairly good thriller even if it`s not tightly plotted and you know where it`s heading

great film

[bobstruckyard · 8/10 · 2 June 2005]

some comments on this film have stated that there are unnecessary killings of agents or witnesses, this is done to show the politics of the film and how there must be no trace back to those who planned the operation, whilst also portraying that petrofsky is a lethal killer, and as Caine says in the film "the best". A great story, and very believable, spies that remain hidden from each other and no excruciating scene where the bad guy reveals his plot to the good guy. Would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the operation had turned out differently, or the ending for that matter!

Of course one of the best things about this film is the acting as previously stated by other people. Caine brings his character to life and is very believable in the role of John Preston, the agent who cares, and will "bend" the rules to make sure things get down. Brosnan is similarly good, his character will stop at nothing to complete his mission, he is a stone cold killer and this is portrayed well, he doesn't let anything get in the way of the mission.

All in all a very good little film, much better than some of the tripe we get from Hollywood and with one of the finest British casts i've seen in some time.

A Good Example Of The Cold War Spy Thriller

[timdalton007 · 7/10 · 28 April 2010]

Based on the bestselling novel by thriller writer Fredrick Forsyth, The Fourth Protocol stands out as one of the last of the breed of Cold War spy thrillers. Set amongst the issues of 1980's Cold War tensions, the film is the story of a KGB plot to detonate an atomic bomb in the UK near a US Air Force base, causing the deterioration of NATO as a result if UK security services don't stop it first. With good performances and a fine script that make up for some of the films shortcomings, The Fourth Protocol is a good example of the Cold War spy thriller.

The films has good performances throughout. The cast is led by Micahel Caine and Pierce Brosnan. Caine is British agent John Preston, a bit of a loose cannon himself, who stumbles upon the plot and has to face his superiors skepticism before he can stop the plot. Brosnan is KGB agent Valeri Petrofsky who, masquerading as James Ross, is the man with the atomic bomb. The supporting cast is like a whose who of fine character actors including Joanna Cassidy, Ned Beatty, Julian Glover, Michael Gough, Ray McAnally and Ian Richardson. Sadly the actors playing Russian characters struggle with their accents at times but for the most part the performances work and help the film rather then hinder it.

For the most part the film has good production values. The direction of John Mackenzie, coupled with the cinematography of Phil Meheux, the production design of Allan Cameron and the costumes of Tiny Nicholls mean the the film has a very realistic feel to it. For the most part the editing of Graham Walker helps as well, especially in the sequence where the bomb is assembled by the Brosnan and Cassidy characters. Unfortunately there's moments where the editing is rather hap-hazard with scenes of Petrofsky on his motorcycle, then packing his car, then on his motorcycle again. Another example is the sequences involving the McWhirter couple (played by Matt Frewer and Betsy Brantley) with Petrofsky which, while a fault of the script admittedly, should have been cut from the film as they serve no purpose and slow down the film's pace. Even with the issues with the film's editing, the production values hold up well.

The film also has a fine script as well. Frederick Forsyth adapts his own best-selling novel, with help from writers George Axelrod and Richard Burridge. The script remains fairly faithful to the original novel though there are some significant differences (such as the amount of time spent investigating soviet agent Jan Marais at the beginning for example). This helps the film plot wise as it focuses the film more on the tense build-up to the possible detonation of an atomic bomb on British soil. The film nicely contrasts the arrival of the bomb's components from Petrofsky's side with Preston's attempts to derail the plot. The script also reveals a world of crosses, double-crosses and triple-crosses as the plot keeps getting more and more complicated as it goes on. The result is a well-written thriller.

With good performances, good production values and a well-written script from noted thriller Fredrick Forsyth, The Fourth Protocol is a good example of the Cold War spy thriller. Even with editing issues, the film is a well-paced and tense story of Cold War intrigue and a story of how things might have bee. Even more surprising is that despite its being entrenched in 1980's Cold War politics the films dealing with the on-going threat of nuclear terrorism means it has relevance over two decades later. Thus the film remains a tense, if somewhat dated, thriller.

The usual Caine, the better Brosnan

[Rakesh Kumar · 15 February 2002]

Forget Brosnan's performance in the Bond movies or the recent excellent Tailor of Panama. His cold, calculative KGB agent in The Fourth Protocol should have told us what a wonderful actor he is. Made in 1987, the film is closer to its older brother (The Days of Jackal, also by Frederick Forsyth) than the spy films starring Michael Caine, as I originally thought it would be. The pace is slow, but thoughtful. Like Jackal, we get to see Brosnan making preparation to bring in the bomb and piecing it together. We also get to see Caine, 'the rebel' of M16 tracking him down. Great show!

Competently made and acted Cold War thriller, but terribly familiar.

[barnabyrudge · 5/10 · 2 February 2006]

Frederick Forsyth's bestselling novel is here brought to the big screen with an all-star cast, but despite occasional moments of excitement it is not a film that genuinely gets the blood pumping. While the intricate build-up of detail and suspense made the book absorbing, in the film it merely creates a cold, dry and rather plodding atmosphere. The film has an old-hat feel to it, for it pursues a storyline that has been done to death over the years. If you think about it, we've seen stories like this countless times: Rod Steiger plotting to blow up Parliament in "Hennessy"; Edward Fox plotting to assassinate De Gaulle in "Day Of The Jackal"; Bruce Dern planning a terrorist attack on the Superbowl in "Black Sunday"; Steven Berkoff wanting to decimate an American air base with an atomic bomb in "Octopussy". This time, in "The Fourth Protocol", it is the turn of Pierce Brosnan to carry out yet another despicable plan against the civilised world. Genre addicts will probably enjoy the film, but for the majority of us it's a tired case of more of the same.

Secret agent John Preston (Michael Caine) leads a raid on the apartment of an idealistic government bureaucrat, George Berenson (Anton Rogers). In Berenson's safe, Preston discovers some top-secret documents containing sensitive information about NATO activities in Britain. When confronted, Berenson claims that he has been passing the information on to a South African contact, but to his horror his South African "contact" turns out to be a Russian spy who has been forwarding the information to Moscow. As high-ranking Secret Service official Sir Nigel Irvine (Ian Richardson) tells Berenson: "you've undermined NATO.... perhaps irretrievably". Meanwhile, in snowbound Russia, deadly and highly decorated soldier Major Valeri Petrofsky (Pierce Brosnan) is briefed to carry out an audacious mission that could bring NATO to its knees. Petrofsky comes to Britain posing as a hard-working, unmarried model citizen and promptly buys a house that backs onto an American air base. Gradually he sets into motion his chilling plan, which involves triggering a nuclear explosion from his house, disguising his act to appear like a terrible accident that occurred at the base, thus strengthening the calls for NATO to be disbanded. Preston races against the clock to stop Petrofsky before his deplorable plan becomes a devastating reality.

The cast perform decently enough, though there seems to be a certain degree of indifference, or perhaps unenthusiasm, from some of the stars. Ian Richardson probably has the best of it (he has a suggestive, sinister tone of voice and shifty eyes that make him perfect for these cloak-and-dagger roles), while Caine makes an amiable enough hero and Brosnan a fairly believable villain. Others fare slightly worse, like Ned Beatty as a Russian official with an over-prominent American accent, and Julian Glover as a bad-tempered Secret Service bigwig whose attempts to evoke anger would barely trouble a child, let alone his adult colleagues. John Mackenzie directs adequately but unremarkably, allowing the jigsaw pieces of plot to slot into place in a by-the-numbers fashion. The very concept of a nuclear strike within Britain is quite disturbing and exciting on its own terms, but the film never really sets the pulse fluttering. Some might argue that this kind of low-key, realistic approach provides a worthwhile contrast to the extravagance and excesses of a James Bond movie, and they'd have a point, but there's something just a little too mechanical and familiar about "The Fourth Protocol" for my liking.

Gripping, intelligent and very good Cold War espionage thriller

[SimonJack · 8/10 · 9 August 2022]

"The Fourth Protocol" is a gripping, intelligent and very good Cold War espionage thriller. It was produced by the Rand Organization and premiered in London in March of 1987, opening in late summer in the U. S. A. The film is based on the 1984 novel of the same title by English author Frederick Forsyth. He is a master story teller of espionage, political thrillers and mysteries. "Protocol" is one of five such films that were based on or adapted from Forsyth novels, the others being "The Day of the Jackal" in 1973, "The Odessa File" in 1974, "The Dogs of War" in 1980, and "The Jackal" of 1997, which was based on the 1973 movie.

This story has a more purposeful, deliberate screenplay that includes a considerable look at discovering and tracking suspected spies, as well as the detailed work of spies smuggling in parts and then assembling an atomic bomb. It's more intelligent than many films that are heavy with action and have much less discovery.

In this story, there is dissent among some of the heads of Soviet agencies. Generals Karpov and Borisov are worried and wonder what the head of the KGB is up to. Comrade Govershin has been stripping Borisov's department of his best people. Only later will they learn of the KGB chief's plot to explode an atomic bomb in England. It will be blamed on a mistake by the U. S. Air Force which flies nuclear-armed aircraft out of its base in the U. K. That will lead to Britain ousting the Americans, with hopes for the demise of the NATO Treaty and pact.

At the same time, there is dissent among the top level British intelligence heads. Brian-Harcourt Smith heads an agency in which John Preston is assigned. Preston is Britain's best intelligence brain. Harcourt-Smith is the envious type who is more concerned about his own recognition than getting the job done. Preston is the opposite. Fortunately, the head of them all, Sir Bernard Hemmings, and another department head, Sir Nigel Irvine, support Preston in his efforts to sniff out Soviet spies. All of this is clearly shown up front in the film, but the intrigue and action follow in the Russians trying to carry out their mission and the British intelligence sniffing out, tracking and trying to stop the plot.

All of the cast are very good. Michael Caine is John Preston and Pierce Brosnan plays Valeri Petrofsky, the best Soviet agent who gets the special mission to explode the atomic bomb in England. A subtle aspect of this film is the portrayal of Soviet mistrust and the KGBs little regard for the lives of its own agents and citizens. It secretly instructs some of its own agents to kill one another.

Forsyth's novel and this film came out just before the end of the Cold War. The Berlin Wall fell in 1989 and just four years after this film, the Soviet Union was dissolved. Still, these espionage films are very interesting. There were some real spy stories based on real spies during World War II and in the Cold War, so many of the public were interested in and enjoyed these type of films. I am such a fan. And those who know some of the history will recognize and appreciate the inclusion in the opening, of Kim Philby. He was one of the most famous real spies, a double agent, for the Soviet Union from well before WW II and well into the Cold War. He was one of the Cambridge Five of Soviet agents within the ranks of British intelligence and foreign service. Philby tipped off colleagues Guy Burgess and Donald Maclean who fled to the USSR in 1951. Then, he himself fled to Moscow in 1961. The film shows Philby as a Russian colonel who gets killed on order by Govershin. But, in reality he was still alive and died the next year in Moscow, at age 76.

This is a very good spy thriller. Comic book fans will probably find it too slow. But many in the modern audiences should still enjoy it.

Pretty standard spy thriller with a good performance from Pierce Brosnan

[Red-Barracuda · 6/10 · 2 February 2015]

Rogue spies try to undermine the Fourth Protocol, which is a secret agreement between the USA, Britain and Russia to cease smuggling nuclear weapons into their respective countries. A Soviet agent is sent to the UK to stage a nuclear accident that could be blamed on the Americans and set off a chain reaction of events to unbalance this stand-off.

The Fourth Protocol is based on a novel written by Frederick Forsyth. I have never read it but have read others by this author. His style focuses on the intricate detail of the spy/politics of his thrillers, while his characters contrastingly always seem to be really cardboard, with very little recognisably human about them. With this in mind it's not too surprising that The Day of the Jackal was his most successful book, seeing as the very blankness of the central character was an actual important plot point. But usually this weakness in characterisation is more noticeable. The Fourth Protocol is a quite typical Forsyth spy thriller, in that it has a fairly detailed plot and paper thin characters. Michael Caine phones it in as a Harry Palmer type spy who doesn't play by the rules. It's a quite weak and clichéd character and to be honest Caine doesn't bring much to the table with this one. Pierce Brosnan, on the other hand, is pretty good as the cold Soviet killer. Like in Day of the Jackal, it's this villain who is the more interesting when set alongside the dull heroes, meaning that its actually the bad guy whom we want to succeed, which I'm sure could not have exactly been the original intention. Unlike Caine, Brosnan is playing against type and certainly makes better work of what he is given and is certainly the best thing about the movie. On the whole, this is a pretty standard spy film, with nothing very distinctive about it. Despite its generic nature, it is quite enjoyable though.

A guilty pleasure.

[Draculas_guest · 7/10 · 6 September 2003]

I wouldn't consider this movie a "classic" or even particularly "great", but for some reason I really enjoy watching this film. I haven't read the book, however I used to own "The Fourth Protocol" computer game for the Commodore 64, and was vaguely familiar with the basic storyline.

I can't pinpoint what exactly it is I like about this movie, but I did enjoy seeing Michael Caine as a British agent tracking down the nuclear bomb. I could probably watch a whole series of films based around his character. I also liked some of the other characters and I think it had a good cast of actors. The workings of government agents was very compelling to watch, but it was good to see that the film wasn't overwhelmed by ridiculous gadgets and stuck to the drama involved.

The 80's technology in the film also had an element of nostalgia about it. This film reminds me of a bygone age of the BBC Micro and Ford transit vans. In fact, I love watching the film just to see the various parts of England as well.

I liked the fact that its a rather 'quiet' movie, but I do think it needed to be re-edited. Some parts of the film just skimmed through major plot developments without giving them time to breath, and other times the film would show a character hopping from various locations in England without giving a sense of the travelling in between. Watching this film would give the impression that England is only about 10 miles wide! Some elements of the film really needed to be fleshed out a bit more.

This isn't the sort of movie I would go to a cinema to see, its more of a "Friday night in" movie that I would watch on TV. I would only recommend it to someone if they were die-hard fans of this genre.

second tier level espionage

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 28 July 2016]

The Fourth Protocol in a nuclear treaty forbids unconventional nuclear weapons. Major Valeri Petrofsky (Pierce Brosnan) is assigned by KGB head General Govorshin to infiltrate the United Kingdom and set off a nuclear device next to an American base disguised as an American accident. Borisov (Ned Beatty) informs his friend General Karpov who starts looking into the secret operation. MI5 officer John Preston (Michael Caine) is a top British counter-espionage operator. His brash unorthodox methods rub the acting-Director Brian Harcourt-Smith wrong, and is relegated to airports and ports. He encounters the case of a dead courier delivering a nuclear device component.

This is a second tier level espionage movie. Brosnan is good as a freezing cold spy and Caine is fine as the operative. It's a fine movie existing somewhere below the best of the genre. It doesn't have the gritty realism of the best murky spy mysteries. The limited action is fine but not good enough to be an exciting action thriller.

Well-paced thriller based on the Frederick Forsyth bestseller about a sinister conspiracy with fateful consequences

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 8 November 2020]

A Brit agent, MichaelCaine, suspects something big is being smuggled into England, and his guess is accurate, as he discovers an atomic bomb delivery, putting the world in nuclear jeopardy. The nasty plot is supervised by Russian agent Pierce Brosnan, a totally dedicated undercover officer assisted by a Russkie engineer : Joanna Cassidy.

Thriller about political fiction with chills, thrills, intrigue, twists and turns. Based on the famous Bestseller that Frederick Forsyth himself updated. Michael Caine is the principal component of this political thriller giving a nice and believable acting in his usual style as British agent attempting to stop a conspiracy from destroying NATO . While Pierce Brosnan is ultra-cool as Russian agent prividing one of the best performances to date. They are well accompanied by a nice plethora of secondary actors, mostly Brits, as Ian Richardson, Michael Gough, Julian Glover, Ray McNally, Betsy Brantley, Cartwright, Joanna Cassidy, Matt Frewer, though marred by odd casting as Ned Beatty who is really miscast as a high rank Russian General.

It displays a poweful and suspenseful musical score by Lalo Schifrin with his ordinary sounds and similar to Jerry Goldsmith . Moreover, colorful and evocative cinematography by Phil Meheux. The picture was nicely directed by John MacKenzie. This British filmmaker was a good professional who made some successes and flops . John began working in TV plays , which inspired him and gave him the best training to shot , it also taught him how to work quickly . Mackenzie was one of Britain's finest directors with nice results in his enjoyable films . He moved to length features decisively with his biggest hit : "Long Good Friday" , but a decade spent in Hollywood that proved to be unfulfilling , artistically , shooting failures as "Honorary Consul, "The Innocents" , "Blue Code" and "Ruby" . Although he was never achieved the recognition he richly deserves , he was a notorious director , though sadly deceased in 2011 at 72 years old . Rating 7/10 . Well worth seing. The yarn will appeal to Pierce Brosnan fans .

Title explanation

[ib011f9545i · 7/10 · 17 May 2005]

It is a while since I this film but the title is explained at the start of the film,a voice over and text on the screen says something about a treaty signed by the major powers during the cold war and mentions a secret "fourth protocol" that forbids the planting of small scale nuclear weapons in each others countries. Iiked this film but at the time (1987) many people said that Forysth was a right wing nut,he is but we know know that the USSR had all sorts of crazy ideas about attacking the west because they thought that the west was going to attack them first.

People who liked this fiom should also look out for THE WHILSTLEBLOWER ,another 1980s British spy movie with Michael Caine.

Aged Well - Like Vintage Port

[graestella · 8/10 · 27 September 2008]

I hadn't seen this for ages. Then it was given away free with the Daily Mail.It really has aged well. The plot is still believable. Just substitute Islamic terrorists for Russian ones. Caine was brilliant and doing his 'laser' style acting in all the close ups. Something he doesn't bother with in his many pot boilers. I have to agree with some of the other posters. It really should have been promoted as Harry Palmer's midlife crisis. He would have developed just like this. The hero in the book reads like an ex-Para version of Freddie Forsythe. Caine makes the role his own and adds his own interpretation. Another of my favourites Pierce Brosnan acts his heart out too, as the stone killer Petrofsky. The Ian Richardson and Anton Rogers scene has to be a career best for both of them. Only a side plot but absolutely brilliant.

Slow...but still very, very good.

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 10 December 2020]

Michael Caine: "We wound up with a wordy action movie which, although it was quite a good picture, and did fair business, never had the speed and pace of the best American action movies. So for long sequences in the film, we not only had a talking picture, but a lot of talk, and even worse, most of it unintelligible. I went there as the star and associate producer, and one might have thought this would give me sufficient authority to put my own strongly-held opinions into practice, but no chance. Even I, in my exalted position, wound up making a talking picture, when it should have been a moving one."

While I would agree with Mr. Caine that "The Fourth Protocol" is a slow film, after seeing it, I think that perhaps he was being a bit too tough on this film. Yes, it could have used a bit more action, but the film did have some very tense moments and the script was excellent. This shouldn't be too surprising, as Caine has a long history of terrific spy films....and his Harry Palmer movies are simply amazing!

So, although I do recommend this film, there are a couple things I should point out first. The movie, as I mentioned above, is a bit slow...so it's certainly not for everyone. Second, my only complaint about the production is that NONE of the Russian characters sounded the least bit Russian....and at least some of them should have! Still, I can look past this...and assume you'll be able to as well.

Not bad but almost getting there

[Rodrigo_Amaro · 6/10 · 29 December 2011]

A good film, indeed, but not so much of an exciting experience to watch it and those who know Frederick Forsyth's works as novelist are highly familiar on how gripping and thrilling his characters and situations are. But the thing that disappointed me the most is that Forsyth wrote the film script and what I saw wasn't so interesting to make me feel great about it.

Well, the story isn't news, again we have a plot where Soviets want to destroy the Capitalist/American system, this time the target is an American base in England. Now, the British intelligence has to find the terrorist before something bad happens. The villain, however, is one man and one man only, a deadly KGB spy (Pierce Brosnan) who has the mission of exploding an atomic bomb on a American military base. The man on his track is the charming agent John Preston (Michael Caine, very good), who has to fight the bureaucracy of his boss (Julian Glover) to finally solve this situation.

The problem I had with the film is the awfully number of characters and tiny little situations where I couldn't understand clearly what was happening, some of the characters motivations as well wasn't good presented. The lack of some great action sequences also bothered me a little, but the ones developed were very interesting (the scene where Michael Caine jumps out of the car, then runs to a moving train; and Barry's crazy chase with the van almost hitting the people).

The cat and mouse game of "The Day of the Jackal" is inexistent here except for the final moments (here's a writer making a copy of himself. The whole situation is so similar that is beyond belief). The appeal of "The Fourth Protocol" lies in the incredible cast assembled that not only includes Brosnan and Caine but also Ned Beatty, Ray McAnally, Joanna Cassidy (quite effective as Brosnan partner), Michael Gough and others.It's not a case of great performances but all of them have decent parts to play with.

Surprisingly strange is the fact of a great director like John Mackenzie, specialist in creating thrilling moments in films like "Deadly Voyage" and "Infiltrator" (both TV movies) seemed a little lost with this script since it's hard to feel some thrill with everything presented (except when Pierce is killing his victims, he's a real stone cold kind of a guy). If the drama is quite hard to follow, the suspense only works for limited moments. But seeing the general picture as a whole you still can have a decent movie, with some good surprises. To me, one random moment that marked me in this film is when Michael Caine beats two racist punks on the subway, that was really awesome. I don't know why it's really in the film but it's a great moment to be seen.

It could've been special but it also could've been way worst, just one step in false and this could be a reunion of wasted talents. Gladly, this didn't happened. Fans of Cold War flicks will enjoy it but be prepared for lots of confusing things. 6/10

Pierce Brosnan as a Russian spy and Michael Caine chasing him

[clanciai · 9/10 · 17 July 2020]

The usual Forsryth standard - supreme suspense all the way, with excellent performances by Michael Caine and Pierce Brosnan,,especially by the latter, as a very hard-boiled Russian agent with no scruples at all to kill anybody, very much like the jackal type. The direction is also flawless, as the story and script couldn't be better, the director just has to follow suit. There are a few ladies in it also, but as usual in Forsvth's works, they don't get much of a say, not even the Russian spy from Finland. On the whole, it's a top thriller from the heyday of the Cold War final struggle, and there is nothing wrong with it. But you miss some humanity and the human factor - only agent Preston's family life provides a bit of that. It's apparently not of much consequence in Forsyth's world, in which he differs tremendously from Graham Greene, and not even the cat incident in the end is of any consequence. For all its perfection, there can be all but a top mark.

Another underrated gem

[Angeneer · 8/10 · 26 May 2001]

This is one of the best cold war movies I have ever seen! Excellent cast (Pierce Brosnan surprised me, what a performance he delivers!), great novel by Forsyth, which works in many layers (an insightful look at the political games of the era, a character study of the top agents in both sides and some action, while this is not the primary goal of the movie), superb directing and the right pacing. The only problem I had was with the ending, I wanted something more intellectual.

Great thriller, first-rate cast

[AlabamaWorley1971 · 9/10 · 19 December 1999]

Fascinating old-fashioned spy thriller with (for the 80s) new high tech elements. Pierce Brosnan is very good as the smiling sociopathic Russian deep cover agent. Michael Caine is, well, Michael Caine. Ian Richardson has a lot of WONDERFUL lines as Caine's superior. Ray McNally and Ned Beatty are fine as old Cold War veterans whose time is passing.

The Fourth Protocol

[CinemaSerf · 7/10 · 9 February 2023]

There is something plausible abut Michael Caine's performance here. He ("Preston") is the antithesis of Sir Alec Guinness's "George Smiley" - a hard nosed, blunt spy catcher who hates toeing the line with his bosses. After a bit of clandestine activity, he is on his way out and is sidelined until a seemingly straightforward fatal accident gets his alarm bells ringing. Meantime, KGB agent "Petrofsky" (Pierce Brosnan) arrives in the UK and - eventually - takes up residence near an American Air Force base equipped with nuclear missiles. What's he up to and can "Preston" find out and thwart his dastardly plan? This is one of Frederick Forsyth's better stories. The plot is clear to the audience, but the two characters exist in isolation (from each other) for much of the drama as neither know of the other's existence! Despite being experienced and pretty well known, the supporting cast isn't the most effective - I struggled a bit with Ned Beatty's "Borisov"; but both Caine and Brosnan work well to build up a sense of menace as the nature of the mission becomes clear and director John Mackenzie develops a tightly constructed and well paced plot into a denouement that goes down to the wire. It's dated a little, and maybe serendipity plays a wee bit too much of a part at times, but it's still very much at the better end of those cold war stories and is still well worth a watch.

An example of a well done job to be followed

[fernandoantelodiaz · 8/10 · 23 July 2022]

After more than 30 years, it's still an exciting thriller and a well-made film. I wish there were more movies like this. It is undoubtedly an example to follow for those who want to dedicate themselves to making films of this type.

Good movie, but Michael Kane make it better!

[mm-39 · 8/10 · 5 September 2020]

The Fourth Protocol is a good movie, but Michael Kane make it awesome! The Fourth Protocol has strong story of a rouge K G B element plans to set off a nuclear device by a US Airbase in England. Sound like a good made for T V movie, but the A list actors make The Fourth Protocol an A movie. The character development is of Michael Kane who fights inner self interested bureaucracy politics in order to save the country is great. Pierce Brosnan is outstanding as the cold mechanical K G B agent which could violate The Fourth Protocol. There is lots of spy games, great supporting cast, and believable budget for an intense Cold War thriller. The Fourth Protocol has a great ending of the inner self interested bureaucracy recklessness which questions the dangers of the deep state. 8 stars.

Gripping cold war thriller

[Tweekums · 7/10 · 17 December 2011]

When this film was made nobody suspected that the Soviet Union would no longer exist in five years time; they were still the bad guys of choice for spy thrillers. Here a Soviet agent; Major Valeri Petrofsky has been tasked with a mission which if successful could spell the end of the North Atlantic alliance: his mission is to assemble a small nuclear bomb inside the United Kingdom and detonate it next to a US airbase... with the intention that everybody will believe it was an accident involving weapons on the base. Against him there is John Preston, a British agent, who stumbles upon the plot when one of the people bringing in one of the bomb components is killed in an accident.

While there are a few plot holes it is possible to suspend ones disbelief as this is a fine thriller with great performances from lead actors Michael Caine and Peirce Brosnon who play Preston and the ice cold Petrofsky respectively. The action keeps up throughout the film from the start when traitor Kim Philby is killed to the end where Preston struggles with Petrofsky to prevent him detonating the bomb. That first scene was a bit of a problem for me however as it involved the killing of a real person who was very much alive at the time of the film's release; I think it would have been better to have had a renamed fictionalised version of him. Having recently watch Michael Caine play a similar role in the 1965 thriller 'The Ipcress File' it is great seeing that he can still be believable in such a role twenty years later.

I love this film. It's an underrated gem

[praestandum · 8/10 · 23 July 2021]

This is a great cat and mouse spy-plot. MC and PB are excellent in their respective roles. A hidden gem.

Solid movie

[fletch5 · 8/10 · 19 June 2001]

The Fourth Protocol may not be more than a basic thriller, but it's so engaging and impeccably executed that you hardly realize it. The film stands very well as a whole; it's elaborately paced, thoroughly well-acted and expertly directed by John MacKenzie. If there's one flaw, it's indeed the terribly abrupt ending which doesn't do the film justice.