The Cold War is one of the most fascinating conflicts in humanity’s brief but destructive history. Despite lacking the large-scale military clashes of more famous conflicts, civilization has arguably never been as close to mutually assured destruction as it was at the height of hostilities. Angel Studios’ historical political drama “The Brink of War” aims to capture that feeling, focusing on one of the Cold War’s most pivotal moments as humanity stood at a crossroads and delivering a movie that history buffs are bound to enjoy.
“The Brink of War” takes place over 36 hours during the now-infamous 1986 Reykjavík Summit. The unprecedented gathering saw then-President of the United States Ronald Reagan (Jeff Daniels) and his trusted confidant George Shultz (J.K. Simmons) meet with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev (Jared Harris). Under immense pressure from their respective advisors and intelligence agencies to reach a resolution, the summit presented a remarkable opportunity for the two leaders to find common ground as they attempted to pull their countries back from the threat of nuclear confrontation.
A Thoroughly-Researched Film
Brought to life by debut writer-director Michael Russell Gunn, the movie has clearly been meticulously researched, aided by Shultz’s transcripts. This is most apparent in the scripted exchanges between Reagan and Gorbachev, whose verbal jousts and constant one-upmanship provide some of the movie’s most entertaining moments. Their dialogue is consistently sharp and cutting, creating palpable tension that could be cut with a knife as their strategic chess match unfolds.
From the outset, there’s an evident deep-rooted mistrust between the two leaders. Even as much needed breakthroughs appear to be imminent, the “trust but verify” mentality underpinning the negotiations means everything could fall apart at any moment. It creates an unnerving sense of anxiety around their discussions, yet Gunn’s tight script almost always keeps things moving forward.
That’s not to say it’s perfect. There are more than a few occasions where the historical accuracy of what is unfolding feels questionable. In one particular scene, at the height of the disagreements between the leaders, Gorbachev can be observed in his private quarters lauding Reagan’s achievements, something that feels strangely out of place given the circumstances. There’s also some forcibly inserted political mudslinging that sees Democrats become the butt of several jokes, which doesn’t fit the otherwise serious tone of the movie.
Takes Liberties Painting Reagan as a Hero
More significantly, Reagan is painted as a patriotic hero who remains virtually immovable in his stance, with his stubbornness presented as the primary catalyst for change. Gorbachev, meanwhile, is portrayed as the weaker of the two and seemingly willing to concede ground at every opportunity. It reduces one of the most complex political relationships ever into an oversimplified “I’m more stubborn than you” dynamic. History tells us that Reykjavík was not simply defined by one leader standing firm and the other yielding, but by two men pursuing ambitious nuclear-arms reductions while remaining divided over Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative. By sacrificing some historical nuance in favor of a more flattering portrayal of Reagan, it prevents “The Brink of War” from becoming anything truly special.
The movie also struggles whenever it leaves Reagan and Gorbachev’s meeting room. Scenes elsewhere feel like palate cleansers designed to break up the dialogue-heavy negotiations, but they mostly serve as distractions. They’re considerably less compelling and repeatedly halt the momentum of the developments unfolding behind closed doors. A more focused approach may have made the movie stronger.
True to form for many Angel Studios productions, the heavy-handed religious messaging can also be a little on the nose. Admittedly, it’s less distracting than regular viewers may be used to, but it’s still weaponized in a way that belittles the Soviet Union, which at times seems to be deemed morally inferior partly because of the state atheism associated with its Marxist-Leninist ideology.
Daniels and Harris’ Back-and-Forth is Mesmerizing
That said, there is something slightly ironic about the core message of the Reykjavík Summit. The prevailing sentiment throughout is that building a lasting peace, even with your greatest adversaries, is ultimately more beneficial than going to war. Given the increasingly confrontational posture of many world leaders today, that message carries renewed weight at a time when history often seems in danger of repeating itself.
Of course, for a dialogue-heavy movie of this nature to work, the performances have to keep audiences engaged. That’s where Jeff Daniels and Jared Harris excel. Their back-and-forth tête-à-têtes are completely captivating as they transform themselves into two of the most famous leaders of the 20th century. J.K. Simmons, in a much more limited role, threatens to steal the whole movie with an effortlessly commanding performance that brilliantly captures the gravity of what is at stake should the negotiations fail.
For a movie predominantly shot in one location, Gunn, alongside cinematographer Magdalena Górka, makes an admirable attempt to create interesting and inventive shots that keep things visually fresh. Set decorator Marta Luiza Macuga also provides impressive period detail that helps transport audiences back to the ’80s.
A Mixed Bag but Still Captivating
Less impressive, however, is the dreadfully misplaced whimsical score. The world is staring down the possibility of nuclear catastrophe, yet the music wouldn’t feel out of place in a fantasy drama. It’s a baffling creative choice that rarely captures the gravity of what is unfolding on-screen and easily becomes one of the movie’s weakest elements.
Overall, it’s safe to say “The Brink of War” is a mixed bag. Those who aren’t fans of historical political dramas will likely be bored to tears. But for those who are, there’s enough to admire, particularly in the sharp dialogue and commanding performances, to make it a worthwhile trip to the cinema. Its oversimplified political framing prevents it from becoming the definitive Reykjavík Summit drama it might have been, but when Daniels and Harris are sitting across the table from one another, it’s difficult not to be captivated.
