User reviews

I perfectly understand the impulse to satirize Cold War nuclear dealings. How do you work for peace by building missiles, Ronald? And released at the mad height of Reaganomical autocracy, this muddy blotch on the scintillating filmography of a great modern director aspires to be a sharp, shrewd, and audacious satire of the global arms race, but it rarely seizes me, or seemingly any audience, on any considerable comic or intellectual level. The movie starts promisingly enough with a commercial mocking the arms industry, a promo for the Luckup Industries "Peacemaker," a fighter drone guaranteed to "preserve our way of life," with shots of families and children in the background. There's a stroke of Dr. Strangelove as the company executives thrash out promotional schemes for the plane, but the fanatical boss wants a more hard-hitting ad crusade, something like, "Why do I fly it? On account of it kills."

While the film plainly expects this brand of send-up to be shrewd and slashing, the film never takes any of it very far at all. Most frequently, the calculated gags seem too solemn. Not even Chevy Chase's peddling of military wares is ever very funny, though a booby-trapped urinal is clearly intended to be. Yes, Chevy Chase. And Wallace Shawn and Richard Libertini, all hilarious people. Libertini plays an immensely wealthy arms merchant who explains how recent changes to federal law not only legalize bribes to foreign dictators, but make those bribes tax deductible.

But no one concerned appears to have had any clue where the film's tone should've been pitched. The black comedy approach is merely dealt with from time to time. The scathing digs at the arms industry are haphazard. The humor varies from the relatively keen to the dumb to the utterly absent. What is Weaver's character designed to be anyway? The widow of the Luckup sales rep whose deal is successfully taken over by Chase, one moment she is a matchless fraud, the next she's a brokenhearted widow, and thereafter that she's pursuing Chase and surrendering herself to the General.

And Gregory Hines, an ex-fighter pilot now undergoing a religious crisis of conscience. After years of capitalizing off the wholesaling of death, he out of the blue finds religious conviction. Is this meant as a parody of born-again fanatics? Or is it just a narrative expedient to get us to the movie's utterly boring climactic warfare? Whatever the case may be, both actors are significantly wasted in their distracted roles. I would've been delighted to see this one and leave calling it unluckily misread or gravely undervalued, but the thing's an utter muddle most of the time.

Eddie Muntz (Chevy Chase) is an amoral small-time weapons dealer. He's in San Miguel selling real and unreal weapons to both rebels and the military dictatorship. Ray Kasternak (Gregory Hines) is his work partner. He's approached by Catherine DeVoto (Sigourney Weaver). Her late husband sold drone fighters from American military contractor Luckup and she wants his commissions from the sale. The contract was canceled but the company recruits Ed to sell the Peacemaker drones even though it had a terrible demonstration in front of the US military.

This is good material for an interesting satire. The first fifteen minutes is good satire fun. After that, the story has to take over and the characters have to take over. Sadly, I don't care about these characters or their story. The drone is a great predictor of future war but even that is not enough. It's a long slow decline after a promising start.

The film itself (in content) is pretty much for the chickens. But Sigourney Weaver looks really sexy in this strip, which is almost rare for her. That's why the film is worth not just watching it once.

It seems like everyone's opinion on this movie is evenly divided. People either love it or hate it. Personally, I am not a Chevy Chase fan by any stretch of the imagination. But I like many of William Friedkin's films so I wanted to give this a chance and went in without too many preconceptions.

It obviously can't stand up to a comparison to DR. STRANGELOVE as a few here have done. However, it still remains a fairly on-target, unflattering satire of the weapons industry and by extrapolation, other mass production industries that love to sell the government and public crap product cosmetically hyped as the next great answer to all their fears and desires, product that ends up being useless or obsolete within a year (if it even works properly in the first place). There are some pretty funny scenes sprinkled throughout and I was pleasantly surprised through the whole film how much dark, subversively funny jabs Friedkin gets away with. Especially in a big studio movie.

There's one scene in particular that makes the film well worth seeing --Gregory Hines (I believe it was him) gets into a verbal altercation with another extremely hotheaded driver (a maniacal Tony Plana) (over a fender bender? it's been a while since I've seen it) -- the verbal sparring quickly escalates into a life-threatening situation and the emotional dynamics the two actors bring to the scene is scarily believable while remaining extremely funny. This scene alone provides a microcosmic metaphor for the provocations of nations going to war and perfectly illustrates the pointless absurdity of aggressive behaviour in general. Also of note, it's great to see the underrated Vince Edwards in a large supporting role as the ruthless air weapons manufacturer.

DEAL OF THE CENTURY is never less than amusing and has some extremely funny sequences -- much better than many of these IMDb reviews would lead you to believe.

What were they thinking?! Is this movie a comedy or is it a drama? It looks like it's a comedy--especially in regard to how they marketed the film. The only problem is, it just isn't funny. If it's a drama, there was no tension and the underlying message appears muddled. So, regardless of the intent, it fails on both levels. As a result, it is uninteresting and dull beyond belief. No, now that I think about it, it's VERY easy to believe that this movie is unappealing. So many ex-SNL people (especially the original cast) did MANY totally unfunny movies. Neighbors, Nothing But Trouble, 1941, Dr. Detroit and Funny Farm stand out as prime examples of this curse.

Part of my disliking this movie so much may be because I just haven't enjoyed any of the Chevy Chase movies I've seen, whereas many of my extended family members think he is brilliant. However, even they hated this movie and found it annoying, so that says something.

OK, here's an all-too-familiar story. Following the end of the US-back Shah in Iran, Iraq and Iran subsequently became embroiled in a pointless war. The US, mindful of Iraqi business, supported them for the first few years, but then sold weapons to Iran to counter Iraq's growing success. Profits from these sales went to the Contras in Nicaragua, thus the Iran-Contra scandal begins. After the Iran-Iraq war ends, the US pays Kuwait and Saudi Arabia to combat the Iraqi threat. Here we are today...draw your own conclusions.

What a story! Think of the possibilities if some competent screenwriter could make a film adaptation. Alas, this movie isn't anywhere near as engaging. It's Mel Brooks material like 'High Anxiety', any cheap shot that can be taken is taken. What Kubrick had in 'Strangelove', above all else, was research. This is as well-researched into its topic as the 'Left Behind' material or a made-for-tv movie.

I don't like Chevy Chase, his method of humor is both unsophisticated and dated even for the 80s. All his expression is in his eyebrows while his voice remains the same.

Friedkin hasn't had the best track record. He doesn't keep up with the times, thus he loses his edge.

Final Analysis = = Cinematic Dud

Sit in a hard chair if you intend on staying awake through all of Deal of the Century. This movie is just plain boring. It deals with Chase, Weaver, and Hines trying to sell a bunch of pilotless planes to a dictator who looks like Saddam Hussein's chipper twin. There are a few funny lines. Overall you'll just wonder what on earth is going on but won't care enough to rewind and try to find out. Wallace Shawn is the only bright spot in this mess, but he's eliminated quickly.

You got the director of Sorcerer, you got Chevy Chase, Sigourney Weaver, and Gregory Hines, and a contemporary Dr. Strangelove story, man, it's gonna be something great!

Well, unfortunately it is something great. A great pile of crap. I don't know what happened, but the movie bombed because it was savaged by critics and ignored by audiences, and for good reason. The film fails to ignite the outrageous Dr. Strangelove storyline. I think Friedkin was out of his comfort zone and into unknown territory. Honestly, Friedkin is not the kind of director you call for comedies. It's not his forte.

Although the film is total crap as a whole, I will say there are elements of genius in there, not much, but it's there. One interesting note is that Friedkin completely throws away his unique induced documentary style and goes classical and traditional for the second time in his career. The first time was on The Brink's Job in 1978. Some of the action sequences are pretty raw and realistic. The jokes are amateurish and sophomoric. Friedkin should have never made this film. If anyone is contemplating if they should view this film, well my answer to you is absolutely no. I really mean it. Not even Friedkin would watch it. I think he would burn this film if he owned the negative. Watch Lord of War (2005), it has a similar story and concept, but only slightly better or just watch great films about this same concept like Wag the Dog (1997) or Dr. Strangelove (1964) and Charlie Wilson's War (2007).

Remember Paul Brickman?

The director and writer of "Risky Business"? The director of "Men Don't Leave"? Remember?

Well, here's one to forget.

In spite of Friedkin as director, in spite of great special FX and in spite (or maybe because of) Chevy Chase as the star, "Deal of the Century" is more of a swindle.

1983 wasn't a very good year for movies, and here's more proof if you needed it.

If this really was the "Deal of the Century", let's all try to hold out until the year 2983, shall we?

Two stars. One for the effects and another for Sigourney Weaver. She did better in "Ghostbusters".

Deal of the Century is for those with an appreciation of the absurd. A dry, dark comedy, and an ironic portrayal of 1980s American (Reaganite) values. The film is a humorous, critical portrait of the hypocrisy behind Ronald Reagan's deadly cold war shenanigans. Its a political comedy -- very well directed by William Friedkin (The French Connection, The Exorcist). It is also well performed and photographed. Chevy Chase is perfectly cast as a cynical arms dealer. And the late, great, Gregory Hines, as his partner, disenchanted with the arms business and suddenly filled with pathos, desperately and hilariously turns from heavy-weapons to Jesus. It is not a perfectly plotted or written film, but it strives to intelligently portray its era.

This movie is nothing , but a Hollywood propaganda made against president Ronald Reagan. It's not strange , since Reagan was right-wing and Hollywood almost always has been left-wing. Anyway , you shouldn't be able to enjoy this piece of s*** unless you're some left-wing fanatic . I guess Hollywood likes propaganda ("Avatar").

Ronald Reagan was one of the best , if not the best president of United States . Along with British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II he destroyed communism. How ? Thanks to economy . He bankrupted the USRR thanks to the arms race. He knew that the United States will win the race . He didn't buy or invest money in army because he was some dictator or blind fanatic (as the movie tries to suggest) , but because he was a visionary who knew that victory will come with time.

Putting aside political beliefs , this movie is just terribly bad. It tries to be a black comedy , but there isn't a single good joke here . There is nice shot of Sigourney Weaver's long sexy legs . And the actor who plays the guy waiting impatiently for phone is good. It's sad to see Chevy Chase and Sigourney Weaver in this mess . Thankfully , the movie didn't destroyed their careers (It's REALLY so bad , believe me) . Weaver soon made "Ghostbusters " and "Aliens" , while Chase triumphed with "Fletch".

If you're looking for good anti-war comedy better watch "Dr. Strangelove" . If you're looking for good 80's anti-war comedy you should watch "Spies like us" with Chevy Chase and Dan Aykroyd . I give this 1/10.

This is a must see for any Chevy Chase fan or anyone who has ever worked at a large defense subcontractor! Office Space for the defense industry. I've worked at big companies (both defense and commercial) and this movie portrays them quite accurately. Even though the inherent humor in the plot line is based on the defense industry, it is very accessible to those who know little about it. Chevy is at his finest as the movie plays his character's extreme comical greed (i.e. will sell any weapon to anyone for any reason) against Gregory Hines' burgeoning conscience about their chosen profession. I was initially shocked by the low average rating of this movie. After reading some of the other reviews about this movie I begin to understand. Because Chevy plays an humorously amoral individual rather than his usually lovably goofy, one I think many viewers were shocked. I didn't think that the humor in this film was subtle; but apparently for many, it was. This movie also makes a very strong moral point about the military industrial complex that should be taught (whether with this movie or not) to all people before they are allowed to vote.

Eddie Muntz is a pervasive black market arms dealer who after a missed sale, meets a fellow salesman Harold in the same field for the US Luckup Corporation while in South America. After he commits suicide with the stress of waiting by the phone for the government dictator to ring him back to complete the deal. Eddie answers and takes over the deal which involves a new high-tech, non-pilot plane known as the Peacemaker. Soon enough everybody wants to get on this multi-million dollar deal. Eddie's work pal Ray has found god, and he's doing his best trying to keep him on the job and Harold's icy widow Catherine wants her share of the prize.

William Friedkin's "Deal Of the Century" is somewhere in between a black comedy and frank pot-shot on the international arms trade. It never distinguishes itself either way, but I think that's the point. Especially how nervously bizarre this turns out to be. I certainly enjoyed this misunderstood satirical item on an interestingly flavorers topic and the sardonically dark humour was neat treat to the senses. Those looking for a laugh-out-loud affair will only get humour that's rather broadly downbeat in tone, despite how over-blown they turn out to be. While, it didn't constantly make me laugh, it got some grimaces out of me. It can feel like a Chevy Chase vehicle most of the time, as the rest of the cast do pale in comparison. That's not their fault, because their characters don't have the material to lift them out of Chase's shadow. Chase is one of my favourite iconic 80's comedians and he immediately fits the role with his causally dry and quick-witted personality. Sigourney Weaver is there to look good in her steely firebrand performance and Gregory Hines doesn't look too interested throughout. There's a short comic performance by Wallace Shawn too.

The freshly ammo-packed story by Paul Bickerman is complicatedly knotty and obvious with its attacks. Creeping in were oddball situations and a surrealistic air on the worrying subject at hand. The snappy script works up a creative novelty, smearing it with sneering gags, spicy irony and that of Chase's slyly gruff voice-over narration to string scenes together. Super weapons to ensure peace, nicely put. As for William Friedkin's direction, well at first I didn't even know that this was on his resume. His style is extremely random and kinetic in just what's going to happen, but this unfocused mark goes on to morph its way into the premise. The interestingly high octane climax springs to mind. The production does look cheap, but the sweeping musical score creates the right vibe and there's strikingly framed camera-work. Explosions make there way in and the effects for the plane look rather hokey when its up in the air, but decent enough when on the ground.

While, I don't see too much love for this offering. It isn't significantly great and it can be clumsy, but I don't see it as a piece of absurd garbage that it's made out to be. Simply a delightful, if farcical romp that kept me highly entertained.

I loved this movie when it came out, and I still think it's one of Friedkin's most under- rated efforts. Where it lost a lot of the audience was in its requirement that they actually think about what was being presented to them. The jokes are not the usual Chevvy Chase, fall on his ass kind of thing, but for the most part have an actual point behind them. Where the film failed, I think, is culturally; audiences at the multiplex tend not to like to have to think about the entertainments they consume, so the movie got lukewarm reviews, and poor audiences. Look at the scene for example, where Gregory Hines' character is accosted by a mugger, and the way in which the scene escalates, for a perfect mini-allegory of the cold war, and the simplicity of its essential "strategies."

In truth, the movie falls between two stools, in terms of the audience it was aiming at. It's too much a Hollywood production to play on the art-house circuit; but its ethos is too "political" to play well in the major exhibition houses, ie, suburban multiplexes. It might be the case too, that because its satirical target is the military, some thought it as somehow "anti-American" and stayed away for that reason. But it's a fine film, well-structured and well scripted (in my opinion), having as its core the moral redemption of an immoral man. It also features – a rarity for American commercial movies – a black man in a major, well-thought out role who's not just a comedy sidekick for the hero. Give this one a chance, and it will reward multiple viewings.

Where The Brink's Job felt like a dramatic film with missing comedic elements, Deal of the Century feels like a comedy with missing comedic elements. The earlier film still worked to some limited degree by preserving its screenplay through the edit, but Deal of the Century feels like there was almost no comedy in the screenplay to begin with. I think, at his core, Friedkin simply did not understand how comedy worked. He hired a pair of comic actors in Chevy Chase and Gregory Hines and expected him to be the main source of laughs while doing almost nothing (almost) to try and elicit laughter in any form from any other source. This is simply dead on arrival.

In a film with a myriad of problems, I think the biggest is simply the fact that its screenplay is kind of total junk from a structural point of view. It veers back and forth from the fictional South American dictatorship of San Miguel to the headquarters of the weapons manufacturer LuckUp in California and back with seeming no purpose. The seeming center of all of this is Eddie Muntz (Chase) who owns a small weapons manufacturer with his partner Ray (Hines) back in California. He's in San Miguel to sell weapons to anyone, but focusing in on the rebels in the country. He meets Harold (Wallace Shawn), a LuckUp sales executive waiting for a call from the president General Cordosa (William Marquez) to sell him fifty drones called Peacemakers. At the end of his rope, Harold commits suicide, leaving the contract and Eddie to pick it up and complete the sale.

Alright...why this level of complexity? It would make sense if it was done for comedic purposes, right? Except none of this is funny. Absolutely none of it. Some of it is obviously intended to be funny (Eddie's deal with rebels is interrupted by helicopters attacking, and it's obviously supposed to be low-level zany stuff), but very little of it lands because Friedkin doesn't seem to understand the basics of comedic filmmaking. Anything that elicits a chuckle is the result of some limited tight editing that was probably handled by his team of three editors. The rest of the efforts at comedy feel like Friedkin put his actors in the center of frame and told them to be funny, but the script isn't actually very funny. All that ends up creating is mugging, at best, and I will honestly never understand the appeal of Chase's mugging. It's smarmy, not funny.

So, there's this back and forth with the head of LuckUp, Frank Stryker (Vince Edwards), failing to secure American military contracts because the prototype Peacemaker bugs out during a presentation (in probably the film's funniest moment which made me chuckle...once). Finding out that Eddie got closer to the sale in San Miguel than Harold ever did (just because the phone rang right after Harold died and Eddie was there to pick it up), he gets Eddie to continue the sale...while Harold's wife Catherine (Sigourney Weaver) is trying to get Eddie to bring her in on the deal as well. This is just a mess of inefficient storytelling that's never entertaining and never interesting.

It all caps with a weapons expo in America where Eddie is supposed to close the sale. This is where the political satire is supposed to reach its crescendo, especially with several news clips of Reagan included as well as a mention of Vice-President Bush. Except, there doesn't actually seem to be a point beyond, "Weapons sales are dumb and bad, I guess, amiright?" This isn't exactly Dr. Strangelove here, despite the blurb on the back of the box (I think I read that that comparison is on the DVD box). There's a special effects sequence because Ray steals a jet and Stryker has to use the Peacemaker to down him but the expo ends up blowed up. Whatever. It's so stale and uninteresting without any kind of satirical bite.

So, describing the film in the most general of terms, it seems like a comedy. Starring Chevy Chase and Gregory Hines, it's the story of how weapons manufacture is a corrupt and inept industry that yearns for conflict to make money. Except, the point is shallow and none of it is actually funny. Apparently, Friedkin never even mentioned this film (neither did he mention The Guardian) in his autobiography, and I can see it. It's so completely missing the mark, that it's a wonder he got through the production with his name still attached to the project. If he had pulled his name off and said it was Alan Smithee, I would have understood.

I'm kind of surprised the color-timing is consistent across shots.

But, I'm overplaying it, I think. This is bad, but it's mostly just dull and boring rather than offensively terrible. It's built like a comedy that has no actual comedy, and that just creates this uneventful experience as we watch Chase smarm his way through most of it while Hines gets one moment with a flamethrower that's kind of interminable to get to. I'm not sure if it's going to end up being Friedkin's worst film, but it'll at least be in the running.

I saw this when it first came out and really enjoyed it. I was just a little kid at the time, but I enjoyed the story and actors work. I just watched it again recently and have to admit, it's dated, the FX are horrible, BUT I still enjoyed the performances and story.

If you're not a fan of the cast and can't get past really bad "special" effects, then you'll probably hate it. But if you like any of the cast, and watch it for their performances and a kinda cheesy story, you'll probably find it entertaining.

The cast is the only reason for really watching this movie.

It is a satirical look at the industry of arms sales. Chevy Chase is an independent broker who sells rifles, grenades, rocket launchers, etc. to any 3rd rate dictatorial government (or its opposing insurgency) like he's selling vacuum cleaners. Somebody is going to get rich arming South American counties at war with each other so why not him? Gregory Hines is his business partner who is becoming a born again Christain and therefore developing a moral crisis over the implications of their work, which is brilliantly exemplified in a scene where he is sent to Long Beach to check out a good deal on flamethrowers and listens to the client describe them as "house warmers" because in North Africa the paramilitary uses them to burn village huts in order to find out who resides in them- a preferable alternative to knocking on doors. This movie is for people who want to learn about the ugly convergence of business and war peppered with a handful of great jokes about the subject. "Haven't you heard of the separation of church and business? This country was founded on it!"

The movie Lord of War with Nicolas Cage is about to be released, and from the trailer it looks like the writer saw Deal of the Century and decided to update it for 2005.

How could the producers and William Friedkin have imagined that a film that mocks the US military-industrial complex, guns, gun manufacturers and the US military, could have been successful?

There is not a single character in the film who is human and not concerned with money. To counteract this, the screenwriters introduced the character of Gregory Hines, who tries to become an apostle of non-violence and even gets baptized. And Sigourney Weaver, in a glamorous role, is perfect, although underused.

The satire works, and is perhaps not outrageous enough. This is what can be reduced the scope of the film. Because the cast and the actors are all good. Chevy Chase is perfectly at ease in the irony and the quip. The film makes fun of Central American dictatorships.

It's funny to think that at about the same time two great American filmmakers made films on similar subjects: Client Eastwood with Firefox (1982) two years after Deal Of The Century where the prototype drone became the plane of Firefox. One film is pro-American and a bit ridiculous, Firefox, the other is ironic and makes fun of the Americans.

If you work in certain areas in the defense business, you will be sure that some one who worked in the business did the script. Some of the most outrageous incidents in the film are the most true to life. It may be that you have to have some professional insight to appreciate it fully. It's like a Dilbert cartoon.

I recently watched Deal of the Century (1981) on Tubi. The storyline revolves around an arms dealer who seizes a lucrative opportunity when he encounters a South American dictator. Pushed to sell cutting-edge weaponry, he becomes relentless in pursuit of his goal and won't take no for an answer.

Directed by William Friedkin (To Live and Die in LA), the film stars Chevy Chase (National Lampoon's Vacation), Sigourney Weaver (Alien), Gregory Hines (Running Scared), and Wallace Shawn (The Princess Bride).

With a classic 80s comedy vibe, a stellar cast, and a premise reminiscent of Best Defense, Survivors, and War Dogs, the comedic elements are a bit cheesy but generally hit more than miss. The expo scenes are outstanding, the flamethrower sequence is impressive (flamethrowers are always captivating), and the ending is satisfying. Gregory Hines' plane finale stands out as well.

In conclusion, Deal of the Century may not rank among Chevy Chase's best films, but its great cast and comedic content make it worth a watch. I would give it a score of 5.5/10 and recommend viewing it at least once.

The overall plot of this movie is weak however there are A LOT of memorable scenes. These scenes make me watch this movie a couple times a year. This movie has a similar tone to Caddyshack, Head Office, Fletch, etc. I think it's one of Chevy's better performances. His narration in the movie helps add to the overall comical tone.

If you are at all a Chevy Chase fan and enjoy his older work (Caddyshack, Fletch, etc.) this is definitely worth renting.

While this wasn't one of the best movies I've seen, it had some really nice comedic bits in it. I particularly liked Wallace Shawn doing the anxious salesman, and Gregory Hines as the born-again who gets the ultimate revenge.

Worth seeing just for these two bits, plus a few other great moments.

Deal of the Century is a serious action comedy that stars Chevy Chase, Sigourney Weaver, Gregory Hines, Vince Edwards, Richard Libertini, Bradford English, and Charles Levin! There are many surprising moments in this picture. The action scenes are done very well. Chase and Weaver had good charisma together and they both looked really different. Hines was good as well. The special effects were really neat. William Friedkin's directing is great. I really can't see what is wrong with the movie. Give this movie a chance because its a very different film and the cast are in serious roles. So anyone who likes Chevy Chase, Sigourney Weaver, and Gregory Hines give it a chance and check it out!