Seven Days in May

The United States and the Soviet Union have signed a peace treaty that calls for both nations to eliminate their stocks of nuclear weapons. President Jordan Lyman (Frederic March), who pushed for the treaty, sees his approval rating reach an all-time low, the deal unpopular among many Americans. His most prominent opponent is U.S. Air Force General James Mattoon Scott, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Burt Lancaster), who believes Lyman has weakened the country. 

Marine Colonel "Jiggs" Casey (Kirk Douglas) is chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, serving directly under Scott, whom he greatly admires. Jiggs stumbles upon evidence that Scott and other generals are planning a coup d'etat, removing Lyman and installing Scott in his place as the head of a military junta. The plan is set to take place in seven days, under the cover of a training exercise.

Seven Days in May is both refreshing and sobering. It's refreshing because as a movie about a conspiracy theory at the highest levels of government and military, it doesn't rely on cheap tricks or swerves to fool the audience. There are no phony twists or rugs pulled out from under the viewer at the last minute for a hackneyed thrill. This movie is about a political chess match, each side trying to get its pieces into place to strike the winning blow.

Maybe back in the 1960s, before every thriller needed to have so many twists and turns, it was enough for audiences to be invested in a plot about rogue generals (and their political allies) trying to orchestrate a coup against a sitting president, and director John Frankenheimer and screenwriter Rod Serling (adapting a book by Fletcher Knebel and Charles W. Bailey II) didn't need to fill the story with artificial tricks and contrivances.

The movie is sobering because of how prescient it feels. Look at what's happening in the United States. Remember Jan. 6 and the rioters who stormed the Capital. Consider the speeches of Donald Trump and how divided the country is. Reflect on the actions of Elon Musk, an unelected, unappointed individual snatching the levers of government. Compare this with the events depicted in Seven Days in May, and it's hard to miss the parallels. 

As a movie, Seven Days in May is thrilling and tense. We learn fairly early on Scott and his cohorts are planning a coup, but we only gradually learn how they plan to carry it out. The film sprinkles in leads and clues for Jiggs and the president's supporters to pursue and investigate. We wonder if they'll figure it out in time to stop it.

Seven Days in May has only one scene that could qualify as an action scene (an escape from a secret military base), but watching the movie feels like waiting for a metaphorical bomb to explore. You know it will; you just don't know when. I imagine a version of this story made today would pump up the pyrotechnics and throw in some fight scenes and shootouts, but as demonstrated, those aren't needed.

Frankenheimer, as a director, always felt ahead of his time compared to his contemporaries. Replace Douglas, Lancaster, et. al with unknown actors, and Seven Days in May could pass as a more modern film. Frankenheimer drops his camera in the middle of the Oval Office, cutting rapidly between the players, and it feels like we're in the middle of a heated meeting of the president and his advisors. The footage of Scott speaking at a rally, presented as footage on a television, looks and sounds authentic as a gathering of budding fascists and dangerous demagogues. 

Scott is presented as the antagonist who seeks power, but it's important to note he's not a one-dimensional villain. Serling gives him ample opportunity to speak his mind and share his beliefs, and Lancaster's performance is not one of a deranged fanatic but a well-intended extremist, a duty-bound soldier who believes he's doing what it is right.

Meanwhile, Jiggs and Lyman call out the hypocrisy of his actions, those of a man who so loves America he would destroy his Constitution and everything it stands for. Serling, with The Twilight Zone, was never afraid to be political or philosophical, and by the end, his script is a defense of American principles, even in the face of rabid populism.