Robert McNamara seated in a suit gesturing with both hands raised
Film review

The Fog of War

2003 · Directed by Errol Morris · 1h 47m

In a sentenceRobert McNamara can explain almost everything about war except quite how sorry he is

Robert McNamara sits down with director Errol Morris to revisit a life spent close to decisions about war. The former American defence secretary discusses Vietnam, the Cuban Missile Crisis and the limits of judgement in positions of power. Morris arranges his account around eleven lessons, combining the interview with archive footage and recorded conversations. John F. Kennedy, Fidel Castro and Curtis LeMay appear in the historical material. McNamara considers what leaders know, what they fail to understand and how they explain their choices afterwards. The focus remains on his recollections and his account of responsibility.

Fi1m review

Errol Morris makes Robert McNamara’s account of war gripping and deeply uncomfortable. The interview and archive deserve close attention, though the film sometimes gives an eloquent explanation more credit than it earns.

Errol Morris’s The Fog of War is a gripping documentary with one serious limitation: Robert McNamara has considerable control over how his account is heard. The former American defence secretary reflects on Vietnam, the Cuban Missile Crisis and the difficulty of making decisions with imperfect knowledge. Morris organises his reflections into eleven lessons and gives him room to think. The result deserves close attention, provided we keep asking questions that an intelligent, articulate man can make surprisingly easy to forget.

McNamara addresses the camera directly, and cinematographers Peter Donahue and Robert Chappell make that encounter absorbing without offering much relief from it. There is time to study the speaker as well as to follow what he says. The production design by Steve Hardy and Ted Bafaloukos stays unobtrusive, an appropriate choice in a film whose main attraction is someone explaining himself. We need to concentrate on McNamara, and the interview gives us little excuse to look elsewhere.

Editors Doug Abel, Chyld King and Karen Schmeer give the interview movement through archive footage and recorded conversations. They make the shifts between recollection and historical material easy to follow, without reducing everything to a brisk illustrated lecture. The recordings are particularly valuable because McNamara’s account no longer has the soundtrack entirely to itself. John F. Kennedy and Curtis LeMay appear in that historical material.

Philip Glass’s solemn score helps sustain the unease, though it sometimes supplies more gravity than the material needs. We were unsettled by the recorded conversations. Hearing the people involved speak, alongside McNamara’s recollections, makes their decisions feel less safely remote. The voices do the work here, and the music is most effective when it leaves us room to listen.

The difficult part is deciding how much credit to give McNamara for being willing to talk. Morris lets him explain himself at length, and a lucid account can begin to feel like a sufficient answer even when the question concerns responsibility. We found ourselves listening with respect, then wondering how much of that respect belonged to the intelligence of the speaker rather than the choices he was describing. That discomfort is useful, but the film does not always press hard enough on the distinction.

Anyone looking for a prosecution will find Morris’s patience frustrating. We think his approach is largely justified: giving McNamara time to reason aloud makes it possible to hear where those reasons become evasions. The eleven-lesson structure is less convincing when it implies that such enormous mistakes can be made useful by numbering them. A political documentary need not deliver a sentence, but it does need to leave us equipped to question the person it has asked us to listen to, and this one does.

Allow more than its 107 minutes if watching in company. There is plenty here to disagree about, including how far Morris should have challenged his subject and whether giving him so much time was the right decision. We recommend it to anyone prepared to argue afterwards.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

78
Positive
14
Mixed
3
Negative
0

Most critics are impressed. The reviews agree that Errol Morris has found a rich subject in Robert McNamara and a clean way to organise him: eleven lessons drawn from a life that runs through the Second World War, the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam. The praise clusters around the direct-to-camera interview, the archival footage, the editing and Philip Glass’s score, and around Morris’s decision not to prosecute his subject but to let him talk. Several critics say politicians should be made to watch it.

The reservations are about that same restraint. A minority wonder whether Morris is too gentle, and whether McNamara’s word should be taken at face value. The Independent finds the film gripping but comes away unsure if its subject is an honest broker or a war criminal, and notes the absence of emotional regret. The New Yorker treats it as a moral travelogue that leaves viewers divided over his refusal to apologise fully. No critic dislikes it; the spread runs from admiring to unsettled, with nobody below the middle.

Screen Daily
2 June 2003 · festival review
90*

Morris delivers a brilliant, nuanced examination of McNamara's career as defense secretary during Vietnam, highlighting the intellectual, moral and political complexity of his 11 lessons. As a cinematic experience it is rich and full-bodied, respecting its subject while revealing the inner man.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
3 October 2003 · Joshua Vasquez
90*

The film structures McNamara's reflections around eleven lessons on the limits of reason and human judgment, maintaining ironic distance while sympathetically probing his conscience and America's. It stands as one of Morris's best works, a haunting portrait of a life interwoven with history that expects few easy answers.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
4 April 2004 · Philip French
90*

The film is a masterly, riveting and challenging documentary that uses McNamara's direct-to-camera interview and archival material to explore lessons from history. It highlights his reflections on war, power and ethics while noting his restraint in not speaking out earlier against the Vietnam War.

Read the full review →
The Times
1 April 2004
90*

The critic calls the film essential viewing and one of the most important confessional films ever made. McNamara's candid reflections on his decisions and the near-misses of the Cold War are singled out as fascinating.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 September 2012 · TCh
90*

McNamara reflects on a life spanning WWII, the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam through 11 philosophical lessons of his own. The film is brilliantly realised by Morris and should be mandatory viewing for politicians.

Read the full review →
Empire
· David Hughes
85*

McNamara reflects on his career with archive footage and tapes backing some claims, proving crafty in interview. The film is a must-see, never less than fascinating re-examination of Vietnam regardless of one's view of its subject.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is The Fog of War worth watching?
The Fog of War is worth watching for anyone interested in how powerful men explain their decisions afterwards, and we scored it 84. Errol Morris lets Robert McNamara reason aloud about Vietnam and the Cuban Missile Crisis, which is gripping and uncomfortable in equal measure. Our reservation is that his eloquence sometimes earns more credit than his choices deserve, so watch it prepared to argue.
How long is The Fog of War, and what is it rated?
The Fog of War runs 1h 47m. It is a documentary film.
Where can I watch The Fog of War in Germany?
The Fog of War is available to rent from Amazon Prime Video from €0.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.
How does The Fog of War compare to The Thin Blue Line?
The Fog of War and The Thin Blue Line are both Errol Morris documentaries about competing accounts of what happened, with Philip Glass scores that refuse to let the audience rest. The earlier film is the tighter of the two, with a man's freedom hanging on the details and re-enactments that argue a case. The Fog of War is the more patient and the more frustrating, because it lets its subject speak with less challenge.
What should I watch after The Fog of War?
After The Fog of War, try The Thin Blue Line (1988, Fi1m 90): Morris examines competing accounts again, with a man’s freedom hanging on the details. Then The Battle of Algiers (1966, Fi1m 93): For another unsparing examination of political violence and the people authorising it; and The Act of Killing (2012, Fi1m 88): Another encounter with men whose accounts of violence demand careful, sceptical listening.

Cast

Awards

Academy Awards, 2004

Won
Best Documentary Feature Film

If you liked this, try…

  1. The Thin Blue Line (1988, Fi1m 90)Morris examines competing accounts again, with a man’s freedom hanging on the details.

  2. The Battle of Algiers (1966, Fi1m 93)For another unsparing examination of political violence and the people authorising it.

  3. The Act of Killing (2012, Fi1m 88)Another encounter with men whose accounts of violence demand careful, sceptical listening.

  4. The Sorrow and the Pity (1969) · not reviewed yetMarcel Ophüls uses interviews to unsettle comfortable accounts of wartime conduct.

  5. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964, Fi1m 93)For when the reasoning of powerful men becomes too frightening to take straight.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever