Do they try to portray it like there was anything at all actually to this farce, or do they just come out and tell it like it was-an attempt by certain CIA bureaucrats to damage the Bush Administration?Do they acknowledge that Plame's husband was a Kerry supporter? Does it come out that the person that actually revealed Plames name was not Scooter Libby, but Richard Armitage? Or do they actually get that far? Or worse, do they push the myth that Bush or Cheney was behind it?I don't see what the point is to making a movie about this if they are going to deny or obfuscate what are the known facts. And if they are doing that, then what does that tell you other than the film is an obvious propaganda hit piece?Who made this thing? Redford? Somebody else of his ilk?
Com'on, leave politics out of this please. This is only a movie for entertainment. Treat it as such and make life easy and happy for everyone, please.
I will comment when I see the movie this week.However, this whole "Valerie Plame affair" has exposed the supreme irony of American politics: the American Left is now defending and glamorizing Salvador Allende's killers. That's where an irrational hatred of Bush leads...
Sean Penn plays Joe Wilson. Tells you all you need to know. Penn doesn't make "only a movie for entertainment", anything he makes has got to have some kind of "meaning" to it. I was right, its a Bush bashing movie. I hope Hollywood keeps making them, the more outrageous and ridiculous the better.Every time a movie like this is made, one hundred thousand people learn to hate the Hollywood left, and those that already do hate them, find themselves hating them just a little bit more.Of course, that's wrong, as this is just "art".
Pagan: The movie wasn't about the details of the case. It was centered on Valerie Plame, and the work she gave up, the day she was revealed.Wilson a Democrat? What a shock. It mentioned Wilson worked for Clinton. Kerry has nothing to do with the story.Sonia: I agree. I sympathize with Plame, but never supported her campaign. I don't define myself as anti-Bush, as pro-socialism. It is a good movie, well acted etc.Anonymous: I agree.
Interesting. And they use real names in the film. I presume there must have been some meticulous research to avoid litigation.
One sure sign this has got to be a horrible film is the fact that it wasn't put out until after the election. If it was a film the majority of people could sit through- without being tempted to riot if they didn't get their money back-Hollywood would have released this piece of filth two weeks before the election in order to sway a few thousand votes here and there.Of course, in order for propaganda to be effective in a democratic society, it has to be something people would actually want to watch.This film stars Sean Penn as Joe Wilson, and laughably portrays Valerie Plame as a female James Bond. The only people I can think of off the top of my head who deserve to be forced to sit through that shit are Gitmo detainees and Henry Waxman.
Marvin: I believe it was based on two books about the events.It didn't deal with details, of who was responsible. It was more about their personal lives and marriage.Pagan: Your embarrassing yourself.
Renegade, I'll keep an eye out for it over here.
Thanks for sharing the video. I missed it. but not after watching thisSample Pakistani CV Format
Anonymous,This is only a movie for entertainment. I can't believe anyone actually believes that this movie is devoid of a political component. The names Joe and Valarie Plame screams ant-Bush/Cheney.Don't you know that everything we experience in life has some component about political persuasion? Especially recent Hollywood film.
Oops, anti-Bush/Cheney not ant.
Recent Hollywood film? What happened, Godard set up shop in Burbank? Now, time for everyone to just take a deep breath and admit that the right wing bed wetters were way out of line and out of touch with this WMD in Iraq nonsense. The film may remind us of how easily the right was manipulated. The only thing they ever found was Condo Rice's botox treatment.
Wow Ducky I wasn't aware mustard gas was a component of Botox.
Duckster,admit that the right wing bed wetters were way out of line and out of touch with this WMD in Iraq nonsenseI'm sure that it just slipped your mind to include the following LEFT wing bedwetters like Bill Clinton, Sandy (stuff it in my pants)Berger, Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Al Gore, Bob Graham, Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd, Jay Rockerfeller, Henry Waxman, Hillary Clinton, etc.... source.. snopes.com .. "Words of Mass Destruction".Another feeble attempt to rewrite history wearing left wing blinders.
Duck,right wing bed wetters were way out of line and out of touch with this WMD in Iraq nonsense. Utter nonsense.It's the leftist Democrats who voted for Iraq War because they actually believed there were WMDs in Iraq. They admitted it themselves, proving what stupid fools they were (voting for war against a country they believed had WMDs).The Right voted for the Iraq War to remove Saddam Hussein from power (he was getting dangerously popular among Arab masses for standing up to America). They voted for war knowing very well Saddam didn't have any WMDs. If they thought he had them, they probably wouldn't have voted for war. Too risky.
The song by "the Decemberists" preceded the movie by years... thereby immortalizing her attempted treason and enshrinement in the leftist pantheon of American traitors long before Sean Penn had a brain fart."Oscar-worthy performance," Bwah-ha-ha-ha!
btw - Even the Left Coast papers recognize that the Plame outting was a non-starter.Everybody already knew her hubby was a diplomat aka-"CIA mole".
I saw the film. Stylistically, it is uneven (only the second half is good). But I like the film's political message. It denounces Bush for lies about WMD and the abuse of power, but it implicitly agrees with Bush's decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power.My review of the film is here.
Sonia, It denounces Bush for lies about WMD and the abuse of power This is exactly why I caution against any kind of Hollywood based scripted portrayal of actual events in history. Denouncing of Bush for what the left repeatedly called "lies" and the "abuse" of power when, in fact, these accusations were not and are not established fact but politically inspired insinuations.Over time this kind of almost subliminal "piling up" and constant repetition of these "lies and abuses" will have the effect of cementing same in the minds of the audience as if they were indeed historically factual.Anyone can look back and find that it was a combination of three major reasons given by the Bush administration for invading Iraq.One was Saddam's flouting of all UN restrictions for years and firing on our planes patrolling the no-fly zones. Two was Saddam's mentally unstable and horrific tendency to commit genocide on his own people (gassing Kurds, etc). A distant third was the WMD thing and that was a mutually (Democrats and Republicans) position at the time.Sarcasm by the Duck aside, there is quite a bit of Jean-Luc Godard’s current mindset in the Hollywood film industry. Yes, “Breathless” was amazing but that was a LONG time ago before Jean-Luc’s mind was addled by his 80 years.
Post a Comment