Charlie Wilson's War

[ellenkushner]

I loved this movie, and so will you!

Watch for Julia Roberts in a cameo appearance as Diane, Duchess Tremontaine - OK, not quite: her character, Joanne, "the 6th richest woman in Texas," is referred to as "a woman with time on her hands who dabbles in politics" - exactly what Diane works hard not to appear to be. But the way Roberts plays her, as an older woman very secure in the privileges of her own power (and wealth) and status, one who does not think twice about using her sexual appeal to get men of power to do her outside work for her, or of using her charm and understanding of their weaknesses (and strengths) to create exactly the desired result (love that scene with Doc in the Afghan refugee camp!) and make them like it (and even think they thought of it themselves). . . well, it's pure Diane, and I love seeing it so well done. I sure learned something.

Now I just have to write a book for Philip Seymour Hoffman to star in. Or maybe I already have: the man can do anything.

Comments

[miladyinsanity.livejournal.com]

It was just such a good movie!

[apuleius.livejournal.com]

Odd. I just watched that yesterday, followed shortly thereafter by Goya's Ghosts. Talk about two, "We'll see" ,saith the Zen master, films in a row.

[ellen-kushner.livejournal.com]

omg, we watched it yesterday, too! Haven't seen Goya's Ghosts yet - must put on imaginary list....

[yaoi-in-exile.livejournal.com]

Ha! Well, that's all the prompting *I* need to rush to the theater.

[ellen-kushner.livejournal.com]

I have the powah (gloats)

[calimac.livejournal.com]

I enjoyed Charlie Wilson's War. It has superb acting that doesn't call attention to itself (after watching this film, I went home and pulled out my old videotape of Big, just to savor the range of Tom Hanks's acting ability), and it makes captivating and lucid sense out of a complex and potentially boring subject. My objections are extra-cinematic and concern its relation to the real world. This film makes war sound both easy and fun, and it neglects to mention that those noble Afghan insurgents later became known as the Taliban. Oops.

[ellen-kushner.livejournal.com]

A typical Sorkin play: it's implied all over the place, but if you don't know what it means, they never feed it to you.

The scene where he's desperately trying (and failing) to get them to appropriate money for schools, after the war is over, f'rinstance - and I've just realized what it reminds me of: Lawrence of Arabia.

[calimac.livejournal.com]

That's part of what bothered me: the implication that, if only we'd appropriated that itty bitty money for schools, the Taliban might never have happened.

I don't think it was anywhere near that simple. The Taliban had Taliban-like notions from the start. Not to say it was necessarily wrong to ally with them to beat the Soviets: just that one should be aware from the beginning just what the costs of your strategy are.

[ellen-kushner.livejournal.com]

I agree. They did elide over that; no one was ever shown going, "Hey, plus these guys are hardcore!" (I bet in was in one draft of the script, and they took it out because the arc of Charlie's character was really what they wanted to focus on.)

Better make another movie about that!

[crowyhead.livejournal.com]

Have you read the book it was based on, by George Crile? Absolutely one of my favorite nonfiction books I read last year. I've avoided the movie because the book is so funny and in-depth and written so well that I know I'll be disappointed by the film (also, honestly, Tom Hanks kind of annoys me...). I do think Philip Seymour Hoffman was an inspired choice for Gust, though.