Q: What’s the movie about?
A: The true story of how Ambassador Joe Wilson and his wife, CIA agent Valerie Plame, had inside information about how the reasons we waged war against Iraq in 2003 were a lie. They knew for a fact that we'd been lied to because they were the ones who had done the reconnaissance proving that Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction. But when Wilson spoke up about his findings-- or lack thereof-- Vice President Cheney's office outed Valerie Plame's status as a covert agent, compromising all of the missions she had been working on for her country, and causing the deaths of hundreds of innocent people. And that's not counting all the soldiers and civilians who were killed in the war.
Q: Who’s in the movie?
A: Naomi Watts, Sean Penn, David Andrews, Michael Kelly, Sam Shepard, Bruce McGill, Noah Emmerich, Liraz Charhi, Brooke Smith, Ty Burrell, David Denman, Tim Griffin, David Warshofsky, Kristoffer Ryan Winters, Anand Tiwari, Ashley Gerasimovich, Quinn Broggy, and George W. Bush as himself.
Q: Is this movie worth the price of admission?
A:
Go! We were lied to. You should care.Q: Will this movie make me laugh?
A: If any of Joe Wilson's dialogue is accurate, he's a funny guy!
Q: Will this movie make me cry?
A: Excuse me? You've read this review this far and you're not crying already?
Q: Will this movie be up for any awards?
A: Hopefully Best Picture, but I'm giving it the Patriot Award, because these people stood up for what's right, even though it was the President who was wrong. And you'd have to be a true red-blooded American to do that.
Q: How is the Acting?
A: Having seen two Naomi Watts movies back to back, I can honestly say that she's always the same. By the same but different token, Sean Penn is always the same level of amazing.
Q: How is the Directing?
A: As Doug Liman himself said in the Q & A, his style is recognizable from one film to the next because he doesn't know how to do anything else. And in the long run, that's the kind of comment you come to regret having said.
Q: How is the story/script?
A: It starts out heady and hard to follow, but fear not, before long it all becomes clear, emotional, and engrossing, and you realize that you didn't really need to understand any of the things that were going over your head.
Q: Is there anything else worth mentioning about the movie?
A: I'm sure some idiot out there will find a way to say that this movie is a lie. And that's why that person will be an idiot.
Q: Where can I see the trailer?
A: http://www.moviefone.com/movie/fair-game/1428068/trailers
Back To Top |  |
3 comments:
Except that the main premise that Bush, Cheney et al were the evil ones that conspired to expose Plame out of some kind of revenge on her and her husband is a lie. It was Former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage (a Bush critic that outed Plame (see story on CNN). Of course, his name is never even mentioned in the movie as that wouldn't be quite as good for the Left's Hollywood propaganda machine.
As Mark Tapson from Big Hollywood puts it -
But the truth is, it was State Department official Richard Armitage – a Bush critic, not an evil neocon – who leaked Plame’s name, and who hid his involvement for many months while Rove and others unfairly bore the brunt of the investigation and of the public excoriation. In other words, as Horowitz writes in Party of Defeat, “the entire affair was concocted out of whole cloth by opponents of the war.” Rove, Libby, Cheney, Bush – the whole criminal pantheon of the Left’s fevered imagination – were not responsible for Plame’s outing (Libby was found guilty, though, of perjuring himself during the investigation). Yet Armitage’s name never appears in the script. And how could it? That would defuse the filmmakers’ intent to demonize Rove and Bush and to condemn the war as shameful, unjust American aggression.
Watch it if you want, but be aware that it's FAR from being true.
Thank you for your comment, I.M., I hope that others will enter the debate as well.
As far as I'm concerned, I remember at the time being convinced that Iraq had no WMDs, and regardless of who leaked the information about Valerie Plame, I do feel that we were manipulated and lied to, because they wanted an excuse to go to war. Saddam never had anything to do with 9/11, and we still haven't found Osama. Considering what America's CIA and Military are capable of, the only reason I can think of for us not having found Osama is because for reasons unbeknowst to the average citizen, we don't want to find him.
Oy, Monique. The fact that you buy this leftist claptrap makes me cry for Argentina... and your education.
Joe Wilson only refuted ONE aspect of the case for war against Iraq: that Iraq had tried to obtain yellowcake uranium from Niger in order to construct a nuclear weapon.
The case for WMDs in Iraq was extensive and not made because those evil Republicans lied, but because so many of the world's intelligence agencies had so much circumstantial evidence.
This evidence was so convincing that even Hilary Clinton voted for the Iraq war and even a quasi-Republican like Colin Powell went to the UN and put his reputation on the line to call for war against Iraq because of the WMD evidence he presented.
Nobody lied (well, except "Curveball", the main CIA source, but that's another story). The Republicans who sold the war were sincerely convinced that Iraq had WMD.
But getting back to this particular "movie" (though it's more like "Triumph of the Will" considering how one-sided and political it is), the exposure of Valerie Plame led to exactly zero deaths. I don't care what this movie says, because as the other commentator made clear, this movie is not interested in the truth, it's only interested in pushing a political narrative.
If you can prove to me that even ONE person died because of Plame's exposure, much less "hundreds", then I will apologize profusely and watch whatever movie you think is the worst movie ever.
Deal? :)
PS: And speaking from 2011 October, they found OBL and killed him. The reason they didn't find him for 10 years is not because "they didn't want to find him" but because he didn't want to be found. Two very different things. Even in this super-interconnected world, it's very hard to find a single person who wishes very much not to be found.
Post a Comment