Cool News
Bungion Boy joins up with CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR!!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
Ahoy, squirts. Quint here! Bungion Boy saw CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR, so that means I hate Bungion Boy now. It's easy to get caught up in the big tentpole flicks. I'm dying to see IRON MAN and INDIANA JONES and THE DARK KNIGHT just as much as anybody out there, but I'm so looking forward to this flick. Mike Nichols is one cinema's best working directors and putting him with a script by Aaron Sorkin and giving Tom Hanks some rich scenery to chew sounds like a great combination. And Bungion Boy says it's great! Get the details below. Be warned of slight spoilers.
Hey Moriarty, et al. Bungion Boy here in New York with a review of Mike Nichol’s new film “Charlie Wilson’s War,” starring Tom Hanks, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Julia Roberts, Amy Adams, and penned by Aaron Sorkin. The talent involved suggests a great film and a major Oscar contender this year. I’m sure it will be that and am happy to report that it is also a very good film, just not quite a great one. The film, set in the mid 80’s, tells the story of Charlie Wilson a Texas congressman who leads the initiative to supply Afghanistan with weapons to fight the soviet invasion in their country. Wilson is a charismatic leader and a drunk womanizer, whose schovinism emerges, as only a politician’s can, in a funny, charming way. There is a large focus on politics and nonfictional characters in the film, and it has that based on a true story feel. But you spend most of the film wondering just how much of it is really true.
The thing that seems to define Charlie Wilson’s War the most is the screenplay. I’ve been a big Sorkin fan over the years, (especially of “The American President” and “Sports Night”), but as “Studio 60” showed us recently, (and “Malice” showed us years ago), he can be a lot more hit or miss than he’s sometimes given credit for. About a month ago, before the stagehands strike, I saw his new Broadway play “The Farnsworth Invention.” It was also based on true events, (in this case the invention of the television), and aside from being bogged down by way too much narration, it was an entertaining play. However there was one moment in the play that really spoke to me. Late in the play, two characters that have not yet shared the stage finally meet. After some moving dialogue that the play has been building to for nearly two hours, one of the characters turns to the audience and says “That never actually happened. I only added it in for dramatic effect.” That line sort of sums up Sorkin’s writing style for that play and for this film as well. I was thoroughly entertained for the whole film, but I couldn’t help but think that over half the scenes probably didn’t happen in the way they’re depicted in the film, and the rest of the scenes probably never happened at all. They’ve been enhanced with Sorkin wit so that when Wilson is demonstrating his debauchery he is doing so in spectacular ways, such as a Vegas hot tub with topless strippers. That’s expected, but even when he just having a meeting with an agent in the CIA, it is also played for outrageous laughs. I don’t know how to respond to that because both those scenes are very engaging, funny, entertaining, and well written, but they also detract a bit from the more serious scenes because we’ve become so used to the zany characters and snappy dialogue. There’s a serious and tragic story about the state of politics and foreign relations to be told here, but it’s somewhat undercut by a light frothy attitude geared toward pure entertainment. It reminds me of another Hanks film “Catch Me If You Can,” which at its core was a story about an emotionally disturbed kid who found himself the greatest victim of his own crimes. But that approach doesn’t make for a fun movie so most of the real danger and drama was taken away to make room for charm and sexy flight attendants. Before you attack me in the talkback, please know that I think this was the right decision for “Catch Me…” and about 60% of the time it is the right decision for “Charlie Wilson’s War,” but I think the subject of bombings and refugee camps should be handled a little more seriously than they were. I have not read George Crile’s book on which this film is based, so as far as I know the more outrageous scenes are very close to what actually took place, but somehow I doubt it.
All that said though, I ultimately found the film to be entertaining and engrossing. It took about 30 minutes for the story and characters to really settle, but once they did everything moved really well. Perhaps too well. The films was remarkably short at about 100 minutes. The ending was quite abrupt and although the main story had seemed to wrap up, I expected more about the after effects and consequences of Charlie’s and America’s involvement with the war. However that is all summed up in about two scenes and on Wilson quote before the end credits.
The performances all range from very good to excellent. Roberts is the weakest link and is still quite good. Just maybe a little miscast, and playing a character who is never as developed as the rest. She pops up here and there but never long enough to really get really involved with the whole story. I think she might be outshined by Amy Adams, the budding star on the rise. She also just has a small role as Wilson’s personal assistant but makes good use of her little screen time. There’s a nice bit part from the wonderful Ned Beatty and Om Puri brings a lot of grace and dignity to the film as the president of Pakistan. Hanks is going to be the focus of all the marketing and publicity. It really is his film and he carries the film in a way that we maybe haven’t seen him completely carry a film since perhaps “Road To Perdition.” He is funny and captivating as Wilson and continues to establish himself as one of our most reliable actors, if not quite our very best. That title might go to Hoffman. I don’t think I’ve ever uttered the phrase, “Wow. Phillip Seymour Hoffman really sucked in that movie,” though to be fair, I’ve never seen “Patch Adams” or “Flawless.” He steals every scene he’s in and gets huge laughs, even though they happen in some of the more out of place and theatrically witty scenes. He is having an amazing year, starting with the LAByrinth play “Jack Goes Boating,” to two of the best films of the year, “Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead” and “The Savages.” His performance here is maybe not as devastatingly rich as in “Devil…” or as subtly poignant and naturally funny as in “Savages,” but he’s hysterical in this, very flashy, and aided by funny facial hair, so if there’s a performance that he’ll score an Oscar nod for this year, it will probably be for this,
And that logic will be the same thing that makes the film a success as well. This is yet another fall film that is about war and the middle east, but where films like the preachy and labored “Rendition,” “Redacted,” and “Lions For Lambs” failed this will probably reach audiences. Why? Because it’s less of a film than a movie. A fun movie. It features bright colors, big stars, snappy dialogue, and characters with funny facial hair. You may be surprised when this movie does turn effectively serious and political, but the people who are usually turned off by that won’t mind, though the people who want more of it may be disappointed.
-
+ Expand All
-
Would've never seen that coming.
-
Cuz, that could get dodgy.
-
COLD MOUNTAIN. He's a great actor with a lot of amazing performances under his belt, but man is he terrible in that flick. And in a film full of terrible accents, his is the worst...it's all over the place (except maybe NC/VA, where he's supposed to be.)
-
And I think Hoffman gave easily one of the best performances of the year. The scene where he breaks down in the car rings as true and heartbreaking as anything I've seen from an actor in 2007. The man is just the best actor of his generation and joins the likes of Daniel Day Lewis and Sean Penn in the ranks of our best living actors. The film itself unfortunately falls apart right when it needed to be strong the most, when the events of the story finally coalesce into a climax. Unfortunately I don't think the film earned the ending it gives you. Which is a good thing offhandedly considering how Hollywood and crazy I think the last 15 to 20 minutes were and how grounded the rest of the film was.
-
The, probably true, implication that a film has to have bright colors and funny facial hair for people to consider seeing it. I agree with Bungion that those other films are failures but I hope we don't have to keep trading poignancy for spectacle to get people to see something political in nature. God is the American moviegoing public just a bunch of pigs.
-
So a perfectly nice film may be ruined by a blatant political message slipped in at the end. Too bad. I had thought this might be worth seeing and I still might see it based on Hanks' performence. But if we're going to be told that, after all, we shouldn't have helped the Afghan people give the Soviets the boot and that we created the Taliban (a lie, by the way; the Taliban was created by Pakistani intelligence), then Charlie Wilsons War may be another casualty of Hollywood's insistence on shoving left wing BS down the audience's throats.
-
I don't think that you should worry about slipping an anti-American message into this film. If the movie used the book as any kind of reference at all (and it does), then there could only be a pro-Charlie Wilson/America theme to the ending. Yes war is bad, Mmm-Kay(???) but sometimes you have to smack the bad guys in the mouth. That's what this good 'ole boy did.
-
Funny how this talkback is so anemic. I guess there isn't enough America-bashing going on for the likes of 'RedSky' or 'DarfurOnTheRocks' to bother posting. Bitches...
-
And it looked like Forrest Gump IIVery Hanks, Very quiet and quite, quite, dull!!!
-
How can Julie Roberts be "maybe a little miscast?" Isn't that like saying she has "maybe a little" bit of a horseface?
-
Please make better use of paragraphs. Also, this guy is a plant if I've ever seen one.
-
Tom Hanks' best film.
-
Bungion Boy might check out some of Molly Ivins' columns about Charlie Wilson to see how you don't have to add much to his already outrageous life and dialogue to be funny and surprising. He did and said things almost as if he were preparing for someone to someday make a movie about him. I grew up in his district in southeast Texas and we loved him. He was the perfect politician for an east Texas Democrat. Someone you could love for having a soft heart, but who had no problem kicking ass. Hopefully the film is true to his nature, though, and shows that he was a bigger than life character that eventually self destructed and made the people who loved him ultimately hate him. My dad loved everything about him up until Charlie was the grand marshall in my town's Dogwood Parade while my dad was constable there. My dad had to be Charlie's primary security that day and he was looking forward to it. After watching him show up at 10 am falling down drunk and seeing him scream at his staff, calling them "worthless fucks" he never said a good word about him again. Maybe the film will remind my dad why he liked him.
-
Only a plant wouldn't know how to spell chauvenism. Kidding. Can't wait for this.
-
"I'm a big Sorkin fan..."
-
and Wilson's antics read pretty over the top in the book, too. Yes, there were strippers and gambling and any number of decadent indulgences in Crile's account, but I wondered about "artistic license" in that account as well. Thpugh I don't think Crile was ever sued, so perhaps the zaniness falls into the "you-can't-make-this-shit-up" category of actual non-fiction.
-
Doing a political comedy, count me out. Sounds lame, Hanks should stay out of pretending to be a political guru like Batman with Nipples. Hanks could probably retire right now and we would all be ok with that, Da Vinci Code was one of the worst movies I've ever seen, just horrible, boring. And Hanks was pretty much Flawless in my book. I even enjoyed the Lady Killers. Charlie wilsons blah. This reviewer did say that it would change our ideas about political movies though? But I am so sick of them, I have no urge to see any political drama. Can't wait for Forrest Gump 2 though: Gump Harder.
-
Thanks for your comments, Reagan. I fully admit I don't know much about the real Charlie Wilson and this film certainly makes me curious. Ideally I would have done a little more research last night before writing the review but I had a lot on my plate. I certainly will now. I'm a big fan of Molly Ivins' work so I'll start with that. The film does tread on the unbelievable at times, but I also wouldn't be surprised at all if this really was what Wilson was like. If anything, it was more the over the top feel of settings and situations that seemed to distract me more than his actual behavior. And regarding the film's ending, I didn't mean to imply that there is an anti american message at the end or that the film suggests that these actions led to the creation of the taliban. It doesn't do anything of the sort. My complaint was that the film ends somewhat abruptly and I felt didn't offer enough of a portrait of what happened next. It only hints. In a way I'm glad for that because it could have taken things in a real preachy, pessimistic direction, but I still wanted to know a little more about the situation and wanted a little more climax to the story. Like I said, it really feels cut off and I wouldn't be surprised if this film went through some heavy cuts.
-
I promise you all that I didn't misspell that word. Here's what happened, I wrote the review while on a shoot last night. My friend who was there asked to read the review before I sent it off. He's my friend and I value his opinion so I let him. He gave me a few notes on one of the sections and I made some appropriate changes that I thought would help. What I did not know was that he also made a few word changes of his own. It's my own fault for not proofing that paragraph again after he read it. It won't happen again. Even when I do misspell words, I use spell check and correct it for my review. I apologize for the error but your beef is with one Jesse Hicks of New York. If anyone wants his contact information just let me know.
-
about a guy who accidentally shaped the face of modern terrorism? And he's the hero of the film? Isn't that kind of like making an inspirational film about a guy who saved Hitler's life in 1925? Neither could have known what they were doing would lead to, but should we really celebrate the lives of people who made the world a worse place to live, regardless of their intentions...
-
...without falling asleep. This was not the one.
-
"And Bungion Boy says it's great!"
"...it is also a very good film, just not quite a great one." -
there's really nothing I want to read less than a wordy review from a guy who doesn't break up his paragraphs or bother looking up "chauvinism". And now, I didn't look it up either, but I'm not writing a review.
-
Alas, poor Jessie...
Thrown under the bus... -
Heckles, if you fall asleep banging a girl, don't blame the girl...get off the pot, brother, and stop whiningBungion Boy, nice review. I agree sometimes about Sorkin's work that he throws in some lines he just can't resist, even at the expense of the overall tone of a scene. in The West Wing, he seemed to get it perfect, but maybe that was because these people had to make huge and difficult decisions, and then live with the consequences without as much dwelling as us normal people would. maybe in this movie, the balance is a little off, but I'm glad you pointed out that even with that, it can still be entertaining.thanks again for a thoughtful and well-written review!
-
Welcome to Michael Bay country.
-
chauvinism indeed!
-
it's true, i admit it. it's like liberal pron. i will prolly see this just to get my sorkin on. but i am DEFINITELY seeing 'the savages' and 'devil', PSH is the tits.
-
This was a hard film to review. I had a lot of mixed feelings and they were hard to convey. Glad you enjoyed it. Hope you enjoy the film. I do recommend it, even with my reservations, but ultimately the film works.
-
Gotta say, no matter what. I love Alec Baldwin.
-
I will be in the theatre first night for this, but I'm not sure if anyone else will be.
-
Felt it was written by a film fan with intelligence and appreciation for film. It's exactly the sort of review I come here for. Professional, dry, poster-quote chasing reviews are for the entertainment sites. Ones written by 13 year old fanboys on acid and appalling smash-the-keyboard grammar is what the imdb forums are for. This is a nice middle ground and made me want to see the actual film in question. Sure, I'm rambling. But good work.
-
I never really care if people see or don't see a film based on my reviews, but it's really nice to actually hear someone compliment the review itself. Means a lot. Glad you enjoyed it.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts