|
| Charlie Wilson's War | 
| Category: Movie
This item is no longer available
Avg. Customer Rating:  131 reviews
Sales Rank: 9818
Rating: R (Restricted)
Media: Video On Demand
Running Time: 103 minutes
ASIN: B001688V2E
Theatrical Release Date: December 21, 2007
Release Date: October 6, 2008
|
| Customer Reviews:
Who Was Charlie Wilson? April 27, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
A first rate movie about the end game of the Cold War. This is the best film on the Cold War since "The Company." For once, Hollywood got it right about the consumate evil of "the Evil Empire," and about how the good guys - after years of blundering and bumbling - finally brought it down.
But the missing character in this movie is the man who really did bring the Soviet Empire to its knees - the man who finally abandoned the old, failed strategies of "containment" and "detante" and devised the strategy that won the Cold War by destroying the Soviet Union. And it was not Charlie Wilson. It was Ronald Wilson Reagan, whose name is not even mentioned in this movie.
No doubt Charlie Wilson was a dedicated anti-communist. No doubt he was sincerely horrified by the very real atrocities committed by the Soviets in Afghanistan. No doubt he was instrumental in securing the Congressional funding needed to implement the Reagan administration's policy of supporting the Afghan resistance. But the strategy which led to the collapse of the Soviet Union (of which Afghanistan was only a part) was all Ronald Reagan's.
The unspoken premise of this film is ridiculous. It is simply absurd to suppose - as this movie clearly does - that a Congrssman (however powerful) could run a private war against another nation out of his Congrssional office without the approval of the administration. Foreign policy and war making are the prerogatives and responsibility of the executive branch, not Congress - and certainly not a Congressional sub-committee. Congress can play a supporting, or (as we saw in Vietnam and Iraq) an obstructing role, but it can neither initiate nor manage a war.
Congressman Wilson may have played an important role in supporting the Reagan administration's policy of actively opposing Soviet aggression in Afghanistan. But According to this film the Reagan administration played no role at all (at least none that is acknowledged); not even a supporting role in "Charlie Wilson's War" - the title tells it all.
Ronald Reagan is simply airbrushed out of the picture the way Stalin had the enemies he liquidated removed from old photographs of the Soviet leadership in order to turn them into non-persons. Ronald Reagan is the non-person in this film.
But perhaps that is the point of the movie - to expunge Reagan's legacy as the man who won the Cold War; to rewrite history by removing from the scene the most successful American President since the end of the Second World War.
Nevertheless, in spite of this major flaw, "Charlie Wilson's War" remains one of the best films about the Cold War since Hollywood's big left turn in the 1960's - primarily for its remarkably clear eyed portrayal of the evils of Soviet totalitarianism.
Good work all around. Not perfect, but very, very good. April 27, 2008
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
If not for this movie you could ask many people why they should know who Charlie Wilson was and they'd likely reply 'who?' Even with this movie, and the book that it was based on, many people will continue to wonder who Charlie Wilson is and what his impact on history was. Sadly, the fact that people have an impact on history is something far too many people miss in the U.S.A. and worse yet, many people never seem to think the idea of making an impact on history is something that should be aspired to.
Charlie Wilson was a U.S. Representative from Texas, from a district that needed little, if anything, offering him an opportunity to collect far more political chits than those that he might need to trade away for any of his own goals (or those of his constituents). Having those political chits, at least if you believe the based on the true story telling of his tale, offered Charlie Wilson the opportunity to help bring down the Soviet Union.
Before I get too far along, I have to say I take exception to the idea of Charlie Wilson being responsible for bringing down the Soviet Union. That description of Wilson's role in history is a vast over simplification of things, and gives far too much credit to one individual when there were many people and many policies involved in the collapse of the Soviet Union. Suffice it to say that Wilson's role in perhaps hastening the end of the Soviet Union's role as a military power may have been quite significant and this story is certainly entertaining and somewhat enlightening about the characters and events that were happening behind the scenes and scope of public attention.
Aaron Sorkin deliver's a good script with his usual crisp, snappy and intelligent dialog. Tom Hanks delivers a good performance and the supporting characters, especially Philip Seymour Hoffman, do well in their roles too. The story moves along at a good clip and comes in at a quite reasonable 90 minutes (approx). Nudity and language earn the film the R rating, along with depictions of drug use, quips and sexual innuendo add to the need for the rating as well. There's also images of the effects of the U.S.S.R.'s attacks on the Afghan people which may be upsetting to some viewers.
A few more quick comments here. This film was a Universal picture's release. It's ironic that the disc includes a 'trailer' advertising the look and sound of perfect (HD DVD) since this film might have been one of the last of the HD DVD releases that Universal would have made. Might have been, had Universal not dropped the format like a hot rock after Toshiba accepted defeat in the format war. It's hard to tell whether or not this movie would really benefit from being released as hi-definition disc (eventually it'll be out on Blu-ray, and/or out on premium cable channels in a high-def format). There are some scenes on the DVD release depicting the Soviet military copters that didn't seem to shine through as well as they should have. Those scenes were not as effective as they should have been and looked flawed and downright bad to me in spots. Hopefully the images transfer better in whatever hi-definition formats this film is made available on in the future.
Depending on the price, this movie would make a nice addition to many collections. Certainly worth viewing. (Un-box is a great alternative for those that want immediate satisfaction ;) )
 Sorkin, Nichols, Hanks, Hoffman Shine April 27, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Aaron Sorkin writes political drama better than anyone. I liked absolutely EVERYTHING about this film. I am one of those snooty CNN watching American's who overestimates my grasp of history. Gotta' say, I didn't know anything about this segment of the cold war and am I embarrassed. Aaron, I'm eating crow.
Sorkin's dialog can sometimes be called "snappy patter" but it is always smart as well as witty. Nichols is a master and has not lost his magic touch since he started directing in the 70's. Hanks has become that old dependable leading man who's paid his dues and actually learned from his early mistakes (Joe vs the Volcano? what WAS he thinking). Hoffman was born to play this role and should have received the Academy Award for this performance.
The film told the story of an anti-hero who changed the world. Unfortunately even Charlie couldn't save the world. bg
and not one Academy Award? April 26, 2008
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
Absurd. This is one of the half-dozen best flicks I've ever seen, and it didn't even get a look-in at the Oscars! (Note how many of the four-star reviews are really raves. C'mon guys, why are you sitting on your hands? Give it the fiver it deserves!)
I like Tom Hanks but was a bit tired of him--he's superb in this film. I don't particularly like Julia Roberts--she's superb. And the portly CIA guy (he got a nomination but no cigar) was pretty good as well, though I'd like to see if he can still act if they took f*** out of his vocabulary.
I have only one question: why couldn't Hollywood have made a film like this before 1991?
Real American Story April 25, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
I haven't seen a good American story in a while but this one hits home. I thought the parts were well acted and the Character of Charlie Wilson is just a guy you have to love. He is a patriot, a hater of the evil communist empire, a senator that every one loves. Then he is a womenizer, a drinker and cuts every corner he can to get what he wants.
This was a fun movie the charactered played by Philip Seymour Hoffman is the type of CIA agent everyone wants to be, knowledgable, clever and aware of all the problems in every situation. He uses this to get what he wants like it the part about the belly dancer. Julia Roberts is lovable as this rich beauty queen who hates the communists.
This will be enjoyed by anyone who likes a fun movie where the good guys finally win.
|
|
|
Wildlife, nature and the Environment
Sponsored Links
Learn how to get your own Amazon Book shop | |
