Death of a President.

[bk59]

Anybody seen it?

What are your opinions?

Umm... has anyone who has actually seen the film provided an opinion and answered the original question?

I'm alright with people choosing not to see the film... it's your choice and makes no difference to me either way. But personally I won't judge it until I've seen it. Having said that, it's not high up on my list since it would appear to be more hype than substance.

Review on www.rottentomatoes.com.

[iani]

It was on British TV last week, and released on DVD this week.

Yes, we have seen it, and its about what can happen to a leader when he doesn't listen to his people.

[kimmy]

The reviews on the movie have been rather poor. ThisSlate review claims that despite the provocative concept, the film doesn't actually have much to say. The review makes it sound more like an episode of Law & Order than a political commentary of any sort.

This Richard Roeper review complains that the director's vision of the aftermath of the President's assassination is negative-- Cheney in Charge, a Patriot Act III, a swift and questionable trial of the most convenient suspect. Sure, that's probably negative... but is it unrealistic? My gut says no.

And, if the movie dealt with President Smith and Vice-President Jones rather than Bush and Cheney, that vision of the future wouldn't be controversial... it wouldn't even be that interesting... it would be predictable, if anything.

The director apparently made a similar "documentary" of fictional events recently, depicting the effects of a mass transit strike in Britain. It sounds to me as though his interest is in speculative realism, rather than political commentary. And perhaps he just felt that depicting some imaginary president would be contrary to the objective. Or, perhaps he just thought it would get him some extra publicity. Maybe both.

The reviews for Borat, on the other hand, have been overwhelming...

Borat: Critics make fresh! You are clicking here for find out more!

Favorable reviews outnumber unfavorable by 128 to 5, and an average rating of 8.4 out of 10.

Amy Biancolli, Houston Chronicle:

As Borat, his reportorial technique is simple: Visit real people, blurt asinine questions, film their replies. Though some of these interviewees seem friendly enough, others come off as world-class jerks (and a few have complained they were duped).

By now, they realize that baiting people is Borat's métier: His racist hijinks have sparked outcry from the government of Kazakhstan, the European Centre of Antiziganism (i.e., anti-Roma) Research and the Anti-Defamation League. Kazakhstan objects to the unflattering portrayal of Kazakhs. The Roma group has sued to prevent the film's release in Germany. And the ADL, ill at ease with Borat's garish anti-Semiticism, has released a statement cautioning movie goers not to mistake the character's bigotry for Cohen's.

This is key: Cohen himself is an observant Jew. When Borat speaks in bogus "Kazakh," it's actually Hebrew. When he shows clips from an annual "running of the Jews," when he flees in terror from Jewish "cockroaches," when he asks an ammo salesman, "What's the best gun to defend from a Jew?" — all of these are occasions to gasp at Borat's lunacy, Cohen's audacity and the monstrous intolerance of average people. The best gun, Borat learns, is a .9mm or a .45.

...

But at some point, a squicky feeling hit me: What if everyone isn't in on the joke? Maybe, OK, this whole anti-Semitic-mysygonistic-homophobic-racist shtick really is an attack on anti-Semites, misogynists, homophobes and racists. But what if they're in the theater? And what if they're laughing, too? If so, I'm betting they'll miss the irony. And I fear that they'll miss the point.

-k

[JerrySeinfeld]

First, I think this thread should be in "Moral and Religion" until Greg grants us a category for cultural questions.

Second, I haven't seen this film and while I often go to the cinema or rent DVDs, I think I'll give this one a pass. It seems to me that it's in very poor taste.

On a related note, I don't know if I'll see Borat either.

I am tired of "iconoclastic" movies that seek attention by somehow breaking Western Taboos. It's so 1960s. Real iconoclasm means taking on the real taboos. Not the safe, fuzzy ones.

From what I understand, Borat never ridicules any Muslim. Why? It is easy to ridicule Americans. It takes courage to ridicule Muslims. (Galileo had courage to stand up to the Catholic Church.)

What would happen if someone made a movie about assassinating an Iranian politician or Saudi royal?

Exactly. I have made posts about this periodically and nobody gets it.

Hollywood keeps touting itself as "controversial" by making movies about gay cowboys, or the Dixie Chicks criticizing GWB, or (cue drum roll) ...wait for it...MCARTHYISM!!! (ta-da!)

I'd like to see United Artists make a big budget movie about a couple of gay yak-herding Muslims and call it "Mohammed and Mustafa Get It on In Paradise" and then start counting the seconds before the head office gets firebombed.

A movie about GW Bush being killed is "ballsy" or "controversial"? Go to a starbucks on a saturday morning...that's regular coffee talk!

[Remiel]

I don't think there is anyone in the Bush administration that is worthy of being assassinated.

[ft.niagara]

I don't think there is anyone in the Bush administration that is worthy of being assassinated.

Worthy? Worthy?? of being ASSASSINATED?

[August1991]

The reviews for Borat, on the other hand, have been overwhelming...

Borat: Critics make fresh! You are clicking here for find out more!

Favorable reviews outnumber unfavorable by 128 to 5, and an average rating of 8.4 out of 10.

I don't know who votes for these things but I'll bet that there's a base of young American males, or their equivalent. I figure adolescent boys - the target audience of the James Bond producers and Hollywood players - love seeing other people being ridiculed. It's sarcasm writ large and probably overcomes their teenage angst.

A heartfelt movie that shows this without indulging it is Summer of 42.

Anyway, as Jerry and I noted above, the real story here is that Borat never breathes a word of ridicule about a Muslim.

This isn't radical. This is just pure commercialism.

[Remiel]

Well, let's see... Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln...

Bush just doesn't have requisite qualities.

[jdobbin]

A heartfelt movie that shows this without indulging it is Summer of 42.

This movie has been flagged by some conservative groups for promoting a pedophile relationship. The boy the story is based on is supposed to be 14 and having a sexual relationship with an adult.

Heartfelt?

[ft.niagara]

Well, let's see... Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy...

Bush just doesn't have requisite qualities.

Requisite qualities for what, being a philanderer? or being assassinated?

[Guest American Woman]

Anybody seen it?

What are your opinions?

I just finished watching Death of a President this morning. Has anyone else seen it since this thread was started? There really don't seem to be too many comments about the actual film.

I don't see how it can be regarded as anti-Bush, especially any more than it can be regarded as anti-Muslim. If the film in any way justified/supported the assassination, then it would be anti-Bush, but it shows people speaking highly of him as well as people hating him. It's about our present political climate. In that regard, while the assassination of Bush isn't in any way 'justified' by anyone in the movie, immediately blaming it on a Muslim/Islam is more or less justified.

Of course, as has already been pointed out, this film is a British film, and is only a work of fiction; no more, no less.

In regards to this comment-- "Apparently Bush allowed to have footage filmed of him for the movie while he was in Chicago (I believe). He never bothered to ask the title of the movie it was going to be used for...": I'd need a source backing that statement up. With security the way it is, no one but no one gets near Bush without prior screening/approval and there is no way the secret service, FBI, CIA, or whoever, would actually allow someone to film him without questioning why.

Edited August 18, 2007 by American Woman

[AngusThermopyle]

I'm a bit of a movie nut, I generally watch a movie every day, on weekends more like three or four. I've seen both movies under discussion and enjoyed them both. Niether one will go down in history as ground breaking efforts to advance the art, but both have positive merits as well.

They're just visual stories folks, nothing more than that. Distastefull? I just don't see that . Death Of A President deals with a very real concern actually. It touches on a present reality, the fact that many many people dislike GW and have valid reasons for wanting him dead. As for Borat, it's nothing more than satire. In fact it does have some pretty amusing moments. I liked the Anthem singing part as well as the "traditional wedding sack".

If you want a good movie then try anything with Anthony Hopkins, you just cant go wrong with that guy. He's a superb actor who has the ability to make you actually believe in the characters he portrays. You wont see him playing the part of the gay cowboy in love. Incidentally, parts of Broke Back Mountain were filmed here in this town where I live. Such a shame that my little town's claim to fame is a steaming pile of dung passing itself off as fine cinematic art.

[Guest American Woman]

I haven't seen "Borat" yet, mostly because it doesn't seem like my kind of movie; but I suppose I will one of these days just out of curiousity, if nothing else. On Demand and PVV are just too easy sometimes.

Getting back to Death of a President: I think it's definitely anti-war, don't you? And I found it interesting how 'real' it seemed, Cheney speaking at Bush's funeral, etc. It was, I thought, put together well. Not an outstanding film by any means, as you said, but worth watching (and contemplating).

[bush_cheney2004]

President Bush has a very good insurance policy preventing "assassination"....his name is Vice President Richard B. Cheney. All US presidents face this threat, even as candidates, it's just part of the job description.

[Guest American Woman]

President Bush has a very good insurance policy preventing "assassination"....his name is Vice President Richard B. Cheney.

You got that right!