"FAIR GAME" ☆☆ 1/2
(NOTE: I caught this one, after a November 5 release date, so I know it's late.)
"Fair Game" might be a political platform for actors Naomi Watts and Sean Penn, both outspoken activists themselves, and as the movie itself is somewhat preachy to do for us, too, but even so, as a movie, it needed to act as a liberal ad campaign? Really? And does it really work?
Director Doug Liman, and Watts and Penn, dish out all the hardy detail about Valerie Plame's CIA operative and her and Langley's task at locating intel on nuclear weapons in Iraq (in the early years after 9/11), as well as Penn's Joe Wilson, a former US Ambassador, and Valerie's husband, who does an off job for her and the CIA to look into Niger to highlight the paper trail on possible sales of "Yellowcake" Uranium, which might be being used in some tubing to make those nuclear bombs, those dreaded and oft mentioned things on Bush's "Where the heck is it?" list: Weapons of Mass Destruction.
It takes almost a full hour for the movie to set this all up for us, which it does, as mentioned, in fine detail, without leaving one piece of evidence, or source, or betrayal, under the political forefront rug. Soon, Valerie knows Irag isn't making those tubes, and Joe knows Iraq isn't buying that Yellowcake. All clear, right? However, in Bush's 2002 State of the Union, he speeches, in the most infamous 16 words in any State of the Union Address, Iraq does have those WMD's, based on British Intelligence rather then the known intel by Valerie and the CIA, so the US has a just cause, however false, to enter into Iraq. Valerie doesn't like it, but Joe (and Sean Penn) can't stand it, and as a good - and passionately outraged - American, and not one for political injustice (Penn!), he speaks out in a New York Times article. That strikes a cord to the President's VP office, and they aren't ones for injustice, either, and decide Valerie should pay for it, leaking her name to the press in return - in what was the Robert Novak Chicago Sun-Times piece - given by her own comrades after the evil VP's started snooping around Langely and the whole WMD operations.
The real hook for the story, and the movie: Valerie's name is out, her job is caput, and her reputation and family are on the line. And while she tries to keep a level head about it all, Joe (Penn!) decides he needs to fight the system by doing loads of press, as a guest on talk shows and being quote bytes for newspapers (and Fox News, which maybe Penn received a pay raise when asked to say the line, "Fox wants me to comment...").
Only once the drama, and Watts and Penn, heat it up in the movie's last forty-five minutes or so, when we finally center on them for a change and not the Bush Administration, or those WMD's, then it's interesting.
I prefer the human drama, honestly. I'll take it any day, which is why I just couldn't take all this political, I'm sorry, mumbo jumbo (yes, I know it's all fact) that "Fair Game," and possibly Watts and Penn, need to convey for us, without any sort of movie filter. The film, and the script, are adapted well, but why not do this all to suit the layman? And why bother to set this all up when it doesn't have much of a payoff? We don't even get to see Valerie fight for her own name, but instead we get the early stages. The threats, the husband/wive feuds, all that supposed juicy detail on everything that happened up until someone in The White House pinned a scapecoat. Then, when "Fair Game" is just about over, we cut to the end credits as Valerie takes the stand in Supreme Court. Isn't that the real movie we should be seeing? The real drama? What the hell, man!?
(NOTE: I know "Fair Game" is based on two memoirs, one from both Plame and Wilson, and it might have only been about those early times, and they might have been insistent, and have set all that detail about the Langley bomb search and Joe's anger. And what happened once Valerie did take the stand might not have been that interesting at all but to just show as subtitles during the end credits. Even so, I still can't see "Fair Game" being a movie.)
Liman directed good (after the silly "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" and "Jumper," and back to smart movies like the career boosting "The Bourne Identity."), and even as I would prefer he got his own DP then do the duty himself (the cinematography is sloppy), and Watts and Penn are powerhouses in this, just...come on! I don't want to see the light and picket on the lines with you guys! Enough trying to hammer the evils of the Republican Party across! Enough left-wing crusading! If you had concentrated more on the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson story, which it only does for that last half, then I could justify the movie adaptation. Anyway, can you see a film made just as a political lecture on what exactly happened in the "Plamegate" debacle, and the absolute injustice of it all? Yes, it's outrageous. Yes, it stinks. Yes (maybe), the Bush Administration were really evil, manipulative bastards and that President Bush had no idea what he was doing. Yes, I know this is the story, the turning point, the catalyst, that got us into The Iraq War. I don't know politics, and I don't really much care, because as such the movie often bored and confused me. All I cared about were Valerie and Joe (as much of a self-righteous dick as he was. Penn!), and we were with them all the way. I say, with all this jargon and grainy detail, I liked the movie enough only because of them.
The real hook for the story, and the movie: Valerie's name is out, her job is caput, and her reputation and family are on the line. And while she tries to keep a level head about it all, Joe (Penn!) decides he needs to fight the system by doing loads of press, as a guest on talk shows and being quote bytes for newspapers (and Fox News, which maybe Penn received a pay raise when asked to say the line, "Fox wants me to comment...").
Only once the drama, and Watts and Penn, heat it up in the movie's last forty-five minutes or so, when we finally center on them for a change and not the Bush Administration, or those WMD's, then it's interesting.
I prefer the human drama, honestly. I'll take it any day, which is why I just couldn't take all this political, I'm sorry, mumbo jumbo (yes, I know it's all fact) that "Fair Game," and possibly Watts and Penn, need to convey for us, without any sort of movie filter. The film, and the script, are adapted well, but why not do this all to suit the layman? And why bother to set this all up when it doesn't have much of a payoff? We don't even get to see Valerie fight for her own name, but instead we get the early stages. The threats, the husband/wive feuds, all that supposed juicy detail on everything that happened up until someone in The White House pinned a scapecoat. Then, when "Fair Game" is just about over, we cut to the end credits as Valerie takes the stand in Supreme Court. Isn't that the real movie we should be seeing? The real drama? What the hell, man!?
(NOTE: I know "Fair Game" is based on two memoirs, one from both Plame and Wilson, and it might have only been about those early times, and they might have been insistent, and have set all that detail about the Langley bomb search and Joe's anger. And what happened once Valerie did take the stand might not have been that interesting at all but to just show as subtitles during the end credits. Even so, I still can't see "Fair Game" being a movie.)
Liman directed good (after the silly "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" and "Jumper," and back to smart movies like the career boosting "The Bourne Identity."), and even as I would prefer he got his own DP then do the duty himself (the cinematography is sloppy), and Watts and Penn are powerhouses in this, just...come on! I don't want to see the light and picket on the lines with you guys! Enough trying to hammer the evils of the Republican Party across! Enough left-wing crusading! If you had concentrated more on the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson story, which it only does for that last half, then I could justify the movie adaptation. Anyway, can you see a film made just as a political lecture on what exactly happened in the "Plamegate" debacle, and the absolute injustice of it all? Yes, it's outrageous. Yes, it stinks. Yes (maybe), the Bush Administration were really evil, manipulative bastards and that President Bush had no idea what he was doing. Yes, I know this is the story, the turning point, the catalyst, that got us into The Iraq War. I don't know politics, and I don't really much care, because as such the movie often bored and confused me. All I cared about were Valerie and Joe (as much of a self-righteous dick as he was. Penn!), and we were with them all the way. I say, with all this jargon and grainy detail, I liked the movie enough only because of them.
No more liberal agenda movies, okay guys?
No comments:
Post a Comment