Techincally Astounding, But the Writing Is Weak
Added 4/7/2009
I remember a few years ago when DEATH OF A PRESIDENT was touring the film festival circuit. People on the political left hailed it as a monumental and groundbreaking piece of cinema while people on the political right heavily criticized it (and boycotted it in many cases) because it showed the assassination of President George W. Bush. I'm sure (more so now after watching the making-of featurette with the filmmakers on the DVD) that the filmmakers knew that their subject matter would create publicity and some controversy, but had no idea just how controversial the film would be. When I first heard about the film, I assumed the subject matter was important, but was worried that some nut-job would use the movie as inspiration and attempt to recreate the movie. I'm so grateful that never happened.
DEATH OF A PRESIDENT is a fictional documentary. It's not a mockumentary or a mockudrama. The movie uses some real and unedited footage of actual events, footage of real events that has been edited, scenarios that have been acted out, and fake interviews with actors portraying characters. In all honesty, the movie should have been nominated for an Oscar for editing because the editing in the film is flawless--it makes the things in FORREST GUMP look like cheesy 1950s special effects--but wasn't even considered because the film was originally made as a special that aired on British television.
The film does raise some important questions that all Americans should consider. Yet, the overall story of the film is heavily flawed. For instance, the trial of the man who is considered the main conspirator in the movie begins just weeks after the assassination. In reality, no matter the public outrage, the trial wouldn't have started for months, if not years after the assassination and would last several months, too. In the film the man is arrested, tried, and found guilty all within the span of a few short months. Or take the evidence factor. One of the "FBI forensics" people says that people have been convicted on less than a smeared fingerprint before. That's true, but only in novels and movies. With a usual movie, things like this can easily be pushed aside by the suspension of disbelief. However, DEATH OF A PRESIDENT is not a usual film and in the world it creates these minor flaws are glaring and distract viewers from the issues the filmmakers want viewers to think about.
I enjoyed DEATH OF A PRESIDENT and found it to be a much more interesting and thought-provoking film than I was led to believe (by people both on the left and the right). Technically, the footage is seamless and amazing and I found the entire concept quite original and unique. It's definitely not a movie everyone will enjoy, but if a person really doesn't know anything about the movie ahead of time and is either aware of it's scriptural flaws or is somehow able to watch the movie and not pick up on them, then perhaps they might enjoy and think about some of the larger issues the film raises, too.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Initial impression was wrong.
Added 4/29/2008
My initial impression regarding this film was that it is some sort of political propaganda, but after finishing it I have discovered that I was wrong. What this film is really about is how our world has changed after 9/11. Although there are no overt statements being made, the general tone of the film is that these changes have not been for the better. I believe that the intent was to show how we are heading down a slippery slope, and that it would take very little in order to push us over the edge.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Political Thriller as Cinema Vérité
Added 11/24/2007
The fictional "Death of a President" (2006) has more plausibility and resonance a year after its initial release. Despite the occasional heavy-handedness of his fauxumentary approach, director/co-writer Gabriel Range reveals some provocative truths about America and its reaction to a hypothetical assassination. Now that the controversy and critical brickbats have died down, this flawed but fascinating film can be seen in a more objective light.
10 out of 11 people found this helpful.
|
Brilliant and Utterly Fascinating
Added 11/23/2007
This is one of those movies so brilliant in its conception, so smart and skillful in its execution (pardon the pun), and so disturbing in its implications that any intelligent American who isn't bogged down in political ideology should take a look at it... This is not a film that bashes Bush -- it's a piece of art that contemplates the hyper-violent society we live in and the implications of the angry, increasingly gun-obsessed nation we've become. Remember, folks, ideas aren't dangerous -- only people are -- so give this a chance.
3 out of 5 people found this helpful.
|
October 19th, 2007 - Where will you be?
Added 10/3/2007
Possibly no man is so universally regarded as the strongest contender in the Worst President Awards than George W. Bush. I know I certainly would nominate him. He and his administration exploited the worst tragedy in our nation's history to push their own dreams of war with Iraq, tremendous gas prices for us (generating enormous profit for them), undermining our civil liberties and sacrificing so much precious human life in the process.
And yet, as one who considers myself a very liberal Democrat and card-carrying Anti-Bushie, this film made me cry. Make no mistake: I would never want to see Bush assassinated, his horrific transgressions notwithstanding. Karma is a very real thing, and the amount of negative karma the man has accumulated will be punishment enough for him.
Now, of course, I don't need to tell you that DEATH OF A PRESIDENT is a fictional documentary about the fictional assassination of The Decider (and Darth Cheney's subsequent reign of terror.) What is amazing about the film is how emotional every last second of it is.
The suspects include an anti-war protestor, A Yemenese-American, an Iraq war vet struggling with drugs and unemployment, the vet's father who is embittered by his other son's death in Iraq, and a Syrian immigrant office worker working in a building adjacent to the location of the assassination.
No prizes for guessing which one Cheney decides to pin the rap on and subsequently convict. At least he doesn't rip the dude's head off and drink his blood, as he did with so many innocent chickens on LIL' BUSH.
No Michael Moore documentary could have stirred up more outrage the a film about the assassination of a sitting President, however unpopular. Even Hillary Clinton denounced the film. The overwhelming majority of this criticsm was sight unseen, and that's no surprise, but this is not a movie made to express a desire to kill Bush, or even one that portrays him in a particularly unfavorable light (although, from the DVD special features, I gather that the filmmakers aren't fans of his themselves.)
Indeed, it seems to be more of a warning against such a tactic to unseat such a despicable leader. We may not like our President (actually, scratch that - We DEFINITELY don't like our President), but violence can do nothing but breed more violence, as the Iraq war has shown.
But in the end, the most likable and sympathatic character in the film is the young Iraq war veteran. Having lost his own brother in the war, being disillusioned over the reasons for the war, and seen his father crumble like a house of cards at the death of his son, he tries to put the past behind him and make a new life in Chicago, the location of the assassination.
In many ways, he represents the entire country living under the rule of The Bush Administration: Wanting nothing more than to live his life in peace, the Administration's foreign and domestic policies catalyze a war that will forever alter his life, and not for the better.
DEATH OF A PRESIDENT is a well-made, often highly emotional film comibing a suspenseful politcal murder mystery with a retrospective-documentary and featuring at it's center, the heart-breaking story of a man pushed over the edge.
5 out of 7 people found this helpful.
|
