Charlie Wilson's War Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
A stiff drink. A little mascara. A lot of nerve. Who said they couldn't bring down the Soviet empire.
Based on a true story. You think we could make all this up?
A drama based on a Texas congressman Charlie Wilson's covert dealings in Afghanistan, where his efforts to assist rebels in their war with the Soviets have some unforeseen and long-reaching effects.
| Shiri Appleby | Jailbait |
| Peter Gerety | Larry Liddle |
| Erick Avari | Avi Perlman |
| Yousuf Azami | Relief worker |
| Anthony Azizi | Refugee |
| Paul Bartholomew | Date |
| Ned Beatty | Doc Long |
| Jehangir Behzadizadeh | Wounded man |
| P.J. Byrne | Jim Van Wagenen |
| Kevin Cooney | Kane |
| Walter Delmar | Lobbyist |
| Christopher Denham | Mike Vickers |
| Jon Donahue | Stu |
| François Duhamel | French News Photographer |
| Russell Edge | Mike Wells |
| Mike Nichols |
7.50 out of 10 (19676 votes)
Visitor Reviews
"Charlie Wilson's War" an example of a realistic movie
posted on 22 Aug 2009From my point of view, as an Arabic citizen, I think this is one of the best movies. This movie gives an example of how can we expect the good thing from anyone, although this one could not be from our religion, country, or even have our belief, but he has feeling in helping other people just because they are dying under the attack of their enemies. He is not involved, unless he is asked by someone else to go and see how some people are dying with no mercy, and how they live in tents with no enough food, water, or medicine. He shocks, and gives promises to do some help and he does.Tom Hank plays the character of the gay how likes to drink and have sex with women, and how doesn't care about anything else, but he does what ever he can to help the Afghans, and at the same time he doesn't change his life style, he doesn't stop drinking or meeting other women, he continues his life as it is, but he takes the challenge of saving the Afghans, and he manages to at the end. Although, he succeed in his goal, and the others how help him were just want to have the benefit for their personal attitude, but he continues working and working even after the Soviet Union army left Afghanistan, but he discovers at the end how he cannot continue, because those who agree with him took their benefits and they done.I really like this movie and I hope everyone who watches this movie should notice the lessons the story is trying to show to the audience.
rather bland for a Tom Hanks film
posted on 20 Aug 2009I'm a big fan of Tom Hanks, but he picked a bad choice in starring in this film. The story was OK, but it wasn't great. Phillip Seymore Hoffman actually had a better role than Hanks. Hanks plays Charlie Wilson, a congressman whom visits Afganistan and sees the poor conditions refugees are living in and the suffering of children, etc.. He wants to help these people beat the invading Soviets. He seeks aid from super rich ex girlfriend Joanne and CIA agent Gust. He's also dealing with his own investigation because he's been accused of using cocaine and like to drink a lot. He uses his wits to get the money he needs to fund weapons to the Afgans. The budget starts at 5 million and at first he wants to get it doubled. The movie shows a couple of years down the line the budget has grown to a billion dollars.The acting was OK, with Hoffman being the best. Hanks southern accent is to over the top. Julia Roberts looks great in this except for the bleach blonde wig.FINAL VERDICT: Not exactly one of the most interesting stories to tell. It's OK, but nothing that's a must see.
Accessible and entertaining that is no less worthy for it – but needed more of weight at the end
posted on 20 Aug 2009Charlie Wilson is a congressman with a taste for man a vice in life and also many interests – but overwhelmingly his key political passion is his own re-election. However when a wealthy supporter asks him to go to Pakistan and talk to the President about the fallout from the Russian push into Afghanistan he finds himself in a massive refugee camp full of suffering and tales of massacres. He returns to Washington to confront the CIA about the lack of support and their weak strategy against the Communist offensive and finds himself talking to embittered but talented Gust Avrakotos. Together they conspire to covertly fund the Afghan fighters via Pakistan from Israeli weapon stockpiles using US funding approved by Congress.This story could easily have been dry, historical, worthy and important and it would have been a very different film, but I'm sure one that is as good but in different ways. Instead the makers have gone for something that is much more fun and light on the surface while still having the importance of the subject in there. Now I can understand why many have had an issue with this as an approach and have seen the film as making light of the subject of US involvement in Afghanistan. I can see their point to a certain degree but not wholly. For my money the light touch and focus on Wilson allows for the sheer spontaneity and scale of the approach to be presented in quite comical ways, without ever taking away from the intent of those involved or the importance of the events then and since. As a piece of entertainment it is easy to get into and enjoy as a bit of a swaggering film and at times it does feel it must be fictional.It is fun and interesting and Sorkin's screenplay does fizz along as one would expect but for me it ends just a little too rapidly and only hints at the longer term failures. The mood does turn sombre towards the end and it is clear that some understand the importance of not saying "job done" but it does this in a committee room in Washington whereas it would have been more meaningful to extend that slightly and make the bigger connections that it only hints at. This would have helped but most people will be able to make the connections themselves and, while the light tone does risk trivialising events, the trade off is that it is much more accessible to a mass audience in the delivery of ideas. Not everyone will agree that that is a fair trade, but here we are.The cast mostly fit into the light, fizzy approach without too much fuss. Hoffman steals all his scenes with a great turn in a great character but the main player is Hanks. Not really an actor that ever excited me (and certainly not of late) he fits the bill perfectly here and provides a good mix of playboy and politician, producing a larger than life character. Roberts is in the background but is good for what she has to do but never threatens to upstage the main two. The supporting cast is roundly solid and features many well-known faces. Nobody really does well when the mood turns darker (Hoffman I suppose but only in one scene) and I'm not sure if it ends where it ends.Charlie Wilson's War is not a perfect film and for many viewers I'm sure the gamble in regards tone and delivery will not really work but for me it was entertaining and easy to get into – if only they had followed through with the more sombre material in the latter stages of the film.
Fun but paper-thin
posted on 20 Aug 2009A fun picture with a lot to like about it, but paper-thin. The problem is there's no real obstacles. Charlie wants money, he gets money. He want out of hot water with his philandering, he gets out. Whatever Charlie wants, Charlie gets. Doesn't make for great drama or depth of character. It feels like an extended episode of a TV show. It feels like Sorkin has been doing TV too long.The best part of this film is Hoffman, steals every scene he's in as usual and that's no small feat up against Hanks. Best as a rental. It's not a bad film by any means, just not much too it. Cotton candy gone as soon as you leave the theater. Trying to make my tenth line, sprinting for the finish here. Puffing and out of breath.
Very good...
posted on 16 Aug 2009Great film, a very worthy 7/10.Tom Hanks was at his usual best, the heavy drinking congressman who saved Afghanistan from its communist oppressors! Based upon a true story tells us how the West throws money and arms at a problem and expect it to go away. Well, it did go away, albeit temporarily. Look who we (the British, amongst others) are now fighting the very same people who the US gave arms, training and money to in the 80s.This film was always going to provoke political thoughts by the people who watch it, but it does portray a very nice story. However, once the main objective is achieved, i.e. ridding the communists from Afghanistan, it is seen how quickly the plight of people is forgotten about.This film was good, it was a well deserved 7/10. It told the story of the Communist invasion of Afghanistan and the subsequent covert operation by the US to some detail and was dramatised well. Although being a good film, I will recommend it to people but some people will not enjoy it particularly is a serious film about good (US) v evil (Russia) isn't your thing!
Interesting story, beautiful women: pleasant 90 minutes.
posted on 16 Aug 2009Interesting story, beautiful women and (again) Tom Hanks in a roll that fits him like a glove. All together: a pleasant 90 minutes.Finely a movie with a political message, based on true events combined with humour. This movie doesn't take itself too seriously although the reality is everything but funny. I think that Tom Hanks is well cast, his self mockery and his fat head makes him the perfect man for the job. To my surprise I can't get enough of Julia Roberts. She makes this movie a very sensual experience. By the way, if this Charlie Wilson really got away with his lifestyle in congress, politics isn't as dull as it seems. I'm looking forward to the extras on DVD.
Great moments in history
posted on 16 Aug 2009Charlie Wilson's War was a very entertaining movie. It is a drama about the unusual, fascinating, often humorous life of Congressman Charlie Wilson. The dialog was very well written and fast paced. The story was easy to follow. Phillip Seymour Hoffman stole the movie as Gust. Tom Hanks deserves an Oscar for his portrayal of Wilson. Julia Roberts's performance was also extraordinary. The language and sexual content make it unsuitable for children. The book is even better than the movie. If you liked the book, you will really love the movie and vice versa. It was a revealing glimpse of recent US history. This is one movie you don't want to miss!
Well done real life political tale that's fun, cool, entertaining and playful a must see.
posted on 16 Aug 2009Just finished watching "Charlie Wilson's War" and for my say it's one of the more recent and better political films, not just because of the real life story of Wilson at the same time the acting and direction was top notch. Director Mike Nichols who has never been one to shy away from controversial topics and issues like politics, sex, gender, race, and social issues scores a gem here with this real life political tale of early 80's congressman Charlie Wilson(Tom Hanks). Starting in early 1980 in a Las Vegas hot tub with Charlie Wilson surrounded by partying playmates from the start we see the womanizing and shady ways of Wilson from drugs, alcohol and women. Charlie Wilson was the real life democrat Texas congressman from Houston who was liberal and booze and skirt chasing, yet all along he knew how to perk power, back scratch and log roll his way to political favors. One day after getting a call from Joanne Herring(Julia Roberts) a wealthy, elegant and sexy right wing rich Houston socialite who wants change and would like to bring down communism and some of the Soviet empire by funding weapons for help to Afghanistan during their cold war against the Soviets. Then from then on the film shows it's jargon of politics with humor, sex, and scandal with wheeling and dealing that stays true to form with politics. As the viewer clearly sees those methods from his events and covert dealings with Joanne like events and even seducing the socialite and meetings with Pakistani government officials to help provide weapons with Israeli arms dealers to persuading other congressmen to invest in weapons these were some fun and smart covert dealings. Most importantly the help to Charlie is provided from smart but shady CIA veteran agent Gust Avrakotos(Philip Seymour Hoffman) who knows the enter and outer works of global politics. Hoffman's performance is very funny and direct his character was so likable. Piece by piece the film is set up so well that finally Wilson's plan happens the weapons are delivered in high quality being first class and ready as now air strikes can begin against the Soviet empire. Misson accomplished? As we see in the end and saw in the future the mission strategic at it's time ended up biting the U.S. in other ways. So the viewer can really be the judge if as to not that Charlie Wilson's funding of weapons to Afghans would later lead to radical jihad or the terrorism of 9/11 or of the present day. The film proved and showed with strong courage even though playful and shady that Charlie Wilson started the downfall of the Soviets and it was Charlie's right to fight his war his way no matter if you agree or disagree because political sides and each and every country are so complex and different. Overall this movie was done very classy and stylish by Nichols the champion of real life issue films, and the acting is top notch from both Hanks and Roberts the chemistry that Tom and Julia had was great their performances made the film watchable and seem even more like the times of the 1980's real life Wilson saga. This movie is a cool and enjoyable winner.
What an unexpectedly amazing film
posted on 12 Aug 2009I thankfully knew little about this movie before I saw it on Christmas evening. It was spectacular. Everyone was great, especially PSH. He cracks me up ever since he was the fat dork who couldn't find a shirt that fit in Boogie Nights. I have to say the trailers I did see on TV made it out as a comedy, and though I laughed out loud, it was so much more. The scenes from Afganistan were tragic. I was moved when the camera panned out in what seemed unending tents of refugees. To think those very children are who we are fighting today is eye opening to say the least. And yet the whole movie is peppered with hilarious writing, I fell out when Tom hanks yelled out "Jail Bait!" calling for the help of his staff. Very telling and yet not your average documentary.
A Sly, Sophisticated Piece of Film-making
posted on 10 Aug 2009I like Tom Hanks, and he is one of few actors who will draw me into the theatre regardless of any misgivings I may have concerning the film. I worried about Mr. Hanks return to "light comedy" as this is the arena where he made the transition from TV to film- remember "Big"? Well, "Charlie Wilson's War" is not light comedy. It is political satire, and extremely well-written political satire at that. The script is the star of this film, and the word-smithing by Aaron Sorkin is some of the best on offer this year.Mike Nicols holds the entire escapade together, delivering a film that zips along in a very quick 90 minutes (timing is everything in comedy, and nothing is ever funny if it drags). Nicols' choice in sets and lighting are also very reminiscent of '70's and '80's TV, a move used deliberately to root the piece in period.The return to the use of model work and stock photography over digital special effects also enhances the retro look and believability. Note to the production designers in your choice of stock footage: I know the difference between an F-16 and a MiG, and a Bell and a Hind. But that may have been part of the joke, too.I saw this film in Philadelphia. It was interesting to watch and listen to the audience NOT get the historical references to their own history. History tends to repeat because the recidivists have forgotten what happened the first time around.Kudos to both Mr. Hanks and that chameleon Phillip Seymore Hoffman. Sorkin's script is brought to life by these actors, and the entire production team is on the top of their game.Heartily recommended.
Ronald Reagan won the cold war, but he didn't win it alone.
posted on 29 Jul 2009In the late-1970's the west was losing the cold war. We gave up the war in Vietnam, leading to three bloody communist takeovers in South Vietnam, Laos, and worst of all Cambodia. Red armies all over the world got the message than they could kill whoever they pleased, and tell themselves that they were doing it for the people, and we would do nothing to stop them. We were so afraid to use our military without fear of political backlash, that we wouldn't even send an army platoon to Guyana to stop the Jonestown Massacre. Two events changed things for us; The Islamic Republic of Iran took hostages at the US and other embassies, and the USSR invaded Afghanistan after struggling to force communism upon the Afghan people. This movie is about one congressman's reaction to the latter of these events.Tom Hanks plays Congressman Charlie Wilson, a Liberal Democrat from Texas who spends much of his time partying. We don't actually see Hanks snorting a line of cocaine, as Wilson did in real life, but that's beside the point. Wilson is a Kennedy Democrat. Not Ted Kennedy, but John Fitzgerald Kennedy. He's a liberal and a cold warrior, something you don't see too much of after 1968. Needless to say, he's touched by how the Soviets are victimizing the Afghan people, and seeks to do something about it. With the help of a rich socialite he's having an affair with, he goes to Pakistan to visit refugee camps, and to Pakistani General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq(Om Puri) who took over the country in 1977.Part of the reason I saw this was Amy Adams, despite the fact that she didn't get as much screen time. Adams plays Bonnie Bach, the head of Wilson's secretarial pool. Though she certainly wants to help the people of Afghanistan as much as Wilson, she also realizes that some of the people who oppose Soviet-control aren't 100% good either. Nevertheless she agrees to work for him to do more than much of the Democratic-controlled Congress and the CIA is willing to do to help the Afghan people resist communist tyranny, all while he and others within the House of Representatives are being investigated in a sex and drug scandal. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I also got a sense that Miss Bach had a crush on him. Along comes Gust Avrakotos(Phillip Seymour Hoffman), a rogue CIA agent who offers to help. Gust knows that the existing leadership isn't as willing to help as they should be, and that he's lucky to find Wilson as one of the people who are. One interesting aspect are the scenes where Wilson tried to get help from Israel and Egypt, by using former Soviet-made weapons captured during Arab-Israeli Wars, and then had to coax General Zia into accepting the deal. Muslims throughout the world should take a lesson from this; Jews assisted in their liberation. They should think about this before they try to destroy Israel under the false pretensions of "defening Palestinians against Zionism," or whatever other excuse fanatics use for seeking their destruction. I also like the scene where Wilson talks about a time in his childhood when he coerced some newly registered black voters into getting them to remove a government official from public office for killing his dog.Towards the end though, you have the scene where Gust warns Wilson that the victory over the USSR isn't going to be so sweet. Because a much worse group of fanatics is ready to take over who was just as opposed to Soviet domination. Yet the powers that be don't think they have to be concerned, and neither do much of the public. It should also be pointed out that General Zia was killed in a plane crash in 1988, which probably affected the outcome of events next door, and has aroused dozens of conspiracy theories. Despite the fall of the Soviet Union, the communist threat remains a fact of life, and so does the threat of Islamo-fascism. But between the liberation of Kuwait from Iraq and 9/11, most of America retreated into isolationism. The Republicans of the 1990's became more like the Republicans of the 1930's, until George W. Bush was elected by a narrow margin. It should also be noted that contrary to many of the critics, the movie doesn't portray politics in this country as being 100% clean, and just because Osama Bin Laden and his faction fought against Soviet domination of Afghanistan, that doesn't mean Wilson, Reagan, the Pentagon, or the CIA were in any way responsible for the rise of the Taliban or the 9/11 attacks. We have nothing to be ashamed of by helping the Afghan people kick the Soviets out of their country.
Win the war, lose the country
posted on 27 Jul 2009Charlie Wilson's War is a slice of American foreign policy--American interventionism, actually--seen (because this time it really was) as the work of a single Congressman. It's been called "a history lesson" and "a cautionary tale." The warnings are only tucked in hastily in the end, and no "history lesson" so greatly limits its context. Nonetheless, enjoyable as the show is, it's above all instructive. It's the way Stephen Gaghan's Syriana would have been if it had a tidier structure and made more sense. Despite the emphasis on glossy personalities, there's a lot of fast, smart political analysis of how things get done when you want to win a little war on the sly against a big enemy for a little country.Nichol's film is based on a book by the late CBS correspondent George Crile--and that's Crile's title, not a jazzed-up movie version. The screen adapter is Aaron Sorkin of TV's "The West Wing," a master at swiftly blocking in the machinations of top-level politicos.This is a story of people making a big splash momentarily on the world scene, and for it Nichols has enlisted three big American film stars: Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts, and Philip Seymour Hoffman. Some commentators wish they played even bigger; that Julia had had a bit more fun and that Tom was as histrionic as an old -time southern politician. But they do okay: Julia can't be Erin Brokovitch every time; Wilson wasn't the old-time kind. What Hanks conveys is a look of mellowness and overindulgence.Hoffman plays a wildly independent and outspoken CIA man who becomes Wilson's ally. He's convincing too, and yes, he does tend to steal most of the scenes he's in, while we're constantly saying to ourselves how he almost doesn't look like Philip Seymour Hoffman: he's hiding behind tinted lenses and black dyed hair as Gust Avrakotos, a man of Greek descent, who hasn't been doing much and thinks most of his bureau chiefs are idiots.Hanks' character is a Texas Congressman who's on two important committees, but so deeply in love with women and booze that it raises a potential scandal, and he justifiably addresses his cleavage-heavy office staff members collectively as "jailbait." In 1979, the Soviets are invading Afghanistan, and Congress is offering the Afghans only a pittance to defend themselves. If the Cold War means anything, Wilson reasons, we ought to stop the Russians in their tracks.This movie earns constant points for depicting how things get done in Congress, the deals, the extra doubled allocations hidden in a bill. This war of Charlie's is a secret war, the biggest ever. He increases the funding from $5 million to $1 billion, and works through Israel, Pakistan, the Saudis, the Egyptians, strange bedfellows who all stood to gain from keeping the Russians back. Through CIA operatives arranged by Avrakotos, Russian weapons are delivered to the Afghan resistance fighters, the mujahidin (which Charlie learns means "holy warriors"--but this was twenty years before 9/11), to bring down Soviet planes and helicopters without revealing an American presence. Wilson is spurred on by a Houston socialite who, despite being a Christian fundamentalist, is working to strengthen the Pakistanis. They of course, are more eager to turn back the Russians than anybody and have the closest stake in Afghanistan. Charlie persuades some of his Congressional colleagues to join his side by taking them to the Afghan refugee camp where he realized the atrocities being committed to the Afghans by the Russian invaders.Wilson wins his war: the Soviets are turned back. Maybe this contributes to the fall of the Soviet Union. Charlie gets a special award from the clandestine services for his initiative. But as a closing caption quotes the Congressman as saying, though things had turned out fabulously well, in the aftermath "we f----d up." Indeed: the mujahidin turned out to include Al Qaeda and the Taliban.Mike Nichols has dealt with politics and war interestingly before--Catch-22, Postcards from the Edge, Primary Colors, but he's more at home in the drawing room than on the battlefield. Here, politics seems above all to be the raw material for the acting gambits, the fun sparring between Tom Hanks and Philip Seymour Hoffman in a room. Wilson calls Afghanistan "just a pile of rocks" at one point. The sex between Hanks and Roberts, which is part of our, and Wilson's, introduction to the Afghan-Pakistan dilemma, isn't any more real than the politics. The scenes of aerial battling and desert skirmishing can't be taken very seriously and could have been done overnight at Cinecitta.But the insider stuff is very suggestive. Mike Vickers, played by Steppenwolf Theater actor Christopher Denham, was a young but talented man who Avrakatos put in charge of the covert operation, and he's still a special ops chief for the CIA. When he's first enlisted in "Wilson's war," Vickers is playing simultaneous chess games. It's a good metaphor: the Afghan war is a war game, and only one of many. Though the refugees and the kids with missing limbs and disfigurements are real to Wilson, the lesson of this movie is how Americans habitually fail to see the larger picture when they engage in manipulations of world politics. You can have a dramatic effect sometimes by injecting large quantities of money and arms into a situation, but it's the follow-up that counts. And you can't control a whole region by tweaking a few events.Charlie Wilson's War is a movie that's grown-up, relevant, and smart. It's's not a great movie but it makes you think, and that's all too rare.
The real Charlie Wison
posted on 27 Jul 2009Whoever wrote that Charlie Wilson was a Republican is wrong. Charlie was and still is a Democrat. All the rest about Charlie is pretty much true. The drinking, the drugs, the girls. His district is primarily rural and very Christian. But the voters looked at Charlie as a very bright but naughty son of Texas. As for the Texas accents in the movie, almost no one ever gets them right. And with the homogenization of all parts of America there are sadly very few Texas accents left. Most Texans now sound like Owen Wilson. He's a genuine Texan but with no Texas accent. To complicate the matter that are actually about five different Texas accents, or there used to be. Weaver Morrow
Entertaining if somewhat light weight
posted on 25 Jul 2009I wasn't surprised that a movie directed by Mike Nichols and written by Aaron Sorkin would be smart and entertaining; that's pretty much a given. I was surprised by my enjoyment of Tom Hanks, who thankfully ditched his typically noble characters for someone more interesting; a dissolute congressman who decides to help Afghanistan against the Russians. It's an engaging story and the movie does a solid job of showing the schmoozy nature of international diplomacy. The cast is very good, particular Philip Seymore Hoffman, and like Hanks, Julia Roberts is given a chance to stretch and does a nice job of it.This movie is more entertainment with politics than politics made entertaining, meaning much of the complexity of the situation is tossed out in favor of a pretty straightforward story. But it does work, and it does make a few interesting points, although they are touched on so briefly that the don't have as much impact as they should. All in all, this is a witty, fast-paced movie that is well worth watching.
Zen Master awaits for his line!
posted on 25 Jul 2009Very carefully written as far as entertainment goes, the dialogs will keep you company for the entire movie along with Phillip Seymour Hoffman in his best appearance as a supporting actor. The scenes with Mr. Hoffman simply take control of your guts, in a good way though.A dubious film as far as politics. We have Tom Hanks as congressman Charlie Wilson (perhaps the volleyball from Castaway is sort of a real life inspiration for Hanks since he is the producer on this one!) who is a human-tutorial of "how to become a good politician". He defines a real man's good taste (in a Conservator's point of view, instead of Liberal): he has intelligent-beautiful women as secretaries, drinks good Scotch, and doesn't beat around the bush when politics is the game. In sum, Hanks reminds us of the parallels concerning personal image and professional life, but with an updated language, the disclosures of backstage "know how".The duality of the film lies in how real life facts are constantly left undone. It is a political lesson that shows a group of influential people from Texas in the middle of cold war in the 80's, the Russia x Afghanistan 7 years war. The idea is to bring today's Iraq situation in as comparison with totalitarianism x democracy. Hanks keeps reminding us how good is to be free to choose and express religious beliefs and moral behaviors (I mean, you can do whatever you like in the West, hence Wilson's meeting with Afghanistan President as he's offered something to drink). Meanwhile, Hoffman's character tries to tell us (and Wilson) the little story about the Zen master... well... the movie goes on...In the end, after 1 billion dollars of guns and deaths, Afghanistan is free from the Russians. Only then we get to hear Hoffman's story about the Zen master, which simply explains to us the real issues after the war: how to rebuilt the country. OK, so... let me see if I get that... hum... after years of death and bombings and destruction, what would be necessary to rebuilt the ruins (physical and psychological)? As if strategical men of power could not perceive, only Mr. Avrakotos could! Well... this movie doesn't work, politically speaking! Just as any excuse for war doesn't as well! If they (whoever they are) want to convince people the north American army should stay in Iraq and then invest money to bring democracy into the eternal-warlords of Middle-Eastern minds, then lets bring all the non-Muslims to the U.S.! It's cheaper and least painful! Or that doesn't work either, because of segregation? Come on! Give me a break!The greatest thing about this movie is in how it fails completely as far as influencing any political idea to be truthful. Bravo!
My wife and I both really, really like this movie.
posted on 23 Jul 2009This is a movie about real people and real events, and a much better story than a writer can invent in his mind. The acting is first rate, and the script is just so interesting that you never feel the time of the movie go by. Highly recommended.Tom Hanks is Texas Congressman, Rep. Charlie Wilson. He likes to party and likes to employ pretty, young women in his office. But when it comes to politics he usually took the easy road.However when good friend and Houston socialite, Julia Roberts as Joanne Herring, calls his attention to the early 1980s attack on Afghanistan by the Russians, he takes a keen interest. Still, he hardly had an idea of the problem until he was taken by helicopter to a tent village where thousands were suffering.This got him energized, requiring help of political friends, to eventually find a way to get proper armament in the hands of the Afghans to allow them to shoot down planes, helicopters, and to destroy Russian tanks. This effort is mostly credited with defeating the Russians and the eventual crumbling of the Communist USSR machine.Amy Adams is good as Bonnie Bach, Charlie Wilson's personal assistant. Philip Seymour Hoffman is his usual superb self as CIA man Gust Avrakotos who helps Wilson understand the magnitude of the issues and to hone in on the proper armament for Afghanistan.
America saves the world....again.
posted on 19 Jul 2009When the American movie industry tries to critically look at their own government they make damn sure it looks good even when it's bad.The film does 1 thing right it demonstrates perfectly what is wrong with the American politics. The motto seems to be to f**k with whoever it takes to get things done!!! Mix an American Congressmen, a CIA agent, a Jew and an Arab... just to f**k the Ruskies. Thanks to US for giving us Osama Bin Laden.The disappointment of the film comes in the face of muddling up the issues: using imagery of Afghan children with no arms and the stories of soviet atrocities and then making a blatant attempt to suggest a link between those and the reasoning behind the American help. Every sensible person knows why the $1,000,000,000 was raised... not the dying Afghani children that's for sure.As usual the serious issues are covered into facade of bullshit dialogue. "Here is to you, you M***r F*****s" Hoffmam chants at the end, all that's missing is the American flag in the background and the stupid military solutes. The films can not help but leave the aftertaste of the feeling of American pride and glee on how we (the Americans) have saved the world... once again. Not even the last 5 minutes of the film can save it, where an attempt is being made to stop praising yourself and wake up to the fact that its just another American F**k up.The acting and editing was good though.
Charlie Wilson's War Deserves Your Attention
posted on 17 Jul 2009I find it extremely sad that this comment section has been taken over by neo-conservatives who can't see the point of this movie because all they can seem to focus on was the sex, drugs and booze. The point, as I see it, was that despite everyone's character flaws (and we all have them--yes, even you neo-cons believe it or not) weak men can help accomplish great things.Hell, I didn't even know he was a lefty until about half way through the movie when he said he was a liberal.Of COURSE Wilson didn't single handedly end the Cold War just as Ronald Reagan didn't but they BOTH contributed to the down-fall of the USSR. As did the will of the average Russian and the collapse of the Soviet economy but that all seems to get glossed over by the Ronald Reagan sycophant cultists.I can't believe the people who think Hanks didn't do a great job!! Were they watching the same movie as I? The interplay between Wilson (Hanks) and Avrakotos (Hoffman) was what made this movie. Their dynamic sucks you in and makes you feel like you were there following their plight and care about the outcome of their actions.These two characters were compelling in their oddball, unconventional way of getting things done. The streaks of humor were well played and added a another level of interest to these fascinating people. Of course Wilson had some character flaws but that combined with his good intentions and concern for others is what makes him so damn interesting!! I find it amusing that some here can only focus on his partying nature as "immoral" and ignore the greater morality that he practices by helping a people who were being mostly ignored.Julia Roberts was good but not on the level of Hanks and Hoffman. Her accent kept slipping but overall her character was believable. I was fascinated with this woman and the juxtaposition between her cold hearted appearance and her true heart of gold.This film helps me believe again that our politicians have great potential if pointed in the right direction and shown what is at stake. Speaking of politicians, it was very interesting to get a peak behind the curtain and see how politics gets hammered out in America.Overall I expect great things from the awards season for this film.
"Well See....." said the Zen Master
posted on 15 Jul 2009Well we definitely did see and I and many other people were actually expecting worse. It did have some good parts too it that I was not expecting it still did fail in other areas though.First off the acting was above average. I love Phillip Seymour Hoffman in this movie and I liked Tom Hanks. Hoffman was the glue to this movie. If it were not for him this movie would have crumbled and hit rock bottom. His performance was by no means stunning but absolutely necessary. He gave a good witty, cynical performance in what most other actors could have easily made his character into a cliché. Tom Hanks really gave a nice loose performance and did not disappoint but he certainly did not impress. What I could not stand was that Julia Roberts was involved in this movie. She was as big of a miscast as I have ever seen. For one she is a bad actress, at least to me, she was to young for her character and was to phony even for the character she was playing.The directing was average to me. I'm not really a big fan of the recent Mike Nichols movies and I'm not exactly impressed by this one either. It was made with such a Hollywoodish, cartoonish touch hat I could not stand. The worst part about it was that he tried make it be a really meaningful movie at the end. I love meaningful movies but not when a movie tries to rush a scene or two at the end and show something that tries to justify the rest of the garbage spread throughout the whole movie. That is something that Mike Nichols has seemed to have done a lot in his recent track record.The one impressive part of this movie was the writing. The dialog was put together very well and was able to let the story play out. The writing was what was able to really able to take this movie to an above average level. In so many scenes I found myself laughing in part by the writing.Well that is some of what we saw at least. A lot of the scenery was good in the movie if you get what I mean but not a lot other than that. I did like that this movie did not glorify everything America had done. It is obvious that during this whole war in Afghanistan the U.S. gave weapons to the people who are now against us. This movie kind of show we are too blame for that. It shows that what may seem good in the short term may turn into something horribly wrong in the future. This movie did have a good original message but it just did not deliver it right. Overall though it was entertaining.
An good (although could have been greater) film with razor-sharp performances.
posted on 26 Aug 2009Charlie Wilson (Two time Oscar-Winner:Tom Hanks) is a easy-going Congressman... Who loves to party, enjoys the company of woman and especially drinking his booze. When Charlie's old friend and ex-girlfriend Joanne Herring (Oscar-Winner:Julia Roberts) wants Charlie to visit Afghanistan, which that country certainly need of help. Charlie is shocked of what he seen, especially from all different ages are killed or hurt from this war with the Russians. He decides to help the people and the rebels to fight the Russians, who started the war. Charlie, Joanne and one renegade CIA Agent by the name of Gust Avrakotos (Oscar-Winner:Philip Seymour Hoffman) will start a good fight to bring the largest covert operation in history.Directed by Oscar-Winner:Mike Nichols (The Birdcage, Regarding Henry, Wolf) made an lively, entertaining sharp satire war comedy that is based on a true story. Hanks, Roberts, Hoffman in a Oscar nominated performance and Amy Adams as Charlie's loyal assistant are very good in their roles. Despite the excellent true-life premise, "Charlie Wilson's War" never really catches fire and it is not as wickedly funny as you liked it to be. Director Nichols and Screenwriter:Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men) keeps things moving and the characters are well liked throughout.DVD has an sharp Pan & Scan (1.33:1) transfer and an good Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD's only special features are the behind the scenes featurette with the cast & crew and a real-life featurette with Charlie Wilson and Others. "Charlie Wilson's War" is a good movie that could have been really great but it's not. But this movie is smart enough to please for those, who enjoyed well written or well acted adult comedies. (*** 1/2 out of *****).