Charlie's Movie (More Left Wing Hollywood Myths-my title)

The Washington Times ^ | December 21, 2007 | Bill Gertz

[Stonewall Jackson]

Well, they do call me an eternal optomist. On the other hand, even I am about ready to give up on Hollywood and call it a lost cause.

[Recon Dad]

I will be glad to let you know me take. I am going into this with the hope they stayed true to the book. The book was not anti republican. The CIA fought Charley tooth and nail not because they were a bunch of conservative republicans, but because they didn’t want some congressman running American foreign policy, turf war thing.
We’ll see.

[Recon Dad]

There were things that Charlie was doing and being praised for, while Ollie North was getting reamed for doing 1/100th of what Charlie was

I backed Ollie’s Contra program and thought it was brilliant. The dems saw his play as attacking a communist government. The Afghanistan situation was quite different as a Soviet occupation. You really need to separate the two and just congratulate Charley for getting around all the liberals the way he did.

[Captainpaintball]

Wow, that was really going out on a limb...

[Carbonado]

I have slowly come to the conclusion that the Liberal Hollywood myth machine will simply have to be starved to death completely before Hollywood ever changes it’s ways.

That also goes for the Liberal media myth machine. Just because there is one Liberal newspaper or only Liberal broadcast “news” sources in your area is no longer an excuse. The Internet is now available to circumvent the lies, distortions and obfuscations of the media Libs. Encourage everyone you know to use it and help kill the Liberal myth machine for good.

[colorado tanker]

Yes, the organization that Osama eventually led was funded by the Saudis, not the CIA. The organization contributed little to the war in-country and wasn't backed by CIA.

The Saudis on the other hand, were more concerned about insuring a Wahabbist presence in the anti-Soviet coalition.

[rlmorel]

Yep. Exactly right on.

[rlmorel]

"...I don't know which damns Aaron Sorkin more: that he is a crackhead, or that he once dated -- EWWWWWWW! -- Mo Dowd..."

No contest there.

[VOA]

“yes - he was what they called a yellow dog Democrat”

Thank you; I should have mentioned that political label in my prior post.

But I guess that for drinking and womanizing, Charlie Wilson would
still be at home at least in The Kennedy Men sector of today’s
Democratic Party.

And I don’t say that in a judgemental way about the actual Charlie Wilson.
War, even covert ones, are almost always fought and won by guys/gals
that are NOT shoe-ins for sainthood!

[Hildy]

LOL! Yea, I guess you’re right. But you don’t have to be so snippy about it! :)

[Hildy]

FYI the History Channel is airing a show about it tonight and tomorrow:

Host Geoff Wawro examines the historical perspective to the new film Charlie Wilson's War. The movie, starring Tom Hanks, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Julia Roberts, tells the story of Texas congressman Charlie Wilson and his crusade to aid the Afghan rebels in their war against the Soviets. We'll focus on the real story of how Congressman Wilson got involved and why he championed the Afghan cause. We'll also bring the story forward by examining what if any insights the film has regarding America's current involvement in Afghanistan.

Rating: TVPG

Running Time: 30 minutes

Genre:Society & Culture

[discostu]

The movie doesn’t say that. The movie says we funded some potentially nasty people (which we did) and then walked away without bothering to help them rebuild after the Russians left (which we did). It’s a good movie, lots of fun.

[fortunecookie]

Sadly, but rightly so, the first thought I had was that Charlie Wilson must have been a Dem. Surely Hollowood couldn't find any good Republicans to make a movie about, at least so they think. And the timing, the 'holiday' season, just before the primaries when the right, we the conservatives, are searching for that next Reagan to run, well, it couldn't be more delicious for Hollywood to dish up to us a Dem who 'saved' us from communism. Not to discount in any way any actual good work done by the real Wilson, it just seems a little too convenient, a win-win, trying to tear at the Reagan inspired end to the Soviet era and a positive on-screen portrayal of a Dem who came to save the world from war, you know, like Hil or others will save us from the one we are battling now. And it doesn't hurt that the movie Wilson is a bit of a 70's style playboy, a kind of shades of Bill Clinton. And good talent playing the lead roles. Yes, a real home run for Hollywood's leftists. (painful, nausea-inducing eyerolling) I'm sure the timing is 'coincidence'. Yeah, right...

And, she said in a whisper, I think the actors playing the lead roles could indeed make it enjoyable, as just a fictional movie. Tom Hanks, Philip Michael Seymour. If it weren't so loaded with ... well, you know...

[Captainpaintball]

LOL! Yea, I guess you’re right. But you don’t have to be so snippy about it! :)

I really didn't mean to come off that way, I apologze.

[Recon Dad]

I think there is a special on Saturday night on National Geographic or Discovery covering the same thing.

I just got back from the movie and without a doubt it was a FIVE STAR film. Very true to the book at least much more so than most movies. There was absolutely no liberal spin from start to finish. I would have rewritten a few scenes but even the scenes like the initial meeting between Charley and Gust while not true to the book I felt worked well.
Charley Wilson was a hero, flawed but a genuine American hero, most are. Please go see it and let me know what you all think.

[Hildy]

Well..color me surprised! And Happily so! I don’t want to be pissed off around the Holidays!!!

[Hildy]

that’s ok..hey, read post #55 here...a review from a Freeper who went to the movie today. Seems our fears were unfounded.

[Recon Dad]

Do me a favor do both, read the book and go see the movie. Doing one or the other first won’t make a difference.

Merry Christmas.

[Recon Dad]

You and I saw the same movie. I hope others see it. Below was my review of the film and I read the book twice.

I just got back from the movie and without a doubt it was a FIVE STAR film. Very true to the book at least much more so than most movies. There was absolutely no liberal spin from start to finish. I would have rewritten a few scenes but even the scenes like the initial meeting between Charley and Gust while not true to the book I felt worked well.
Charley Wilson was a hero, flawed but a genuine American hero, most are. Please go see it and let me know what you all think

[discostu]

I never read the book but the movie inspires me to keep an eye out for it. I don’t know about a 5 star movie, there are some definite rough spots (doesn’t really handle the passage of time well, and Roberts accent is pathetic), but it’s thoroughly enjoyable, not a liberal love fest, well scripted (of course I love the Sorkin rhythm, always have, I’m probably the only person on FR that like Studio 60), and all around fun.