Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Sorry, but I beg to differ. If this were a fictional character and story, you might have a point, ...

Posted by Audiophilander on January 15, 2008 at 11:30:52:
...but this is based upon actual events.

>>> "Peculiarly uninvolving, I don't know why this movie had no emotional content for me. Perhaps Charlie Wilson, as played by Hanks, being a pig, Roberts being a prig, poor directing and acting making the women appear as children\strippers sexpots. Bad script making the women all charicatures and men all serious and importantant. 2 stars out of 5." <<<

The direction was excellent, IMO; Mike Nichols was in fine form, and the Arron Sorkin script is tight and seething with dry wit.

Hanks came across as very effective as a politician who was learning the ropes around Washington and how to use the system to great advantage. The women as sexpots may be politically incorrect, but not for Washington DC, especially during the time frame depicted in this film. I would agree that in some instances the obvious sexism is jarring and normally I'd be among the first to disapprove, but I have even greater disdain for revisionism.

Since there is a strong thread of historically accuracy running throughout Charlie Wilson's War (which may have actually been toned down somewhat since the real life Charlie Wilson was apparently even more of a sexist bastard than the film depicts) I have no problem with the outrageous characterizations, much less the ironies and hypocrisy that this film exposes warts and all. In spite of the serious subject matter, the tongue and cheek humor is great fun.

I'd rate this film ***1/2 (maybe 4/5).

Cheers,
AuPh