Take away Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s straight-talking sourpuss of a CIA agentÑthe one man who actually seems to know what his job isÑand you have one of the blandest sociopolitical movies in memory. Sorkin’s screenplay is based almost entirely on American guiltÑthat we elect and reelect hedonistic idiots who do nothing, that we ignore anything and everything outside our borders, that we’re moral hypocrites. If all it takes for the morality of D.C. to kick on is a quick visit to hospital and refugee camps, shouldn’t we have sent half the House to Darfur by now?
Still, kudos to Sorkin and Nichols for the scene in which Wilson juggles Hoffman’s agent and a gaggle of busty young secretaries, then discoveries a bottle of wine has been tapped. Ingenious.
by Adam Balz | Source: 35MM Theatrical Print
02 Jan 2008 4:26 PM | Comments (3)
I’m in complete agreement with you on Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s CIA agent and the scene involving the bottle of scotch. The character is really the highlight of the film. Honestly, I think my favorite performances by Hoffman are within films where it feels like Hoffman is disgusted to even be associated to the movie and just wants to get the hell off the set as soon as he’s finished reading his lines.
thanks, chiranjit for correctly stating that it was SCOTCH that was tapped – generally speaking i agree w/mr balz but in this case i thought for the 1 hr 30 or so minutes the film was more tolerable than half the junk i sat through (many of which dragged way beyond the 2 hr mark) in 2007.
Sorry, my alcoholic repertoire is a little lacking. And I have to add that, for much of the film’s opening scenes, including Charlie Wilson in the hot-tub, it felt like The Graduate, Part II: Benjamin Braddock Goes to Washington. I don’t know for sure, but Mike Nichol seems to have a love of small, manufactured bodies of water.
Chiranjit
3 January 2008
2:08 PM
Website