It is apparently not based on a book. It is just based on what McKay wrote. And the story involves how ruthless Cheney was, how driven to power, how much smarter he was than Bush, who is shown to be quite hickish and stupid, and almost to a cartoonish degree.
For instance, Bush, while he's eating a chicken wing, invites Cheney to be his veep, and he is extremely flippant about it. You'd think he was inviting him to play golf. And Cheney's response to Bush is that VP is mostly a "symbolic" job. Symbolic? Didn't he mean to say: ceremonial? But, he'd consider it if Bush would put him in charge of the more mundane things, like bureaucracy, energy, foreign policy, and the military. OH! I GET IT! THOSE THINGS AREN'T REALLY MUNDANE! HE JUST SAID THAT KNOWING THAT BUSH WAS A STUPID IDIOT.
I find it strange that anyone would want to make a movie about Dick Cheney, why his story would be considered entertainment. Most movies today are made to appeal to young people because they are the biggest movie-goers. So, do you think young people are going to be interested in this?
So, it's plain as day that the idea is that Bush was an idiot whom Cheney cunningly manipulated, like a puppet, to do whatever he wanted. So, Cheney was really in charge. Cheney ran the country. Cheney made all the decisions. And Cheney was a backstabbing, Machiavellian son of a bitch who could always trounce his enemies and ruthlessly do whatever he wanted because he was always a step ahead of them.
This isn't an expose'. It's a puff piece. And the proof of it is that the media is already praising it and helping it along. Think about this:
The movie has got to cover 9/11, right? And you know from all the positive media coverage that it must go along with the official story of 9/11, right? Because: the media would never give positive coverage to any film that did otherwise, right? So, one thing this movie must do is support and bolster the official U.S. government story of 9/11. Are you starting to understand now why this movie is getting so much free publicity? I assure you it's not because it's so good. It's because it uses an entertainment medium to bolster U.S. government lies.
But, then there are the architects and engineers, and you know what they say: that the towers could not have fallen due to fires, that there had to be a controlled and pre-arranged demolition.
But, I must admit that selling the official 9/11 story to people while they are shoveling popcorn down their gullets at a movie theater is a brilliant move. They are only there to be entertained, and having the official 9/11 story fed to them at that time is like hypnosis.
And what about the wars we started in Afghanistan and Iraq? Both were under Cheney's watch. Is the movie going to lay bare the monstrousness and the atrocity of those wars? Over a million people have been killed in those wars. And that's being conservative. A million people have probably been killed in the Iraq War alone.
If you haven't noticed, Hollywood has become pro-war. How many anti-war movies have there been in the 21st century? It's a nice round number: zero. Yet, pro-war movies, movies exalting and glorifying our wars, have done well. The Hurt Locker won the Oscar for Best Picture. American Sniper did very well too.
And it's worse than that because it's not just Hollywood: there is no public debate about these wars anywhere. We have been in Afghanistan now for 17 years, so you'd think there might be a segment on Crossfire in which someone who favors the continued fighting of that war is opposed by someone who thinks we should get the hell out. But, such a debate is completely absent from the airways. There is no debate any more about U.S. wars.
On the other hand, I must admit that it was just the other day that someone brought up the Iraq War. It happened to be the President of the United States, Donald Trump. He said that starting and waging the war in Iraq was the biggest mistake this country has ever made. A mistake, was it? A mistake?
Let me tell you something, Donald: If I go to Home Depot and I buy a 1/2 inch couplet, and it turns out I needed a 3/8, that's a mistake. But, when you cross an ocean, and you kill a million people, that is not a mistake. Mistake is not the right word. Mistake is putting it so mildly that it's an insult to all the people who died.
And Trump got trounced for saying it. Not the way I just trounced him, but mockingly. For instance, Conan O'Brien, after saying that Trump said that the Iraq War was the biggest mistake we ever made, corrected him by saying that it was the second biggest mistake we ever made. The audience laughed, but something is terribly wrong if we don't take the killing of a million people seriously.
Debate is dead in America. You can debate Kavanaugh. You can debate Kavanaugh 24/7. But, you can't debate the military actions of the United States.
Recently, the International Criminal Court began an investigation of U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan. There was some coverage of it in the media, but only concerning National Security Adviser John Bolton's denunciation of the ICC, saying that it had no authority, no legitimacy, and the U.S. was going to apply sanctions against it and not cooperate with it the least bit. But, there was no coverage of the exact charges. What are they claiming U.S. soldiers did? Why, in a free country, would you cover such a story without delving into it? The point is: if it's OK to look into Kavanaugh and his alleged war crimes against women, why isn't it OK to look into the alleged war crimes of the United States?
I strongly urge you not to go see the movie Vice. If there was a way for you to see it without spending money, fine. But, do not support it with your dollars. Because: you can be darn sure that it does not get anywhere near the truth about Dick Cheney. It doesn't begin to scratch the surface of what he did and what happened on his watch.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.