Tammy Bruce: About the Movie Atrocity, "Death of a President"

About the Movie Atrocity, "Death of a President"

A post by Maynard

I need to make a confession: I'm one of those pseudointellectuals who attends art-house films. I'm a (pardon my French) connoisseur of a few of those abstract, brooding, pretentious movies. Sometimes I find myself defending shows that my fellow travelers in the vast right-wing conspiracy seem to unanimously condemn.

I'm also against censorship, and I think most of my right-wing comrades are with me on this one. We must defeat bad ideas by tackling them head-on, rather than silencing them.

Even so, some things are so vile and disgusting that it is necessary and appropriate to protest. The British mock-documentary, "Death of a President", falls into this category. It depicts the fictional assassination of President Bush. Here are a few excerpts from a FoxNews editorial report, Bush 'Death' Film: Placing a Target on the President?, which is worth reading in its entirety.

In “Death of a President,” George W. Bush is murdered after making a speech in Chicago on Oct. 19, 2007...

After Bush is killed and Dick Cheney becomes president, it takes about seven months for law enforcement to arrest a Syrian-American for the assassination. He’s tried and convicted. In the meantime, we meet a black soldier recently returned from Iraq. He is initially suspected but later dismissed. Then it turns out his brother died in the war, and their distraught father has killed himself because of it. The soldier goes through his father’s things and realizes that his grieving dad was Bush’s real killer. He held the president responsible for his son’s death....

There are some big questions that have to be answered about this movie. One, will it give some crazy person the idea to go out and try to kill the president? I don’t know, maybe. I think there’s something tasteless about showing a sitting president in this light, whether you like him or not. The producers of the film told me they thought Bush looked sympathetic here, but I didn’t see that.

Their intention is to show him hoisted by his own petard, as it were; the ultimate victim of his Patriot Act. This doesn’t quite work, since “Death of a President” simply turns into a laborious episode of “CSI” rather than expanding the premise so we can see America post-Bush...

This film hasn't received widespread attention, and that's a good thing. I hate to give it additional focus. I would have ignored the whole ugly episode, except I just got notice that a major Los Angeles theater that I often attend plans to show it. This news sent me scrambling to send the theater a note. Here's what I said:

Dear --------,

I'm disturbed to see that you have chosen to screen "Death of a President", which postulates the assassination of President Bush. This imagery is simply on the wrong side of the line, either for the purpose of discourse or entertainment. I understand you have the right to screen whatever you want, and I've been enthusiastic about certain challenging dramatic material. I'm not an advocate of censorship. But surely there's a limit imposed by your own sense of decency. Would you screen, for example, hardcore pornography or the latest Egyptian dramatization of the Protocols of Zion? When you move into the realm of indecency, you foul the spirit of your business. You create a stench that lingers. I hate to see that happen to an establishment that I've been so enthusiastic about.

This is not about George Bush. It's about the abandonment of propriety. It's about filth and hate masquerading as art. I'd write the same letter with respect to any elected American leader.

Thanks for your attention.

My purpose in highlighting this is to suggest that, if you happen to notice any local venue presenting this outrageous film, you may want to similarly comment. We've heard the voices of the hatemongers. Let your voice also be heard.

Posted by Maynard · October 21, 2006 01:49 AM · Permalink
Hollywood/Films | Just Wrong | Maynard Post

Comments

It's hard to say something good about the film. I watched it on its first showing in the UK on TV. It's dull, dull, dull. The "plot twist" which is described above is so obvious it would be hard for a sentient being not to see it coming.

The only thing that distinguishes it is the use of a non-fictional sitting president. Plenty of dramas and films have taken a shot at -a- president but this one kills -the- president. I agree that it sets a bad precedent.

The thing is this film will fail in America except with your loony Kos reading cohorts. If you don't give it any more publicity it will quietly slip into the obscurity that a bad made for TV movie deserves.

Brian of London
Shire Network News & Friends of Micronesia
http://tuatara.blogmatrix.com/

Posted by: Brian of London at October 21, 2006 03:12 AM

Since turn about is fair play, why not have an American company produce a mock-documentary abut the assasination of the supercilious leftise twit, Prince Charles?

Posted by: St. Thor at October 21, 2006 07:28 AM

No objections here.

Posted by: Brian of London at October 21, 2006 04:40 PM

I love pseudo-intellectual films, too. This weekend I saw THE PLEDGE, which started out slow, but got really good with its plot twists and suspense, but can anybody explain the convoluted finale? I loved the mental stimulation of trying to figure out what was going on, but now I feel like I am too dumb to understand the films explanation, and my nephew, who went to see the film with me, had a totally different understanding from the same ending scenes which supposedly explained everything. Help!

Posted by: Psalm_9:17 at October 23, 2006 04:26 AM

By Category

By Month

About the Movie Atrocity, "Death of a President"

Comments

Post a comment