I came into the movie without any expectations. I had heard that some reviewers were disappointed by the movie's failure to explore the political ramifications of a Bush assassination, and indeed, it is true - the movie barely scratches the surface of the Patriot III Act signed by "President Cheney". Rather, the focus of the movie is cleverly subtle - it aims to expose how stereotypes and preconceptions can cloud our judgement, and how undue political pressure can be brought to bear on criminal investigators.
This movie is not about Bush's assassination - the murder is in reality only peripheral to the plot. Bush's death drives the plot forward - it is a vehicle for the message that we should not jump to conclusions about Muslims - or indeed, anyone. The story of the movie is essentially how the investigation of the death of a president led to evidence being forced to fit like a square peg in a round hole, just so that the accused, who fit the preconceived notions of what an assassin would be, would be convicted.
As has been said numerous times already, the subject of Bush's death is not gloated over or glorified - it is really hardly touched on. It is not the theme of the movie, despite its misleading title.
The most disappointing part for me is that the filmmakers were far too subtle with regard to conveying their message about vigilance when it comes to liberty. While obviously they should not be hammering the idea into our heads every five seconds on screen, much of the movie seemed to hem and haw - I was quite unsure where it was leading to or what it was getting at until the final fifteen minutes or so. A better script would have somehow made the focus of the movie on civil liberties and stereotyping clearer and a bit more overt.
Criticisms that the movie is yet another piece of left-wing demagoguery are a bit misplaced, I think. This is absolutely not another piece of Michael Moore-ish trash. If anything, I found the movie to paint the left-wing protesters depicted at the beginning in a rather negative light. (It's hard to feel good about a bunch of screaming people threatening violence, unless you're one of them.) It has been suggested that the movie implies that Muslims are not responsible for terrorism, but this is a very misplaced reading, in my opinion. The movie never says such a thing, implicitly or explicitly - all it does is ask us to be objective when evaluating the evidence, and not to judge a book by its cover. Even when it briefly touched on the subject of racial profiling (in an interview with a security personnel who mentioned looking for Muslim names), the movie was careful not to criticise it - the only commentary it provided was a quote in an interview calling it a "common sense approach".
Overall, the movie's only failing is that it has not been carefully crafted enough to avoid watering down its main thrust - that justice must be blind, so the scales can weigh the evidence without bias. This could have been a brilliant and timely message, had it been properly executed - but alas, it was not. Nevertheless, the plot is suspenseful, the acting and staging are realistic enough, and it's a good way to spend one and a half hours. Eight out of ten.
This movie is not about Bush's assassination - the murder is in reality only peripheral to the plot. Bush's death drives the plot forward - it is a vehicle for the message that we should not jump to conclusions about Muslims - or indeed, anyone. The story of the movie is essentially how the investigation of the death of a president led to evidence being forced to fit like a square peg in a round hole, just so that the accused, who fit the preconceived notions of what an assassin would be, would be convicted.
As has been said numerous times already, the subject of Bush's death is not gloated over or glorified - it is really hardly touched on. It is not the theme of the movie, despite its misleading title.
The most disappointing part for me is that the filmmakers were far too subtle with regard to conveying their message about vigilance when it comes to liberty. While obviously they should not be hammering the idea into our heads every five seconds on screen, much of the movie seemed to hem and haw - I was quite unsure where it was leading to or what it was getting at until the final fifteen minutes or so. A better script would have somehow made the focus of the movie on civil liberties and stereotyping clearer and a bit more overt.
Criticisms that the movie is yet another piece of left-wing demagoguery are a bit misplaced, I think. This is absolutely not another piece of Michael Moore-ish trash. If anything, I found the movie to paint the left-wing protesters depicted at the beginning in a rather negative light. (It's hard to feel good about a bunch of screaming people threatening violence, unless you're one of them.) It has been suggested that the movie implies that Muslims are not responsible for terrorism, but this is a very misplaced reading, in my opinion. The movie never says such a thing, implicitly or explicitly - all it does is ask us to be objective when evaluating the evidence, and not to judge a book by its cover. Even when it briefly touched on the subject of racial profiling (in an interview with a security personnel who mentioned looking for Muslim names), the movie was careful not to criticise it - the only commentary it provided was a quote in an interview calling it a "common sense approach".
Overall, the movie's only failing is that it has not been carefully crafted enough to avoid watering down its main thrust - that justice must be blind, so the scales can weigh the evidence without bias. This could have been a brilliant and timely message, had it been properly executed - but alas, it was not. Nevertheless, the plot is suspenseful, the acting and staging are realistic enough, and it's a good way to spend one and a half hours. Eight out of ten.