This was a VERY good movie about a subject the average American doesn't know about and sheds some light on some of the events that eventually led up to 9/11. Crazy.

 

Anyway, Tom Hanks delivers another solid performance with excellent support from the likes of Julia Roberts and Phillip Seymore Hoffman. It's based on the true story of Congressman Charles Wilson's efforts to assist Afghan rebels in thwarting Russian invaders during the tail end of the Cold War. While the cinematography isn't anything to write home about, I think the editing of old news reels with new footage helped give the film a quasi-documentary feeling that helped deliver the story.

 

This was one of the better films of the year and I'll give it an 8/10.

I was surprised how little screen time Julia Roberts had.

It's because she's fairly terrible, although quite pleasant in this movie.

 

Philip Seymore Hoffman steals the show though. Gust was a great character.

It's because she's fairly terrible, although quite pleasant in this movie.

 

Philip Seymore Hoffman steals the show though. Gust was a great character.

Agreed.

I liked it a lot. I feel that it was a little rushed and we didn't have as much development as I would have liked, and the scene where the choppers took out the civilians at the beginning was incredibly like a video game. Everything was awesome outside of that, though.

 

I'll echo the 8.

I was surprised how little screen time Julia Roberts had.

Well I think, in reality, she had as much of an impact and presence in the actual events as she did in the movie. I thought it 'seemed' accurate, having no idea what really happened.

Well, I watched a special on the History Channel where they interviewed everyone involved except the CIA agent, and they seemed to think it was pretty accurate.

 

I agree that the graphics used during the Hind shootdown parts looked pretty lousy (not talking about file footage).

There is talk that this role assures Tom Hanks of his 3rd Oscar, the one he should have already won with his portrayal in "Castaway". Damn Hanks has gone a long way from his days of "Bosom Buddies"

I'd bet quite a bit of money Hanks does not win.

There is talk that this role assures Tom Hanks of his 3rd Oscar, the one he should have already won with his portrayal in "Castaway". Damn Hanks has gone a long way from his days of "Bosom Buddies"

I haven't even seen either movie yet but I'll say this and fully expect to not reconsider my opinion once I do: If Tom Hanks beats Daniel Day Lewis for an Oscar, it'll be a travesty.

I haven't seen the film just relaying the buzz out in Hollywood. There are those that say if Hanks is nominated , which in all likelihood will happen, He will win not just for this role but to make up for being robbed on the "Castaway" nomination. It would be interesting to see if it were to come true

It's a solid role, but I'm not sure it's Oscar worthy. Then again I haven't seen any leads be really Oscar worthy this year.

 

What's interesting to me, though, is that I've seen two GREAT supporting performances - the character of Gust Avrakotos in this movie and Robert Hanssen from Breach.

I haven't seen There Will Be Blood yet but with the Academy's usual screwing of Day-Lewis I expect Clooney (I expect him to win if it isn't DDL) and Depp to have much more of a chance than Hanks.

 

I don't really see Tom Hanks being screwed for losing for Castaway. I liked Ed Harris and Geoffrey Rush infinitely more than Hanks that year.

DDL is the clear front runner. That movie is one man show.

DDL is the clear front runner. That movie is one man show.

No guarantees.

 

He was the clear front runner after Gangs of New York and got royally screwed (being kind).

 

He should have won for In The Name of the Father (or Liam Neeson should have in '93) and The Boxer as well (not even a nomination, laughable).

DDL's charm is that he can turn mediocre films into great ones. Those films (and the performances) tend to be overlooked.

 

I've seen both Clooney's and DDL's performances and I personally prefer Clooney's subdued performance over DDL's heartless s.o.b.

 

Which is why I think Daniel Plainview is a more of a character than anything else. I talk about that more once more members see the film.

 

Regardless, I see voters voting for DDL.

DDL is the clear front runner. That movie is one man show.

No guarantees.

 

He was the clear front runner after Gangs of New York and got royally screwed (being kind).

 

He should have won for In The Name of the Father (or Liam Neeson should have in '93) and The Boxer as well (not even a nomination, laughable).

+1