Death of a President

Anyone who's not seen this, don't feel pressured by the supposed controversy. The whole thing is as entertaining as being steam-rolled into your armchair by a Lee Harvey Oswald documentary. Why the harebrained duo, Range and Finch, picked this subject is obvious when you scan the hair-triggered rags and the inflamed threads on this board. To explain my low rating. It earned the slothenly four during a long slip from a decent five when it failed to convince me that its creation was justified. Put simply, this was perhaps the most disrespectful tirade against a political figure I have ever seen; they flushed thousands of Franklins down the toilet and this bobbed up? There was no message beyond the flimsily appended, "Patriot ACT, wah wah wah... Patriot ACT, wail cry wail!" Pathetically shallow. Or was it? If you put on your special investigation specs and look closely there's a veiled finger pointing at Cheney. Could he have been the second gunman at the Sheraton? Was his motive for the assassination piggy-backing into office? He had demonstrated a keen ability for the murder method earlier in the year and numerous trips to the table would have furnished him with almost as much aortic experience as his crack team of cardiovascular surgeons. All that's left is opportunity. How convenient then that he doesn't show his face until the President is already critical, and then only to try to derail the investigation and cover up his misdeeds. Very suspicious. Thought provoking! One thumb and a pointer finger up!

i tried to sit through this heap of horse manure but had to shut it off it became obvious bush and his rejects made this film to try to buy sympathy for poor bushie full of manure awful is not even enough to say how bad this joke is. Its pure propaganda and a silly attempt to lead America astray again. I wish they would have at least gotten a real actor bush cant even speak straight let alone act like hes a good guy. Hitler envies satanist bush and demon cheney. Its nothing but a sad movie trying to get you to feel bad because bush has such a hard time trying to destroy America and freedom so we should all feel bad for him. Watch this if you want to try trough you valuable time away i wish i could get my time back it would have been better spent defecating or sleeping or anything else.

There is nothing more predictable than first response to this sentence: "Gabriel Range's new film, 'Death of a President,' is about the assassination of George W. Bush on Oct. 19, 2007." Here's the sequence of your thoughts: 1. Eeeeew! 2. Can they make a film like that?! 3. That's one movie I'll never see. Beyond all the obvious up to this point, nothing is to be taken for granted otherwise about "Death." It is a stunning work, literally. It will leave you dazed, floored, stupefied. (That is, if you see it... but you won't.) To begin with it's neither a mockumentary, nor a fictional documentary, nor documented fiction... I just don't know what to call it. But is is GOOD; if you drag yourself into the theater, you will be grabbed, buffeted, your anticipation and second-guessing will turn out to be all wrong. The opening narrative, right off the bat, seems obvious, but will gain a totally different meaning when it's repeated at the end. Exciting as the "recreation" of the foul deed may be, "Death" is really more about the capturing, trial, and conviction of the suspected assassin, who may or may not be the killer. Not that the 44th President, Dick Cheney, cares about that. But you may. (While, incredible as it may seem, you being to feel somewhat nostalgic about No. 43.) British journalist and film-maker ("The Menendez Murders," "The Day Britain Stopped") Range is brilliant. Overlapping documentary and fictional footage blend flawlessly. Bush, Cheney, many others "play" themselves, are themselves. The interviews with actors playing Secret Service agents, government officials, etc. are totally believable - in fact, they may fool you for a while, even a long while. Range's work has little to do with what may appear to be an obvious twin, Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11," except for dealing with the same national shame of fear and fear-mongering. Moore tried to fill in the gaps left in what is known and what is claimed. "Death of the President" projects our sorry time into the world of Patriot Act III. Range is clear about the certainty of being denounced, sight unseen: "I have always known that I would be condemned for the very idea of this film," he has said, "but I believe that sometimes it is not only acceptable for art to be outrageous - it is necessary. "We live in a time of incredible fear... The advance condemnation of this film by politicians and pundits who have not seen - and may never see - this film reflects the landscape of fear in which we live today, and which my film attempts to address."

i saw this movie yesterday and during my sleep i dreamed that bush was gone for real. today when i woke up and found out he's still alive and in office, i had the shock of my life :-) but honestly, this film was well meant and everything, but as always you get pointed in the wrong direction. bush is not going to die from some assassin unless his puppeteers allow that to happen, which is totally unlikely. don't worry, he will probably survive us all :-D the only presidents or high officials to die are the ones exposing or opposing their masters. JFK, Washington and the others who were assassinated had something in common? hint: it was NOT al-qaida or bin laden. stop falling for the deception and start looking for the common denominator.

I decided to go in to this film somewhat blind as I was only aware that it dealt with the assassination of George W Bush. The idea had some real possibilities and I disagree that it is disgusting to speculate what would occur in such a situation because it could lead to some meaningful conversation. What was disgusting was the acting in this film and how wrong they were in developing the plot. First, I have never seen such poor acting in a film (maybe Karate Kid 3). When they would cut to the interview segments it was almost unbearable to watch. The actress who played the speech writer was so unbelievable and her performance seemed more comedic than serious. Thats not to say the other actors were much better. I would go as far as to say that not one role was cast properly. Another character that deserves mention is the lawyer for the accused. One thing the director did right was not give her much screen time. The other issue I have with this film is how it focused on the investigation of the assassination rather than the political implications. It was impossible to get in to this story. Its obvious that part of this film is an attack on the Patriot Act and its destruction of civil liberties but I feel that this point is lost in this mess of a movie. If there is a valid political statement to be drawn from this film, I don't see how anyone would even care to recognize it. This is a film that should not be viewed by anyone who respects good acting or an interesting story.

OK... I have read many of the feedback from people who say this is a sick docu film as it is based on the fictional death of a real person who is still alive. I do understand those people and i respect their opinion... but do remember it is fictional. One has to watch this film cause this is not a personal dig at George W Bush... its just a story about the build up and aftermath of a fictional assassination of President Bush, the actual assassination its self only takes up 5% of the movie. Its a very well done film and the assassination itself looks very realistic. This film is more about the American system and the way it acts against situations like an assassination (be that a President or something as horrid as 9/11). Americans... don't take this personally... its just a fictional docu film. To be honest (and this is no personal dig at yourselves as i like your country very much) you've done the same with films concerning British people where you have twisted the truth, which i think is even worse. Have a look at a film called U-571... now that really was taking the mickey and insulting the memory of those who died for freedom.

It,s not perfect, but then this genre of movie is very difficult to perfect. The documentary style was very well done, and very convincing. I would even say that the acting looked so real, it would not surprise me if there was indeed no script, but just general guidelines on what each character would/should say. obviously i knew that this was not a real documentary, but it did have me wonder if each of the "experts" called forward to give their side of the story had in fact worked in their characters capacity at some point in the past as the parts were done so well. I was less impressed with the final 20 minutes or so, and found the eventual conclusion to be flimsy, and overtly thought provoking... as if they decided to try and give a twist that was unexpected just for the sake of it. Apart from a few minor plot issues like this, i really did think that this was a very convincing look at how a post assassination investigation and aftermath may look like. It is neither negative towards Bush or his standpoints. It in fact shows him to be in a very positive light whilst showing the anger and frustration of others at his actions towards Iraq and conflict in general. In all, Death of a President was a very entertaining mockumentary and deserves to be seen. It does not incite violence, nor does it glorify war or Bush, it is more or less just a simple look at what would happen IF this were to really happen.

I felt this film fell short of achieving anything truly monumental- aside, of course, from a controversial title and subject matter. A piece of cinematic history it is not, and my opinion is that once the hype dies down and this film slips into 6.2/10 mediocrity people will soon forget all about it. The 'whodunit' feel to this film, using documentary-style interviews with the people involved with the investigation to unfold the story, kept this film interesting. This technique aided in preventing it from being "just another documentary" because the outcome of this fictional future-event is unknown to the viewer, unlike most historical documentaries. DOAP fails to talk about the worldwide and/or nationwide repercussions of such a devastating event as DOAP attempts to examine, which was disappointing and clearly beyond the intended scope of the film. In my opinion, I'm glad I had a chance to attend the world premiere and it's definitely a film worth checking out when it comes to your video store, but DOAP is no more of a "must-see" than any other enjoyable, but ultimately forgettable, piece of fiction.

I was very skeptical before seeing this movie. Title and premise of "Death of a President" led me, and probably others, to expect either a shallow Bush-bashing hack-job or some sort of bizarre, "24"-like "we against the evildoers" hero-epic in a cheap documentary costume. I'm happy to report: I was wrong. "Death of a President" is a very well written, performed and directed drama in the style of a modern (and hardly opinionated) documentary. And most surprisingly, it isn't really a movie about George W Bush. It was a very smart move to make it a "mock" documentary, since it keeps the viewer on a skeptical distance to all the protagonists, so the movie doesn't push the audience into immediately placing the characters into the "good" and "bad" categories like it would be the case with a drama done in a conventional narrative. That gives room to examine the characters different motives and actions without having to rely on pressing the emotion-buttons too much. Of course this approach relies on convincing performances from all actors involved (mabybe even more so than with a conventional drama) to keep the illusion alive of actually watching a documentary.... over-acting could have been a disaster for this movie, and i'm very glad cast and director avoided that pitfall. Fine performances all around. Now, to the obvious elephant in the room (and the reason why this movie is so controversial): Why did the makers of the movie not just have a fictional president killed? Shock value? Some kind of perverse joy in getting rid of the real President? I don't think so. First of all, having the real President Bush in the movie obviously makes this theoretical exercise just more authentic and convincing. And more importantly, the viewer is forced to place himself somewhere among the characters, to place his sympathy and antipathy bets just based on preconceived notions, so to speak. I doubt there are many people who don't have a clear opinion about George W Bush and his administration (I certainly have mine. And in the interest of full disclosure, I'm no fan, to say the least). But that opinion (whatever it is) is important for the movie to get it's point across: it's the setup to play effectively with the viewers prejudices. "Death of a President" manages to make you look beyond the stereotypes and makes a solid point about the misleading force of preconceived notions (for the viewer as well as the characters in the movie). The tag line "Do not rush to judge" is well chosen. The movie in particular makes a valid point about the worrying tendency in the US (and the world in general, I cant think of any society that's not to some degree affected by this "disease") of more and more dumbing everything down to "us versus them". Be it the inflation of the word "Terrorist" as a magic opinion maker, (and drifting away from the movie for a second) be it Republicans versus Democrats, be it the insane shouting matches that pass as talk shows these days or be it the bizarre notion of an inevitable "clash of the civilizations". The movie isn't perfect though. For example, the character of Bushs speech writer was a bit over the top in her praise for the man, while the protesting crowds remained rather stereotypical. Also, some doctored shots didn't quite live up to the otherwise impressive technical level of this production. Yet "Death of a Presindent" offers a bit of much needed perspective on the Terrorism-issue; it sure does it by rather drastic means but it doesn't fail to deliver. Of course for me, as a distant observer of the USA, the fact that the actual President gets "assasinated" in this movie doesn't have quite the emotional punch as it must have for Americans. So I can understand the very mixed reactions it gets from reviewers. But if you feel up to it, go see it yourself and then make up your mind, instead of rushing to judgment based on title and plot outline.

This film, Death of a President had been labeled "controversial" long before the product hit U.S. shores. British director and co-writer, Gabriel Range first introduced his film on U.K. television, and later at the Toronto International Film Festival where it won the International Critic's prize. This film has been given limited release in U.S. This docudrama opens with preparation for a presidential visit and speech at a Chicago hotel. You get a glimpse of the president's speech writer and an individual heading the Secret Service as they position themselves and prepare to protect the Commander in Chief. You get brief looks at large groups of protesters waiting in the streets to welcome the President. And just like the title says - the President dies. All that happens in the first 20-minutes. The remaining 70-minutes of this film carefully details the hunt and investigation to find the killer. The impact on two minority families who may or may not be associated with the event. You see how an ethnic group becomes suspect and how hundreds are picked up for questioning. You get a peek at how the world receives the event and how the current phrases "terror attack" and "Al-Quida" are tossed into the mix. The film is frightening because each and every scene is plausible. It's tightly written, directed and edited. The actors, who range from a close assistant to the President and First Lady to a spouse who may never see their innocent partner again, are all excellently cast. Contrary to popular belief, Death of a President does not advocate the killing of a leader; instead it takes a credible look at America and the possible events following such an occurrence. Trust me - this one you don't want to miss.