Charlie Wilson's War

Plot synopsis:
In 1980, Congressman Charlie Wilson is more interested in partying than legislating, frequently throwing huge galas and staffing his congressional office with young, attractive women. His social life eventually brings about a federal investigation into allegations of his cocaine use, conducted by federal prosecutor Rudy Giuliani as part of a larger investigation into congressional misconduct. The investigation results in no charge against Charlie.
A friend and romantic interest, Joanne Herring, encourages Charlie to do more to help the Afghan people, and persuades Charlie to visit the Pakistani leadership. The Pakistanis complain about the inadequate support of the U.S. to oppose the Soviet Union, and they insist that Charlie visit a major Pakistan-based Afghan refugee camp. Charlie is deeply moved by their misery and determination to fight, but is frustrated by the regional CIA personnel's insistence on a low key approach against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Charlie returns home to lead an effort to substantially increase funding to the mujahideen.
As part of this effort, Charlie befriends maverick CIA operative Gust Avrakotos and his understaffed Afghanistan group to find a better strategy, especially including a means to counter the Soviets' formidable Mi-24 helicopter gunship. This group was composed in part of members of the CIA's Special Activities Division, including a young paramilitary officer named Michael Vickers. As a result, Charlie's deft political bargaining for the necessary funding and Avrakotos' careful planning using those resources, such as supplying the guerrillas with FIM-92 Stinger missile launchers, turns the Soviet occupation into a deadly quagmire with their heavy fighting vehicles being destroyed at a crippling rate. The CIA's anti-communism budget evolves from $5 million to over $500 million (with the same amount matched by Saudi Arabia), startling several congressmen. This effort by Charlie ultimately evolves into a major portion of the U.S. foreign policy known as the Reagan Doctrine, under which the U.S. expanded assistance beyond just the mujahideen and began also supporting other anti-communist resistance movements around the world. Charlie states that senior Pentagon official Michael Pillsbury persuaded President Ronald Reagan to provide the Stingers to the Afghans.
Charlie follows Gust's guidance to seek support for post-Soviet occupation Afghanistan, but finds no enthusiasm in the government for even the modest measures he proposes. In the end, Charlie receives a major commendation for his support of the U.S. clandestine services, but his pride is tempered by his fears of the blowback his secret efforts could yield in the future and the implications of U.S. disengagement from Afghanistan.

Tags: satire, entertaining, historical

Review:
It's Easy Street replete with his bevy of beltway beauties known, appropriately enough, as Charlie's Angels.When asked why his entire office staff was composed of attractive, young aides his response is a classic, "You can teach 'em to type, but you can't teach 'em to grow tits." No argument there.But even the most rakish rapscallion has a conscience lurking somewhere underneath, and for Charlie Wilson the unimaginable atrocities being committed in Afghanistan moved him to muster his entire political savvy toward funding the utter, humiliating defeat of the Russian military and, possibly, to even help hasten the end of the Cold War as a result.
Fat chance, huh?Under the skillful direction of Mike Nichols and a smart, snappy screenplay by Adam Sorkin, CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR is a sparkling, sophisticated satire that chronicles the behind-the- scene machinations of three colorful characters comprising "Charlie's Team."The on-screen "Team," is composed of three marvelous actors with four (4) Academy Awards and nine (9) nominations between them.
As for the third member of the "Team," Philip Seymour Hoffman steals every scene he appears in as Gust Aurakotos, a smart, street- wise (i.e. non Ivy League graduate) CIA malcontent who knows the score -- both in the Agency's boardroom and in Wilson's bedroom.For the Mujahideen to succeed, the most important assistance the U.S. can provide is the ability to shoot down the dreaded MI-21 helicopter gunships which rule the skies.
Just one slip in tone could have wrecked this compelling picture but Nichols and his very strong A-list cast never put a foot wrong in this biopic of a deeply flawed but utterly compelling Congressman.Philip Seymour Hoffman as usual is scintillating and brilliant - here playing a damaged but ultra-smart CIA manipulator, and it is in the exchanges between Hanks and Hoffman's characters where the comedy soars.
The temptation for screenwriter Aaron Sorkin (his claim to fame is "The West Wing") must have been to make a fat movie, but what we get is a breath-taking 90 odd minutes of great story with sweeping implications.This film deserves to be seen and to be recognized for finding an extraordinary balance between the darkest of dark subject matter and the lightness of touch of it's sparkling witty script - even if it does flunk the obvious link between the help that Herring and Wilson provide and the ultimate consequences (9/11)..
Hanks is OK but surprisingly to me anyway was Julia Roberts who is very good in the role of a rather eccentric Texas Oil Millionairess.Charlie Wilson's War is one of the best non Musician Bio-pics in a long while as well as being that rare thing a film that entertains, amuses as well as informs all in equal measure..
Strange because it should carry the title "Charlie Wilson's War the Lie.How could the time frame leave out the real history that while ridding Afganistan of the Russians the CIA was providing support for the Taliban, and today's World of Terrorism.
When the American movie industry tries to critically look at their own government they make damn sure it looks good even when it's bad.The film does 1 thing right it demonstrates perfectly what is wrong with the American politics.
Thanks to US for giving us Osama Bin Laden.The disappointment of the film comes in the face of muddling up the issues: using imagery of Afghan children with no arms and the stories of soviet atrocities and then making a blatant attempt to suggest a link between those and the reasoning behind the American help.
War films, nowadays, should not be giving us two dimensional characterisations of the enemy.Long lingering looks at the traumas of the Afghans suffered under the soviet invasion, how does this relate to the men of power and money in Washington and are they really trying to tell us this was ANY part of their decision to provide so much financial aid.
In one of the better movies of the year, Tom Hanks stars as Congressman Charlie Wilson in this sardonically funny and extremely relevant (given reasonably current events) historical comedy-drama surrounding the 1980s Afghan/Soviet fiasco.
Charlie Wilson in an effort to fix this situation teamed up with the sixth richest woman and religious fanatic in Texas, Joanne Herring (Julia Roberts) and a amusing and robust American spy for the CIA, Gust Avrakotos (Philip Seymour Hoffman) to help supply Afghans with high-tech weapons to destroy Soviet fight air-craft that would try and attack their land.Although certainly not a serious Oscar contender for Best Picture, 'Charlie Wilson's War' is probably one of the best of the many political films of the year.
At 97 minutes, the movie is short and sweet, and that isn't to say it doesn't drag at some points but when it does drag it's for a very brief amount of time.In conclusion, 'Charlie Wilson's War' is not a perfect film by any means, but it's certainly worth a look.
Like he reportedly said, "You can teach them to type, but you can't teach them to grow tits." Despite his sexist attitude, which fits right in with a Texas Congressman, they were fiercely loyal, especially his aide, Amy Adams (Junebug & former Hooters girl).Now, add a rich Texas socialite who wants something done in Afghanistan, played perfectly by Julia Roberts; and a pain-in-his-boss's-ass CIA agent, superbly done by Philip Seymour Hoffman, and you have a movie well worth watching.Outstanding writing, and superlative acting, and a story that needed to be told.
In "Charlie Wilson's War" the shocking truth is outside the characters and the sad and riveting Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams are at the service of something else, it's personal only to a point.
That's my four word review.While Charlie Wilson is a flamboyant character, he was a minor player in securing assistance to the Afghan rebels in their war with the Soviets.President Ronald Reagan, Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger, CIA Director William Casey, Undersecretary of Defense Fred Ikle, along with a bipartisan coalition led by Texas Democrat Charlie Wilson in the House and New Hampshire Republican Gordon Humphrey in the Senate, provided Stinger missiles to the mujahadeen.
I guess they made a movie about Charlie Wilson (widely known as "the liberal from Lufkin") because he was the only Democrat who "got it".I suppose in a Hollywood where "JFK" and "Titanic" are considered good history, we should not expect anything more..
after hearing many positive thoughts of how funny this is and also because tom hanks(in his early performances i might add) i decided to see it.also because it deals with Afghanistan and overall American military and political presence in foreign countries.
oh my...tom hanks is sinking lower and lower in my opinion, simply capitalizing too much lately on his name as a "serious" drama actor ever since "castaway"("the terminal" was his last outstanding role for me).about his acting here, at time it seems that himself is not comfortable with the role he HAS to play because his sarcasm seems to be that of an actor knowing his own "lies".from the point of production, there are many flaws and somehow they feel to me as intentioned (convulsive plot with convenient misses) in confusing the viewer and give him an idea that this could be too "complex" for him to understand.overall , just be aware of the implications given here; while entertaining from a sarcastic point of view, this is not at all what was advertised as would be..
Bits me.If you truly want to understand how CIA works, how US government works, how intergovernmental relationships work, why Russians really lost that war (btw, as a clear parallel you may learn why we are having so much trouble in Iraq too), and what really went wrong (it was not (just) US not wanting to build schools in Afghanistan) do yourself a favor, read real Charlie Wilson's War.Having said that,let me go back to the beginning.
What I didn’t like about this movie was the detail wasn’t there; it was all in the surface.Overall it was a huge disappointment for me, the only thing that might make me come back to watch it was two minutes of sexy body of Emily Blunt and all those hot secretary of Charlie Wilson.
The story of this movie reminds the American people how one,not sinless but just congressman from Texas,could achieve by his efforts increasing the budget for the fight of Afghanistan inhabitants against Soviet invasion.I suppose many facts highlighted in the plot are enlarged, e.g. the fact that the Russians collected A.
Though the importance of Representative Charles Wilson, Democrat from Texas who served from 1973 to 1997 in Congress, in the fall of the Russian puppet regime in Afghanistan maybe in exaggerated in George Crile's book and in this film, Charlie Wilson's War provides an insight into Washington politics that you won't get from the talking heads of the various news networks.I liked Charlie Wilson, or at least the way Tom Hanks plays him.
Rounding out the team is the CIA's own rogue renegade rebel, Gust Avrakotos (Philip Seymour Hoffman), an iconoclast with the intelligence - if not the social graces - to help Wilson win his war.Hanks turns in a pretty believable Texas twang and is a pretty good fit for the role, even when he uses profanity.
Hoffman's fantastic, hidden beneath Gust's bushy mustache and issuing bon mots; he steals the movie from the bigger stars (Oscar win notwithstanding) with a grumpy, energetic performance.All in all, Charlie Wilson's war is simply okay, a decent biopic about a man and situation unfamiliar to most people.
That's a pretty good analogy for what's been done in Charlie Wilson's War.In the latter half of the movie, there is one big lie and one item of anti-Afghan propaganda.
The Massoud "inaccuracy" was included because Tom Hanks "just can't deal with this 9/11 thing"; and because Wilson and Joanne Herring (played by Julia Roberts in the movie) threatened legal action after reading an earlier, more honest, draft of the screenplay by Aaron Sorkin.
The line from Charlie Wilson is "We f---ed up the endgame." Charlie admits to CIA analyst Gust Avrakotos (Philip Seymour Hoffman), "I am not a smart man." Gust says, "No, you just work in Congress" Politics and war are the strangest of bedfellows.Aaron Sorkin ("West Wing") brilliantly wrote the screenplay based on the book by George Crile.
The performances by Hanks, Julia Roberts, and Philip Seymour Hoffman are outstanding and award worthy.While partying with strippers and Playboy cover model in a Jacuzzi in Las Vegas, Charlie Wilson (Hanks), watches a news report by Dan Rather from Afghanistan.
Phillip Seymour Hoffman's stinging wit in this film will be matched, in level, only by the frustration viewers will feel when the end credits role.The main conceit (we track congressman Charlie Wilson as he attempts to supply enough arms to Afghan resistance fighters in order to facilitate them in cleaning the Soviets out of Afghanistan)is well executed and humorously portrayed with Hanks a willing and skillful recipient of Hoffman's much publicised show stealing antics as disgruntled C.I.A agent Gust Avrakotos (the scene in Wilson's office is the highlight).However, it is not just Hoffman who steals the show, nor is it the under-developed, under-used, under-acting Julia Roberts, playing socialite Joanne Herring whose existence in this piece is paid nothing more and, quite possibly, considerably less than lip-service.
Philip Seymour Hoffman is really the best character, as a CIA agent (you gotta admire the spunk of someone who does what he does in his first scene).Overall, "Charlie Wilson's War" is certainly one that I recommend.
Either way, Charlie Wilson now has a wonderful spot in film history with one hell of a tribute to him, and one hell of a story.Go See this movie.
Having followed the career of Charlie Wilson and the shift in support for the Afghans fighting the Red Army during the Afghanistan war, I was eager to see this film.
was the meaning and implications of the joke told by Phillip Seymour Hoffman's scruffy CIA character to Congressman Charlie Wilson(Tom Hanks)about a good thing following a bad thing following a good thing and on and on.......
something that was a great solution at one time turned terrible at a later time.This film story was very entertaining and included three of the most effective actors working today...Hanks, Hoffman and Julia Roberts.
Roberts was also great as a rich Houston socialite who had a long running affair with Charlie, even during marriages, and used his political clout to achieve her grand humanitarian goals that, this time, included saving Afganistan from Russian rule.A very entertaining film, and one of the best of this holiday season..
No surprise -- the script is the work of Aaron Sorkin, who wrote "The West Wing." Though the film depicts the real story of the US's disastrous funding of the very people who would attack her on 9-11, the script is, in many places, laugh-out-loud funny.The leads are superb; Philip Seymour Hoffman, whom I usually can't stand, is especially good here as Gust Avrakotos, a charm-impaired Greek-American CIA agent.
When you know that the "good guys" were behind inducing the Afghan government for asking the Russian military to help them fight the Islamic extremists (CIA funded that became the Taleban) then it changes everything in the movie to being a rather distasteful propaganda piece.Carter adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski stated "According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, Dec 24th 1979.
The point, as I see it, was that despite everyone's character flaws (and we all have them--yes, even you neo-cons believe it or not) weak men can help accomplish great things.Hell, I didn't even know he was a lefty until about half way through the movie when he said he was a liberal.Of COURSE Wilson didn't single handedly end the Cold War just as Ronald Reagan didn't but they BOTH contributed to the down-fall of the USSR.
Based on a true story and the book by George Crile, we get a glimpse at the covert war instigated by Congressman Charlie Wilson (from Texas) after the Russian invasion of Afghanistan around 1980.
Hanks doesn't shy away from the infamous character flaws of Wilson and truly excels in those awkward moments when dealing with the President of Pakistan.The absolute best scenes in the film are those with both Hanks and the great Philip Seymour Hoffman.
However, I will keep my political commentary off this post.Hanks excels as Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson, a morally gray and womanizing politicians with a soft spot for Afghans suffering at the hands of invading Soviets in the early 1980's.
Case in point is CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR.Scripted by Aaron Sorkin (of TV's "The West Wing" and the 1992 classic A FEW GOOD MEN), and directed by Mike Nichols (whose 1967 film THE GRADUATE is a touchstone American film), CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR is based on the true exploits of Texas congressman Charlie Wilson (here played superbly, as always, by Tom Hanks), who, during the 1980s, with the help of an avuncular CIA man (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) and the goading of a right-wing socialite (Julia Roberts), initiated a seven year-long covert operation to help the Mujahadden fighters defeat the Soviet Union after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in late 1979.
Indeed, CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR seems to be as much a political black comedy as anything else, what with Hanks' womanizing aspects, and Roberts' underhanded put-on of east Texas airs.
Of course the Afghani tribalism and the role of Pakistani intelligence's contribution & planning were not discussed but people need to remember that it was a movie about Charlie Wilson and not the Afghan war.
The movie is called " Charlie Wilson War " and based on the real-life Congressman from Texas.
I mean, even I felt like cheering when the simple peasant folk shoot down a Russian helicopter.If Hanks is the lynch-pin of the movie, (and it really is a splendid performance), he is surrounded by some very fine players well up on their game: Julia Roberts as the dame with the dough and a few right-wing ideas in her head; an excellent, if under-used, Amy Adams as Hanks' wide-eyed assistant; Ned Beatty as a canny, ageing politico and best of all, Philip Seymour Hoffman as a volatile CIA man who always seems one step ahead of everyone else and who, when it's over, is the first to warn Charlie of the bad times ahead.
Tom Hanks wages "Charlie Wilson's War" in this 2007 Mike Nichols film, based on the best-selling non-fiction book.
He's approached by a wealthy conservative activist, Joanne Herring (Julia Roberts) to become involved in the plight of the people of Afghanistan, who, occupied by the Russians, are suffering horribly.Hanks enlists the help of Gust Avrakotos (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and commits himself to calling in favors and getting the budget for this "cold war" increased in order to supply the Afghans with weapons that can defeat the Russians.Mike Nichols' direction and casting mines the humor to be found in the story, particularly in the character of Gust Avrakotos.
What would one expect when so many talented names like Aaron Sorkin, Mike Nichols, Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Ned Beatty, Om Puri and Amy Adams are associated with one project?
The movie is the true life story of congressman Charlie Wilson's efforts to secretly fund the Afghanistan people's fight with the Soviet Union in the late 1980s.The book it's based on is probably much better.