Dick Cheney, Dick Lynch, Beazer discussed on Overthinking It Podcast

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Beazer of a postmodern approach to a bio pic where who the person is never really exists. And I guess maybe that's maybe when I think about this movie and how it relates to the mysteries that places inside Dick Cheney's head but then over with zone attention, right? Because it's not just like, oh, there's the moment where dick Lynch and you're talking in silence. And then and then it's like they acknowledge that they don't know what they said. But then they give you experience monologue, which says what they think they said, right? It's sort of like, this is a movie that's all about cake having cake eating eating more cake buying another Kate. Why dangerous to your health from when you eat too much cake. Exactly, exactly. Basically, the worldwide distribution of cake, and what sort of levers power are pulled in order for it to be distributed. And in that sense, it tries to have its cake too. So I'm not sure whether the movie is interested in kind of a materialistic sense, the energy of the movie in a materialistic sense of Dick Cheney is what Dick Cheney did and sort of what is behind the veil is a blank, right? Or is it that Dick Cheney is who Dick Cheney appears to be and his own intentions are irrelevant because he is as a movie called him a bag, and sort of party to thing that happens, and it it's we're not supposed to care what he wants, right? Like like, a or there's the ark of the heart. I guess which is the other weird editorialize ation that the movie makes which is which would put what the thesis of the movie is that Dick Cheney is super villain with one redeeming quality. That at the very end of his political career he sacrifices for good reason. Grooving the he is in fact, worthless human being I guess, I don't know. What do you think about all the stuff? I mean, first of all I think that in an interesting sort of contrast with the Queen movie that just came out feeling this movie makes more of a claim to truthfulness because the Queen movie took liberties everybody understands it's and I think the filmmakers will be a front about the fact that they, you know. Compress things time-wise. They selectively emphasize certain parts of the story for dramatic effect. Right. And they're a front about that that this is more to sort of capture the spirit of Queen and be like a documentary. Recreation of exactly how it went down blow by blow. Where's this movie? You know has this. Disclaimer at the beginning, that's we did our we did our expletive deleted best. So that like this movie wants you to believe that like, you know, although there's much that is noble. We really are trying to present things as it really happy. We are not taking liberties to make it a better story writes that may be disingenuous, but I do think it's a difference in the way the filmmakers are sort of like appealing to the audience. I mean, I would say here's the thing is it may be absolutely true. Like, You know? you know, only the shadow knows what lurks within the dark as of the humid harder. However, the the old thing went, but Dick Cheney has left a balloonists documentary evidence about like what he claims have been his own motivations, which I feel like have been very conspicuously omitted from the movie with one big section, which is like the very final scene where the Dick Cheney characters the camera, and basically says that like what I did I did for the safety of all Americans. And you know, if you are going to question my decisions in the end the.

Coming up next