Dick Cheney on HBO
HBO announced today that it's given the green light to a miniseries based on Angler, Barton Gellman's bestselling book about Vice President Dick Cheney. Brace yourself: the book is a negative portrayal of the former vice president.
It's the second Bush-era project HBO has on the go. From Deadline Hollywood:
Rick Cleveland (Six Feet Under), who shared a writing Emmy with Aaron Sorkin for NBC's White House dramaThe West Wing, is writing the mini, produced by Spring Creek Prods. in association with WGBH/FRONTLINE and Fair Catch Prods. Spring Creek's Paula Weinstein and Jeffrey Levine, FRONTLINE's David Fanning and Michael Kirk and Fair Catch Prods.' David Kennedy are executive producing.
This is the second HBO longform project about prominent Republican party figures announced in the past few weeks. The pay cable network also has greenlit Game Change, a Jay Roach-directed movie, which follows John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign from his selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate to their ultimate defeat in the general election. Julianne Moore has been cast as the former Alaska governor.
Of course, we know exactly how these projects are going to turn out. Even if the source material didn't give it away, the collection of names associated with each project is enough for most of us to roll our eyes and forget to set the TiVo.
On the other hand, they do suggest some great casting challenges. Cheney's a hard guy to cast -- Richard Dreyfuss played him in Oliver Stone's W -- but it's the rest of the cast that's going to be trouble. Who plays Rumsfeld? Who plays Condi Rice? Who plays Robert Gates?
And also: who plays the audience? Because it's not going to be easy to get everyone re-interested and re-outraged about a previous administration that waged a regime-changing war without congressional approval, when the current one is so handy.
Maybe the story of the Bush administration isn't going to be interesting in quite the way HBO wants it to be. My guess is, no matter how hard they try, the few people who actually watch these movies are going to be thinking, Those were the good old days....
- Comment (21)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
"[I]t's not going to be easy to get everyone re-interested and re-outraged about a previous administration that waged a regime-changing war without congressional approval, when the current one is so handy."
That, my friend and colleague, is a beautiful line. And at eleven o'clock, no less.
Now finish your martini and take the rest of the night off.
Jan '11
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
Is this going to be a musical?
Go ahead ... let your imagination play around a bit ...
Jul '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
It's almost like they desperately want to change the subject.
Jul '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
That's it. These are the good old days: Henry Winkler is Dick Cheney, Ron Howard is W, Tom Bosley is HW, Synergy, baby, synergy. Use Lawyers in Love for the theme. Coz is Powell. Phylicia Rashad is Condi. And, of course, Cindy Sheehan playing herself.
May '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
Isn't this an incomplete argument?
I've read the Washington Post excerpts of Angler. I'd argue that the facts unearthed by that project rightly show Dick Cheney in a bad light – basically that he was a hubristic, power hungry guy who thought he knew what was best for the country, and was willing to use illegitimate means to bring about the ends he deemed to be best.
I'm always willing to have my beliefs challenged – especially by someone like Rob Long, whose intellectual honesty and insights I value. But there isn't any argument here. Just the observation that of course HBO is going to render Cheney in a bad light. Well, okay. I agree that was predictable.
But is it inaccurate?
The fact that the media sometimes treats conservatives unfairly – and it does – shouldn't fool us into thinking that any time the media renders a Republican in a negative light it's undesserved.
As a small government, libertarian leaning guy who believes that power corrupts, it seems to me that there is a devastating case to be made against Cheney. If you think The Angler gets something wrong, what is it?
May '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
I particularly recommend this excerpt.
Some Ricochet members will doubtless agree with me that the particular policies Cheney was pursuing were wrongheaded – and others will disagree, I'm sure. What I'd hope we'd all agree on is that the degree of influence Cheney had and his particular methods surpassed what is proper for a vice-president, whatever you think about the outcomes and whether or not they were desirable.
May '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
KC Mulville: Is this going to be a musical?
Go ahead ... let your imagination play around a bit ... · Mar 22 at 12:05am
I might actually watch a Dick Cheney musical. I think you have the next blockbuster there.
Dec '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
I don't think he is smelling very good these days: Tom Bosley (October 1, 1927 – October 19, 2010)
Edited on Mar 22, 2011 at 8:37amMay '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
methods surpassed what is proper? If you have a beef, it's with the president. He answers to his boss. Whatever "power" Cheney had was permitted by GWB...since he's in charge of the executive branch, it's delegated power.
It seems Bush wanted Cheney to have the power he exercised. I prefer a guy with an agenda to a buffoon who simply acted as cover for a candidate's lack of foreign policy expertise during the presidential campaign. I know what I'm getting with the former.
Edited on Mar 22, 2011 at 6:09amSep '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
Conor Friedersdorf: Isn't this an incomplete argument?
But is it inaccurate?
The fact that the media sometimes treats conservatives unfairly – and it does – shouldn't fool us into thinking that any time the media renders a Republican in a negative light it's undesserved.
You mean will it be accurate, right? Well, will it? Make the prediction. Rob Long is predicting it won't be and I will wholeheartedly agree with him. First, no dramatic renderings of real people and events are ever accurate.
Will it be accurate about some things and grossly inaccurate about others? I say, yes. You don't?
Are you saying in the above quote that if a political figure has made mistakes, it is legitimate to portray him generally in a "negative light"?
HBO : JFK bungled the Bay of Pigs, so let's show all his philandering!
HBO : FDR interred Japanese Americans, so let's show him acting brutish to Eleanor.
HBO doesn't do this with Democrats, even though there is just as much - if not more, dramatic material they could mine.
HBO is owned by Time/Warner, just as much an agenda-driven corporation as ExxonMobil or Haliburton.
Sep '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
Call me a romantic, but after reading Lynne Cheney's Blue Skies, No Fences, I'm just not inclined to spend much time listening to people trash either her or Dick Cheney. I think the guy was a great public servant, no qualifiers needed.
As for the movies, current events look likely to turn them into duds. When the current administration is bungling everything in site as the naive, smug rookie President makes almost every stupid decision possible, it's going to be pretty hard to generate the old hatred of the Bush-Cheney years.
If Libya turns into Somalia and the French take over command of US military assets (whether they do or not is impossible to tell in the chaos that is our policy), I think people will long for the days of a competent administration, even if they think that administration was involved in lots of skulduggery.
Oct '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
I have to note the National Public Radio connection here (WGBH/FRONTLINE). Something is rotten in Denmark!
Aug '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
If they are going to call it the Angler, I guess we'll see him on the Matapedia working the big Atlantic salmon, right ?
And there will be alot of storyline about his family, grandkids, etc. ,right ?
Gosh the backstory of how they defended America will be exciting, right ?
And his early career, the campaigning with Lynn, the Congress years, right ?
And how he cut the military budget when he was SecDef, right ?
Or will they try to do a ripoff of Glee, call it Gloom and not have any music ?
Mar '11
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
I get HBO for its boxing coverage.
May '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
Conor Friedersdorf:
The fact that the media sometimes treats conservatives unfairly – and it does –
Sometimes? Sometimes?
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
My point -- well, I had one big one, and a couple of drive-bys -- isn't that HBO is like every other big media outlet, tirelessly rehearsing every anti-Bush/Cheney argument they can; or that the HBO miniseries will be a rehash of Angler, which I did read and found overwrought and circular, but not as bad as the "Frontline" doc on PBS (funny, isn't it? The Frontline folks are also involved with the HBO series!) which actually included hilariously pompous spooky music to remind everyone that Cheney is evil!; or that casting the thing is going to be fun; or that if they wanted a balanced view, they could just ask Stephen Hayes to give the script a look-see -- he also thinks Cheney was the "most powerful" vice president ever, though he doesn't profess to know what's "proper" for a vice president, or if that's really worth discussing, when you remember that the vice president is elected, directly, by the voters.
My main point was that this is a highly-political, highly-partisan anti-Cheney project, but HBO might discover that their viewers have moved on to other administrations and other outrages.
May '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
Yet, Joel Surnow can't get a decent shake from the History Channel.
It's gotten to be like the ending to The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance: "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
Jul '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
Foxman
I don't think he is smelling very good these days: Tom Bosley (October 1, 1927 – October 19, 2010) · Mar 22 at 6:01am
Edited on Mar 22 at 08:37 am
Ach! Christopher Lloyd is a better physical match, anyway. Chemistry isn't everything.
Jul '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
No, Conor, we do not all agree, not in the slightest. And that the Post article glibly misrepresents the legal issues surrounding the matter to partisan purpose is not helpful either. They still seek to misconstrue illegal enemy combatants as protected under the Geneva Conventions as ratified by the United States. The attempts to criminalize politics by the Times and the Post (often while providing aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and civilization) have done nothing to enhance the reputation or standing of either paper.
I am thankful for Cheney's role in this case, it was nice to see an adult on duty. The care and effort that W put into the range of questions surrounding these matters was considerable, as attested to by Ricochet contributor John Yoo. Last night I watched Unthinkable, an excellent piece starring Samuel L. Jackson and Carrie Ann Moss, which lays bare the inadequacies of current jurisprudence in the face of terrorists wielding weapons of mass destruction.
The Presidency, in the face of an existential threat to the polity, embodies the power of the ancient Greek tyrannos or Roman dictator, with impeachment or de-election the primary remedies for abuse.
Jul '10
Re: Dick Cheney on HBO
I'm slightly more optimistic about Game Change, mostly because Danny Strong is a solid writer, Julianne Moore is unlikely to present Palin as two-dimensional, and Game Change presents the president in a pretty unflattering light (though I'm curious to see how much of that makes it to the final film).
As both a viewer who loves historical dramas and a writer who's writing one, I'm really troubled by the timing of this--both because the projects seem likely to coincide with the height of the GOP primary campaign next year, and because I'm not sure we have enough distance to tell any story worth telling here. I had huge reservations about "United 93" and in the end, thought they turned out to be valid. An audience needs perspective and this story isn't just too recent, it's something that been beaten to death already. Cheney may someday make for a great drama...but I don't think we're there yet.