Vice (Adam McKay)

[Ezee E]

IMDB

[Ezee E]

Am I really the first person to see this out of Match Cut?

I'll have to dig into the reviews on this, because on the surface level, I'm not seeing any reason why this is getting some strong hate in reviews.

To me, this is the equivalent of a real-life Thanos origin story, spanning over five decades to get there. It's as creative and on-the-nose as The Big Short was, only The Big Short focused on those that profited off the story, rather than causing the issue.

And after viewing this, and it's depiction of George W., there's not a surprise at all that Obama didn't include it on his favorites list.

[Pop Trash]

Most of the people I pay attention to on letterboxd actively hate it. I didn't mind Oliver Stone's W. It's not a great movie, but as someone that was paying attention to that administration for eight years, it's entertaining.

[Henry Gale]

Been a few days since I saw this and I'm still not sure really how I feel about it.

I think it has segments that are really interesting, inventive and provocative, but then the rest of it feels oddly by-the-numbers and not nearly as probing or vicious despite its clearly seething attitude towards its main subject and the scorched earth he left in his path.

Also, this may be a bit simplification of a clearly committed and transfixing performance, but aside from his final scene, I honestly feel like Bale delivers every line of dialogue as Cheney almost exactly the same way. Not that the real Cheney is the most expressive or multi-faceted personality, but after a while it felt like it was falling into a routine where when the dynamic of a scene shifted to his character to speak, I may not have known exactly what he's was going to say, but it was to the same raspy vocal melody I had imagined, as I had already heard it endlessly.

So I really don't know. It's a such weirdly shaped movie that despite its unique approach to its storytelling in energetic spurts, it ultimately didn't leave much of an impression on me by the end. And the less said about the mid-credit gag (?) the better, since I feel like it simultaneously invites both the inescapible thought that maybe everything prior had not been nearly as sophisticated as you'd given it the benefit of being along the way, as well as planting a seed in your imagination of a version of the entire film much more overtly zany and distinct than what McKay delivered. Something that could've played to the sort of earlier comedic work that is increasingly looking like his clearer calling than what he's done with these last two films.

[Peng]

So in the age of eternal film vs TV debate, McKay decides to go the radical route and make an angry pop-up textbook instead. As a foreigner whom a lot of this are new to (although I know the central figures and some general outlines), I don't mind the handholding as much as others, though it gets a touch condescending at times even in that context, and eventually the very literal-minded aesthetics and smug tone of "do you get this? were you outrageous about this back then? what about now?" numb and wear me down even before we get to the third act. I mean it's kind of remarkable how this captures the problem, especially the tone, that many have with the film. 5/10

[Spinal]

Mild nay. I'm just not a big fan of McKay's style of wiseguy didacticism. I think it's valuable to be reminded of Cheney's role in getting us to a very dangerous place in American politics. And the movie is effective on a certain level for cataloging much of what makes Republicans so infuriating. I just have trouble embracing it on an artistic level, with the broad caricatures and the heavy handed asides. It's like being shouted at by a guy in a bar for two hours. It's not that you don't agree with him. It's that there might be a better way to digest this information.

[Spinal]

Also, this may be a bit simplification of a clearly committed and transfixing performance, but aside from his final scene, I honestly feel like Bale delivers every line of dialogue as Cheney almost exactly the same way.

YES!

[Grouchy]

Matchcut might not be impressed by this one but I dug it.

[Ezee E]

Matchcut might not be impressed by this one but I dug it.

Still in my top ten.

[MadMan]

I thought it was fantastic, although the scary thing is how it still didn't fully reveal how much of an evil SOB Dick Cheney really is. The last part was a bit too on the nose even for me, but I still laughed.

[DavidSeven]

I know this movie is about Cheney, but I think it needed a different protagonist. Maybe a journalist or an idealistic staffer who Cheney could bounce off as a real moral antagonist. Not to say he is a per se villain, but this movie exists in an awkward middle ground where we’re asked to empathize (for narrative reasons) with a character who the filmmaker clearly despises. There are some good bits (“so, what do we believe?”), but in the end, I’m not sure what this exercise accomplishes.

I just don’t think McKay has the sensibility to tell these types of stories in a way that gets to the truth and resonates. He makes it all entertaining enough, but I can’t help but feel he’s doing more to glorify the subjects of his disdain than anything else.

[Grouchy]

Maybe a journalist or an idealistic staffer who Cheney could bounce off as a real moral antagonist.

He's not the real antagonist of the piece but the narrator is an idealistic journalist like the one you are asking for.