"Charlie Wilson's War" (2007) - Movie Review

Here is another film which is much needed for the resultants of mistakes which happened many years ago. This is the tale of how a Democratic Texas Congressman orchestrated the covert war aiding to the Afghan mujahideen in the Soviet War in Afghanistan. And that is Charlie Wilson (Tom Hanks) who never was shy from having a great time and made it continue serving the job he took out. The film is mainly the tactical alliances and the successful operative behaviour of those alliances Wilson made to make that war favourable to the Afghans in turn to US. They do have an intent of saying something of how it all turned out in the current scenario, but since it is more of the back ground operation rather than a preaching, it does take a back seat sometimes.

There is no possible solution as it is for the films focusing on the deadlock situations of war. We get to see the personalities who were so good at their job in almost savage rugged method of operation, the characters flower up flamboyantly into a political comedy drama. It is how “Thank you for Smoking” worked. This while quite does not live up to that, it has the brilliant work of Hanks as the charismatic and free going Charlie Wilson and once again impressively performing Phillip Seymour Hoffman as Gust Avrakotos, the ruthless CIA officer with a conscience of his own. It does have Julia Roberts in a character which did not impressively appeal. She plays the anti-communist Joanne Herring who pays more attention of the Christianity and marking the Soviets as the evil nemesis of that faith. Her casting for the role is good but not great. She does her job but does not impress us.

As it opens up into this congressman having the thoughts of pulling the strings on the situation in the Afghanistan, it becomes sort of condescending towards the viewers. We do not really get Charlie Wilson or others in that scenario. The meeting of Charlie Wilson with the Pakistan President Zia (Om Puri) and his political advisors is when the movie makes its presence. The reason we do not quite thrilled about meeting Wilson in the start of fifteen minutes is the way he carries himself. But that is how it is supposed to and then we get to see the real man who was not traditional is more honest in very many ways with his compatriots. In very essential meaning, the film named aptly of course is Wilson’s war. It is his instinct on looking at the helpless children, women and families in the refugee camp makes him to take the next step. As covert the term implies things you do not want to reveal as it very well crosses the territories of conscience and truth, there is no judgments we can make about it. But the real answer never comes out. What exactly did Wilson or any other wanted out of this war? They wanted the Soviets defeated but as with the post war, there was never a shed of idea was thought through (“No End in Sight”, the documentary movie elaborately and precisely tells the fiasco in the much recent Iraq War).

Analyzing in the end, the coalition by very many countries who were publicly termed enemies conveniently bended their moral fibre as can be defined, to do something for their personal and public interest. It is where the hypocrisy of being religionist and the sides of good and evil takes roller coaster rides and role plays for profit than belief. The film does not take the pain to go more into it but it does not commit on it either at the start. While jokingly we witness those clandestine efforts of Wilson to put through the thoughts and multiply the funding from 5 million to 500 million, it irks on how it is that everything can be turned right and wrong based on how you present it.

The film gives what it promises, the constructive proceedings of this chess game in achieving something and give the people of defeating the enemies and also save the helpless. The latter never got completed which was the elemental goal in the concept of winning the war. The film shows Wilson’s appeal for funding a school getting rejected but did he go into the same ordeal of playing games to make this sanction? I do not know but the attitude in the people not to approve it is pretty much evidential.

It is a good fun film but also gives the creeps. We are seeing the resultants of those funny pictured strategies coming back hard and flat. Whether at that time non-violence could have helped wherein we would not have seen the effects? It is a defense biological reaction of humans to protect themselves and mainly quench the anger and the want to be liberated in their homeland. The job left undone became the outcome of many more tragedies and coming on in this century. It is a one man’s war and the war was done immaculately but the purpose of it never got attained.