Niger | Kevin Barrett's Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Niger’

Truth, Consequences, and Collateral Damage

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Politics, Reviews, tagged Adam LeFevre, Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, American Politics, Bruce McGill, Central Intelligence Agency, CIA, David Andrews, Gabon, General Comments, IranContra, Iris Bahr, Jeff Novak, Jim Pavitt, Karl Rove, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Michael Kelly, Movie Reviews, Naomi Watts, Niger, Noah Emmerich, President George W. Bush, President Richard M. Nixon, Republican Party, Reviews, Sean Penn, The New York Times, Tom McCarthy, Ty Burrell, Valerie Plame, Vice President Dick Cheney, Watergate, Weapons of Mass Destruction, WMD, Yellowcake Uranium on August 30, 2025| 2 Comments »

“Fair Game” – Director’s Cut (2018) — movie review
Today’s review is for the political biographical drama “Fair Game” – Director’s Cut (2018), starring Naomi Watts as Valerie Plame (a covert CIA operative whose career is destroyed by a political leak), and Sean Penn as Joseph C. Wilson (her husband, a former ambassador to Gabon turned whistleblower whose public dissent triggers the political backlash), David Andrews as Lewis “Scooter” Libby (Chief of Staff to Vice President Dick Cheney; portrayed as a key figure in the leak of Plame’s identity), Adam LeFevre as Karl Rove (Senior Advisor to President George W. Bush; depicted as part of the political machinery retaliating against Wilson), Tom McCarthy as Jeff Novak (a fictionalized composite journalist representing the media’s complicity in the leak narrative), Bruce McGill as Jim Pavitt (CIA Deputy Director of Operations; represents the agency’s internal response and institutional pressures), Michael Kelly as Jack Valerie’s (colleague and confidant within the CIA), Noah Emmerich as Bill (Valerie’s friend and fellow operative, offering emotional and professional support), Ty Burrell as Fred (a CIA analyst, pragmatic and skeptical), and Iris Bahr as CPD Agent (a composite character representing internal CIA perspectives and bureaucratic friction).

Background: I first saw this film several years ago when it was streaming on my cable box. Watching it again now, with the benefit of hindsight and a few more political scandals under our belt, the film reignites my outrage and makes the threat of a criminal Administration feel even more relevant. It’s not just a story about about the weaponization of political office, news or truth. It’s about the cost of speaking it (truth). It’s a film about the real world impact of having leaders lacking the moral framework to “do the right thing” and their willingness to do what they can get away with (morally right or wrong) rather than what they should.

Plot Summary: The film dramatizes the real-life fallout from former Ambassador Wilson’s public challenge to the Bush administration’s justification for the Iraq War, and the retaliatory exposure of Plame’s identity. In the film, Valerie Plame is a CIA officer working undercover on nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Her husband, Joe Wilson, is asked to investigate claims that Iraq is attempting to purchase yellowcake uranium from Niger. He finds no evidence and later publishes an op-ed in “The New York Times” challenging the Bush administration’s justification for the Iraq War. In fact, he establishes it was virtually impossible for the amount of yellowcake to have been mined and transported without anyone’s knowledge – simply based on the volume and logistics required to move such volume (500 TONS!! That’s 50-60 full truck loads that nobody notices!). In retaliation, Plame’s identity is leaked to the press — effectively ending her undercover career and putting her contacts and missions at risk. The film follows the unraveling of their professional and personal lives as they confront betrayal, media scrutiny, and political pressure. The movie’s story is a bit of a slow burn, but the tension builds as the couple fights to reclaim their integrity and their relationship.

So, how’s the film? The Acting? The filming / FX? Any problems? And, did I like the film? Short answers: The film is infuriating – but good, the acting is very good, nothing special (filming or FX), minor, “like” or “enjoy” are too strong of words for how this film made me feel.

Filming / FX: Other than some documentary style footage of visiting other countries (Niger), there are no “special” filming tricks or FX in this film. As an aside, I have not seen the theatrical release (2010), so I don’t know what’s “extra” in the Director’s Cut (2018) (my version) that isn’t in the original.

Problems: There are only two worth mentioning: 1) This film is targeted for adult audiences. It’s talking about Federal crimes being initiated from within the White House and as long as Mr. Libby was willing to take the fall and then get let off, there are NO consequences for the Republican Party. If fact, it emphasizes the opinion that as long as you’re in charge of the government, you can get away with anything – even Federal crimes. As such, the film assumes a level of political sophistication that might leave casual viewers confused. (And, by the way, how has allowing that attitude towards criminal action being acceptable worked out for us?) 2) Because of these actions by the Administration, foreign “actors” / agents who were friendly to the United States were almost certainly tortured and killed. And NOBODY at the CIA or in the Administration gave a damn!! Which begs the question, why would anybody in ANY foreign country ever trust the U.S. again – EVER!

Did I enjoy the film? Yes. It’s not a popcorn thriller, but it’s a compelling drama that demands adult attention. It’s a film about consequences — personal, political, and moral. Watching it now, it is easy to see how Watergate, IranContra, and WMD have led us step by step to having the current felon / con-artist / mob-boss wannabe in the Oval Office. As Nixon stated: “If the President does it. It’s legal.” Even when it isn’t!!

Final Recommendation: Highly recommended — especially if you’re interested in post-9/11 politics, media manipulation, and the human cost of government overreach. “Fair Game” is a reminder that truth isn’t just inconvenient — it can be dangerous. And sometimes, standing up for what’s “right” can be costly.

.
Click here (30 August) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.