Des hommes d'influence

Watching in 2022 where politicians have now regularly created false issues to galvanise support and maintained that over years has devalued the impact of this film. Most frightening is that this type of deception now works.

I saw this before the brouhaha with Clinton and Lewinsky broke, and I imagine most of the negative comments about this film came because they saw it after and thought this was a Nostradamus film. When I saw it, I thought it started a bit slow, and was a bit too self-satisfied (like the scenes of people crying at a concert; that seemed fake). However, for most of the way, this is sharp, biting, and yes, funny, though when I first saw it, I thought it was more accurate in its Hollywood satire than on its government satire. Time, of course, proved me wrong.

David Mamet will never be universally loved, because not only does there seem to be a large group that doesn't get him, but that thinks those of us that like him are degenerates. Myself, I happen to think he's one of the best playwrights and screenwriters working today (though I'm split so far on his novels). His writing may be highly stylized, but I guess I'm in tune to the rhythms of his dialogue. And he doesn't assume his audience is dumb; rather, he seeks to challenge them by asking you to come to your own conclusions, rather than hit you over the head. And he does that very well in this movie; at the beginning, we may think Conrad Brean and Stanley Motss are real sleazebags, but at the end, while we deplore the action they take of faking a war just for political ends, we can't quite dismiss them either.

Of course, a lot of that has to do with the performances of Robert DeNiro and Dustin Hoffman (Anne Heche is also a standout as Winnifred Ames, the increasingly bemused presidential aide). DeNiro seems at first like a teddy bear here, with his beard, his hat, and his bow tie, but he transfers the energy associated with his more volatile roles (TAXI DRIVER, RAGING BULL, GOODFELLAS et al) to guile and street smarts here. The way his eyes probe whoever he's talking to, and the way he anticipates almost every verbal comeback the other person has demonstrates that(he can't anticipate every event, of course, but once he gets used to it, he can).

But the standout here is Hoffman. There's been a lot of comment on Hoffman basing his character on Robert Evans. My own theory is he read Lynda Obst's excellent book HELLO, HE LIED, which talks about the producer's role, and simply played that. I formed that theory because of his mantra whenever things go wrong, "This is nothing!", especially when Winnifred reads him the riot act after their plane crashes. There's a part in the book where Obst talks about having to argue budget with the studio, and realizes it's all a game where they have roles to play; she argues for more money, the studio for less. Just as Winnifred's role is to be pessimistic, and Stanley's is to be optimistic. And Hoffman never condescends to Stanley, instead showing a talented, maybe amoral guy who deep down is so insecure that he values credit even over his life("F*** my life, I want the credit!" is one of the best lines of the film"). Contrary to his line, this film is not nothing.

As satirical and surreal as this movie seems, it also has that air of 'Dr. Strangelove' that dialog, scenario's, and actions might not be that far off the mark. Past, present or future. And is scary how 'spin and deflection' has become such an art now. Back in FDR's day with his poliomyelitis, it was just common sense and general agreement to not make it an issue, or use it against him and his leadership. Cut to Bill Clinton and his indiscretion in the oval office, was dragged out and questioned to the point of making him a monster. 9/11 to this day is still questioned by many was it a conspiracy or not? To promote Bush Jr and/or give America good reason to infiltrate the middle east and all? And unlike the mystery of the JFK assassination, 9/11 conspiracy and Republican deflection is more probable and provable with technology and communication - either overtly in front of everyone's eyes, or hacked and exposed via WikiLeaks et al. And even then, it's held with scrutiny, unchallenged, and allowed to wither and fade in everyone's memory. With Wag The Dog, it seems so simplistic at first. DeNiro's 'Mr. Fix It' character seems to know how to handle everything just so. But it also shows the complexity and ease of so many involved that can take a minute piece of information and exploit it or counteract it with a simple leak and denial. And I think it's important to advise viewers to pay attention to the ending. As the supposedly internal mucking and manipulations to secure ones leadership CAN have an effect on another region of the world as a gateway trigger effect. Can we ever re-establish 'real news' over 'fake news' today and for the future...?

Barry Levinson's under-rated "Wag the Dog" is a brilliant piece of satire which is to the 1990s what "All the President's Men" was to the 1970s. The president is in trouble after a sexual scandal with an under-aged girl. Enter Robert DeNiro and Anne Heche who want to distract the nation with something else as they try to get their boss out of the hot seat. The only problem is: nothing is going on. So it is up to them to create something to rally the country around the executive-in-chief. Now enter sleazy, but high class Hollywood director Dustin Hoffman (in a well-deserved Oscar-nominated turn) who is contacted to start an imaginary war. He agrees and the plan works, but as time goes by more and more problems occur and the lies continue to snow-ball. Levinson's excellent direction and Hilary Henkin's clever screenplay raise the performances of all involved. Naturally DeNiro and Hoffman are guaranteed to excel in a film like this, but good work is also done by people like Heche, Denis Leary, William H. Macy, Woody Harrelson and even Willie Nelson (!?). Somewhat ignored in 1997, but still one of the best films of that year and one of the more important films of the 1990s. 4.5 out of 5 stars.

"Wag the Dog" is the blend of politics and media that may be true, but is generally accepted, ignored or disbelieved. Although the portrayal in this film is surely exaggerated, it is sadly probably not far from the mark.

As is well-known now, this film came out around the same time President Clinton had a sex scandal of his own to deal with. Some have accused him of deflecting criticism by talking up violence towards Iraq. The fact this film was made just before such an event makes it even more important.

With a great early performance by Kirsten Dunst, and the winning combination of William H. Macy, Dustin Hoffman and Robert DeNiro... can this film really ask for more? Oh, and there's Denis Leary! (Willie Nelson and Shooter Jennings, too!)