Death of a President: Burn Him in Effigy

Is This an Immoral Portrayal of the Murder of a Live, Sitting President

K.L. Hartwig
I spoke with a handful of people as we were leaving a viewing of Death of a President. I asked them what they thought. One college-age woman said, "Well - I think its done well, but as to it being controversial, I don't think it was that controversial. I mean there's all this controversy around it, and don't think its controversial. Its more like a look-ahead movie."

Another woman with much gray in her hair said, "Bush inspired me to do something I've never done in my life. In the Bush / Gore election, I went straight down the ticket, didn't even glance at the names, and voted a straight Democratic ticket. I don't like Bush. I want Bush impeached, and it irks me that no one will even talk about it after the Clinton travesty. I think Bush should be impeached, but I think a movie about killing him is immoral."

This woman's friend said, "I want Bush impeached, too, but not assassinated. This movie makes me feels sympathetic toward him, and I sure didn't have any sympathy for him when I walked in! Its like, yeah, well, I'm not happy that he's not impeached, but at least he's not murdered." The younger professional woman standing nearby said, "That's right. I feel sympathetic, too. So what is this meant to be? It looks like it is meant to be against Bush, but maybe its really meant to be for him. Because I feel sympathetic to him now, too. I feel like I should go home and phone him to make sure he's all right."

I went home feeling under a heavy cloud of burden spread by the realism of the docu-film Death of a President; I felt like I should buy a black dress from Chadwick's and make plans for a funeral. This is a pronounced effect to be had from a movie. I still can't quite shake the gloom.

People are by nature imitative. Look at dressing trends throughout our history, for example. Towns folk and villagers all adorned themselves in the same array; it was the village costume or the national costume. You can still see vestiges of it in European countries. But the documentation of the imitative trait goes all the way back to the Mycenaean empire. And faith in our human monkey-see-monkey-do gene is what made Tom Sawyer and Mark Twain famous.

This trait is integral to at least part of the discussion of the moral nature of Death of a President. People do imitate what they see and hear. People in America are a little more unstrung these days than in times past, and so imitate more things more often. Somebody will imitate the attitudes, ideas, behaviors and actions in Death of a President.

They set the film in 2007 and set a prominent caveat at the front of the film declaring it an unquestioned work of fiction. But should you say, "I could kill you!" to the wrong person at the wrong time (is there a right person and a right time?) can be turned against you and construed as a threat in a court of law. Surely, simulating the murder of a President - one alive and sitting in office - could be construed as a threat against his life. Oh, yes. It is declared fiction. I wonder if there are any lawyers in our midst. What do the legal minds say about this particular moral and legal point?

Surely, in director Gabriel Range's second film, the cinematographic excellence of the qualities of this film are without question: It is the definitive film of it's genre. The acting, the cinematography, the directing, the screenplay (Simon Finch and Gabriel Range) are all unflawed. I had to keep reminding myself, "This is just a movie." If I were to rate this movie just on these things I would have to give it a definitive 5 Stars, because I saw no flaws.

Death of a President is really a contemporary, high-tech way of burning this President in effigy - or is it, like the young woman said, a kind of reverse effigy to drum up sympathy and gratitude toward George W. Bush? If its the former, wouldn't it be equally dramatic and demonstrative to make a movie about impeaching him - successfully. Because last time I checked impeachment is not a violent crime, whereas murder - assassination - you see, is.

For thematic content, as opposed to production quality, and for entertainment value, this movie gets a different rating from it's rating for cinematographic excellence. For theme and entertainment, I rate Death of a President 1 Star.

Combining these two to get one overall rating for Death of a President is tricky: It is like combining the proverbial Apples and Oranges. How do you go about it? By cinematographic qualities? Or by value and entertainment? I must take the approach of judging by thematic and entertainment value. Number 1: It isn't entertaining; it's provoking. It is truly real-to-life in it's pseudo documentary garb. And life isn't generally entertaining. It contains very questionable thematic and moral - or should I say immoral - material. My rating for Death of a President is 1.

Published by K.L. Hartwig

A retired stockbroker, I am in e-education, tutoring in English Literature and Language and studying for an M.A. in English Linguistics.  View profile

  • Impeaching Bush is legal: why not make a docu-movie about impeaching Bush?
  • Many people want Bush dead, no one sane wants him dead.
  • Sympathy for Bush is built through watching Death of a President.
A UK news broadcaster, this is director Gabriel Range's second film. He has collaborated with co-writer, Simon Finch, on several TV projects in the UK. Death of a president made its debut at the Toronto Film Festival in hopes of finding an American Distributor.

6 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Marie Lowe11/20/2009

    killing a president, good grief.

  • Goat1/7/2007

    Heh. Word limit. Here's the rest of it. ...Even the negative publicity (theatres told their patrons that they wouldn't show it; normally, people would flock to other theatres and make the movie a hit - this didn't happen and it's more or less forgotten now) couldn't save this movie from mediocrity.

    Now, if you want a real and serious discussion about Presidential assassination and consequence, read "Checkpoint" by Nicholson Baker. The quality of the writing is debatable, but he makes so many good points (on both sides) that it's worth checking out.

  • Goat1/7/2007

    Codie said "...the intent was to show the great tragedy that would be realized were Bush to be lost, as opposed to advocating the benefit of such a thing..."

    The problem is that they do NOT show the real consequences of this possibility. There is no real discussion about the very real effects on the country and its policies beyond a vague reference to "The Patriot Act 3," which is NEVER followed up. Instead, to paraphrase James Berardinelli, the movie is solely concerned with showing that it might not be a good thing to be a Muslim in today's highly blame-happy world.

    I would have liked to see what real decisions Cheany would make, to the betterment or detriment of the nation. I would have liked to see if anyone in the nation would have the guts to stand up and say "Damn it, I don't care who the President is, if you shoot him you're a criminal!" I would have liked to see a more intelligent movie, and I didn't. It was a one-note movie, with one draw. Even the negative publicity (t

  • Goat12/17/2006

    Unfortunately, this movie is a typical example of one-note film-making. Why did anyone care about Shortbus? Because there was unsimulated sex in it. Why does anyone care about this movie? Because it shows the assassination of George Bush. The people who hate Bush will back it completely because they hate Bush; no other reason. The people who like Bush will vilify it because they like Bush; no other reason. And that's it. It had no message, no statement, no real reason to be notable at all except that it shows Bush getting killed. It is a purposeless movie with one single exploitative draw, and has no other merit.

  • Bobby Ramsey11/16/2006

    It's easier for them to hate Bush than to state an alternative.

  • Bobby Ramsey11/15/2006

    there are those unstable enough to imitate that sort of thing.

    it is easier to be against something (someone) than to be for anything of your own, i believe.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.