I have never seen a movie where I was so aware of one of the actors actually acting. Everytime she spoke it brought me out of the whole movie. It has to be one of the worst pieces of acting in a long time. Why Oliver Stone didn't recast is beyond me. Perhaps due to the rushed shooting schedule. Everyone else did a fine job especially Brolin and Cromwell. Did anyone else cringe at Newton's performance? I'm glad her screen time, and even better her dialogue, were very limited.
she looked perfect...but was terribly directed...Stone should have caught her overacting. no one else played their character so broadly...it was an SNL parody performance.
"I have never seen a movie where I was so aware of one of the actors actually acting. Everytime she spoke it brought me out of the whole movie. It has to be one of the worst pieces of acting in a long time."
Honestly I thought it was a pretty good portrayal because to me that's how Rice seems, she seems like she is acting and just repeating the various party-lines. She was the ultimate yes-man. It was a little cringe-worthy, but so was Rice herself.
lol to be fair she did look like CR but her acting was terrible.Her manerisms wouldnt have been out of place in a Planet Of The Apes movie. "aint nothin but a muffin,we got a lotta butter to go"(url)http://theGouckster.bebo.com(/url)
I so totally agree with the original poster. It was an offensively cartoonish portrayal of Rice and a weak attempt to make fun of her. Despite whatever opinion you have about the Bush administration, you have to agree this is just insulting to the person as they depict her as a mindless "yes man" to Bush with little depth, a Buckwheat like speaking voice and a grotesque insult to the gap in Rice's teeth. Yes she had limited screen time which was good, but that still meant I had to endure whatever lines she was given.
Honestly, the only actors I liked in the film were Brolin and Cromwell. As much as I like Richard Dreyfuss and Jeffrey Wright, their characters are so badly written that they become exaggerations of themselves no matter the view on their actions.
Even Brolin and Cromwell don't get away completely unscathed. The film seems to assume it can summarize everything about Bush's character with a simple father-son conflict and condescending scenes meant for us to point and laugh at a human being who did nothing more than try to do the toughest job in the United States. No he didn't do it perfectly, but what president is perfect? Along with that, the movie offered no insight, dragged on forever with uninteresting scenes, gave good actors bad dialogue and, worst of all, insult our intelligence by trying to sell itself as bi-partisan when it's obvious meant for the left. I don't think it's bad for a movie to try being so, but it shouldn't try to pretend to be something it's not.
I was bothered by Newton's role in the film, too. But I wonder if maybe the point was that Stone didn't feel he could devote much energy to developing the Rice character. He was more interested in Cheney, Powell, Tenet, and, to some extent, Rumsfeld.
The only serious bit of independent thinking you see on the character's part is when she points out early in the film that Iran has somewhat of a democratically elected government and so doesn't fit the "Axis of Evil" pattern that well.
"Extremism in the pursuit of moderation is no vice."
This is one of those threads where insecure middle aged men slate the predominant female role in a movie isn't it. Well it makes a change from the insecure prepubescents that slate the predominant female role in a teen movie.
You're an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bill
Female performers attract a disproportionate amount of criticism from male movie goers. This seems to stem from their own insecurities, not from the abilities of the actress. IMDB boards are full of threads like this one.
Thanks for the clarification. But whatever you think about the tendencies of male reviewers, don't you think it was a rather unflattering portrayal of Condoleeza Rice? I don't know if we can blame Newton for that, because it could be that Stone simply didn't want to develop the character more. He had to include her in the film, but seemed to have her do as little as possible.
As a middle-aged male, I don't personally see anything wrong with Newton's acting. Her part just wasn't very big.
"Extremism in the pursuit of moderation is no vice."
No it isnt that they(white ? males) are biased against her(black female)It is that she sucks in this big time and should be ashamed of her perfomance.(Black female writing this who admires <once> the real Condaleeza Rice.)Watching this movie right now on TV and I am seriously bothered by this performers choices.
lol i thought she was hillarious. actually the whole movie was brilliant and, depending on the person, either extremely funny or offensive. i loved the ending dream analogy of george bush not just missing the ball, but not even seeing it cause it was never there. this movie doesnt condemn bush for his actions, it excuses his actions as president because of his stupidity. excellent movie.