Get ready for some stern words from Tony Snow. Herewith, a press release I received this morning. I think it speaks for itself.
PRESIDENT BUSH ASSASSINATION FILM MAKES ITS WORLD PREMIERE AT THE 2006 TORONTO INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL
New York, NY (August 31, 2006) – The Toronto International Film Festival released new details today regarding a film in their line-up. Previously referred to as D.O.A.P., the film’s actual title is DEATH OF A PRESIDENT. This fictional drama, which mixes archival footage with narrative elements, focuses on the assassination of President George W. Bush in the style of a retrospective documentary. DEATH OF A PRESIDENT makes its world premiere in the festival’s Visions section on September 10th at 8:30 p.m. at the Paramount 3 Theatre in Toronto.
"We’re thrilled to be screening the film at Toronto," said writer/director Gabriel Range. “It’s a striking premise which may be seen as highly controversial. But it’s a serious film which I hope will open up the debate on where current US foreign and domestic policies are taking us.”
DEATH OF A PRESIDENT is a thought-provoking critique of the contemporary American political landscape. In the film, President Bush is confronted by a massive anti-war demonstration as he arrives in Chicago to make a speech for business leaders. Unperturbed, Bush goes ahead with the visit but as he leaves the venue, he is gunned down by a sniper. While the nation mourns, the hunt for his killer swings into action and the state apparatus tries to make sense of this horrific attack on the administration. The investigation soon focuses on a Syrian-born suspect.
DEATH OF A PRESIDENT is co-written and directed by Gabriel Range ("The Day Britain Stopped"), and is produced by Borough Films’ Range, Simon Finch and Ed Guiney. The executive producer is Robin Gutch. U.S. rights are represented by William Morris Independent, with distribution already secured in the UK by Film Four/Channel 4.
Comments (1-30) of 36 Add your comment
Would love to see it, probably won’t get to though since everyone will be up in arms about it.. and no one will want to show it for fear of being labeled “unpatriotic” and supporters of Al Qaeda.
This is disgusting … how could you WANT to see a movie about the President being murdered and then say, you’re afraid of being unpatriotic??
If you WANT to see a movie about your president being murdered that is the very definition of being unpatriotic.
What is wrong with this country!
actually, patriotism is defined as love for one’s country. last I checked, the president wasn’t the country.
Love the line that starts, “While the nation mourns…”
The press release stated this was a documentary style film, but clearly there are fantasty elements, as well.
Cee, sounds like this falls under Freedom of Speech.
I will say, the movie may be better received by the public (ala ‘24′) if it was a fictious president, not a real one.
We’ve had assassinated presidents.. This is stupid and in very poor taste.
whaaaa?!?
The enemy doesn’t believe in free speech, human rights or liberty.. bwa-hahahaha! What fools these film makers are to pity and protect them.
I find this movie a bit disturbing, for too many reasons to list. I’m sure there are millions of people who would like to see this happen but…I don’t know.
When I think of the guys that have passed away in the war and gas prices….
I’m working on the sequel as we speak.
It’s called “D.O.A.P. II: Hunting Season,” and it stars Jason Statham as the nation’s new President Richard Cheney. He locks and loads his quail-boomstick and goes on the hunt for the late Bush’s Wilkes Booth (I’m thinking a knife-fight climax in a forest, a la The Hunted).
I’ve already had auditions for the assassin. Garrison Keillor showed me some surprisingly good stuff, as did Stephen Colbert, Al Franken, Jon Stewart, Michael Moore, Lewis Black, Bill Maher, George Carlin, and each member of System of a Down and Green Day. I’ll keep everybody posted on my casting decisions.
Can you image the wrath and absolute disgust towards the enemies of the USA if someone should kill our president? Even the liberals’ fearful voice would be shut completely, on the rally to arms and forget being patient and careful of political correctness! Think again..filmakers.. how this film will really be seen as troublesome, opposite to the peaceful causes you decree and totally crazy on both sides of the enemy line.
I doubt that somewhere in the caves of Afghanistan, Al Qaeda is gathering to watch a sneak preview of this movie and then beginning to plot world domination when it is over.. people get over it.. people have the right to express themselves within legal limits. I for one would love to see this movie I can tell it’s a bit of a dramedy especially the line about the nation mourning.. hahahaha that’s a hoot.. if anything you would probably hear a collective sigh of relief….. to bad it’s just a movie..
Sounds like the feel good movie of the year to me. Kidding, I’m kidding, but it does sound interesting, I’ll check it out. I remember ditto heads practically drooling over the prospect of Clinton catching a bullet, so let’s put your outrage in some perspective.
I realize that it’s art and as a filmmaeker, I appreciate the ingenuity of the idea behind the documentary. The only problem I have is that yes, film does inspire people to do dumb things. Some idiot out there might watch this film and get ideas.
Case in point #1- when “Snakes on a Plane” came out, I told all my friends to watch the news the following Monday because some idiot somewhere would bring snakes to a theater just to be cute. Lo and behold, some idiots in Arizona brought two rattle snakes to a theater. Ha-ha, very friggin’ funny.
Case in point #2- Where did John Hinkley Jr. get his idea for shooting President Reagan? From a movie.
I don’t think the movie should be censored, but let’s not be so naive to think that some moron somewhere won’t be thinking, “Hey that’s a great idea! I’m gonna shoot me a president and then it will be like the movie was prophesying my date with destiny.”
The rattlesnakes in the theatre turned out to be false. A snake did slither into the lobby from outside, but no one actually released rattlesnakes into the theatre, the media got it wrong, of course they didn’t report the follow up with the headlines they did the first rumor they heard.
Hinkley was delusional and wanted to get Jodie Foster to notice him, or so he said, who really knows what was going through his mind.
My opinion: While they may have the legal right to make such a movie, I find it to be in very poor taste (for the record, I’m a firm Democrat).
They could have made the same point with a fictional president (thinly-veiled, even). To do a film with a fictional assissination of our real president shows that their intention is not to garner debate but rather to grab attention and headlines.
If your wiring is faulty enough to actively contemplate assassinating the president, inspiration could come in a Tom & Jerry cartoon.
How about a movie about the Impeachment of a President? It would have to have a believable plot. Fooling around with an intern wouldn’d be reason enough. Lying about the reasons we got into a disasterous war or gross negligence following a natural disaster might be.
I detest everything George W. Bush stands for but I’d never want to see him or any American president assassinated. This is a terrible idea. The poster who suggested an impeachment, that sounds great. Let’s actually get a political dialogue going instead of looking at something in such poor taste as this.
So people who wanted to see JFK were unpatriotic? It appears so, given some of the comments I’ve read.
As for this movie, they have the right to make it, though I agree a fictional president might be a better way of getting their point across, given all the publicity around the movie will center on the fact that President Bush is portrayed in it.
I agree with the last two poster’s. An impeachment movie would be a great way to spur some political discourse over the failings of this administration. But, alas, the majority party in Congress is that of the White House. And, oh yeah, the president didn’t get a bj (thank God he restored dignity to the WH though!)
I’m not sure why everyone seems to think that this is a fantasy film for liberals. The release says that Bush is shot after confronting a massive anti-war protest (the audience is supposed to think the sniper is among the protesters), and then the suspect is an Arab student, which is the default “evil guy” for a lot of right-wingers.
It sounds to me more like a “worst-fears-realized” type of film like “Red Dawn” or other dreck from John Milius.
Tacky and pathetic. Amazing what some people will do to create controversy and make $$. Whether you like Bush or not is irrelevant. He is a real, living, human being and to create a movie about killing him (or any other real, living, human being) is unquestionably wrong.
This struck me as funny, seeing the words “Bush” and “assassination” together. Get it? Look at the word “assassinnation”…”ass ass in nation”
It’s in incredibly poor taste, but so what, there’s nothing that says free speech is required to be tasteful. I find many things that Ann Coulter say to be beyond bad taste, but if she wants to scream that 9/11 widows are happy that their husbands burned to death in the WTC, or talk about how she wishes Timothy McVeigh had blown up the New York Times building instead; she has every right to do so, and I have every right to turn the channel when I happen upon her, which I do.
If the very idea of this movie offends you, don’t watch it, seems pretty simple to me.
I… think it actually sounds interesting? In poor taste, but interesting? I’m kind of ashamed for saying so?
I obviously don’t want Bush assassinated, and an impeachment movie would have been far better, but it’s not like the film seems to be celebrating it… just taking a look at what it would do for the country?
Yet everything about it makes me feel so uneasy I have to end all my sentences with question marks?
And by what an assassination would do for the country, of course I don’t mean that it would do anything good, but it would be interesting to see, albeit fictionally, the effects of it on the war on terror, the situation in the Middle East, and the perspective of Bush’s presidency. After all, assassinated presidents tend to be lionized…
Maybe I’ll just read the reviews first.
Disagreeing with a politician and disliking his politics is one thing. Fantasising about someone’s death is something else entirely. Oh, and the difference between this and JFK is that Kennedy was already dead. Plus, I don’t get the impression that Oliver Stone thought that was in any way a good thing.
Agree with Daisy. JFK was an illustration of real events. After all, that is what Aristotle defined drama as. It was historical fiction, and the part where he dies, isn’t supposed to entertain you. This movie is almost like an illustration of someone’s fantasy. I find it to be a stunt and frankly distracts from whatever the rest of the movie is trying to say about American politics. It should have been a thinly veiled other country with its own president, or America with a fictional president, so that we would focus on the movie’s overall themes and messages. I am a democrat and hate where Bush has taken us, but I would NEVER want to see him assassinated, and I hope to God that this film does not plant some crack pot idea in some weirdo’s head. (I’m also not too keen on the fact that this film is a foreign film … why dont you kill off your own frickin leader, A-hole!)
Wow! I’m more liberal than not, I think President Bush is the worst thing to happen to this country in decades, and even I am offended by this movie. There is a huge difference between freedom of speech and ugliness for profit. Making a movie that imagines the death of a living person, especially one who – regardless of how you feel about him – holds a position that should be respected, disgusts me.
WoW…. If everybody who is upset about this movie would show the same concern for”real, living people” ACTUALLY dying all over the world right now, we would live in a better world.
Why is it that the Dixie Chicks continue to get slammed for a comment Natalie Maines made YEARS ago (and don’t tell me that their recent shutout at the CMA nominations despite a critically and commercially acclaimed CD wasn’t a cruel and deliberate act on the hick voters’ part), but a movie such as this not only be filmed, but shown to the public?
The mind boggles at the hyprocrisy and downright stupidity of the masses…
Sickening on all fronts.