Redwarmin This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

Boobirt Stylish but barely mediocre overall

Pluskylang Great Film overall

Fulke Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

studioAT Aaron Sorkin has had back to back big screen hits with 'The Social Network', 'Moneyball' and 'Steve Jobs' but here is his earlier effort.It boasts a big name cast (including the much missed Philip Seymour Hoffman) and with Sorkin penning the script it should be a good film, right? Wrong! This film is Sorkin very much in his comfort zone. The world of politics. Lots of people walking around, being important, spouting write-me-down one liners.But all this hides the fact that the characters aren't that likable, the story isn't the great and lacks all of the fizz and sparkle that makes Sorkin's other (more successful work!) like 'The West Wing' accessible for people who don't care about politics.I find Sorkin to be hit and miss. Guess which column this gets filed in?

hatlad Hanks does wonderful with Wilson's TX accent and playboy personality, sarcastic wit and character development. Philip Seymour Hoffman's character is just totally hilarious. I loved when Hanks/Wilson asking him "Do you drink?" and he said, "Oh God, yeah!"SPOILER ALERTAs for accuracy, I don't understand the criticism of another reviewer that the film doesn't address "that the funding of the Afghan rebels led directly to the formation of Al-Qaeda and all that followed." Uhhhh, not exactly. 1. It was the sudden withdrawal of US support once Russia exited Afghanistan that left the power vacuum that was filled by al-Qaeda. 2. The film did allude to that in 2 ways; development in the plot that the funding suddenly reduced once the Commies were gone and the end on screen text that said "We f-d up the endplay."

nzpedals I am astonished that they went to the trouble of making this movie in spite of the revelations after the 9-11 tragedy. There is no acknowledgment that the funding of the Afghan rebels led directly to the formation of Al-Qaeda and all that followed. Maybe Wilson et al, are indirectly responsible for all that?So, I now wonder how these people, Wilson and Herring especially, can look themselves in the mirror or show their faces in public. Or maybe America would rather gloat over their "victory" over the Soviets?But there is merit in the writing, some great gags, some subtle twists, some quotable lines, the saddest being at the very end, where there is a tiny hint that maybe it might not really achieve what they all thought it was going to.

SnoopyStyle Charlie Wilson (Tom Hanks) is celebrated by the clandestine services. The movies flashbacks to the early 1980s. Playboy Texas minor congressman Charlie Wilson gets interested in the struggles of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. Bonnie Bach (Amy Adams) is his executive assistant. He is pushed by his wealthy supporter Houston socialite Joanne Herring (Julia Roberts) and assisted by maverick CIA agent Gust Avrakotos (Philip Seymour Hoffman).Tom Hanks is fine but I wish he is acting bigger and brasher. Julia Roberts is not nearly acting big enough for a Texas socialite. The hair is big but she's not wild enough. They are playing it a bit too safe for a satire. The thing is that I never bought into its realism either. PSH ups the fun factor with his acting. The movie is not jokey enough to be funny. Neither is it harsh enough. Considering 9/11 at the top of every audience's mindset, it could have hit a lot harder. It's somewhere in the lumpy middle. The film leaves only a couple of scenes for the post-Soviet Afghanistan. That could be a compelling switch in his character but it gets short-changed.