Satire needs to be rooted in fact to be truly meaningful. An author knowing his subject is a must, or as the old saying goes, "write what you know." Responsibly, no one would read a book, especially a satire, without finding out a little about its author (at the very least there's usually a bio on the back sleeve). An author's political slant tells you what the story is about; his writing skills dress it up. What weight or importance we give the story is based on that author's intellectual, educational and professional credentials in the area of his subject. In other words, if the author was once the director of the CIA and writes a spy novel it seems pretty reasonable that the story would be plausible and the facts about the inner workings of the spy business pretty much on target. If the author was a waitress in a small mid-western town and writes a tale about the politics of small-town mid-western life it seems pretty reasonable that she would have a unique expertise in that area.
So now we have Bob Roberts, written, directed, and starring Tim Robbins an actor and former member of Los Angeles' Actors' Gang, an experimental ensemble that expressed radical political observations through the European avant-garde form of theater. Tim Robbins is a self-proclaimed left-wing political activist who has made no attempts personally or professionally to hide his disdain for American values (he prefers European values) and hatred for conservatives and nationalism (he prefers liberalism, socialism and internationalism). His story-line for Bob Roberts is campaigns and politics, a subject matter Tim Robbins the author has virtually no experience in professionally or intellectually (he was a drama major at UCLA), but alas, this is Hollywood where a drop-out like Martin Sheen can pretend he is President on screen and off. Why actually know your subject when you can just make it up as you go along? It sure as heck beats having to know the subject professionally or have any real insights.
If a story is built on the knowledge and expertise of the author then Bob Roberts is not really a story of politics or campaigns. It is on the surface a story of acting, Bob Roberts is an "actor," a "con man" who pretends to be one thing but is actually another. Tim Robbins, the "actor" had been acting professionally for about a decade when Bob Roberts came out so one has to give their own assessment for what constitutes experience in this department. The point I am making is that acting is his only experience so playing a con man can't be too much of a stretch. Given that his roles included an astronaut, a prisoner and a Viking, a con man is virtually home turf.
During his professional career Tim Robbins formed his political views which became what the story of Bob Roberts is about dressed up as political satire. If you are looking for substantial facts or any connection to the truth you won't find them here, but why would you? Consider the source of the information...or more precisely the lack of information. If you are interested in left-wing anti-American sentiment the libraries are filled with books by qualified individuals who studied decades of philosophical viewpoints, some even holding political power. You may disagree with their philosophies but at least they spell out the philosophy, perhaps offering examples lifted from experience and they don't re-write the philosophies of others. The points of view are left bare for people to either agree, partially agree or disagree based on their merits.
Bob Roberts is a dangerous film, and an inaccurate one, because it doesn't support its philosophy by spelling out what it believes. Instead it incorrectly describes other people's philosophies based on emotion, not facts. Like a spoiled brat the film can't find anything nice to say about itself or it's viewpoint, so it makes up something bad about others. This is Hollywood fake-believe. Don't expect it to be factual. Set your standards higher than a Tim Robbins film.
So now we have Bob Roberts, written, directed, and starring Tim Robbins an actor and former member of Los Angeles' Actors' Gang, an experimental ensemble that expressed radical political observations through the European avant-garde form of theater. Tim Robbins is a self-proclaimed left-wing political activist who has made no attempts personally or professionally to hide his disdain for American values (he prefers European values) and hatred for conservatives and nationalism (he prefers liberalism, socialism and internationalism). His story-line for Bob Roberts is campaigns and politics, a subject matter Tim Robbins the author has virtually no experience in professionally or intellectually (he was a drama major at UCLA), but alas, this is Hollywood where a drop-out like Martin Sheen can pretend he is President on screen and off. Why actually know your subject when you can just make it up as you go along? It sure as heck beats having to know the subject professionally or have any real insights.
If a story is built on the knowledge and expertise of the author then Bob Roberts is not really a story of politics or campaigns. It is on the surface a story of acting, Bob Roberts is an "actor," a "con man" who pretends to be one thing but is actually another. Tim Robbins, the "actor" had been acting professionally for about a decade when Bob Roberts came out so one has to give their own assessment for what constitutes experience in this department. The point I am making is that acting is his only experience so playing a con man can't be too much of a stretch. Given that his roles included an astronaut, a prisoner and a Viking, a con man is virtually home turf.
During his professional career Tim Robbins formed his political views which became what the story of Bob Roberts is about dressed up as political satire. If you are looking for substantial facts or any connection to the truth you won't find them here, but why would you? Consider the source of the information...or more precisely the lack of information. If you are interested in left-wing anti-American sentiment the libraries are filled with books by qualified individuals who studied decades of philosophical viewpoints, some even holding political power. You may disagree with their philosophies but at least they spell out the philosophy, perhaps offering examples lifted from experience and they don't re-write the philosophies of others. The points of view are left bare for people to either agree, partially agree or disagree based on their merits.
Bob Roberts is a dangerous film, and an inaccurate one, because it doesn't support its philosophy by spelling out what it believes. Instead it incorrectly describes other people's philosophies based on emotion, not facts. Like a spoiled brat the film can't find anything nice to say about itself or it's viewpoint, so it makes up something bad about others. This is Hollywood fake-believe. Don't expect it to be factual. Set your standards higher than a Tim Robbins film.