Vice (Adam McKay, 2018)

Though, by the opening’s own admission, many of these details within this narrative are unverifiable, the team claimed they did their best. Yale University dropout Dick Cheney entered the political world in 1969 when he became a White House intern during the Nixon Administration. After many decades of various political aspirations, including being Wyoming’s sole representative, he finds a new opportunity knocking at his door when George W. Bush, the son of George H.W. Bush, is running for president and chooses Cheney as his running mate.


Vice is one of many politically-charged films of 2018. While many sought to directly or indirectly criticize the then-current presidential administration, Vice took a look at the past. Dick Cheney, the forty-sixth vice president of the United States, proved quite a controversial figure throughout the 2000s. During the Bush Administration, he was anomalously active. By many political figures’ own admission, Vice President was considered a joke position with the person holding it just waiting around for their boss to die. Cheney didn’t do this; through careful political maneuvering, he wielded power in two different branches with nobody to overrule his decisions.

Dick Cheney is portrayed by Christian Bale, and I have to say the transformation is astonishing. While his younger depictions don’t resemble the real-life Cheney during those times, his 2000s portrayal is dead-on accurate. I had absolutely no idea who it was until I read the cast listing. Even after learning of his involvement, I assumed he was playing George W. Bush. Mr. Bale had proven himself quite the chameleon over the years, but this performance was particularly impressive. I’m certain that most people watching this film at the time would have assumed they got a body double to play the former vice president.

Having been made by Adam McKay, an avid supporter of the Democratic Party, Dick Cheney gets a very interesting portrayal in this film. The narrative doesn’t outright state whether or not Cheney’s actions are the result of a well-intentioned, if woefully misguided desire to keep his citizens safe or a lust for power. Nonetheless, it doesn’t shy away from the highly destructive, horrifying things that happen as a result of his campaigns. At the same time, he’s shown to be fiercely loyal to those he cares about. He clearly loves his wife Lynne, but his most endearing moment is how he handles his daughter’s biggest secret. That is to say, she’s a lesbian. He makes it clear right there and then that he will stick by her no matter what. Given that someone with his moral beliefs would be far more likely to leave her homeless, this is genuinely admirable.

Though this is a genuinely heartfelt moment, it’s ruined with what follows afterwards. The film appears to end, playing sappy music while claiming Cheney would never enter politics again. Given the name of the film and the fact that it came out roughly ten years after President Bush left the White House, nobody is going to fall for this joke, which defeats the purpose of telling it in the first place. Adam McKay used a similar joke in The Big Short, but he was dealing with more obscure subject matter, which could have tricked people into believing the false premise. The fake credits gag, on the other hand, is dead on arrival. When this occurred, I found myself impatiently waiting for the film to finish reveling in how clever it was so it could move on.

Indeed, for a comedy-drama, a majority of the jokes end up falling flat. The opening narration appears to be a standard “This is based on a true story” disclaimer, and then it uses an expletive because that’s hilarious. There is also one scene in which Dick and Lynne lapse into iambic pentameter after the narrative suggests it’s unlikely the fateful conversation that led to him being George W. Bush’s running mate was Shakespearian in nature. To comedians, this would be like revealing the punchline before telling your joke.

The only real comedic element I enjoyed was Sam Rockwell’s portrayal as George W. Bush. To put it bluntly, President Bush is portrayed in Vice as a hapless dupe who goes along with everything Cheney says and clearly doesn’t understand half of what is occurring around him. He’s essentially along for the ride along with the audience. At the same time, it’s a rather tired joke. During the 2000s, President Bush was subject to no shortage of jokes poking fun at his intelligence, and while it is said that absence makes the heart grow fonder, they still come across as extremely dated.

In fact, I think one of the bigger problems with Vice is that it doesn’t know what kind of film it wants to be. It handles fairly serious subject matter throughout, yet the jokes are so predictable that they typically don’t illicit laughter. In this regard, Vice reminds me a lot of You’re Next in that its inability to settle on a tone is the source of its downfall. Had it focused entirely on the comedy aspects, it would have had the potential to be one of the most darkly hilarious films in years. On the other hand, its subject matter would have lent itself to a naturally compelling drama, and Mr. McKay feeling the need to tell jokes every five minutes lest the audience gets bored actively sabotages his own goal.

Given its many missteps, it’s not terribly surprising that Vice doesn’t stick the landing well either. It ends with Cheney breaking the fourth wall, apologizing for nothing and only doing what the audience expected him to do. These kinds of developments have to be handled with care, as there’s a fine line between challenging your audience and outright belittling them. Unfortunately, Mr. McKay doesn’t skirt the line as much as he blows right past it in a sports car, having removed the brakes beforehand for good measure. The film had begun fairly hostile to its own audience at the beginning when it depicted people having the temerity to enjoy their leisure time instead of being serious all the time, but this speech really pushed it over the edge.

It doesn’t help that the speech is eventually followed up with a stinger. In it, a right-wing member accuses the film of being left-wing propaganda, causing a left-wing member to get in a fight with him. A neutral onlooker merely says he’s going to see the next installment of The Fast and the Furious franchise. I don’t enjoy using the word “pretentious” because I think it’s overused to the point of meaninglessness, but that is exactly how I would describe this sequence. Mr. McKay’s work already reeked of egotistical posturing with its obnoxious editing and in-your-face brand of storytelling, yet showing this fight and possibly having the observer representing an average filmgoer with long-atrophied taste buds was horribly self-indulgent and condescending even by its own standards.


At the end of the day, Vice is too much of an unfocused, self-indulgent mess to recommend to most people. I could only realistically envision someone who is so vehemently opposed to Dick Cheney and everything he represents getting anything out of it – and even then, there’s no guarantee this hypothetical person would actually admire it. In fact, I feel the primary reason Vice fails to deliver is because it is paradoxically heavy-handed without being able to make a coherent point. It claims Cheney was a greedy, power-hungry individual, but anyone who cracked open a history book could have determined that. With its obnoxious presentation and general inability to take its audience seriously, Vice doesn’t have anything substantial to offer other than reaffirming the beliefs of those who were on board with what it had to say in the first place.

Final Score: 3/10

11 thoughts on “Vice (Adam McKay, 2018)

  1. This is disappointing. Great actors and a great premise, a dark comedy about one of the country’s shadiest political figures – I didn’t think they’d be able to screw it up. I started college when the second Iraq war was running very hot, and I remember all the protests and the hatred aimed at Cheney and Rumsfeld in particular. I might check this out if it comes out on Netflix or somewhere just to see Christian Bale and Sam Rockwell’s performances.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sorry, I gave it a shot, but it’s just way too flawed to recommend. How it got the Oscar nod over something like Leave no Trace or Mandy is beyond me. I too remember his reign; it wasn’t pretty to say the least. It really does seem like the kind of subject that would make for a great film, but Vice is too full of itself to accomplish anything productive.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. “Unfortunately, Mr. McKay doesn’t skirt the line as much as he blows right past it in a sports car, having removed the brakes beforehand for good measure.”

    I actually laughed out loud at that.

    This is the kind of movie I would wait to see if it were on Netflix or something. While Cheney is an easy target, I always felt the stabs at George W. Bush’s intelligence were lazy and tired, and feared this movie would pull that same joke. Sad to hear that’s exactly the case. I even got the hunch that’d be the case from the trailers alone, which struck me as odd for such a movie to happen now. Given the current state of the White House, it seems pulling the usual schtick against George W. Bush seems a bit misguided, like holding a grudge against someone who looked at you wrong a long time ago even though someone else is kicking you in the crotch right now (yes, that’s the best analogy I could think of right now…It’s 4AM, I’m tired).

    I will say the makeup definitely looks fantastic, and I do like Christian Bale. But…nah, I think I’ll skip this one.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks! I actually came up with that metaphor back in 2016 when I was reviewing Metroid: Other M. The context was that I said Yoshio Sakamoto didn’t take a risk with the game as much as he got into a sports car and blew past the line. I normally don’t like recycling analogies, but I realized I hadn’t actually used the metaphor in an article; it was in a response to someone else’s comment, so into my review of Vice it went.

      Yeah, this is not a film I’d pay money for. If you’re curious, Netflix is the way to go. The stabs at Bush’s intelligence were funny in the 2000s, but they became painfully dated and hackneyed once he left the White House. He didn’t even have the courtesy to be like Dan Quayle and drop fascinatingly stupid quotes that are fun to read. And I see what you mean; it’s like thinking of a witty comeback ten years after you were badly insulted – the boat has long sailed. Honestly, Vice encapsulates everything that makes modern satire so tedious. You get these weak writers who have no sense of subtlety or tact being praised left and right simply because journalists can get behind the message. Then again, given its relatively modest score of 66% as of this writing, it would appear it failed to do even that (if it succeeded, it likely would have received at least a 90%). When I wrote about someone who is “vehemently opposed to Dick Cheney and everything he represents”, I have to admit I was referring to myself (okay, maybe not so much the surprisingly progressive attitude he had accepting his lesbian daughter).

      I know there was one point where you expressed frustration about cinephiles not giving modern films a chance. While I do think the one of the biggest failings of independent video game critics and (to a lesser extent) music critics is that they fail to acknowledge the good art being made right now, I find given the film journalists’ track record in the 2010s that I can’t blame cinephiles for favoring old films over new ones. Critics are more concerned with promoting their beliefs, and in the process, they aren’t so good when it comes to parsing actual stories. It’s to the point where positive reviews of Marvel films are some of the only ones I can blindly trust anymore because they are so out of step with what journalists enjoy, that if they can get good reviews from them, I know they went about receiving them honestly and not by reaffirming the critical circle’s beliefs. By contrast, I remember being thoroughly impressed with Orson Welles’s Touch of Evil because while it was an anti-racism allegory, it was still ultimately a story first (and an incredibly innovative one at that) and an allegory a distant second. Even if it doesn’t have a single Mexican in the cast, it manages to blow 99% of modern satires out of the water entirely because of its stellar narrative.

      All I can say is that Mr. McKay’s work is lucky to have been released in the same year as Upgrade because if it wasn’t, it would have been the nadir by a wide margin. For that matter, I’d even go as far as recommend Hereditary over this one because at least that director tried to craft a good story. He failed miserably, but he tried.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Pingback: The 91st Academy Awards’ “Best Picture” Nominees Ranked from Worst to Best | Extra Life

  4. Pingback: February 2019 in Summary: Alphabet Soup | Extra Life

Leave a Reply to Amanda Hurych Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.