Today came the news that Robert Redford is set to direct Against All Enenies based on Richard A. Clarke’s memoir about, says The Hollywood Reporter, "how the Bush administration handled the al-Qaida threat
before and after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Clarke, a former U.S.
terrorism czar, offered the ultimate insider’s account into the
nation’s security apparatus, featuring a cast of power brokers
including President Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Clarke." Paul Haggis was set to direct, but dropped out.
Thing is, Clarke’s story is truly complex and his real life political characters very much still in the news. While these politicos likely won’t be in office when the film hits theaters, Redford is tacking quite a difficult subject.
And aren’t Redford’s directing efforts hit and miss? In my mind, Ordinary People was brilliant with Milagro Beanfield War and Quiz Show kind of just OK, but generally watchable. While I can’t wait to see what Redford does with Tom Cruise and Meryl Streep in Lions For Lambs, coming November 9, let’s not even talk about The Legend of Bagger Vance and The Horse Whisperer.
I’m intrigued about Against All Enemies, but wonder if it’s going to be as great. I know it’s early, but what do you think? Is Redford a great director who can tackle any subject?Read More