Fair Game (2010)

“I'm only doing my job.” This is one of the most well-worn lines of dialogue in modern literature, especially when it is related to reporters. We are all familiar with the weathered, hard-nosed journalist in films, whose efforts help the working-class fight back against an oppressive government and the upper-class societies who serve to keep them afloat. It is a little confronting to be on the other side of this battle in 'Fair Game', as we witness the complete dissection of both a career and a marriage of a government employee under the spotlight of the media.

The story centres around Agent Valerie Plame, played by Naomi Watts. She portrays the character as self-reliant, often to the detriment of her outside relationships. It is apparent that she is a woman that has given her all to the service of her government. Watts effectively portrays the inner conflict of a woman struggling to maintain an outward appearance of strength for her children whilst trying to resolve a clashing of ideals internally. For a main character, she has very little internal dialogue, meaning the audience finds her motives and opinions in the conversations she has with other characters, as well as her body language. The audience can divine the majority of her character's emotions simply by watching her facial expressions throughout the movie, which is a testament to the strength of Watts' technique. Sean Penn plays Joe Wilson, Plame's husband. It was the government's falsification of his report from the start of the film that sparks the conflict. He is as stubborn and strong-willed as his wife, and it is their conversations that provide the human side of the characters. Most of the discussions with people in the government and assets in the field are laced with lies and subtext, as is to be expected in a spy film. Without the more open, emotional discussions between Plame and Wilson as husband and wife, this film would have begun to drag substantially by the end. It is the balance between these characters that ensures they remain compelling throughout the film.

The film is presented as an expose for America's military interests in Iraq. However, I felt the more important issue was the ease with which American media could be twisted and manipulated to serve the needs of the government. Whereas governments have suppressed media in past war efforts to protect their interests, this film shows that modern times dictate another path. In an era where internet and mobile phones facilitate unbroken streams of news, it seems more beneficial to feed irresistible news to the masses and distract them rather then fruitlessly try and keep secrets from the omnipresent eye of mass media. This film serves as a warning to the public about the dangers of an unstoppable media system, as well as the importance of being informed as an individual. The apparent ease with which the general public was turned against the truth was frightening.

One of the most effective scenes in the film is actually as the credits start to roll and the scene transitions smoothly into the news footage from the actual court hearing. It helps to drive home the fact that this was not a fiction. This is not a spy film where secret government agencies bring down evil warlords in distant lands; it is a retelling of the time the President of the United States told a barefaced lie in his address to the nation, which almost lead to the destruction of a loyal government servant and her family. This was one of the most frightening films I have ever seen.