LBJ (2017)

Every now and again you get an IMDB moderator that strikes down anything political that he doesn't agree with... ... in this case it's saying that LBJ wasn't a great movie and that he wasn't a great president. This is the president that took out his manhood when the press asked him why we were still in Vietnam. This was the president that tried to force an astronaut's wife with a speech impediment to appear with him on television to further his career. LBJ ignores all of that. LBJ falsely makes the case that Johnson devoted his presidency to expanding Kennedy's policies. In reality he reversed him. His first act as POTUS was to reverse NSAM #263 and sent thousands of kids to die in Vietnam. LBJ glosses over all of that to make him look like a virtuous president concerned only about carrying on Jack's legacy. This is an epic of revisionist history.

Following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, his Vice President, Lyndon B. Johnson, stepped up to take the main job. This biopic stars Woody Harrelson as Johnson, and tells the story of LBJ as Vice President under Kennedy. Other than the tragic circumstances from which he inherited the role, when compared with his predecessor, JFK, and his eventual successor, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson had an uneventful presidency. _LBJ_ digs into what made the man tick. Like many political flicks - especially those released around an election (in this case Trump in 2016) - much of its content has to be taken with a pinch of salt but, in truth, it is difficult to see what story _LBJ_ was trying to tell in the first place. Johnson comes across as a confused individual, caught between his loyalties to his Southern heritage and his reluctant thrust into Kennedy's progressive administration, often jerking from a ruthless and power-hungry politician, to a sensitive and loyal husband. The film attempts to concentrate on the Civil Rights movement, but oddly skirts over other defining issues such as Vietnam, giving it the feeling of an evening documentary with dramatic recreations. Overall it is Harrelson - distracting and inaccurate makeup aside - that keeps the film together. His sombre portrayal of Johnson provides just enough charm to keep the film flowing, turning what would have otherwise been a drab documentary into appreciable entertainment. Worth watching for a little more insight between the Kennedy and Nixon years.