The camera rolls, the black and white film begins to play out the final moments of one of America’s most hated presidents. Then comes the sound of gunshots; a mechanical clicking followed by a momentary silence. There is no motorcade; no beautiful blue Texas sky overhead. There are no curtains; no voices pouring out the lines of “Our American Cousin.” George W. Bush stumbles forward, grasping his chest, and falls to the ground fatally wounded.
This is the premise of a new British Documentary by Gabriel Range – entitled “Death of a President” – set to air in October on television and this month at the Toronto Film Festival. The film, which documents a fictional assassination of the current President Bush, will focus mostly on the aftermath of what may occur if America was left to fight a war it never wanted to begin.
The film opens with Bush arriving in Chicago, exactly one year from next month. As Bush makes his way out of a Chicago hotel, in front of which an anti-war rally is being held, he is gunned down by a hidden shooter. There is immediate chaos, followed by an investigation which quickly reveals a man of Syrian origin, Jamal Abu Zikri, as the prime suspect. After three years have passed a British documentary maker shows the world what the United States has become since the assassination.
The key question here is whether the film will be shown to the American public. Is it OK to view a film which depicts your leader being murdered? Is it understandable to be curious about America’s stability without a president who would otherwise have another year to do as he wished? In a country where saying that you are ashamed of your president earns you death threats and a boycott, is it fair to say that a film such as this one will be appreciated? Hardly, but is it fair to say that the American people deserve the right to see a film about a president whose overall ratings have dropped to 37 percent in the last month? Absolutely.
At this moment there are no plans to let the film air in the United States and when questioned on its behalf the White House declined to comment.
The Republican Party in Texas, however, has made its opinion on the matter quite clear. Gretchen Essel, spokesperson for the Republican Party, said, “I cannot support a video that would dramatize the assassination of our president, real or imagined. I find this shocking, I find it disturbing. I don’t know if there are many people in America who would want to watch something like that.”
Contrary to what the Republican Party wants to think, it is obvious that Americans are curious about this documentary. A recent CNN poll shows that, when asked if the movie should be shown in America, 66 percent (5,711 voters) of readers answered ‘yes’. So, where is our Constitution when we need it, our freedom of speech, the freedom to raise questions whether fictional or real? Must we limit ourselves for fear of truths that we pretend to not already know?
We’ve managed to forget the things that matter, the thoughts that should be racing through our minds are pushed aside by petty issues. It’s a frightening world when we can no longer stand up, demand our rights and remember to think for ourselves.
Just as Ray Bradbury wrote in “Fahrenheit 451,” “The zippers displaces a button and a man lacks just that much time to think while dressing at dawn, a philosophical hour, and thus a melancholy hour.”
When we let them overrun us, push us back into the shadows then we forget to think and lose our desire to know.
Curiosity is natural and freedom is a blessing. Why should we not put both to use?

Author