Caricature of a War Criminal: The Real-World Application and Validity Behind Adam McKay’s Satirical Film Vice

December 2024

For a well-known figure like the “famously tight-lipped” former Vice President Richard Cheney, appearances and portrayals play a major role in the way that the public has come to understand his actions, as well as their consequences, two decades after his reign. In the current age of technology, information can be accessed easily through any search bar or, more recently, artificial intelligence software. Though it requires a further dedication of time than just a mere Google query—memoirs, documentaries, and films allow the general public to gain additional personal insight into the minds of famed celebrities. However, when the topical matter is laden with terrorism, murder, and governmental corruption, a Ken Burns-style documentary may be too harsh for a family movie night. Enter, Adam McKay’s 2018 satirical documentary film Vice, which documents the life of Dick Cheney. 

Britannica defines ‘satire’ as “artistic form, chiefly literary and dramatic, in which human or individual vices, follies, abuses, or shortcomings are held up to censure by means of ridicule…” A satirical approach makes serious content more approachable and accessible, and therefore more likely to be watched. In a satirical film of a real-life figure, a need for a marketable and comedic plotline may cause the content to deviate from true factuality. For me, the present writer, Vice was how I first became aware of the War on Terror and the governmental collusion that is threaded throughout the film. I was born less than a year after September 11, 2001, so all of my knowledge about the attack and its aftermath comes from film, television, or journalistic articles. Watching the heinous activity in Vice, the only feature film that focuses specifically on Cheney’s life, drew me into learning more about the Bush administration. However, it also led me to research the real occurrences and compare it with the feature film that states to be a ‘true story.’.

Hand in hand with President George W. Bush, Dick Cheney ushered in the third millennium with the mindset of a businessman but the resumé of a well-established American politician. During Bush’s two terms, the cabinet surrounding the 43rd president was shrouded in secrecy, as the attacks of September 11th, 2001 occurred less than a year after he took his oath. During this time of shocking horror and tremendous destruction, Americans cared more about the safety of their loved ones and the protection of their homeland than the methods through which the United States was to retaliate. The evening of the attacks, writes counter-terrorism advisor Richard Clarke in his 2004 memoir, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told Bush that international law only allowed force in order to cease future attacks, not retaliation. “I don’t care what the international lawyers say, we are going to kick some ass,” Bush retorted. Americans wanted revenge, and Bush and Cheney knew just how to worm through the system to achieve it. 

The truth surrounding Cheney’s orders and occurrences during and after September 11th remain inconclusive. The war on Iraq was launched off of misinformation, which Bush and Cheney both doubled down on despite governmental intelligence claims. Cheney stated in a 2014 interview that he still believes that launching the war in Iraq was “the right thing to do.” Further, the 9/11 Commission Report stated between 2003 to 2009, 22 million emails sent among the Bush administration were ‘lost.’ Even removing the inevitable conspiracy theories that have now become attached to the event, it seems all that is left to speculate upon is public discourse and various biopics, films, and memoirs. Twenty-three years later, there is still an insurmountable disconnect between confirmed facts and circumstantial rumors. And Cheney, referred to by George H. W. Bush as “iron ass,” but known to many others as a war criminal, continues to bounce intermittently in and out of the public eye. 

In 2015, comedian Gabe Gundacker posted a video on the now-defunct video-sharing platform Vine, staring into the screen and repeating, “Dick Cheney made money off the Iraq War.” This video gained millions of views while on its original site, but amassed even more once uploaded onto YouTube after Vine became discontinued. Viners typically made humorous content targeted to young children to young adults, so it could be said that this simple video may have introduced many to the life of Dick Cheney. While this video is only six seconds long (as all Vines were), its popularity is interesting when conflated with facts surrounding Gundacker’s claim. Fracking company Halliburton, for which Cheney was the CEO from 1995 to 2000, was the only company invited to bid on a $7-billion contract “in the run-up to the [Iraq] invasion”, according to the BBC. The Guardian reported that Cheney received another $1 million while he was in office. While the corporation also gave Cheney a $33.7-million severance package when he left to pursue the vice presidency (as well as half a million in deferred compensation in 2004), the complete range of Cheney’s actual payouts, circumstances, actions, choices, and opinions before and amidst the duration of the September 11 attacks and the subsequent War on Terror remain fragmentary. 

It has not been stated directly that Cheney benefited financially from the war in Iraq, but there is a profitable relationship. During their second term in 2007, Cheney had assets valued from “$21 million to around $100 million,” while Bush “held assets worth $7.5 million to $20 million”, according to Reuters. Days after his announcement as Bush’s running mate, a Forbes article from July 2000 taunts Cheney’s wealth, entitled, “Cheney’s done so well he can afford to do good.” The article continues, likening the prospective VP to Cincinnatus, a dictator of ancient Rome. Looking back from the present, the unitary executive theory supported by Cheney hints that he had a lot more in common with Roman dictators than any vice president to come before him.

As Paul Begala wrote for CNN, “Cheney’s endless media appearances… reveal a nearly sociopathic refusal to admit any error, express any remorse, apologize for any mistake.” Even though the 9/11 Commission Report had claimed that there was no relationship between al-Qaeda and Iraq in its 2004 release, Cheney continued to reject the factual data a decade later. Though Cheney in real life should definitely be differentiated from the film’s protagonist, Vice helps to combat the lack of knowledge about the inner workings of the Bush/Cheney administration, while overexaggerating at times for comedic effect. Adam McKay’s film Vice presents a riveting take on the real-life lead-up to the Iraq War, using satire to carefully disentangle Cheney’s public persona from his authoritarian policies. This paper will address the historical accuracy of the film as well as its meanings for scholarship in the modern age.

The first scene in Vice following the title card and disclaimer, “The following is a true story. Or as true as it can be given that Dick Cheney is known as one of the most secretive leaders in history. But we did our fucking best.” Vice is marketed as a true retelling of the life of the former Vice President, but it is ripe with exaggeration and falsities in order to create a more marketable feature. Even still, the storyline is based off of truth and should as such not be considered parody, either.

Adam McKay’s Vice details Dick Cheney, played by Christian Bale, splicing together scenes of his raucous youth and impressionable political beginnings on his path to Washington, culminating in the Iraq War as seen from the executive branch. Richard Cheney was born in the Great Plains of Nebraska in 1941, but moved to Wyoming as a young boy. In high school, he met his wife-to-be, Lynne, played by Amy Adams. The first scene of the film shows 21-year-old Cheney rolling dice as he hoots drunkenly. Driving home, he is then pulled over on an isolated strip of Wyoming freeway by a police officer. Upon being asked to get out of the car, Cheney stumbles, falling to the ground while slurring his responses. These scenes are immediately followed by Cheney at age 60, harshly shushing Condoleezza Rice in the White House’s situation room minutes after the World Trade Center towers were hit. 

While he was eligible to be drafted into the ongoing Vietnam War, Cheney told The Washington Post that he “had other priorities in the '60s than military service”. These priorities, argues Vice, were drinking and engaging in barfights. During his congressional hearings for his Secretary of Defense confirmation, Cheney stated that his five draft deferments were done so that he could continue his college education. During the years that Cheney was eligible for the draft, he flunked out of Yale University twice for poor grades and was arrested twice for driving under the influence of alcohol. In 1964, he married Lynne, as married men were exempt from the draft. In October 26, 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson allowed only married men who had children to be exempt from the draft. Liz Cheney was born July 28, 1966, exactly nine months and two days after Johnson’s announcement. 

The movie follows Cheney in tow with “his best girl Lynne”, as he creates a right-wing powerhouse, the likes of which had never been seen within the hallowed history of the executive branch. Perhaps to show Cheney’s inner flimsiness, Vice paints Lynne as the key playmaker towards his eventual VP slot, essentially cultivating him from a college dropout into a structured and rigid politician. With a PhD in British literature, Lynne served as a Chair for multiple humanities and higher education foundations, also co-hosting CNN’s Crossfire segment and serving on Lockheed Martin’s board of directors until Cheney’s confirmation. During the film, the narrator says, “And then big money families like the Kochs and the Coors that were sick of paying income taxes, rolled into Washington DC and started writing fat checks to fund right-wing think tanks that would change the way many Americans looked at the world.” While he speaks, still images of the buildings of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the CATO Institute, and the Heritage Foundation are projected onto the screen. Though it is not mentioned within the film, Lynne served as a senior fellow at AEI, and Dick gave speeches at both CATO years before his vice presidency and at the Heritage Foundation while in office in 2003. 

In the film, a younger Dick Cheney is captivated by the passionate and cruel-speaking Donald Rumsfeld, played by Steve Carrell. Carrell’s satirical acting and line delivery works well in many of his films, but his snarky dialogue in Vice is marred by the film’s subject matter. The audience’s first glance at Rumsfeld comes as he addresses the incoming group of White House interns, including Cheney. “[If] an opportunity to work in the halls of decision making for the most powerful country in the goddamn world… doesn’t give you a hard on, I don’t know what will.” After Cheney has chosen Rumsfeld as his internship advisor, the pair walk by President Richard Nixon speaking with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in the latter’s office, Rumsfeld asks Cheney why he thinks this meeting is not occurring in the Oval Office. Cheney responds shyly, “He’s having a conversation he doesn’t want to go on the record?” “Very good,” Rumsfeld responds, explaining bluntly that Nixon has decided to bomb Cambodia despite his promise to end the Vietnam War. In this moment, Cheney’s eyes widen as he becomes captivated by the power that could exist, as well as how to get away with hiding it. However, this storyline was added for the film. In 2003, Cheney revealed to the New York Times that the pair met for the first time when Rumsfeld was interviewing Cheney for a speechwriter position, which he did not receive. After Nixon appointed Rumsfeld as the head of the Office of Economic Opportunity, Cheney wrote Rumsfeld a letter, offering tips on what to change within the department. Months later, Cheney was called into Rumsfeld’s OEO office. Pointing to Cheney, Rumsfeld said, “You, you’re Congressional relations. Now get out of here.”  Yet, the initial (made-up) exchange between Rumsfeld and Cheney shows how crass Rumsfeld is (in real life as well), yet Cheney goes on to work with him, and consider him a confidante, as evidenced by their later work together. 

Vice also portrays George W. Bush, played by Sam Rockwell, as a malleable, red-blooded Southerner who wants only to please his father by entering politics while still maintaining his childish ways. In the film, the year is now 1986 and Dick is now a Wyoming congressman, as he and his wife enter Reagan’s White House Christmas party. The pair strike up a conversation with George H.W. Bush, Reagan’s VP. In his first informal run-in with the Cheneys, the group watches George W. Bush stumble drunkenly around the formal gala, grabbing at a waitress and knocking over her platter of champagne flutes. “Lighten up sweetie! It’s a party!”, cajoles the 40-year-old future president to the scared-looking waitress. While this exact moment is exaggerated for the screen, a 2017 tell-all on the Bush father-son duo The Last Republicans opens with an interview from the younger Bush, where he admits that he “chased a lot of pussy and drank a lot of whiskey” when he was younger. Like Cheney, Bush also was arrested and fined for a 1976 DUI.

 Immediately after Bush’s scene at the event, the set changes to days later when Mary Cheney, their younger daughter, comes out as gay to her parents. Her father gives her a hug and reaffirms his love, while Lynne says, “It’s just going to be… so hard for you…” For Dick, this is one of the few moments within the film that helps to humanize him. For Lynne, it is unclear whether she is directing this line toward her daughter or her husband, which shows that her first reaction is to contemplate how it will affect the family politically. Once she and Dick are alone, Lynne’s advice for avoiding their political opponents is “We deny. Shame them for going after the family.” During the Bush/Cheney campaign in 2000, that is exactly what she did. reporter Cokie Roberts asked Lynne Cheney about her “openly gay” daughter. Cutting her off, Lynne responded, “Mary has never declared such a thing. I’m surprised, Cokie, that you would even want to bring it up on this program.” At this time, Mary Cheney had referred to herself as a lesbian in multiple publications at the time of the interview in 2000. In the film, her coming out scene took place in 1986. 

After Lynne and Dick speak following their daughter’s admittance, the scene changes to show the Cheney family, now complete with grandchildren. An adult Mary chases her mother with a fish on a hook, and the whole family is laughing and smiling. Their picturesque house sits near a lake, and the onscreen text states, “Dick had a choice between pursuing the presidency of the United States and his youngest daughter. He chose his daughter. The Cheneys would never again enter politics or the public eye. Lynne and Dick are happy and wealthy and live in Virginia where they breed award-winning Golden Retrievers.” The credits begin to roll, using the real names and roles of the cast members. Here, McKay breaks the fourth wall of the story. The audience knows that Cheney’s story doesn’t end here, given the flashbacks featured earlier in the film. Rather, Vice treats this moment as a second chance, using Mary’s coming out as a point of no return for Cheney. His choice between his thirst for power and his own daughter was the catalyst, asserting that Cheney perhaps did choose the presidency over his daughter. The tone of a ringing phone begins loudly and overwhelms the orchestral closing number, and the film resumes.

Jumping forward to 1999, and back onscreen, Cheney receives a phone call from the Bush campaign, announcing his run for president and asking for Cheney to step in as VP, which he declines. After Lynne says, “Vice President is a nothing job,” the wheels in Cheney’s head again seem to turn, visible by Bale’s enthralled look. “There are certain moments, that are so delicate,” says the narrator while Cheney stares at himself in the bathroom mirror. “Like a teacup and a saucer, stacked on a teacup and saucer, stacked on a teacup and saucer, and on and on. That this moment could fall in any direction and change everything.” With each additional phrase, the scene changes, displaying various emotive moments in Dick’s life, from the shame in his barfight days to a family hug with both daughters. A stack of teacups shaking onscreen, the narrator again butts in, saying that because no one, save for the Cheney couple, knows what the conversation between Lynne and Dick consisted of where they decided to take the VP slot, a Shakespeare-esque soliloquy has been lodged in its place. “Thou shared thy torch’s flame with mine, revealing halls and spires of long faded empires,” Cheney says, holding Lynne. “But now I hold aloft mine own fiery cresset to make flesh our bond of power.” Upon realizing that he could mold the actions of George W. Bush, the same man who made a drunken scene only a decade earlier, the inclusion of the campy soliloquy showcases a likening of Dick and Lynne to the power-hungry escapades of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth.

Following the intimate moment, Cheney is planning out his side of the campaign. The phone rings with a call from David Addington, Cheney’s personal legal counsel, who speaks the golden words that the Cheneys had been waiting for. Because the vice president is secondary to the president but also has the ability to cast votes in the Senate when needed, Addington informs Cheney that no specific branch can technically be in direct command of the VP. This is known as unitary executive theory. 

This theory uses Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution to allow the executive branch (more specifically, the president) to have freedom over what occurs in the other branches without their approval or agreement. Therefore, a single individual acts as the “ultimate policy maker.” The narrator comments, “To hell with checks and balances, especially during times of war. [Unitary executive theory] was the power of kings, pharaohs, dictators.” The film makes a big show of the theory by highlighting lawyer John Yoo as he and Addington, sitting menacingly, begin to lay out the legal background. Yoo is featured in another War on Terror feature film, The Torture Report, for “redefining torture” and “redefining pain and suffering” in his 2002 ‘Torture Memos.’ The unitary executive theory has not been made into law and remains solely an idea. Marjorie Cohn writes, “Seeking to empower the president to override the will of Congress, Yoo inserted the phrase “unitary executive” into Bush’s signing statements attached to legislation, in which the president reserved the right to disobey any parts of congressional statutes with which he disagreed.” Many, lawyers and laypeople alike, have spoken out against unitary executive theory, with Attorney Paul Malykont calling it a “highway to dictatorship.” 

Vice depicts their second meeting: Cheney takes Bush’s offer to be his vice president over a pitcher of sweet tea and buffalo wings, the red sauce smeared on Bush’s hands reminiscent of the blood yet to be spilled. As Bush takes another bite of his chicken, Cheney says, “The Vice President is a mostly symbolic job… However… the Vice Presidency is also defined by the President. If we were to have a… different understanding…” As he speaks, Bush nods along, inadvertently accepting Cheney’s request for more input. Cheney continues, asking about “managing the bureaucracy, overseeing the military, energy, foreign policy…”, while Bush likens the presidency to managing a baseball team. McKay displays Cheney easily slipping into a new position through Bush’s dumbfounded and unobservant gaze, just as Lynne could have instructed him to during the conversation hidden by soliloquy.

After the election is won, Cheney personally stocks Bush’s cabinet, with the latter reacting like a boy listening to his father’s instructions. McKay depicts the appointees as game pieces, waiting to be told their next move. As he furthers his way up the ladder of American democracy, he becomes more stone-faced and matter-of-fact. In the film, Rumsfeld asks Cheney where Bush’s political allies will be placed, to which Cheney responds, “They were not offered jobs in the administration at this time.” Rumsfeld replies, “Have you gotten more ruthless Dick!? You must not be getting laid!” This is followed by an uncomfortable silence. Even despite Steve Carell’s voice pitching higher as his character grows more shocked by Cheney’s newfound tone, it is obvious that the obnoxious old-timer has now taken a back seat to the bland and dry vice president. 

As Cheney, Rumsfeld (now Secretary of Defense), and Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Secretary of Defense) figure out who to put where, Cheney asks, “Let’s see what kind of plans they have to invade Iraq, okay Paul?” In the film, this mention of Iraq stands out to the viewer, as this would be well before the War in Afghanistan, and even more before the September 11th attacks. In reality, on the day of the attacks, Rumsfeld said to one of his aides, “[we need] best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at same time. Not only UBL [Osama Bin Laden].” While Rumsfeld’s team had intercepted a phone call from one of Bin Laden’s subordinates only an hour later, adding more evidence that al-Qaeda had been the perpetrators, Rumsfeld’s mind remained set on Iraq. This is shown in the film, as CIA Director George Tenet says, “We’ve picked up chatter from well-known Al Qaeda operatives celebrating today’s attack,” to which Rumsfeld responds, “We shouldn’t rule out Iraq.” Only a decade out from the Persian Gulf War, the government wanted to keep an eye on any future harm from Hussein while he served as the country’s dictator. Iraq had also not complied with the United Nations’ disarmament procedures outlined in Resolution 1441. This led the administration to believe that Iraq may potentially have weapons of mass destruction at its disposal. In a 2021 op-ed, Bruce Riedel, an American terrorism expert, reflects on his time at the White House in the days following 9/11. He states that he was in the room with Bush while he phoned Prime Minister Tony Blair, saying, “Bush immediately said he was planning to ‘hit’ Iraq soon. Blair was audibly taken aback. He pressed Bush for evidence of Iraq’s connection to the 9/11 attack and to al-Qaida. Of course, there was none, which British intelligence knew.”

Days after 9/11, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Tenet, and Addington are sitting in the Oval Office. Tenet asks about the Geneva Convention and its utilization in the current situation. Cheney again attempts to use his sway on Tenet, saying “We believe the Geneva Convention is open to… interpretation.” The group continues speaking, and Cheney gets the closing words, “Therefore, if the U.S. does it, by definition, it can’t be torture.” The screen cuts, showing scenes of graphic torture and water boarding, then cuts again, and the original group (except Tenet) are seated at a fine dining restaurant. The waiter, dressed in a suit, lists the specials to the group: 

Tonight we are offering the enemy combatant: whereby someone is not a criminal or a prisoner of war, which gives them no protection under the law. We also have Extreme Rendition where suspects are abducted without record, on foreign soil and taken to foreign prisons in countries that torture. We have Guantanamo Bay which is very, very complicated but allows you to operate outside the purview of due process on land that isn’t technically US soil, but is under our control… And there is a very fresh and delicious War Powers Act interpretation, which gives the executive branch broad power to attack any country or person that might possibly be a threat. Finally for dessert we have the fact that under the unitary executive theory, if the President does anything, it makes it legal. In other words you can do whatever the fuck you want. So which would you like gentlemen?

“We’ll have them all,” Cheney responds. Here, McKay again presents dreadful information through a satirical lens. Ordering at a restaurant may have been used to represent the ease with which they were able to adapt torture into use at Guantanamo Bay. The group eats steak, graphically ripping the tendons apart. After ordering, Wolfowitz speaks up, stating that he has been “using focus groups and executives to help us sell the War on Terror.” The film depicts one such focus group:

19-year-old girl: I don’t get what this Al Qaeda is. Are they a country? Why can’t we just bomb them? 

Focus group leader: Interesting. Who else isn’t entirely sure what al-Qaeda is? … Would it be less confusing if it was a country? 

60-year-old guy: Damn right. I’m angry as hell. We gotta fuck someone up. 

Focus group leader: Really strong feelings from Mark, I’m interested. Who agrees with this statement?

The method with which the focus group leader speaks to the group is similar to a therapy session, softly and gently. This is in stark contrast with the content of their discussion. The concept in its totality of making war sound more palatable to the American public at first seems to mock the War on Terror in its physical setup. Whatever marketing the administration did, it worked. Focus groups were held in February 2002. For example, in February 2003, Tenet testified, “Iraq is harboring senior members of a terrorist network led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a close associate of al-Qaeda.” In March, the United States invaded Iraq. By September, 69% of Americans polled believed Hussein “was personally involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks” and 82% that Hussein “has provided assistance to Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network”. 

In a 2014 appearance on Meet the Press, Cheney held strong to his beliefs, saying, “We got to the point where we were very concerned about the possible linkage between terrorists on the one hand and weapons of mass destruction on the other. Saddam Hussein had previously had twice [sic] nuclear programs going. He produced and used weapons of mass destruction. And he had a 10-year relationship with al-Qaeda.” The official 9/11 Commission Report declared in 2004 which stated, “Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al-Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.” Even a decade after the official facts were released, Cheney would rather stick to his opinions than stand with the truth. 

Vice helps to convey information to an audience who seeks to learn, but would rather do so under the guise of watching a quick dark comedy film than through reading the 500-page 9/11 Commission Report. Filling in the pieces, Vice is not completely fact-based, but its vivid visuals and explicit and gritty dialogue assist in an attempt to complete Cheney’s story, most of which remains in the ether. Writes Carly Mellenbaum for USA Today, “‘The amount of bread crumbs that are left aren’t even crumbs,’ says McKay of the former vice president, whose autobiography doesn't disclose much. ‘And I’m not even sure there was a trail the bread crumbs were left on.’” 

Due to its heavy satire, the film does not land perfectly with every smart Alec-y line. The decision to focus only on Cheney’s role diminishes the other individuals who assisted with the creation of the War on Terror. Vox’s Alissa Wilkinson and Emily St. James argue that Vice’s goal was to “demonize America” and reflect upon “ how stupid we are” The film was also originally slated to have a musical number, which was soon scrapped as filming commenced. The movie is already so jam-packed, edited to the gills with cut scenes and onscreen wordplay, that fleshing out a more conclusive narrative would be tricky, but Wilkinson and St. James believe that McKay had it in him to develop a better conclusion rather than dogging on Trump-era talking points, as made evident by his past films (The Big Short (2015), Don’t Look Up (2021)). Further, Vice was called “Backseat” during its writing phase, but upon a deeper reflection, it leaves the audience wondering what Cheney’s vice could be.

Vice, still, has implications for the modern-day. Project 2025 was not published until 2022, but it was visible in the undertones of the administrations that Cheney participated in. “Around the vortex of Heritage have spun projects, individuals and organizations devoted to Coors’ ambition to rescue the United States from the gloom and despair he believes it to be in,” says a 1975 article from The Washington Post. In a memo sent to Rumsfeld shortly before the piece was published, Cheney writes, “Al [Abrahams] thinks the story could be a fairly major crack at the Reagan wing of the Party and an effort to demonstrate that much of the Reagan effort is really a front for Joseph Coors”. The crack never occurred, and Reagan took office in 1980, backed by the Coors family (among other highly-regarded families in the same sphere). American Enterprise Institute, the CATO Institute, and the Heritage Foundation can be easily categorized as neoconservative think tanks or projects, but the Heritage Foundation has recently made its way into modern news through its ‘Project 2025,’ which plans to limit abortion rights, target mass deportations, use and abuse the data of Americans, and more. The key to the schemeis unitary executive theory. Although the film was released in 2018, Cheney’s complicity continues to make waves in today’s political climate. While the aforementioned aspects are not touched on in Vice, except for a single mention of the Heritage Foundation, McKay’s film has teed up a reality check for viewers, regardless of whether they watched it during its opening weekend or on the night of the 2024 Presidential Election. As Trump prepares to take office for the second time, the recent Trump vs. United States outcome of presidential immunity may have created a perfect storm for the implementation of a unitary executive.

In the film’s post-credit-scene, a small focus group, who, earlier, decided that the War on Terror “would be less confusing if it was a country”, communes. 

MARK: “Yeah, something’s been bothering me this whole movie and I just figured it out. This whole thing is liberal. It’s got a liberal bias.”

…

TURNER: This is all facts. I mean, they had to vet all this, right?

MARK: You would say that, libtard!... You probably like Killary!

Then, the two men in the focus group fight, while a third person talks about how excited she is to see the new Fast and Furious movie. McKay’s point with the ending could be that the political disparity that exists in present politics is incessant, and will continue so long as one’s political affiliation is held above them as a person, which is glaringly ironic. In Vice, Cheney is only sometimes represented as a human being beyond his politics, showing shots of him using a cooing baby voice to his young daughter on the phone and teaching his children and grandchildren how to fish. Even during these moments, McKay includes subtle references to the future to come. As he holds the rod for a young Liz, she asks her father, “Is it a good or bad trick that we’re playing on the fish?” He replies, “It’s not good or bad, it’s fishing.” 

Most recently, Cheney has made the news not for his aiding of atrocities, but for his endorsement of Democratic Presidential Candidate Kamala Harris in early September 2024. In a published statement, Cheney wrote, “[Trump] tried to steal the last election using lies and violence to keep himself in power after the voters had rejected him. He can never be trusted with power again." The former Vice President shocked American voters (as well as the greater world) with his astounding swap in political party affiliation. When coupled with a basic understanding of the misrepresentations spread by Cheney during his time in office, which have been later confirmed as lies when using information recently released to the public, it can be argued that he, himself, is just as well versed in using lies and violence to keep himself in power. Referred to by The Atlantic as a “Hail Mary”, Cheney’s daughter Liz Cheney, who clenched her 2013 Wyoming senate bid by standing against same-sex marriage and promoting conspiracies regarding Barack Obama’s birthplace, also endorsed Harris. Even further, sitting Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar spoke in October at a Harris-Walz campaign event, saying, “I want you to picture this — Bernie Sanders and Dick Cheney together holding a sign that says ‘Brat fall’,” referencing Charli xcx’s 2024 dancepop album Brat, which was subsequently coerced into becoming a buzzword for unapologetic womanhood. Obviously, this did not go other well with the Democrats.

During Christian Bale’s Golden Globe acceptance speech for Best Actor in a Musical or Comedy for his role as Cheney, the Welsh actor said, “Thank you to, uh, Satan for giving me inspiration on how to play this role.” Despite the 35 awards that the film won, a Fox News correspondent asks Liz Cheney about “that movie that no one saw.” Liz responds, saying that Bale blew his chance to play “a real superhero, and he clearly screwed it up,” referring to his previous role as Batman. The real-life Dick Cheney also passed a message along to Bale through a mutual friend—“Tell him he’s a dick.” Bale’s initial response was to laugh, as he believed the former VP was making a joke on his own name. The friend responded, “No, there was no humor to that whatsoever.” Cheney’s attempted intimidation of those who criticize him goes beyond just an actor who has portrayed him. Cheney is also the only sitting vice president to shoot someone with a gun. He never apologized to the man he shot, Harry Whittington. However, Whittington did apologize to Cheney, the wound of the shotgun pellets still raw, for bringing Cheney’s name into the media in such a negative light. Still, Cheney has never apologized, even following Whittington’s 2023 death.

Using the method of satire, McKay approaches the taboo topics of 9/11 and the Iraq War by equipping a tactic we can all get behind, poking fun at politicians. “The father who says the right thing when his daughter comes out as gay is also the vice president who may not have consulted his boss before issuing orders to shoot down one of the hijacked planes on 9/11,” writes Todd S. Purdum after viewing the film upon its release. The film not-so-elegantly breaks apart different aspects of the former Vice President, parsing him as a promoter of the Iraq War, a family man, a quiet and calculated politician, and a guy who just wants to fish. It is also apt that the production and writing team chose to employ black comedy when dealing with someone who has been accused of being a liar about many important topics. 

As a satire, this film centers around an individual who is already known by the public to be falliable. As the audience continues to gain further glances into Cheney’s life, the overexaggerations, at first viewing, may seem real. McKay’s main approach of critiquing Cheney’s flaws is done through overemphasizing real-life events and actions that Cheney partook in. The more absurd reaches that Vice has added only further inflate his failures as a civil servant. 

Through the use of humor, overstatement, and irony, satire can highlight the absurdities and inconsistencies of political figures without provoking the immediate defensiveness that direct criticism often triggers, particularly in a politically divided society. Additionally, it facilitates the dissemination of messages to a broader audience, as this method encourages viewers to contemplate uncomfortable situations or intricate topics more easily. Amidst the grotesque and grim political state that followed September 11th, 2001, McKay invites viewers to join in on the ridicule of the man who once held the second-highest ranked U.S. office in order to cope with the feelings, whether nostalgia or grief, they have when reflecting upon this dark time in American history. Using the double meaning of the title’s single word, ‘vice’, the viewer will contrast the duality of Dick Cheney’s governmental aspects with his immoral actions throughout the film’s entirity. While the caricature presented by McKay is not wholly factual, it does help to shed light on the lies and corrupt activity that helped to place his man in power.