W. Movie

[nanafan]

Has anyone seen the W. movie yet, I saw commercials about it, I want to see it. Even though I greatly dislike Bush. Anyone interested in it?

[Vexx]

I'd love to see it, but I'm afraid I won't find it funny -- just completely bleeping tragic.

From what I've read, a great deal of the dialog is straight out of the record books. So when the apologists try to trash it -- they're going to be fighting against a marginally exaggerated truth.

[nanafan]

I'd love to see it, but I'm afraid I won't find it funny -- just completely bleeping tragic.

From what I've read, a great deal of the dialog is straight out of the record books. So when the apologists try to trash it -- they're going to be fighting against a marginally exaggerated truth.

i just thought i would like to see how he is portrayed, the commercials made me laugh. very true, cuz i bet most of it is stuff that really happened

[james0246]

It was good, not great. Stone sets out to tell a fairly Shakespearean tale of W. never being able to live up to his father's expectations, and how every single decision that W. makes in influenced by this desire to please his father. While such a personality trait would be quite interesting in a regular Joe fictional character (in fact this is a common older male character type in many fictional stories), as a discussion of W. and why he set out to control/lead the world, the basic premise is very flawed and ultimately too unbelievable to carry the movie.

That being said, the acting was quite good, and all except Thandie Newton as Condi Rice were very good (Newton seemed to take personal offense that Rice is a Black Woman, so Newton attempted to destroy Rice completely, or at least that is how it seems when Rice is on the screen). Josh Brolin as W. was quite good, almost great (which is undoubtedly how W. sees his presidency :)). He was able to capture the mannerism in very subtle and nuanced ways through the film, and helped turn W. from the scripts silly cliche caricature into realistic figure, even if he could not break through the script enough to turn W. into a fully realized character. Richard Dreyfuss as Dick Cheney was superb, and out of all the performances, this will probably be the one considered for the Academy Awards (it would be funny if Dick Cheney competed against The Joker for the Best-Supporting Actor award). The various other figures were quite well done (especially Barbara Bush played by the great Ellen Burstyn, who knows what it means to take care of "special" children :)).

As for the directing...mixed bag throughout. Stone is a very competent filmmaker, and when he tries, he can be quite amazing (see Platoon, JFK, etc), but, it is no secret that Stone has dwindled quite a bit over the years. This film is certainly the best of his movies since his fall after the brilliant but flawed Nixon, but that is damning with faint praise. There are many editing problems throughout the film, transitions that make little sense at times, framing that can be quite bizarre, and a plethora of other 'loose' qualities that make this film seem like a slap-dash effort (which, in all respects, the film actually was quickly finished in order to be released before the next election). All in all, this film would have been significantly better if Stone had worked on post-production far more than going out doing PR stints on various networks. But, there are some very good moments that abound throughout the film, as Stone uses his set-pieces quite well to explore his characters downfalls (the obvious inability for W. to ever feel comfortable in the Oval Office is quite interesting).

In the end, I will give this film a solid 7.3 out of 10. Very good to great performances with a few poor mixed throughout, an interesting even compelling story that becomes deeply flawed as the film progresses, and an excitable director that should have reigned in his enthusiasm a bit more so that the film could have been properly completed.

[nanafan]

thanks james, now i want to see it even more

[Aoie_Emesai]

Is it anything else other than a biography of Bush?

[nanafan]

when i saw commercials on it, i thought it was supposed to be making fun of him. but yeah a biography bout him. i wonder how messed up he was when he was younger

[yezhanquan]

when i saw commercials on it, i thought it was supposed to be making fun of him. but yeah a biography bout him. i wonder how messed up he was when he was younger

He WAS pretty messed up, in terms of being an alcoholic. Then, he cleaned up with the help of religion... and the rest is history, as they say.

Haven't watched the movie yet. According to james's review, Stone seemed to have exaggerated the father-son complex. Bush Sr. served for one term, while Jr. served for two. Now, whether that is a good thing or a bad thing will be studied for the next 10 years and beyond. The father-son complex was definitely there, but the extent is highly debatable.

My personal look at Bush, as of now, is a man who was more on rhetoric than on action. He didn't seem to have a hands-on approach, no matter what the issue was. He gave me the feeling of a leader who delegates a little too much for an office of his importance. Perhaps, most importantly, he mistook his personal "salvation" to be suitable for his country. I hope the movie will at least address some of these topics which I mentioned.

[nanafan]

i don't know about the father-son complex, but it makes sense since his dad was president too, and i am sure that he would wanted his dad approval. course i don't remember daddy bush, i was still a kid then. there are some things bush jr did like drugs i don't know if i could see him doing it, but maybe that's why he's so messed up know.

[Reckoner]

This movie only affirms what I already view to be our current President in certain aspects. I had always felt that he was a man who truly thought what he was doing was "good," but clearly does not understand his office and therefor is unable to make good decisions. He is a man who falls into the error of what I think is good for myself is good for everyone.

Anyways, I thought the movie was entertaining but it wasn't great. Like others have said, the father-son complex was most likely exaggerated.

[yezhanquan]

This movie only affirms what I already view to be our current President in certain aspects. I had always felt that he was a man who truly thought what he was doing was "good," but clearly does not understand his office and therefor is unable to make good decisions. He is a man who falls into the error of what I think is good for myself is good for everyone.

Anyways, I thought the movie was entertaining but it wasn't great. Like others have said, the father-son complex was most likely exaggerated.

Sounds like I should catch this movie.

[Urzu 7]

Richard Dreyfuss as Dick Cheney was superb, and out of all the performances, this will probably be the one considered for the Academy Awards (it would be funny if Dick Cheney competed against The Joker for the Best-Supporting Actor award).



And if there was a "Best Villain" category, they'd be competing for that. (Zing!)

[rainnydaiis]

Is this movie an actual "biography" or a movie just to make fun of him and show how stupid he really is? I saw the commercial for it once on TV and said what a waste of production money.

[nanafan]

i want to see it cuz i am curious to see what made him end up like the way he is. i agree with reckoner, that he believes that what decisions he makes he believes are right, but usually aren't . i also want to see how they do cheney..wonder if they will do anything about him shooting his friend in the face..lol