W Review

W-Review.jpgThanks for checking out our W review.

What can you say about the presidency of George W Bush? I’ve always been a little torn over the man. On the one hand you have a man who will most likely go down in history as the worst president this great country has ever had. But on the other hand, as much as I’ve disagreed with almost everything the guy ever did, I’ve often wondered out loud just how good or bad of a job I, or anyone else would have done given the same set of tragic and historical challenges he found thrust upon him (sometimes thrust upon himself). These were not an easy 8 years to be president and I think it’s important that people remember that when judging the man.

With that in mind I was fascinated when I heard that Oliver Stone was going to do a movie about George W Bush, to be released WHILE Bush was still in office. That’s ambitious. And no matter if you love or hate George W Bush, you’ve got to admit the man has lead one of the most interesting lives and seeing his story (at least from one perspective) interested me great. So off I went to see W last night… semi afraid that it would just be nothing but a character assassination movie… hoping to see a good narrative on this man’s life. I’ve got to tell you I was pleasantly surprised by what W delivered.

THE GENERAL IDEA

The synopsis for W looks something like this: “Josh Brolin stars as George W. Bush in this Oliver Stone biopic that traces the head of state’s rise to power from a privileged alcoholic to a born-again Christian whose belief in religious destiny helped move him to the top ranks of political power. Co-written by Stanley G. Weiser, Bush is produced by fellow Stone collaborators Moritz Borman and Jon Kilik, with Elizabeth Banks co-starring as the first lady, James Cromwell as the elder President Bush, Ellen Burstyn as Barbara Bush and Richard Dreyfuss as Vice President Dick Cheney. ~ Jeremy Wheeler, All Movie Guide”

THE GOOD

The single greatest aspect of W, in my opinion, is that for the most part it looks at the man. The film spends no time at all on the controversy of the 2000 election. No time at all on the 2004 election. No real time on the patriot act, torture, wire tapping or basically any of the massive controversies of his presidency (other than Iraq). Instead it focused on the man. Who is he. Why does he function the way he does. What drives him. And on that level I think the film worked exceedingly well.

As the movie portrays him, George W Bush is not the monster that many like to perceive him as. Instead he’s just a flawed, normal human being. Most of the time 100% well intentioned. A man who loves his country. A man who grew up facing enormous pressure in the shadow of his family in general and his father specifically. A loving husband and all around genuine soul. Most people don’t want to think of George W Bush in any of those terms, but life often isn’t just black and white.

At the same time is also highlights several of the not so glowing sides of W. A man who probably had no business ever being president of the United States. Irresponsible for most of his life, average intelligence at best, hyper poor judgement who, as the film really portrays, surrounds himself with a circus of wrong people… and when he does have one or two good people around him (General Colin Powell) he rejects their counsel. Yes, always meaning well, but also always making the wrong decisions.

The “monster” of the movie really ends up being Dick Cheney. Cheney is portrayed as a power hungry, global empire-ist who sits like a devil on the shoulder of George W Bush and at times subtly manipulating him.

Josh Brolin was nothing short of remarkable as George W Bush. He had W down to a “t”. But more than that… it can not be understated how difficult it was to not only portray the president, but also to portray the humanity of the man when most people in the world just see the president as a side show joke… bumbling and incompetent at best… evil and a monster at worst. Brolin brought that humanity to W and without that, I’m just not sure the film would have worked at all.

THE BAD

Dear heavens. I’ve always believed that Thandie Newton is one of the worst actresses working in Hollywood today, but she topped even herself. easily the worst performance in the entire movie, her Condoleezza Rice felt more like a joke character on a Saturday Night Live skit. Every time that woman opened her mouth it pulled me out of the “reality” of the movie and made me painfully aware that I was just watching a movie. A movie filled with very solid performances… except one glaring awful one.

I was disappointed that the film never covered the resignation of Colin Powell. The film spends a lot of time showing us the position Powell was in, how he alone stood opposed to Dick, Rom, Condie triumvirate in the Bush inner circle and how at odds he was with them. And yet they never showed us the conclusion of that subplot. I found myself really wanting to see the final conversation between Bush and Powell and yet the film never delivered it which was unsatisfying to say the least.

OVERALL

To me, W is a balanced look at the life (as opposed to the politics) of the current president of the United States. I think most left wingers will be dissatisfied because they wanted to see a character assassination movie mocking Bush the whole way through. I think most right wingers will be dissatisfied because the film looks at some of Bush’s shortcomings. But for me, I thought it was a thoughtful, fairly balanced look at the very interesting life of a very interesting man… mistakes, flaws and all. Overall I give W a 7 out of 10.

Comment with Facebook

29 thoughts on “W Review

  1. I didn’t like the movie. Bush got it right, we just went to the wrong counties to start wars. We should have gone to Iran….but no president will ever touch that one.

  2. Speaking of George W. Bush:

    George W. Bush is a raging racist.

    George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism (indicated in my blog).

    George W. Bush did in fact commit innumerable hate crimes.

    And I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed other hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention.

    Many people know what Bush did.

    And many people will know what Bush did—even to the end of the world.

    Bush was absolute evil.

    Bush is now like a fugitive from justice.

    Bush is a psychological prisoner.

    Bush has a lot to worry about.

    Bush can technically be prosecuted for hate crimes at any time.

    In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.

    Respectfully Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
    B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
    Messiah College, Grantham, PA
    Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993

    (I can type 90 words per minute. In only 7 days, posts basically like this post of mine have come into existence—all over the Internet (hundreds of copies). One can go to Google USA right now, type “George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism,” hit “Enter,” and find more than 350 copies indicating the content of this post. All in all, there are probably more than 1,000 copies on the Internet indicating the content of this post—it has practically become headline news. One cannot be too dedicated when it comes to anti-Bush activities. As I looked back at my good computer work, I thought how fun and easy it was to do it.)

    “GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
    _________________
    I am not sure where I had read it before, but anyway, it goes kind of like this: “If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memories so they never got stale and faded.” Oh wait—off the top of my head—I think it came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.

  3. I just watched this movie on “On Demand”. I found it to be a pretty good movie overall,but agree with
    some replys about Thandie’s portrayal of Condoleeza
    being very bad. I know they could have found another
    more believable actress for that role. I thought that Josh Brolin did an excellent job.

  4. Will there be a shoe throwing contest? Bulls eye gets a dollar, miss and get a black eye like Ms. Perino. Hit the judge, get mauled. Seriously… Oliver Stone makes some interesting movies but only Platoon stood out for me. All the rest were like this one.

    1. I just watched this movie that I honestly was looking forward to and I am sorry to say I was deeply disappointed in it!! My personal opinion is don’t waste your time or your money on this one!!!!!!

  5. Rachelbirder

    My husband and I just got back from watching “W”

    LOVED it! I am now an Oliver Stone fan, and Richard Dreyfus outdid himself. Brolin did a fairly good, although irritating-although I’m sure that was his goal-job of nailing George Bush’s mannerisms, although constantly viewing his “see food” got old.
    From the time I saw the first trailer for “W” I knew I’d go see it. Thandie’s poor acting was slightly offputting, and I thought the 33 year old Ioan Gruffudd looked a little young to play the 50 year old Tony Blair, but overall, unprecedentedly even-handed, given Mr. Stone’s previous work. He seemed more interested in presenting a human story about a human than grinding any political axes.
    Apparently, people do mellow with age. Who knew?

  6. I thought this was one of the best acting performances I’ve seen all year. Brolin’s “W”, was better than Heaths “Joker”. Brolin should get the Oscar for this film.

    My review is up at movieguys.org

  7. I saw it last night and I enjoyed it. I enjoy Stone’s historical films. all facts aside because not everyone knows everything and screw whoever says others, none of us know more about him because we’ve been blinded to this man on a personal level for quite sometime. The film came off to me exactly how I think Stone chose to portray him. A man who isn’t the most intelligent in the world, surrounded by intellectual titans, shadowed by his father’s achievements (or failures?), and manipulated into trying to keep up with everything and everyone around in order to feel like he had control. Brolin did a fantastic job, as did Wright as Powell, and Glenn as Rumsfeld. I wouldn’t be surprised if Brolin gets a best actor nod and Wright for supporting as well. Wright has gone a long way in his career so far and is truly showing to be a great actor. Not to mention Brolin has been on fire since late 2006. I agree with you John, Thandie Newton was definitely aggravating in this movie and I don’t think much of her as an actress besides Crash.

  8. Not going to watch this crap film. Bush & Cheney are both horrible people, whether intended or not. No humor about this topic exists except for those who wish to make a profit off what is a pair of horribly deceitful men, whose hindering of truth destroys any claim they make to be religeous. Darkness hates the light, such as untruth hates the truth. The wolf in sheeps clothing is what the Bush Administration is: there is nothing funny.

  9. @Darren

    Yes, I didn’t like Platoon. It doesn’t matter if it is an Oscar winner. Film is subjective, and everyone has their own opinion. That was just mine.

    And I didn’t say I HATED WTC. I just thought it wasn’t the greatest film I’ve ever seen. Again, my opinion.

  10. I saw it last night. It was a good movie and not a “HATE” bush movie at all, although I will not deny it did have a left lean. It gave you a behind the scenes look at factual events of Bush’s early adult life, to how and maybe why he was put in the position he was in as president. What stuck me most is that he was not the sole responsible person in all the decision making. He has advisors (Rice, Powell, Lay, ROVE, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and a few more that I can’t recall that played pivotal roles in this movie) and they all have their own perspectives, rational AND motives to support or deny [war].

    What struck me most in the movie, however is that you need to think on your feet and you MUST have the capability to handle complex issues and keep your personal feelings and beliefs in check as much as possible when dealing will such 3-dimensional issues. I thought about that and literally became frightened in the possibility that someone like Sarah Palin could possibility be put in such a sensitive position or even THE position of power. I thought:

    How easily could she be influenced if someone said, “God would want it this way”
    Or, “Small town America would most benefit if we choose ’X’”, or
    “Excluding this ’X’ group would make America safer according to all the right winged Pastors”…

    Using mathematical probabilities, or public opinion, or financial burdens, or common sense does not come to mind when thinking about Sarah Palin being at the helm of America.

    It scared the “bleep” out of me!

    I would recommend seeing it before the election. I don’t think you will get swayed either way, but it is a good illustration of what it means to be a president AND a human being.

  11. President Bush had a tough life but found ways to lead this country out of troubled spots. Do I believe this footage shows the real president? No, GW Bush has not much control over any domestic policy, of course he is responsible for the Patriot Act which is mentioned in the first part of the movie. Oliver Stone tried to stay in the middle. I did not learn anything new about Bush. I thought they made Condeleeza Rice in to looking like a yes and no women but many people have said she talks well and has lot more agressive attitude towards foreign policy. It also shows a poor depiction of the first lady Laura Bush. Bush was a teacher but also turned into a reader but it does not show how much she was involved in politics before she met GW Bush. Bush always congradulates his wife on most accompishments because he knew without here he would have not been a good leader. I believe the fight among his father and him over the control factor for his child well being shows GW as a greedy and selfish person who cared about himself over what his father wanted which was him to live in piece. When Bush helped him in 1988 Michael Dukakis got beat because GW interefered and helped Karl Rove pursuade the people that his father would win the election with dirty campaigns. The telling point of the film is when GW is talking to Rove, and Rove gives him an advice that Bush has not done anything for himself after his father won proved to be a stepping stone to the lasting success of 8 years as president. I thought the depiction of Dick Chaney shows a serious side of wanting to control oil in the middle east. I have seen Chaney on C-Span when people make fun of him he actually is a light and jolly person. The movie made him into being a stressed out VP who had to many heart attacks. James Cromwell playing the father of GW Bush did the best job he showed a caring side to the 41st president of the United States. He tried to tell his son a few times that he wanted a caring son not a person trying to be a leader. He would rather give that to his more stable son Jeb Bush. I give this movie 4 out of five stars. Oliver Stone had to read 16 books to get this movie together. Its not the best Oliver Stone picture but it was put out at a tiem for many citizens who had a hard time understanding Bush. At times, the President has not been personable with the US people since the days of 9-11. Bush is a caring person but a man who could not control his liquor. Instead, the father bails him out of trouble and puts him with good peopel to chaneg his thoughts and philosophy on surviving as a man. Too many times we look at a President as a Robot, here the human side shows a man who passed from drinking tons of liquor. Bush also shows a temper as he slams the ar into his own garage door. His father said the one thing for Bush was to control his temper and may be things owuld change for him.

  12. @ Mark….

    Yes, it is. Granted, it does not have to be an Ivy League school. If that were the case we might as well say Al Gore is of “average” IQ. He isn’t.

    By the way, which is worse? A guy with an “average” IQ running the White House for eight years, the last four of it being lukewarm (at least)…or a guy who is supposed to be above average and having the same results?

    @Dragonslayer

    Platoon sucked? The 1986 Best Picture of the year?!? The “The machine breaks down, we break down” speech? Tom Berenger and Willem Dafoe oscar nominations? Hmph.

    Yes, Alexander was a pile of crap. But not WTC. Not Nixon.

  13. WOW, “W” is horrible. I want to point out that I’m a moderate leftist in my political views but I don’t hate “W” and wasn’t looking for character assassination or anything else other than a good movie and it didn’t deliver.

    I would give it a 4 out of 10.

    Josh Brolin was great and proving that he’s becoming one of the better actors out there.

    I just don’t think Oliver Stone is very good, I liked some of his early stuff but IMO he hasn’t made anything that good in a long time and I think that’s the problem with “W”. I like the aim of the movie but something just doesn’t work right at all and the casting was awful for the most part.

    Better actors and a different director and this might have been a pretty good movie.

  14. I’m looking forward to seeing this after your review, John. I was going to skip it before, or wait until it hit the cheap shelves at the video store. I’m not a fan of Bush’s presidency but I also didn’t want to just sit through a character bashing. The angle that you describe the film taking sounds interesting.

    @Darren — I know a lot of people of mediocre intelligence with graduate degrees, and yes even from US Ivy League schools. Ambition and drive to succeed have as much if not more to do with students attending those schools compared to intelligence. Bush’s family connections likely had a lot to do with his admittance (and would have if he was brilliant, also). Money and connections can get anyone in. I’m not saying Bush is stupid, but his attendance at those schools isn’t an argument for his intelligence.

    Based on John’s description of the pressures portrayed on Bush to live up to his family’s history, it sounds like he fits that mold of ambition fairly well (at least inf the film).

  15. “average intelligence at best”

    It could have been worse; he could have to Yale University, and gotten a Bachelor’s degree in history in 1968; or in 1973 attended Harvard University, where he earned his MBA.

    Uh-oh.

Leave a Reply