W.

Overheal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg7vwicPx98

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fevUp9j1DHc

October 17, 2008

JWAD

I dont think I could sit through another 3hrs of Oliver Stone pontificating again.
Might rent it on DVD but cinema without 'For f**ks sake, Oliver'-breaks? Nah......:D

brianthebard

Far too tempting to bring a naggin to the cinema and start shouting abuse at the screen half way through...

dr.bollocko

Haha. Oliver stone is back! And to the left?!


Yeah I know what you mean. And when you look at his other biopics, his tendancy is to throw the facts out of the window and just make stuff up.

Sad Professor

This won't be like his other political films though. It's mostly a satirical take on Bush with a bit of sympathy/understanding thrown in. Stone sees Bush as a charming goofball who lacks the brain power of a Nixon or Kennedy. An early draft of the script that leaked was tame by anyone's standards.

I'm really looking forward to it but I'm not sure satire is Stone's forte. Trailers looks great though.

MagicMarker

Trailers look great but i'd personally would prefer a factually sound movie over satire.

Wreck

I just saw a trailer for this and thought it was a piss take. It seems pretty bizarre tbh, will definetely watch it.

Overheal

Extended Trailers and Scenes available on Yahoo http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810026489/video/10124173

Most word I've heard pits it as a fairly even handed movie: Stone portrays Bush as a good guy that never got out of his dad's shadow and ended up in places he probably should have never gone. A human face on Bush if you will.

Inglorious

I'm really looking forward to this too. Stone is quite hit and miss, but this looks like it's pretty much on target. The whole Bush satire has gotten very stale as of late, so it'll be nice to see a more biopic approach.
Ain't it Cool gave it a glowing review.

bnt

I just listened to Oliver Stone on Bill Maher's Real Time show podcast, talking about this. According to Bill it's very funny at times, and not all that polemical - observation but little preaching.

Running Bing

Overheal wrote: »

Extended Trailers and Scenes available on Yahoo http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810026489/video/10124173

Most word I've heard pits it as a fairly even handed movie: Stone portrays Bush as a good guy that never got out of his dad's shadow and ended up in places he probably should have never gone. A human face on Bush if you will.

You see I think its far too easy to take that view and paint George W. as a "charming goofball" as Sad Professor put it. He is much more than that. I'm sorry you dont become one of the most powerful men in the world by having a bit of charm....Bush is a seriously misunderstood and underestimated man imo. You can laugh at his Texas brogue and the odd grammatical faux pas and in hindsight Iraq was a major gaff but I have no doubt he is a very smart man and its a side of his character than is often overlooked if not downright ignored.


I would love a film that gets to the heart of the character and shows his motivations and obvious talents...I dont think this film will do that but I am looking forward to it and I am sure it will be entertaining.

bnt

Roger Ebert has reviewed W, from his "liberal left" perspective, and likes it. He mentions the Peter Principle: everyone rises to their level of incompetence, but I don't think that's quite right: W made it several level further than that.

The cast list has the kind or people that make me interested in seeing it. I mean, Richard Dreyfuss as Dick Cheney has to be something to see..!

aidan_walsh

Just read the New Yorker's review, and two parts in particular stood out to me.

What’s missing from “W.,” however—what would have made the movie fascinating and not merely a hammer blow to an already expiring Presidency—is the cunning that many have noticed in Bush. Despite his family’s misgivings, the actual W. became both governor and President, whereas the man at the center of this movie strikes you as someone who could maybe get elected social director of a country club.

...

“W.” feels poorly timed: too late to have any effect on the public, most of whom long ago checked out on the President, and too early to provide more than a schematic interpretation of who he is.

FionnMatthew

Babybing wrote: »

You see I think its far too easy to take that view and paint George W. as a "charming goofball" as Sad Professor put it. He is much more than that. I'm sorry you dont become one of the most powerful men in the world by having a bit of charm....Bush is a seriously misunderstood and underestimated man imo. You can laugh at his Texas brogue and the odd grammatical faux pas and in hindsight Iraq was a major gaff but I have no doubt he is a very smart man

I sincerely doubt he's a very smart man.

I think the quality you're talking about is certainly there. These parts, I think, we'd call him shlick. A cute hoor. etc.

He's got the guile and brass balls of that sort of character. I don't think it's specifically intelligence that pushes that sort of man as far as he went. It's more like brute ambition and a certain sly talent for walking over people.

It's a sort of smarts, sure. But I still think he's as thick as a plank in the ways that count (to me).

Vic Vinegar

FionnMatthew wrote: »

I sincerely doubt he's a very smart man.

I think the quality you're talking about is certainly there. These parts, I think, we'd call him shlick. A cute hoor. etc.

He's got the guile and brass balls of that sort of character. I don't think it's specifically intelligence that pushes that sort of man as far as he went. It's more like brute ambition and a certain sly talent for walking over people.

It's a sort of smarts, sure. But I still think he's as thick as a plank in the ways that count (to me).

Very well put!

Running Bing

FionnMatthew wrote: »

I sincerely doubt he's a very smart man.

I think the quality you're talking about is certainly there. These parts, I think, we'd call him shlick. A cute hoor. etc.

He's got the guile and brass balls of that sort of character. I don't think it's specifically intelligence that pushes that sort of man as far as he went. It's more like brute ambition and a certain sly talent for walking over people.

It's a sort of smarts, sure. But I still think he's as thick as a plank in the ways that count (to me).

What ways are they?


Bottom line is you dont get a degree from Yale, become the first governor in Texas history to be elected to two consecutive four-year terms and then be elected the President of the most powerful country in the world for two terms by being a think-as-a-plank schiester.

Im not saying he's a genius or that it was purely down to his intelligence that he went as far as he did but at the same time you cant get that far without intelligence.


My point is its all too simple to portray him as the slick cute hoor that he appears on the surface. Its a cop out imo. There is a certain element of people that I know that know absolutely nothing about politics (by their own admission), know even less about American politics and know even less again about George W. Bush but they will never let the opportunity to lament Bush as "a stupid cowboy" pass them by. I have not seen the film yet but I have a feeling that this is the view that Stone has pandered too.(not lumping you into that category Fionn, Im just pointing out it exists).

As I said I will see the film, and take it for what it is. I will most likely enjoy it too but I still think there is a lot of stuff there ripe for exploration and Ill look forward to the day that someone takes a real look at the man from an unbiased perspective.

JP Liz

Is this movie a comedy or a drama??

I'm curious cause Brolin is front runner for a Golden Globe best actor musical or comedy

chalad07

JP Liz wrote: »

Is this movie a comedy or a drama??

I'm curious cause Brolin is front runner for a Golden Globe best actor musical or comedy

I think the main problem with this movie is that it's neither. Stone really needed to decide what kind of movie he wanted to make. I think his desire not to make a hatchet-job movie stopped this film from being truly entertaining,

Not funny enough for a comedy, and not dramatic enough for a drama,(see what i did there?)

MMD

I personally can't wait to see this film....I'm choosing to ignore the reviews and make up my own mind.

Roll on tomorrow!! Let you guys know

Handsome Bob

I was pleasantly surprised. I really liked how it just didn't blame Bush but also focused on the actions of the likes of Cheney and Rumsfield. I enjoyed it yet I agree with what was posted earlier about it's muddy waters between comedy and drama. I thought the dramatic bits were handled very well and just represented what might have been a classic.

Tusky

Pretty disappointed in this. You dont learn anything that you wouldn't know already..the film doesn't offer much insight. From a comedy point of view, it mustered a few chuckles but nothing more. Entertaining-ish but definitely not great.