W. (2008)

Instant Favorite.

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

I'm not American, not well-versed in American politics and not a big fan of either political party, but I still feel that this movie grossly misrepresented George W. Bush both as a man and as a president. His presidency was riddled with controversies and difficulties, and I hoped to get an insightful explanation of his ups and downs. This movie did not deliver. It simplifies, caricatures and mocks President Bush.Josh Brolin's performance has been lauded as excellent. I thought he was okay but lacked the bravado and confidence of the real George W. Bush. James Cromwell as his father, President Bush, was much better.I understand that the point of the movie was to humanize political figures and make their motivations and flaws relatable and understandable to the general audience, but the difficulty of their decisions and the sheer amount of work and responsibility that comes with political power was overlooked.For a political drama/comedy that actually works, check out the French comic book 'Weapons of Mass Diplomacy'.

As as I'm not a true big fan of the man, I haven't taken the time to watch the movie before now. I was afraid that this movie would serve as a way to restore a little the image of George W. Bush and it's not falling far from here as I now saw it.I've seen many biopics about the famous people who were an active part of the history of the country. Every time, it was treated with depth and kept being really objective. But there, it's looking like unfinished.Most of his career is overlooked. Not any mention about his oil businessman success story. His governorship is really depicted poorly. We don't even see him getting elected president. 9/11 was the most important event of his presidency, the one which changed it all and made it what it was but still except of mentioning it during several exchanges with his cabinet, we don't see any scene about that day nor his declaration of war against Afghanistan. The only real focus was the war in Iraq explained in a very simplistic way. About that fact, I have also my grief. Oliver Stone wants to make us believe that Bush was just a puppet of his cabinet. Someone who just jumps in because he's told so. I have my doubt about that. Sure W is not very bright but come on he is not that gullible even from my point of view. He was a governor and a pretty acclaimed one before he was elected to the Presidency. He inspired some leadership. He must have had some control of his policy as President of the United States.The only thing they got their part right is Colin Powell who was maybe the smartest of the Cabinet and the only one who expressed doubts about the WMDs in Iraq but was shut off by Cheney, Rice and ultimately Bush. That was the only part I really liked. But the rest seems to be pure propaganda.I feared that it could be that way and i wasn't wrong. Like the real President himself, this movie will definitely not be a part of my favorites.

After directing presidential films like 1991's 'JFK' & 1995's 'Nixon', Oliver Stone now has his eyes on George W. Bush. However, instead, of directing a realistic mostly accuracy movie of the president, Stone choose to directed yet another fictionalized dream-like portrait. While, it's a largely sympathetic portrayal of the man. It does somewhat make Bush look like a cartoon than a real person. I don't agree with some of the critics that says, this was a down-to-earth portrayal. Don't get me wrong, George W. Bush is indeed goofy, however, while he did make some stupid mistakes, he's also shown to be savvy and reflective about some things, from time to time, and generally means very well. While, I'm not a big fan of the guy at all, never did voted for him, I do have to say, that he wasn't the worst president ever. However, I can't agree with this film, in the way, he is presented as a Man Child with daddy issues who is over his head. He's more complex than that. This biopic movie is almost directionless. It doesn't know, what part of George W. Bush's life, it wants to talk about. So, it pick all, the gimmicky outrageous parts. Despite that, I didn't mind, too much of Oliver Stone, taking artistic license on the history, too much. The real-life quotes from George W. Bush being used in very different contexts is fine with me. I just wish, the movie feels more like a realistic tone film than a series of over-the-top dream theatrics, news clipping and political caricatures. It was a bit jarring. During the editing process, there was said to be up to five different cuts of the film, each with a different tone, with some being more satiric, others darker, etc. While, the movie makes a great satirical comedy, it doesn't really give us, the viewers; a true understanding of the man named Bush, besides that he love baseball, supposedly. It doesn't really shown, any of his hard work to reach the presidential, nor does it explore, any of the key controversial issues that George W. Bush had, during his administration, besides his push for the war with Iraq. It's kinda a letdown, because I really wanted to know, what he was going through, during the controversial 2000 election. I kinda wanted to see, if he thought that Al Gore really win, over him. I also really wanted to see, how he dealt with the events of 9/11 event, and Hurricane Katrina. Most of all, I wanted see, some fore-shadowing to the financial crisis of 2007–08. After all, the banking collapse of 2008 could still be added on, during filming in mid-08. Just think, how much more popular, this film would had been, if they did that. Anyways, the version that Stone pick is the story of Bush's life, mostly away from the Presidency. Only a short half is honestly, about him, being president. I guess, this turn from the main focus, is a way to combat the controversy of releasing, a biopic of president, while that said, command and chief is still in office. Understandably, but why even make it, if you're not going to cover all of the keys events of his presidential? It felt like a waste of time. Anyways, conservatives on the right, accused it of being liberal propaganda, and many liberals of the left accused Stone of being too soft on Bush; which is basically, the same criticisms Stone received for Nixon. Despite, the unrealistic Daddy issues, Bush has, in his film, I thought, the rest of how Bush was portray, was alright for the most part. I kinda like Josh Brolin as George W. Bush. He really does seem to inhabit Bush's skin, through his facial expressions, and voice, despite, not really looking like him at all. Still, Josh Brolin lost about 20 pounds in order to better play Bush as a college student, and then had to gain it all back in order to play him in senior age. So, he try to look the part, even if he kinda fails at that. Even the supporting actors were alright in their performance as these real-life characters. I kinda like the soulless version that Richard Dreyfus was giving us, as Vice President Dick Cheney. Yes, Cheney in the film was so Machiavelli, but it's really hard to dispute that, when actual accounts, says he was. It's suck that Dreyfuss and Stone did not get along well during filming. I was really hoping for more of them, teaming. Anyways, mad props to Richard Dreyfus, he really brought it to this role. The same, can be said with James Cromwell as President, George H. W. Bush, Jeffrey Wright as Secretary of State, Colin Powell, Toby Jones as Policy Adviser, Karl Rove, and Scott Glenn as Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. They really made this movie, so much more mature than juvenile. The only supporting actor that didn't really bring it, is Thandie Newton as National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice. I found her character, so useless. Anyways, the movie is well-shot. The soundtrack was good enough to listen to, and the film pace was standard. Overall: 'W' was somewhat enjoyable and provocative. I wouldn't call it, the best presidential biopic, but it's no way, near the worst. It was average at best.

I was reluctant to see this film for a long time. The reason for that reluctance was the lack of desire in reliving what I considered to be the period in which our country was governed by the least able man in the history of this republic. Starting with the stolen election of 2001 (in which his brother was a willing accomplice), the 8 years of "Dubya's" presidency were lackluster at best and criminal at worst. Having said all this, I bit the bullet and finally watched the film and my reaction shocked me. I even ended up liking (just a little bit) poor Dubya. As was once said in a MadTv skit which played a mock debate between Bush and Kerry, Kerry says "I know why America loves you, it's like loving a retarded baby" and that's the truth! There are moments that utterly hysterically funny in this film and yet don't come across as mocking or degrading. I dislike Texas "swagger" (or "walking" as they call it in the film) and yet Stone portrays it all in a very palatable way. The acting is excellent, the dialogue is well written, and it all moves along at a good pace and plays out very well on the screen. The relationships within the family are fascinating to watch (Ellen Burstyn is fantastic as the very caustic Barbara) - so what I expected to watch with one eye closed I've now seen a few times and kept both eyes fully open during the entire film. Strange indeed.