Oliver Stone's W.

[Cult]

I'm going to see this tonight, but I'm really not that excited. I hope I'm proved wrong, cause I think this looks pretty dull and unnecessary.

[trotchky]

I don't think the film does this. I think you did this.

Well, do you think there's at least contextual support for that in the film, even if it failed or was ineffective, or do you think Stone actually didn't intend anything of the sort? I mean the opening shot of Brolin standing in a baseball stadium, arms raised, draws some pretty obvious allusions to Rome, and the film's hammering on of ideas like legacy, fraternity, and paternalism make it hard not to see an effort at putting Bush's legacy (or more appropriately, the Bush family legacy) in some sort of historic context with other famous and/or infamous rulers.

And, the movie is heavily mannered. Almost every character borders on caricature. Why is this? I don't know, but I'm attempting to provide one explanation for it that goes beyond "Stone doesn't have anything to say."

Something else I want to bring up is the contrast between the heavy claustrophobia of the scenes of Bush the president (in meetings with his staff, etc.) and the outdoor, frontier swagger of Bush of the past. There's a bunch of other stuff I'm forgetting because I was pretty high when I saw the film, but come on. You really don't think the movie has anything political on its mind?

[number8]

We need to do something about your username. It's ruining our feng shui.

[Milky Joe]

There's a bunch of other stuff I'm forgetting because I was pretty high when I saw the film, but come on. You really don't think the movie has anything political on its mind?

The shot I remember clearest (I was pretty high myself) was at the end of the lunch scene between Bush and Cheney, when Cheney is walking away into the background. The shot is composed such that on the table in the foreground on the right side of the screen are two long, slender white candles standing up side by side, and Cheney's blurry figure is right in the middle of them. I certainly know my answer to your question.

[Spinal]

You really don't think the movie has anything political on its mind?

Never said that. I was responding to Watashi who said that he liked that the film isn't "overly political".

[trotchky]

We need to do something about your username. It's ruining our feng shui.

Yes, please. Sorry about that, guys.

[Ezee E]

Yes, please. Sorry about that, guys.
At least you got rid of that horrible avatar.

[trotchky]

Was it really that bad?

[Sycophant]

Despite the fact that I have a mad crush on her, Thandie Newton's performance in this film was kind of grating.

I liked the film over all (and would love to give it a shot at some point without an audience and with some knowledge of what it's relaly about); it was entertaining. James Cromwell pretty much stole the film, but Brolin and Banks both turned in remarkable performances as well.

Too many of the characters that surrounded W seemed cartoonish. A little bit of human depth for the people surrounding 43 would have been a welcome addition. The nods to Bushisms seemed a bit forced and often felt awkward in their scenes. The audience's reaction certainly came off awkward, anyway.

Speaking of Tarantino, it occurred to me that he could play a mean Lee Atwater. Atwater wasn't in this film, but I kept hoping to see him pop up as played by the T-man.

[SirNewt]

Nice.

Though calling him the most derided president in U.S. history may be a bit much. Remember, there's always Harding and Nixon floating around down there at the bottom waiting to prop somebody up.

Then again, I doubt even their bloated corpses can keep this anchor that is this president afloat.

[Izzy Black]

This film is incredibly political and incredibly crass. I enjoyed watching it at times, however.

[Ezee E]

It's pretty interesting to read this thread after I've seen the movie now. Lots of us seemed to have seen a different movie.

The first half of the movie is pretty great as we see the creation of President W. Bush into what the American public seems him. He walks his administration through dirt roads and gets lost (one of the standout scenes). We see him struggle to get his Dad's approval, and his troubled early years.

Then, what I think is the best scene of the movie, the political scene of the approach to Iraq. I'm still unsure of how to approach it from W's point of view as he's simply left in the dark, but the acting from Jeffrey Wright and Dreyfus is perfect in this scene. The subplot of their conflict is one of my favorite things about the whole movie.

Afterwards, the movie mostly concerns W's awakening to everything he had missed. Sure, he got his dad's approval. Sure, he found God. But now he's got a nation to lead, and it might just be too late. He realizes this at a press conference when questioned about a mistake.

Oliver Stone takes a surprising approach to this movie, as this seems like a biopic that we'd see in 10-20 years, not the full SNL approach that I was expecting, minus Thandie Newton's annoying performance (although, who's to blame there?). I would've liked to see more of Elizabeth Banks, as her scene where she meets W., is something that the movie could've used just a little more of.

I'm very surprised by this actually.

Stone makes great use of people chewing away at food throughout this whole movie. It's off-putting, but when the scene with the Pecan Pie shows up, W., isn't the only one thats blind to it all. An obvious approach from Stone, but what else do you expect from the man?

[SirNewt]

That's it I'm seeing this on Friday. That is if, "Changeling" doesn't open here.

[Ezee E]

That's it I'm seeing this on Friday. That is if, "Changeling" doesn't open here.
It should. It's opening pretty wide this weekend.

[SirNewt]

It should. It's opening pretty wide this weekend.

hmm. . . maybe I'll see both. Then again 'Fallout 3' is out this week so maybe I'll see neither.

[Sxottlan]

Caught this on its last day in the area.

It was actually more interesting and engaging than I thought it would be. Still lots of gaps here and there where I thought it would have been a shoe-in (winning the election, 9/11). Liked the end when he left the presser and retreated behind closed doors. What is he feeling there? Does he realize how absolutely terribly he comes across? Is he finally questioning his own supposed rock steady beliefs?

Surprise scene of the year: H.W.'s reaction to the loss of the '92 election. Not played for irony or laughs or anything. Straight up devastating. I actually got a little choked up. I remember quite liking him as a kid and never heard how he took the news that he lost. Overall, a very balanced portrayal and Cromwell was great in that scene. So unfortunate how H.W.'s better qualities don't come to light until put against the behavior of his son. Loved the lesson that W fails to learn about making it personal when his father didn't.

EDIT: Nice original score too. Some of the music sounded a little goofy, but the original work was nice.

[Sycophant]

Surprise scene of the year: H.W.'s reaction to the loss of the '92 election. Not played for irony or laughs or anything. Straight up devestating. I actually got a little choked up. I remember quite liking him as a kid and never heard how he took the news that he lost. Overall, a very balanced portrayal and Cromwell was great in that scene. So unfortunate how H.W.'s better qualities don't come to light until put against the behavior of his son. Loved the lesson that W fails to learn about making it personal when his father didn't.Indeed. Devestating is the word. Magnificently played by all involved.

[Ezee E]

Is there a clip somewhere of W.'s actual response that is shown at the end of the movie?

[Sxottlan]

Is there a clip somewhere of W.'s actual response that is shown at the end of the movie?

I stayed through the credits. I don't recall seeing anything.

What are you referring to?

[Ezee E]

I stayed through the credits. I don't recall seeing anything.

What are you referring to?
His press conference where he eventually retreats, not knowing how to answer the reporter.

[SirNewt]

His press conference where he eventually retreats, not knowing how to answer the reporter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haQzdW7hg4A

Is this what you're looking for.

[SirNewt]

Were they holding the budget for the scoring of the film in the form WaMu stock? Half the score is fine then suddenly, what the fuck is this, midi music? Did someone extort it, the hell?

[Pop Trash]

Watched this last night. It's not bad I guess, just a little...I dunno...pointless at times. It seemed to be both too long but also missing something.

Formally, it seems like Stone made it a bit on the fly with lots of close ups with hand held cameras and such. There is something a little generic and TV movie about it.

In yet...at times it's quite compelling. You can tell Stone was most interested in approaching GW Bush's story as someone always trying to impress his father and trying hard to not be a fuck-up but the fact is he is a fuck-up who would have done the world a favor by not even running for president.

The film is also incredibly sympathetic to both Colin Powell (not surprisingly) and George Bush Sr. (surprisingly) Cromwell puts in a very good performance that never tries to mimic Bush too much. Brolin and Dreyfuss were also excellent. I can see the complaint about Thandie Newton but I got the feeling that Stone wasn't entirely thrilled with it either since she didn't have that many lines and I imagine a lot of Newton wound up on the cutting room floor. Often Stone would just cut to a look she would give rather than have a line for her.

Overall: 7/10 but I kind of wasn't here nor there about the movie.

[number8]

Rewatched this tonight. I loved it even more. I really would nominate Brolin's W over Pitt's Benjamin Button.

[Sxottlan]

I can see the complaint about Thandie Newton but I got the feeling that Stone wasn't entirely thrilled with it either since she didn't have that many lines and I imagine a lot of Newton wound up on the cutting room floor.

I was really kind of taken aback the first time she spoke.

She sounded like Leah Thompson as Grandma McFly in Back to the Future 2.

[Ezee E]

Rewatched this tonight. I loved it even more. I really would nominate Brolin's W over Pitt's Benjamin Button.
Indeed. He's actually my favorite of the year.

[balmakboor]

Rewatched this tonight. I loved it even more. I really would nominate Brolin's W over Pitt's Benjamin Button.

I agree. The more I think about it -- and as much as I liked Benjamin Button -- Pitt was nothing more than a mannequin to be manipulated by the makeup and special effects people.

[Spinal]

Brolin's performance is certainly the best thing about the movie. Dreyfuss is a close second. After that ... not much comes to mind.

[Qrazy]

Someone complete this sentence for me so I'll know if I ought to see the film.

W is Stone's best picture since...

[Spinal]

Someone complete this sentence for me so I'll know if I ought to see the film.

W is Stone's best picture since...

I haven't seen any of his films since U-Turn and it's not even as good as that one.

[Milky Joe]

Someone complete this sentence for me so I'll know if I ought to see the film.

W is Stone's best picture since...

World Trade Center.

(That's praise. See the film. Or don't, I guess.)

[number8]

W is Stone's best picture since...

Platoon.

[Qrazy]

Based on the U Turn and World Trade Center comments it's looking like a pass.


Platoon.

JFK and Born on the Fourth of July are high quality films. It's really that good?

[Milky Joe]

Don't listen to me, I love Oliver Stone unashamedly. Just see it! Particularly if you like or have liked Stone's work in the past. Is your time really so valuable?

[Rowland]

U-Turn is feverish, hyperstylized trash of a high vintage. Why can't the studios release more delirious neo-noirs like this? No audience? Fuck the audiences. :pritch:

[Winston*]

U-Turn is a poor man's Red Rock West, except it probably cost a lot more to make.

[Rowland]

U-Turn is a poor man's Red Rock West, except it probably cost a lot more to make.
You could say that, but I'd argue it's more productive to approach the picture as a trippy heightening of noir conventions, to the point that it's as much a gonzo comedy as anything. Speaking of John Dahl, I haven't seen Red Rock West in too long to comment on it, but I wasn't too impressed by a recent revisiting of The Last Seduction. *shrug*

[Qrazy]

Don't listen to me, I love Oliver Stone unashamedly. Just see it! Particularly if you like or have liked Stone's work in the past. Is your time really so valuable?

If I'm going to be seeing another Alexander then yes, yes it is that valuable.

[Qrazy]

You could say that, but I'd argue it's more productive to approach the picture as a trippy heightening of noir conventions, to the point that it's as much a gonzo comedy as anything. Speaking of John Dahl, I haven't seen Red Rock West in too long to comment on it, but I wasn't too impressed by a recent revisiting of The Last Seduction. *shrug*

Yeah I found The Last Seduction to be instantly forgettable.

[soitgoes...]

Someone complete this sentence for me so I'll know if I ought to see the film.

W is Stone's best picture since...
JFK. Though it is very comparable to Nixon in terms of quality. A couple great performances lift both films a shade above mediocrity. See Nixon for Hopkins and Allen and W. for Brolin and Cromwell.

[Qrazy]

JFK. Though it is very comparable to Nixon in terms of quality. A couple great performances lift both films a shade above mediocrity. See Nixon for Hopkins and Allen and W. for Brolin and Cromwell.

Yeah I have been meaning to see Nixon for a while so with all of the above recs perhaps I'll make a double bill of it.

[Rowland]

I found Nixon oddly airless and flat, even with all the same tricks applied that Stone was indulging in at the time. That was many years ago though, so another viewing is in the cards.

[Qrazy]

I found Nixon oddly airless and flat, even with all the same tricks applied that Stone was indulging in at the time. That was many years ago though, so another viewing is in the cards.

I still need to see...

# Comandante (2003)
# Any Given Sunday (1999)
# Nixon (1995)
# Heaven & Earth (1993)
# The Doors (1991)

I have Any Given Sunday. I don't know if I'll ever see Seizure or The Hand.

[number8]

JFK and Born on the Fourth of July are high quality films. It's really that good?

I think so, yes. I would put this and Any Given Sunday as Stone's bests.

[DavidSeven]

Saw this a while ago but never felt inspired to write anything. Probably because there isn't much worth talking about besides a couple standout performances.

For a film that's often been regarded as being sympathetic to Bush, it surprises me that the film appears to completely underestimate him. The film seems content on lazily resting on his public as a simpleton. How useful is this in explaining his meteoric rise to the top of the GOP? This film would have you believe that he decided he wanted to be president one day and was elected the next. It ignores the fact that there is a machine consisting of highly educated and highly influential people who thought this man was their best candidate. I'm convinced that Bush is driven by principles that go far beyond daddy-issues and what God tells him. Any human being in his position would have to be for things to go his way as often as they did. This is a man who convinced 70% of a bipartisan Congress to wage war with Iraq, but does this film in any way paint a picture of a man who could be so shrewd and persuasive as to accomplish such a feat? No. By many accounts, the real Bush is a man who performs incredibly well in personal meetings and one-on-one conversations. Yet this film would have you believe that it was an utter dolt who convinced his government to loosen its principles on civil liberties, human rights, and the separation of powers in search of the greater good. As a result, we're shown a "real" person, and a film character, who is entirely uninteresting and is missing the depth required to explain his life and to make this film any good.