Oliver Stone's "W." Backfires

National Review Online: Director Intended To Make Us Come Out Hating Bush, Instead He Makes Bush More Likeable

(National Review Online)  This column was written by Tom Hoopes.

---

The movie W., despite the worst intentions of its makers, succeeds in making George W. Bush more likeable. Reviewers keep remarking on the strange phenomenon. They hated Bush going in - and kind of liked the guy when they came out.

That the movie doesn’t intend you to like George W. Bush is obvious from the cheap shots it revels in. You can tell a director (in this case Oliver Stone) and a writer (Stanley Weiser) want you to dislike a lead character if they have him:

Chew in your face. For much of the movie, Stone stages dialogue such that Bush is chewing and talking with food in his mouth - hard to watch in person; revolting on a 20-foot screen.

Deliver lines from the toilet. Stone stages a scene such that Bush is handling toilet paper while sitting on a toilet preposterously close to his bed, where Laura converses with him.

Arrange the Willie Horton commercial. The ad about the early release of a rapist helped defeat Dukakis, and conventional media wisdom considers it the biggest sin of the 1988 campaign. The movie makes Dubya the perpetrator of the ad.

Be a friend of cartoon villains. Stone insultingly makes Tommy Franks and the other military leaders who lead the Iraq invasion into callously dim redneck stereotypes, people who chew tobacco while briefing the president.

How can skilled filmmakers who clearly want to make Bush look bad end up making him likeable? Maybe it’s just by comparison to the other characters in the movie, whom they clearly hate much more.

Stone and Weiser really hate Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. The excellent Toby Jones plays Rove like a Herblock caricature of him, and Richard Dreyfuss plays Dick Cheney the way Tilda Swinton played the White Witch in Narnia: as a soulless being who will do whatever it takes to make sure it’s always winter but never Christmas.

But Stone and Weiser really really hate Condoleezza Rice. The actress Thandie Newton is truly awful in this role. She was much better (and looked much more like Condoleezza Rice) in Crash and Pursuit of Happyness. Her performance here insults more than imitates, like a middle-school boy mocking his teacher. Maybe the filmmakers hate Condi with the kind of hatred Democrats have been directing at Sarah Palin. They object that she’s not behaving the way a woman (a black woman, no less!) is supposed to behave.

Stone and Weiser love Colin Powell, but might as well hate him. They couldn’t do any more damage to him if they did. In the movie, Powell woodenly predicts everything that will go wrong with Iraq (in words provided by a screenwriter with 20/20 hindsight), then goes ahead and makes the case for invasion to the United Nations anyway.

But the hatred Stone and Weiser have for those characters isn’t enough to explain why Bush seems so likeable in this movie. Here are a few theories.

Maybe Bush seems likeable because he’s a real person. The movie puts him in scenes you can’t imagine a movie putting the Clintons in:

The tender bedroom scenes. Laura and George are shown in caring, real dialogue in their bedroom. Even when this is meant to ridicule them, it’s sweet and endearing. When Laura soothes George by promising to take him to his favorite play, Cats, the audience is supposed to snicker. But we can’t help but appreciate her gesture - and we can’t imagine the Clintons doing the same thing.

The authentic religious expression. The movie makes a couple of half-hearted attempts to be cynical about Bush’s religious conversion. But his spiritual counseling by Earle Hudd (Stacy Keach) in the film is far from the self-righteous stereotyping of Christians. Hudd tells Bush that “We’re all wounded sinners.” Bush looks contrite and earnest. From then on out, it’s hard to tut-tut his praying at meetings as we’re supposed to.

(As Bob Dole once told the National Catholic Register, “I think Bush’s faith is authentic, and that will be useful to us.”)

Maybe Bush is likeable in the film because it bucks conventional liberal wisdom in a couple of ways that favor him.

The film’s Bush isn’t a “Bush lied, people died” Bush. The movie’s W. clearly believed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He also clearly had the best of intentions when he ordered the invasion.

The film’s Bush isn’t the too-stubborn-to-correct-course Bush. This is especially clear in the way the film plays the scene when Bush is asked at a press conference to name his biggest mistakes in Iraq. In the movie, you squirm with Bush and feel sorry for him. And you realize, “Hey, a president in wartime with American lives on the line can’t glibly answer a question like that.”

Or maybe Bush is more likeable in the movie than the filmmakers intend owing to dramatic flaws in the film itself.

It leaves out 9/11. This shows such glaring bias that it’s hard for the film to recover from it. Imagine a filmmaker making a movie about FDR’s decision to enter World War II - and omitting December 7, 1941. Or imagine a director making a movie about Truman ending the war - and omitting August 6, 1945. Even if the goal is to make this an intimate personal portrayal of the man, you would have to put in 9/11- or at least 9/14, when he visited Ground Zero.

W. can’t decide whether we’re supposed to sneer at Ivy League privilege or Texas down-home idealism. It takes shots at both frat-boy privilege and Southern populism. But by trying to tar Bush with these two different brushes, our dramatists only succeed in making him seem like he was enriched by and transcended both.

But perhaps the ultimate reason why Bush is so likeable in this movie is that Josh Brolin makes him likeable. His W. is an earnest guy who overcame his partying youth by self-discipline, the steady and tolerant love of a woman, and real faith. He saw his life as part of a larger plan, and invaded Iraq because he thought it was the right thing to do. He’s a sincere striver who tries to do right by God, his country, and his family, and is startled and crushed when things don’t go the way he hoped.

That means the movie’s real bad guys are all those around the president who, the film suggests, work with duplicitous motives for dishonorable ends they really don’t believe in.

Clearly, Scott McClellan must hate W.

Finally, perhaps, most infuriating to the Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers: The film also makes the case for John McCain. Stone’s movie carefully makes the argument that all of America was put in danger because Bush was able to get to the presidency with no real experience after political handlers took him over following his failed attempts at various careers. It suggests that Bush has iffy military experience, and the script hurls Cheney’s “four deferments” in our face. If the lesson is, “Don’t put an Ivy League cushy career-jumping reinvented politician with little or no executive experience in office, and only turn to those with military experience in times of peril,” then the way to apply the film’s lesson is to vote for John McCain over Barack Obama.

By Tom Hoopes
Reprinted with permission from National Review Online.

America's Premier Site for Conservative News, Analysis, and Opinion.

Share:

Digg

Facebook

Yahoo! Buzz

Twitter

Mixx

Video and Galleries from Opinion

• Video Robert McNamara's Life
• Video Ginuwine On Jackson
• Video Andy Sheds Some Clothes

Latest in Opinion

Half Measures On Climate Action

When The Cheers Finish, What Next?

Trusting Wal-Mart to do the Right Thing

Add a Comment

• 1
• 2
• next

See all 55 Comments

by doctordonut-2009 October 26, 2008 4:33 PM PDT

http://www.theweeklydonut.com/index.php/2008/10/14/if-only-it-were-an-oliver-stone-film/

Reply to this comment

by stevador39 October 26, 2008 4:46 PM PDT

The movie ignored the extent of ''W''s'' malfeasancein the presidency and before that as governor of Texas. He was known as governor death because of his numerous executions. He has de-regulated until the economy is a ruin and greed rules. The movie is a waste of time. It has no redeeming social value. And the ''star'' looks better than Bush ever did.

Reply to this comment

by mkrajca October 26, 2008 5:28 PM PDT

So let me get this straight: the director and the writer hate Bush so much and intended to make him into a buffon, but the performance of Josh Brolin was so sympathetic towards Bush (the direction he took had NOTHING to do with this) that in the end we should all vote for John McCain.

As Roger Ebert likes to say: Uh huh.

Reply to this comment

by jsl45 October 26, 2008 5:59 PM PDT

It would take an act of God to get the American people to like Shurb the Dumbnificent...he''s destroyed the country and destroyed any legacy he could possibly have had.....history will prove that he is the worst President the country has ever had...period!!

Reply to this comment

by countslapula October 26, 2008 7:08 PM PDT

I''m a liberal but I have no interest in this movie because Stone is a lousy film-maker, trying to capitalize on a scheduling opportunity. What''s your excuse for being a lousy journalist and yes-man? Hasn''t your epic-ly evil party done enough damage to the nation?

I think for myyself. You should try it some time.

Reply to this comment

by cmp271 October 26, 2008 8:03 PM PDT

Maybe Stone is trying to say, "Was life under W really so bad?" George acted in the best interest of this country, he has had bad advisors. As for Condy Rice, I can see why she would be hated by the "old boys network" and who are jealous of her. Rice deserves respect!

Powell lost my respect when he backed Obama, he showed just how black he really was and he too is a bigot. Yo brother, same old nonsense. What is scarey is if Obama gets in!

Vote McCain!

Reply to this comment

by valentin73 October 26, 2008 8:56 PM PDT

Oliver Stone must be STONED, why would I want to see some dumb movie about GEORGE "W" BUSH??????????????

haven''t we seen enough of him already??????

you people are sick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this comment

by ioweign October 26, 2008 9:50 PM PDT

Oliver Stone''s "W." Backfires




Who likes re-runs, right John...

Reply to this comment

by b0ludo October 26, 2008 9:54 PM PDT

Bush is like the rest of middle America. The one you all seem to love bashing. Loves God, loves his heterosexual family, and you''ll take his gun from his dead cold hand. That is the November surprise nobody is expecting.

Reply to this comment

by cdfoxtrot4 October 26, 2008 10:16 PM PDT

Bush is like the rest of middle America. Blah, blah, blah.

Posted by B0ludo

Except that Bush is NOT from middle America. He was born into an extremely wealthy, powerful family. His dad was president, and his grand-daddy was a senior political figure. He can trace his heritage to English royalty. He''s NOT from middle America. It''s the idiots who think he''s one of them and voted as such, that are responsible for the moron-in-chief having eight years to f_uck everything up.

Reply to this comment

by cdfoxtrot4 October 26, 2008 10:21 PM PDT

The article is seriously flawed and, I have to ask: it is so juvenile in its prose, was it written by a grade-schooler? If Oliver Stone wanted to make Bush look bad, he would have shown Bush continuing to read "My Pet Goat" for 10 minutes after being told the country was under attack, on 9/11. He would have shown Bush hiding like the little rat that he is, on 9/11, running from bunker to bunker all over the country - while everyone else was told to keep working as normal.
He would have shown Bush standing up in front of Congress seven months before 9/11 saying our main security threat required the development of a new missile shield. He would have shown Bush ignoring classified memos warning of imminent threats of terrorist attacks, exactly along the lines of what happened on 9/11.

Reply to this comment

by forever1973 October 26, 2008 10:35 PM PDT

maybe some if the actors or others in the film ''sold out'' (?)

Reply to this comment

by ubrew12 October 26, 2008 10:58 PM PDT

"the ultimate reason why Bush is so likeable in this movie is that Josh Brolin makes him likeable."

With the directors approval.

Stone, etc were making a Shakespearean tragedy and they succeeded. To do that, they needed to make the characters sympathetic so that their ultimate failing is real.

Their timing is wonderful, because we come in thinking we ''know'' the characters, and are exposed to the ''dramatists'' version of the characters, different from what we know and different from reality. This actually heightens the drama and tension. I found the experience to be most satisfying. Of course, I also realize that the timing was affected by marketing as well... Bush may not be the ''draw'' he is now in 6 months.

Good movie. Important discussion of current events (esp those leading to the invasion of Iraq)? Yes. Shakespearean tragedy dramatically portrayed? Yes. Accurate portrayal of the central characters? Pulleeze... Under the circumstances, thats one ''yes'' too many to expect. You want an accurate portrayal? Tune in ''Face the Nation'' or some such...

Reply to this comment

by idnnsg October 26, 2008 11:10 PM PDT

I haven''t seen this movie because I can''t stand GW, so why spend 2 hrs watching a movie about him? That said, now that the NRO is claiming that the movie makes GW more "likeable", I''m sure it must do a pretty good job portraying him as the despicable little r@t-b@stard that he truly is. (The NRO''s hit ratio of truth to fiction is about 0.00001 percent.)

Want proof of how badly they twist reality? When Bush is asked what were his biggest mistakes in Iraq, he can''t name a single one! And they think the audience will feel sorry for him because "a president in wartime with American lives on the line can%u2019t glibly answer a question like that"! What absolute BS!!! At that point in time, we ALL knew there were NO WMDs!!! The biggest mistake was illegally invading a country that did not attack us for NO GAWDD@MN REASON! (except to steal their oil and park a bunch of military bases on their soil. Oh, yeah, and so Baby Bush could be a "war president" and get away with whatever he wanted!) We don''t "feel sorry" for the rat-b@stard! We condemn him for 4,000+ dead US soldiers (and maybe a half million dead Iraqis) who did not need to die! We condemn him for wasting our country''s blood and treasure! We condemn him for turning the entire world against us!

I don''t need the NRO to tell me what to think about this movie, or about GW Bush or Johnny McSame. Contempt is too polite a word for the feeling these r@t-b@stards invoke.

Reply to this comment

by tawpdawg111 October 26, 2008 11:25 PM PDT

Lets see.... Take my date to W...... 17 bucks to get in.....15 more at the concession stand....NOPE....I''d rather go to www.alfranken.com and donate 100 bucks. I''d give it to Barack but I''ve already donated three times to him and he''s a LOCK to win and Franken is in a dogfight and Barack will need the 60 Senate seats if we are to dig outta this hole W has buried us in. CHEERS!

Reply to this comment

by tallyman2008 October 27, 2008 12:39 AM PDT

NRO - Please ...

Think you some kind of Roger Ebert or something ?

Just stick with your normal ''Reviews''

Leave Film Critiques to the Pros

But if you insist on attempting such endeavors ?

Do not start with Oliver Stone

Take some baby steps first

Like maybe, oh, John Ford and John Wayne Westerns

That should keep you busy for a while

Then get back to us in 50 years or so

Reply to this comment

by tallyman2008 October 27, 2008 12:53 AM PDT

p.s.

NRO, if you need more examples of what you could aim for ?

Try some imdb-dot-com reviews by ''Joe, Six-Pack or Plumber''


And they do them for free

Reply to this comment

by jamurphy4 October 27, 2008 1:05 AM PDT

It was a great movie, it showed just how stupid little o''georgie boy really is.. He will go down as the WORST President in the History of this Country, as well as the Worst Leader of the Free World. Now you Republican fools want to stick us with Old McCain, and another Idiot Gov. from Alaska. I hope the Movie wins the best Picture Oscar..gets my vote.

Reply to this comment

by flreason October 27, 2008 1:16 AM PDT

I''ve seen the movie. It didn''t change my opinion of Bush. However, I thought it was a remarkably even-handed portrayal.

Josh Brolin was spot-on Bush. Richard Dreyfus did a great job of capturing Cheney calculatedly manipulating Bush. Stone''s speculative portrayal of Gen. Powell was painful to watch, but well played by Jeffrey Wright. The movie might even have been an entertaining film bio, if we weren''t all suffering from the consequences of Bush''s inept leadership, ignorance, and gullibility.

Reply to this comment

by stopkidding October 27, 2008 1:32 AM PDT

Those of us who like Bush should form a club -- I think we ought to call it the 10% Society.

Reply to this comment

by notfooled October 27, 2008 3:18 AM PDT

Never have someone in love with Bush write a review of the movie.

Did you actually watch this movie?

If you liked Bush before you saw the movie, you''re in serious denial.

If you liked him after, you''re obviously suffering from "Beaten Dog Syndrome."

Reply to this comment

by andor3 October 27, 2008 4:19 AM PDT

there is an old guy who walks around our neighborhood. he likes to have long conversations with anyone and you cannot always understand what he means, but you shrug it off. I like him. He is likable a as long as he has no power or authority. But I would never let him be in charge of anything.

Reply to this comment

by Gary Kempf October 27, 2008 6:25 AM PDT

Tom Hoopes, I see they have upped your medication again. You might want to check, because I am sure there is drool running down your cheek. I am also sure the outpatient release program from the mental hospital is a good idea for you. Delusional,writing is a sure sign that you are not ready to be left unsupervised......

Reply to this comment

by ericdrexil October 27, 2008 7:26 AM PDT

I am suprised that CBS allowed this article to be printed. Happy, but very surpised! Thanks for some objectivity. We don''t find that in national media.

Reply to this comment

by bmadeline-2009 October 27, 2008 7:48 AM PDT

Yes Cheney manipulated Bush. Shows how stupid Bush is. It''s ok for my beer drinking buddy to be stupid; But it''s NOT ok for my president to be stupid.

Reply to this comment

by jjp735i October 27, 2008 8:07 AM PDT

"hated Bush going in - and kind of liked the guy when they came out"

Everyone takes a liking to the class clown or the village idiot when they see him in action and not just hear about the dumb bushit the pulled. But most times we pity the idiot.

Reply to this comment

by obamauberall October 27, 2008 8:48 AM PDT

Maybe Josh Brolin should have been president for the last 8 years then?

Reply to this comment

by TomFields October 27, 2008 8:51 AM PDT

I read this article thinking that it would be an objective movie review. Needless to say, there was no objectivity here!

Reply to this comment

by czmdm October 27, 2008 9:15 AM PDT

What an idiotic review. Stone claimed to be making a film that was empathetic to Bush and to show how he became what he is without the massive backdrop of either 9/11 or the war. This reviewer obviously just wanted to make a review into something political, which is why the rest of us hate the repiglicans.....every single point ever made has to be turned to their advantage (in their own minds).

Reply to this comment

by johngaltwho October 27, 2008 9:22 AM PDT

Wow - it must have taken the author a long time to figure out a way to make this film end up being a campaign plus for John McCain...

The lesson however in the end is maybe we should try electing someone who is objectively intelligent for once rather than the guy who runs the dirtier campaign.

Reply to this comment

by cbshater4 October 27, 2008 10:38 AM PDT

"Only an absolute fool"...would post the same comment 3 times to get it published...

I can''t believe CBS published this article. A round of applause, please!

Reply to this comment

by lostcountry1 October 27, 2008 11:12 AM PDT

i can only hope that when obama wins,he remembers all of the republican defenders like this jerk hoopes, fox network, and all of the right-wing radio hosts, and either put them out of business or put them in jail.it will be interesting to see how many of them will start kissing azz to keep their jobs. "IF YOU NEVER TELL A LIE, YOU DONT HAVE TO REMEMBER WHAT YOU SAID''

Reply to this comment

by briannorwood October 27, 2008 11:12 AM PDT

Funny how art imitates life. I saw "W" and thought also that it was not very good.

But, now that I think of it, 8 years of the real "W" was pretty much like sitting through a bad movie too!

Reply to this comment

by incog-nito October 27, 2008 11:23 AM PDT

Huh? Director Oliver Stone had mentioned several times that he intentionally made Bush more human. He also wanted to focus on Bush''s younger years up until his presidency, not so much on 9/11 and after. I understand NRO will bash everything they consider "liberal", but the writer of this article obviously doesn''t get it.

Reply to this comment

by Tinkerthinker October 27, 2008 12:04 PM PDT

We the people are so tired of the MSM and the movie industry blatant biases and sexism! Your treatment of Sarah Palin and Joe the plumber have been deplorable! And I resent it! I am joining every effort I can to bring you down, you do not deserve to put your opinions out there as the truth! You have become psychotic! You lost all credibility.

Reply to this comment

by troutfisher4 October 27, 2008 12:38 PM PDT

"Finally, perhaps, most infuriating to the Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers: The film also makes the case for John McCain."


The spin machine never stops. Just give it up, the moron Bush is on his way out, and we are DONE with him. Voting for McCain would be piling stupidity on insanity.

Reply to this comment

by noloyalisti October 27, 2008 12:43 PM PDT

What makes the NRO (National Republican Order) think that Oliver Stone was trying to get people to hate Bush. Must be their paranoid idea that Hollywood liberals are all out to get them.

First of all W''s record speaks for itself, everyone already hates him. I have not seen the movie but from reviews I think it protrays him as the disturbed pathetic individual he is. Which is quite fair and objective. I mean I have heard right wing wackos defend him by saying that he means well. So did Hitler.

Reply to this comment

by kommoncents-2009 October 27, 2008 12:45 PM PDT

lostcountry1 - You want to put Fox News and conservative talk show hosts in JAIL??? Do you realize that is the definition of COMMUNISM you IDIOT? Why don''t you go live in a communist country you moron.

Reply to this comment

by neonink October 27, 2008 1:30 PM PDT

Hell... I''ve always liked Bush the person.

It''s his policies I hate.

(More dumb journalism?)

Reply to this comment

by grigjd3 October 27, 2008 1:35 PM PDT

I''ve seen Stone''s other films and I think he always tries to find the human aspects of his characters. I know this is an NRO article and as such, has an agenda to be made by actively misinterpreting the film, but really, if the writer of this article thinks the movie didn''t want the character Bush to be likeable, Stone probably wouldn''t have made the film.

Reply to this comment

by taxguydave October 27, 2008 1:38 PM PDT

The writer starts from a false premise--that Oliver Stone was trying to do a hatchet job on Bush. He wasn''t. Like most of his movies, Stone was trying to honestly portray a period of history by looking at events that others dismiss as not being significant.

The movie was forthright, honest, and didn''t go too far on conjecture. He did, in fact, humanize Bush in a way that writers from both the left and the right have previously failed to do. The man he presents is not the devil, nor is he a saint.

BTW, why do some people feel the need to post about Obama when the articles aren''t even about Obama?

Reply to this comment

by mitch5511 October 27, 2008 1:54 PM PDT

"W" is a funny movie. Stone didn''t have to hire comedy writers because Bush provided the script. Basically, it shows how idiotic and inept Bush really is.

Reply to this comment

by noloyalisti October 27, 2008 1:57 PM PDT

I hope that hillary012 returned his government handout tax rebate that Butch did. And was against the socialist corporate welfare bailout.

Reply to this comment

by bobnjersey October 27, 2008 2:29 PM PDT

[But the hatred Stone and Weiser have for those characters isn%u2019t enough to explain why Bush seems so likeable in this movie. Here are a few theories. ]

it was intentional. if stone truly hated him ... he could have made that film. why didn''t he?

Reply to this comment

by gabbysmomrs October 27, 2008 2:38 PM PDT

If Oliver Stone had wanted his movie to cause us to hate George Bush he would have made such a movie. Many of us have "hated" President Bush for a long time, but even knowing that, I believe GWB is a man who was "not ready for prime time." He may or may not be someone worthy of being hated, or he may simply be a man in way over his head and being advised by people who would have their own way with the world. Remember the "Peter Principle."

Reply to this comment

by promaclaura October 27, 2008 4:21 PM PDT

Interesting article, I was wondering how the reviews were going on this movie. I''m pretty sure conservatives have not attended the movie. "W" was advertised continuously on Fox, and it truly portrayed the movie as being a hack job on Bush (right before the election). I don''t think Stone was trying to make Bush likeable, he wanted to show a bumbling fool to remind voters of their "Bush Hate". I''m glad that people are being surprised, all that wasted hate on Bush instead of terrorists must be eye-opening.

Reply to this comment

by impeach__w October 27, 2008 4:42 PM PDT

It''s Too bad the writer has no idea at all about FDR%u2019s decision to enter World War II. That was a FDR conspiracy worse than the one that got us into WWI and would have made a better movie.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/pearl/www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/McCollum/index.html

Reply to this comment

by nskduke2 October 27, 2008 4:52 PM PDT

Oliver Stone''s "W."-EPIC FAILURE

Reply to this comment

by greeneyes222 October 27, 2008 6:18 PM PDT

Oliver Stone''s become a caricature of himself. It''s sad to see talent go away, but sometimes it does.

Reply to this comment

by godseyesore-2009 October 27, 2008 6:24 PM PDT

Why would anyone want to see more of dubya? Dolt idea to make a movie about him, and only dolts would watch it.

Reply to this comment

• 1
• 2
• next

See all 55 Comments

Add a comment

Comment SUBMIT

Click here to add another comment.

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Comment reply

Submit Cancel

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Report offensive content:

If you believe this comment is offensive or violates the CBSNews.com Terms of Use, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the comment). Once reported, our staff will be notified and the comment will be reviewed.

Select type of offense:

Offensive: Sexually explicit or offensive language

Spam: Advertisements or commercial links

Disruptive posting: Flaming or offending other users

Illegal activities: Promote cracked software, or other illegal content

Comments (optional):

Report Cancel

E-mail this comment to a friend.

E-mail this to: (Separate multiple e-mail addresses with commas. Limited to 10 addresses.)

Your e-mail address:

Send me a copy of this message

Note: Your e-mail address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the e-mail and in case of transmission error. Neither your address nor the recipients's address will be used for any other purpose.

Add your own personal message: (Optional)

Hi, I found this user's comment on CBSNews.com and thought you might be interested in reading it. Send e-mail Cancel

[doctordonut-2009]

http://www.theweeklydonut.com/index.php/2008/10/14/if-only-it-were-an-oliver-stone-film/

[stevador39]

The movie ignored the extent of ''W''s'' malfeasancein the presidency and before that as governor of Texas. He was known as governor death because of his numerous executions. He has de-regulated until the economy is a ruin and greed rules. The movie is a waste of time. It has no redeeming social value. And the ''star'' looks better than Bush ever did.

[mkrajca]

So let me get this straight: the director and the writer hate Bush so much and intended to make him into a buffon, but the performance of Josh Brolin was so sympathetic towards Bush (the direction he took had NOTHING to do with this) that in the end we should all vote for John McCain.

As Roger Ebert likes to say: Uh huh.

[jsl45]

It would take an act of God to get the American people to like Shurb the Dumbnificent...he''s destroyed the country and destroyed any legacy he could possibly have had.....history will prove that he is the worst President the country has ever had...period!!

[countslapula]

I''m a liberal but I have no interest in this movie because Stone is a lousy film-maker, trying to capitalize on a scheduling opportunity. What''s your excuse for being a lousy journalist and yes-man? Hasn''t your epic-ly evil party done enough damage to the nation?

I think for myyself. You should try it some time.

[cmp271]

Maybe Stone is trying to say, "Was life under W really so bad?" George acted in the best interest of this country, he has had bad advisors. As for Condy Rice, I can see why she would be hated by the "old boys network" and who are jealous of her. Rice deserves respect!

Powell lost my respect when he backed Obama, he showed just how black he really was and he too is a bigot. Yo brother, same old nonsense. What is scarey is if Obama gets in!

Vote McCain!

[valentin73]

Oliver Stone must be STONED, why would I want to see some dumb movie about GEORGE "W" BUSH??????????????

haven''t we seen enough of him already??????

you people are sick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ioweign]

Oliver Stone''s "W." Backfires




Who likes re-runs, right John...

[b0ludo]

Bush is like the rest of middle America. The one you all seem to love bashing. Loves God, loves his heterosexual family, and you''ll take his gun from his dead cold hand. That is the November surprise nobody is expecting.

[cdfoxtrot4]

Bush is like the rest of middle America. Blah, blah, blah.

Posted by B0ludo

Except that Bush is NOT from middle America. He was born into an extremely wealthy, powerful family. His dad was president, and his grand-daddy was a senior political figure. He can trace his heritage to English royalty. He''s NOT from middle America. It''s the idiots who think he''s one of them and voted as such, that are responsible for the moron-in-chief having eight years to f_uck everything up.

[cdfoxtrot4]

The article is seriously flawed and, I have to ask: it is so juvenile in its prose, was it written by a grade-schooler? If Oliver Stone wanted to make Bush look bad, he would have shown Bush continuing to read "My Pet Goat" for 10 minutes after being told the country was under attack, on 9/11. He would have shown Bush hiding like the little rat that he is, on 9/11, running from bunker to bunker all over the country - while everyone else was told to keep working as normal.
He would have shown Bush standing up in front of Congress seven months before 9/11 saying our main security threat required the development of a new missile shield. He would have shown Bush ignoring classified memos warning of imminent threats of terrorist attacks, exactly along the lines of what happened on 9/11.

[forever1973]

maybe some if the actors or others in the film ''sold out'' (?)

[ubrew12]

"the ultimate reason why Bush is so likeable in this movie is that Josh Brolin makes him likeable."

With the directors approval.

Stone, etc were making a Shakespearean tragedy and they succeeded. To do that, they needed to make the characters sympathetic so that their ultimate failing is real.

Their timing is wonderful, because we come in thinking we ''know'' the characters, and are exposed to the ''dramatists'' version of the characters, different from what we know and different from reality. This actually heightens the drama and tension. I found the experience to be most satisfying. Of course, I also realize that the timing was affected by marketing as well... Bush may not be the ''draw'' he is now in 6 months.

Good movie. Important discussion of current events (esp those leading to the invasion of Iraq)? Yes. Shakespearean tragedy dramatically portrayed? Yes. Accurate portrayal of the central characters? Pulleeze... Under the circumstances, thats one ''yes'' too many to expect. You want an accurate portrayal? Tune in ''Face the Nation'' or some such...

[idnnsg]

I haven''t seen this movie because I can''t stand GW, so why spend 2 hrs watching a movie about him? That said, now that the NRO is claiming that the movie makes GW more "likeable", I''m sure it must do a pretty good job portraying him as the despicable little r@t-b@stard that he truly is. (The NRO''s hit ratio of truth to fiction is about 0.00001 percent.)

Want proof of how badly they twist reality? When Bush is asked what were his biggest mistakes in Iraq, he can''t name a single one! And they think the audience will feel sorry for him because "a president in wartime with American lives on the line can%u2019t glibly answer a question like that"! What absolute BS!!! At that point in time, we ALL knew there were NO WMDs!!! The biggest mistake was illegally invading a country that did not attack us for NO GAWDD@MN REASON! (except to steal their oil and park a bunch of military bases on their soil. Oh, yeah, and so Baby Bush could be a "war president" and get away with whatever he wanted!) We don''t "feel sorry" for the rat-b@stard! We condemn him for 4,000+ dead US soldiers (and maybe a half million dead Iraqis) who did not need to die! We condemn him for wasting our country''s blood and treasure! We condemn him for turning the entire world against us!

I don''t need the NRO to tell me what to think about this movie, or about GW Bush or Johnny McSame. Contempt is too polite a word for the feeling these r@t-b@stards invoke.

[tawpdawg111]

Lets see.... Take my date to W...... 17 bucks to get in.....15 more at the concession stand....NOPE....I''d rather go to www.alfranken.com and donate 100 bucks. I''d give it to Barack but I''ve already donated three times to him and he''s a LOCK to win and Franken is in a dogfight and Barack will need the 60 Senate seats if we are to dig outta this hole W has buried us in. CHEERS!

[tallyman2008]

NRO - Please ...

Think you some kind of Roger Ebert or something ?

Just stick with your normal ''Reviews''

Leave Film Critiques to the Pros

But if you insist on attempting such endeavors ?

Do not start with Oliver Stone

Take some baby steps first

Like maybe, oh, John Ford and John Wayne Westerns

That should keep you busy for a while

Then get back to us in 50 years or so

[tallyman2008]

p.s.

NRO, if you need more examples of what you could aim for ?

Try some imdb-dot-com reviews by ''Joe, Six-Pack or Plumber''


And they do them for free

[jamurphy4]

It was a great movie, it showed just how stupid little o''georgie boy really is.. He will go down as the WORST President in the History of this Country, as well as the Worst Leader of the Free World. Now you Republican fools want to stick us with Old McCain, and another Idiot Gov. from Alaska. I hope the Movie wins the best Picture Oscar..gets my vote.

[flreason]

I''ve seen the movie. It didn''t change my opinion of Bush. However, I thought it was a remarkably even-handed portrayal.

Josh Brolin was spot-on Bush. Richard Dreyfus did a great job of capturing Cheney calculatedly manipulating Bush. Stone''s speculative portrayal of Gen. Powell was painful to watch, but well played by Jeffrey Wright. The movie might even have been an entertaining film bio, if we weren''t all suffering from the consequences of Bush''s inept leadership, ignorance, and gullibility.

[stopkidding]

Those of us who like Bush should form a club -- I think we ought to call it the 10% Society.

[notfooled]

Never have someone in love with Bush write a review of the movie.

Did you actually watch this movie?

If you liked Bush before you saw the movie, you''re in serious denial.

If you liked him after, you''re obviously suffering from "Beaten Dog Syndrome."

[andor3]

there is an old guy who walks around our neighborhood. he likes to have long conversations with anyone and you cannot always understand what he means, but you shrug it off. I like him. He is likable a as long as he has no power or authority. But I would never let him be in charge of anything.

[Gary Kempf]

Tom Hoopes, I see they have upped your medication again. You might want to check, because I am sure there is drool running down your cheek. I am also sure the outpatient release program from the mental hospital is a good idea for you. Delusional,writing is a sure sign that you are not ready to be left unsupervised......

[ericdrexil]

I am suprised that CBS allowed this article to be printed. Happy, but very surpised! Thanks for some objectivity. We don''t find that in national media.

[bmadeline-2009]

Yes Cheney manipulated Bush. Shows how stupid Bush is. It''s ok for my beer drinking buddy to be stupid; But it''s NOT ok for my president to be stupid.

[jjp735i]

"hated Bush going in - and kind of liked the guy when they came out"

Everyone takes a liking to the class clown or the village idiot when they see him in action and not just hear about the dumb bushit the pulled. But most times we pity the idiot.

[obamauberall]

Maybe Josh Brolin should have been president for the last 8 years then?

[TomFields]

I read this article thinking that it would be an objective movie review. Needless to say, there was no objectivity here!

[czmdm]

What an idiotic review. Stone claimed to be making a film that was empathetic to Bush and to show how he became what he is without the massive backdrop of either 9/11 or the war. This reviewer obviously just wanted to make a review into something political, which is why the rest of us hate the repiglicans.....every single point ever made has to be turned to their advantage (in their own minds).

[johngaltwho]

Wow - it must have taken the author a long time to figure out a way to make this film end up being a campaign plus for John McCain...

The lesson however in the end is maybe we should try electing someone who is objectively intelligent for once rather than the guy who runs the dirtier campaign.

[cbshater4]

"Only an absolute fool"...would post the same comment 3 times to get it published...

I can''t believe CBS published this article. A round of applause, please!

[lostcountry1]

i can only hope that when obama wins,he remembers all of the republican defenders like this jerk hoopes, fox network, and all of the right-wing radio hosts, and either put them out of business or put them in jail.it will be interesting to see how many of them will start kissing azz to keep their jobs. "IF YOU NEVER TELL A LIE, YOU DONT HAVE TO REMEMBER WHAT YOU SAID''

[briannorwood]

Funny how art imitates life. I saw "W" and thought also that it was not very good.

But, now that I think of it, 8 years of the real "W" was pretty much like sitting through a bad movie too!

[incog-nito]

Huh? Director Oliver Stone had mentioned several times that he intentionally made Bush more human. He also wanted to focus on Bush''s younger years up until his presidency, not so much on 9/11 and after. I understand NRO will bash everything they consider "liberal", but the writer of this article obviously doesn''t get it.

[Tinkerthinker]

We the people are so tired of the MSM and the movie industry blatant biases and sexism! Your treatment of Sarah Palin and Joe the plumber have been deplorable! And I resent it! I am joining every effort I can to bring you down, you do not deserve to put your opinions out there as the truth! You have become psychotic! You lost all credibility.

[troutfisher4]

"Finally, perhaps, most infuriating to the Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers: The film also makes the case for John McCain."


The spin machine never stops. Just give it up, the moron Bush is on his way out, and we are DONE with him. Voting for McCain would be piling stupidity on insanity.

[noloyalisti]

What makes the NRO (National Republican Order) think that Oliver Stone was trying to get people to hate Bush. Must be their paranoid idea that Hollywood liberals are all out to get them.

First of all W''s record speaks for itself, everyone already hates him. I have not seen the movie but from reviews I think it protrays him as the disturbed pathetic individual he is. Which is quite fair and objective. I mean I have heard right wing wackos defend him by saying that he means well. So did Hitler.

[kommoncents-2009]

lostcountry1 - You want to put Fox News and conservative talk show hosts in JAIL??? Do you realize that is the definition of COMMUNISM you IDIOT? Why don''t you go live in a communist country you moron.

[neonink]

Hell... I''ve always liked Bush the person.

It''s his policies I hate.

(More dumb journalism?)

[grigjd3]

I''ve seen Stone''s other films and I think he always tries to find the human aspects of his characters. I know this is an NRO article and as such, has an agenda to be made by actively misinterpreting the film, but really, if the writer of this article thinks the movie didn''t want the character Bush to be likeable, Stone probably wouldn''t have made the film.

[taxguydave]

The writer starts from a false premise--that Oliver Stone was trying to do a hatchet job on Bush. He wasn''t. Like most of his movies, Stone was trying to honestly portray a period of history by looking at events that others dismiss as not being significant.

The movie was forthright, honest, and didn''t go too far on conjecture. He did, in fact, humanize Bush in a way that writers from both the left and the right have previously failed to do. The man he presents is not the devil, nor is he a saint.

BTW, why do some people feel the need to post about Obama when the articles aren''t even about Obama?

[mitch5511]

"W" is a funny movie. Stone didn''t have to hire comedy writers because Bush provided the script. Basically, it shows how idiotic and inept Bush really is.

[noloyalisti]

I hope that hillary012 returned his government handout tax rebate that Butch did. And was against the socialist corporate welfare bailout.

[bobnjersey]

[But the hatred Stone and Weiser have for those characters isn%u2019t enough to explain why Bush seems so likeable in this movie. Here are a few theories. ]

it was intentional. if stone truly hated him ... he could have made that film. why didn''t he?

[gabbysmomrs]

If Oliver Stone had wanted his movie to cause us to hate George Bush he would have made such a movie. Many of us have "hated" President Bush for a long time, but even knowing that, I believe GWB is a man who was "not ready for prime time." He may or may not be someone worthy of being hated, or he may simply be a man in way over his head and being advised by people who would have their own way with the world. Remember the "Peter Principle."

[promaclaura]

Interesting article, I was wondering how the reviews were going on this movie. I''m pretty sure conservatives have not attended the movie. "W" was advertised continuously on Fox, and it truly portrayed the movie as being a hack job on Bush (right before the election). I don''t think Stone was trying to make Bush likeable, he wanted to show a bumbling fool to remind voters of their "Bush Hate". I''m glad that people are being surprised, all that wasted hate on Bush instead of terrorists must be eye-opening.

[impeach__w]

It''s Too bad the writer has no idea at all about FDR%u2019s decision to enter World War II. That was a FDR conspiracy worse than the one that got us into WWI and would have made a better movie.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/pearl/www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/McCollum/index.html

[nskduke2]

Oliver Stone''s "W."-EPIC FAILURE

[greeneyes222]

Oliver Stone''s become a caricature of himself. It''s sad to see talent go away, but sometimes it does.

[godseyesore-2009]

Why would anyone want to see more of dubya? Dolt idea to make a movie about him, and only dolts would watch it.