W. (Widescreen)
|
List Price: Our Price: $3.49 You Save: $11.49 (77%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.01 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of W. (Widescreen)
Movie Review: Unflattering but not Unsympathetic Study of George W. Bush's Slow Rise and Rapid Fall.
Summary: 4 Stars
Like 1995's "Nixon", "W." is a character study of a disgraced conservative president by the famously leftist Oliver Stone that is fundamentally sympathetic to its subject's emotions but unsympathetic to the President's actions. "W" doesn't have the depth or nuance of "Nixon", however. Written by Stanley Weiser, the film was shot in only 46 days. Stone calls it a "trim-down movie" in which scenes and procedures are simplified and sets less elaborate than they would be in reality. The film takes us through George W. Bush's adult life, starting in 2002 with the President's preparation for his "axis of evil" speech and backtracking to his college days at Yale. It proceeds in this way, alternating between preparations for the Iraq war and Bush's earlier life until the two converge.
"W" draws on books written about the 43rd president to present George W. Bush (Josh Brolin) as the black sheep of the Bush family, a man driven to take on more than he can handle by his need to impress his disapproving father (James Cromwell), but constrained by a critical lack of intellect: An amiable imbecile who easily falls prey to less amiable men, like Vice President Dick Cheney (Richard Dreyfuss) and Karl Rove (Toby James), who need to put a friendly face on their sweeping agendas. Josh Brolin's performance is adequate, but I felt it relies too much on mannerisms. The supporting cast is generally impressive, but Richard Dreyfuss deserves special mention for his interpretation of Cheney's overbearing self-belief. Although the film clearly sees Bush as incompetent and his inner circle as lunatic, there is a darkly comic undertone to their conversations. It's making fun of these people.
The DVD (Lions Gate 2009): Bonus features include a theatrical trailer (1 ½ min), a documentary by Sean Stone called "Dangerous Dynasty: The Bush Legacy" (17 min) which interviews people about the increasingly authoritarian Bush presidencies. There is a feature commentary by Oliver Stone in which he speaks mostly of George W. Bush's life and what he chose to include in the film, but some about the performances and filming. If you're interested in the film's source materials, the disc is a DVD-ROM (Mac or Windows) containing a "Filmmaker Research and Annotations Guide" in PDF. This is 108 pages of annotations and sources (books, articles, television, press conferences, etc.) for the scenes and ideas in the film. Subtitles for the film are available in English and Spanish.
Movie Review: Oh puhleeeze, Mr/Ms Amazon Snifter, a second chance! I was duhrunk when I wrote it . . .
Summary: 4 Stars
Four stars because all the demands of this difficult project were met by researchers, writers, lawyers, set creators, casting, wardrobe and makeup, cameramen, director, editors, etc. Oliver Stone could bring it through. Unlike the man the picture is about, who could not.
In making this film, Stone knew he would have to travel a straight and narrow path, lawyers to the left of him, lawyers to the right. All the characters in the film are drawn from still living persons, any one of whom if "maligned" could wield the injunction club and force reshoots or reedits or entomb the master print for a quarter century. Stone and his financiers would be left reeling. Thus we find ourselves at an anticipated Golden Gloves competition, No Punching Profanity Shouting or Spitting Allowed.
In the first portion of this film, I felt like I was caught up in a flash flood. Finally the appearance of Laura calmed me down, here instantaneously was a warm human being. The restaging of the catastrophic White House doings gave me a You Are There simplified refocus on the existent megaton journalistic trove on the same subjects. The physically towering Father Bush was an indulgent exaggeration to make a point. The film evoked no emotion or insight.
You've heard of the Peter Pan syndrome, but maybe not of Kidult or Puer aeternas. These terms, loosely applied, come to me as I see "George W. Bush" in the film. As he envisions himself as the Sports Hero as thousands cheer, as he cockcrows at the frat house, as he saucy flirts with Laura girl, as he stuffs sandwiches into his face, as he bullies, as he makes big hard decisions without a second thought, as he relishes landing on the carrier in a pilot costume, as he finally muddles down tongue-tied at the press conference. (Oliver neglected to include a crucial scene of the President on tv tossing Us the People his bad-cholesterol Texas hushpuppies.)
Peter Pan, Kidult, Puer aeternas, playing with Poppy's gun in the Oval Office. By acclamation and chaddy ballots, Little Boy George, the new leader of Our Gang. (Turn green with envy, Farina.) Well, his eight years of D-minuses and Deportment Poor are over. Somewhere 500 monkeys are keyboarding away, they will either write Hamlet or GWB's Presidential Memoirs. If the latter, it will make millions. But I say Bosh, Mr. Bush, a penny for your thoughts!
Movie Review: W: You Did a Helluva a Job
Summary: 4 Stars
I enjoyed "W" greatly. However, in the United States, I suspect that views of the movie will be seen through the prism of whether one is a Republican or a Democrat. In my case, as I am not American and merely an outside observer, I think I can be reasonably independent. So, at the outset, I will state that I both enjoyed the film and believe that George W Bush was a buffoon who brought disrespect to America that is most unwarranted. America is the great democracy that is seen as the leading nation of the free world. It is a great pity that it had to endure the eight years of W.
Obviously, Oliver Stone had an axe to grind. Any viewer of the film should understand this explicitly. He portrays Bush as a miscreant. Bush is the son of privilege; the child born with the proverbial silver spoon in his mouth. This is true and should not be a point of debate. Indeed, it is to Bush's credit that he was able to overcome his wayward past, sober up and then successfully run for public office.
Josh Brolin plays W and is excellent in the role. He looks like W and, more importantly, sounds like W. Only Richard Dreyfuss is more convincing as Dick Cheney. Yet, it is the story that is more relevant than how closely individual actors picked up the various idiosyncrasies of the main protagonists. And, it is on this point that Stone succeeds. He outlines the background to W from his time as frat boy at Yale to the emerging failure of the Iraq war to locate weapons of mass destruction. But to be fair to Bush, Stone completely glosses over the war in Afghanistan which was arguably essential and achieved success.
As mentioned at the outset, many people will reject this film simply because they know of Oliver Stone's point of view. This is a shame. "W" is a very good film that, although broadly critical of George W Bush, his policies and his verbal malapropisms is, nonetheless, a rollicking good ride.
Movie Review: Too early
Summary: 4 Stars
Then again, perhaps it is important to focus on his budding personality flaws before we assess all of the damage he has done to America's image with them. Somehow, Jr. has become something of an enigma-is he evil, or stupid? Stone leans toward stupid, but really, he portrays W as a misguided soul with inner conflicts that played into the hands of major power brokers with their own ideas about the future of the country. In light of all of W's early failures in most of his occupational endeavors, it's a convincing GUT of how Dub worked. Stone takes some of the sting out of all of W's recklessness and blundering and presents you an American portrait instead, which may prove infuriating to a good swath of viewers who are expecting a savaging of the Shrub. Brolin is fabulously all over his role as W, everyone else is solid save for Thandie Newton's mousey take on Condoleeza Rice. She had the look down, but her voice coach should have been flogged.
A special note to idiots: there is no "agenda", no ideology, no "belief system", no "liberal take", or whatever phraseology you've been taught to mouth like automatons in the film. There is no doubt in any rational persons' mind that W's presidency is one of the most controversial to take place in modern history, and it deserves all of the scrutiny it gets. The real effect will be studied much further down the line, but it looks to me like Stone wanted to do a character/personality study rather than put focus on the horrendous mistakes he has made which may take decades to reverse, perhaps more.
It's W the man, not W the monster. You can read a bazillion books about his policies-there is far less journalism on the boy king's inner workings, and we should welcome this angle as a compass to finding out a little more as to why he has done what he has done.
Movie Review: Stone makes good films, truthful or not...
Summary: 4 Stars
and you often do not know how much left-inspired claptrap is going to be put into them, and how much factual stuff that few directors could sneak in as well as he does. I am a moderate Democrat, now living in the Bush clan's old hometown, so my vote will never count for anything again, since my county and city are among the heaviest Republican enclaves in the nation. I did not vote for W, either time, but I thought he handled the initial 911 response well, and I gave him the benefit of the doubt on Iraq, until it turned out bad. This film is more interesting for Stone's take on the family dynamics than it is for the Iraq war planning (deceptions, or well-intended honest mistakes?) James Cromwell, as the elder Bush, is wonderful here. Brolin does a fine job in a hard assignment, depicting a person we seem to know so well. It was interesting to see a younger Karl Rove depicted (he just came to town last week promoting his new book.) Love him or hate him, after watching Mr. Stone's very condensed version of his life, you will think you understand George W. a little bit better. Nobody takes the presidential oath intending to hurt the nation, and it's a job that people who are most qualified for it won't go after, because campaigning is demeaning and demoralizing. The Bush family now claims two failed presidents, and I often wonder if W regrets winning a second term. He proved himself more popular than his dad, for a bit of time, but in the end will be rated the less successful leader. This movie reminds us that these famous people once were young, and made lots of ordinary mistakes, before they got the power to make extraordinary errors. You can't help but feeling a bit more compassionate toward the younger Bush when you finish seeing this. That may not have been Oliver's intent, but it's my conclusion.