W

Discussion in 'Movies' started by ::stoned::, Oct 24, 2008.

  1. I am surprised no one has made a post about this movie yet, saw it like a week agoish. Didn't reveal anything new though. I don't like how they give credit to bush for ANYTHING he has accomplished in his life. Friends did not like the ending but it made sense. Alright movie id give it 2 1/2 stars.

    It was funny at the begining everyone there for some reason thought it was gonna be a straight up comedy clowning on bush. So they were laughing at every chance they could just because they thought they had to...that was pretty funny.
     
  2. it was a pretty disappointing movie in the sense that I don't think it had much insight into George W. Bush. It wasn't that I wanted it to be more comedic or bashing, it's just that they simplified Bush into this whiney adult who still cannot please his father. And while I think this might be a facet of Bush, this surely isn't the entirety of his character. Considering the life he has led, he must be a complicated man by now.

    Also - switching back and forth arbitrarily through time was obnoxious. I think the emotional impact of the film could've been much greater if the story-line had been a bit more linear. As it is, it's just kind of a jumbled mess with no rhyme or reason.
     
  3. The trailers made it look like a spoof of Bush, but it wasn't.The movie wasn't that bad, but not a comedy really.
     
  4. I liked the fact it made you sympathize with bush. That is a major achievement.
     
  5. I thought it was a pretty good movie... I'd give it about an 8 out of 10.

    The most successful thing was how it managed to link situations and aspects of Bush's presidency to events from earlier in his life. It definitely gave some accurate insight into his personality and what motivates his actions. Most of the dialogue was well written. Although there are quite a few scenes that we'll probably never know the complete truth about, Oliver Stone has come as close as possible.

    Richard Dreyfuss was great as Cheney, although the scene of him suggesting we invade Iran and Iraq permanently to form an "American empire" was obviously the product of a far-left liberal bias. Not that it was unfounded or untruthful, I just don't think it ever came to that point. Then again, it's kind of hard to depict a person's entire life in a two hour movie, so certain things had to be condensed.

    The strained nature of the father-son relationship was also a bit exaggerated. I don't think it has had as obvious an effect on W's life as Stone would make it seem. I don't think his father was as hard on him as it appeared. I like James Cromwell as an actor, but he didn't portray H.W. as well as Brolin portrayed W.
     

Share This Page