Cast the first Stone.
Let me begin by saying that I typically try to avoid politics in my reviews, but I will offer you two reviews today, one an earnest critique of the film aspect of Stone’s work, the other review will contain a highly partisan opinion of the screenplay as it pertains to my beliefs.
The Film Itself:
Oliver Stone’s biopic of a sitting U.S. President suffers from poor acting with stifled, under-developed characters. An empty stadium serves as the imagined backdrop of W’s mind. Pointless and seemingly amateurish cinematography lacks oomph and demands the audience ask, so what? Stone delivers several pop outs to center field. At times the film lags incessantly, nearing peak ineptness, while Josh Brolin delivers a command performance in most of his scenes. Where he lacks direction, and it is painfully obvious, is in the imaginary dream sequences – Brolin is a matter-of-fact performer. I can see him in an acting class asking his professor, “How the hell should I know how a tree feels?” He manages to pull off a likeable villain as the de-facto scapegoat for all the world’s angst in the 2000s, the ever-loved, W.
Richard Dreyfuss ably performs as Dick Cheney, the diabolical puppet-master all conspiracy theorists love to blame for all the other angst they can’t throw squarely at W’s feet. At times I found it hard to differentiate between Dreyfuss’ ego vs. Cheney’s, I can imagine both are larger than most Texan’s belt-buckles.
Thandie Newton was simply painful to watch, as she appeared to find constipation as her motivation to portray the most powerful woman in the nation from 2000 – 2008, Condy Rice. Her plastic, satirical performance collided with the more professional Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell. Newton came off as cartoonish and idiotic, at times it really detracted from the other performances. Jeffrey Wright is always in love with these torn characters, these inept do-nothings that always have the right answer and never do the right thing – he was aptly type-cast.
Elizabeth Banks, as Laura Bush, was merely an after-thought in the film, coming across as a loyal lover to W’s passionate beliefs that she initially didn’t share. Yet, more emphasis is directed towards a fallen corn-cob in the BBQ scene than explaining her devotion to a fiery Republican. With all the hype, I thought there was going to be some nudity or something, this is Miri after all – I was expecting to be outraged by a little boom shacka wow wow action with the first lady and W. I found nothing controversial about her performance. Like a loyal lieutenant, she falls into line with W’s dreams and never falters in her devotion.
James Cromwell commands respect as the nuanced, master politician, George H. W. Bush. As with many fathers and sons, George is constantly trying to impress his father, and Brolin and Cromwell are very effective in their sequences. Although, a lot of the passionate scenes are delivered in the trailer, like with most things in real life, the reality lies somewhere in between what you want to see and what you do see. In other words, don’t expect a ton of brawls and teary-eyed scenes with these two actors, it is dramatic but not with emphasis. Stone makes you use your imagination, which was brilliant, as W was forced to use his imagination throughout his life in dealing with his father.
All in all, this was not a bad film, if you liked JFK you may find yourself disappointed as this film doesn’t really go for the jugular, if you loathe Bush, this won’t give you anymore fire, really. This film simply tells the whole story, or most of it anyway, of the rise and fall of the Bush empire. But, stay tuned, Jeb was always daddy’s favorite, and being from Florida, mine too. Still, I don’t see Stone having as much success with a movie simply titled, Jeb. So, if biopics are your thing, check out W and remember, it’s just a movie, the truth always lies somewhere in between fact and fiction.
Politics and Oliver Stone – SPOILERS ABOUND.
After 9/11 Bush’s approval rating was 80% when the US invaded Afghanistan, and were he such a playboy as he had been in his younger years, he might have stopped there, but he wanted to keep his nation safe, regardless of the hit to his popularity. Stone wittingly, or unwittingly shows this when his father says, “My son gets the intel briefings. As a father, I will be damned to sit here and listen to people bash my son for trying to keep this nation safe.” This really sums up who Bush was, according to the film anyway. He was the second favorite son of a demanding, stern and highly successful father. He was the heir to a family with high standards and little failures, always in the shadow of his brother and always trying to earn his father’s respect and love. In one scene his father writes him a touching note because he can’t face his son and say the words out loud. Bush had his sins in his youth, and Stone delves into the past Bush vs. the present Bush, but never very effectively connecting the dots – save for the concept of failure and respect.
Many times Stone appears dyslexic in his message about Bush, he never mentions that Bush was a bonesman, opting instead to highlight his fraternity days with Kappa Delta in Yale. The conspiracy theorists would have eaten that shit right up like a pledge funneling Heinekin. Several times Stone appears afraid to really attack Bush, which I found odd, considering how easy some of the shots were to take at the man. Never once did he mention the cocaine use, the DUI, etc. There were minor infractions with the law, but it was for leading a drunken rally (as the head cheerleader, no less) when Yale defeated Princeton. Stone appears intimidated at times, maybe fearing Bush’s notorious temper – and now that he is unemployed again, maybe Stone fears Bush’s goons will come after him? Heh, it’s nice to dream anyway. Right?
Dreams seem to be the only time Stone appears willing to openly criticize Bush with both barrels. Yes, the entire film is a de-facto criticism of Bush’s presidency and life leading up to it – where Christians are portrayed as whackos and zealots – still, I was reminded of Bush’s epiphany sequence of St. Augustine, who was a gambler, a womanizer, and a drunk before he had his calling from God. Believe or no, Bush believed and it was what turned him around and made him seek politics, even according to Stone. It would have been easy to show Bush as a power-hungry rich A-hole – but, again, Stone didn’t go that route. Maybe he really did his homework, I understand he screened his film to several Bush biographers prior to mainstream release.
Many times throughout the film Stone has W being both a puppet and a policy maker, which I think is probably close to the truth, no one man can be played constantly and no one man, or team, can pull the strings constantly either – the truth always lies in between. There are levels of gray in W. that I didn’t see in JFK for example.
Stone never strikes at the jugular of WMD in earnest, he never once makes some connection that Bush lied to the American people about the WMD. He shows us a Bush that was duped by faulty intelligence, to me it smelled like LBJ apologists with his “advisors” getting him into Nam. Of course, I don’t think that was Stone’s intent, but he either couldn’t, or wouldn’t show Bush as flat out lying to the people – yes, he wanted the intel to be given more credit and his CIA director wouldn’t play ball, but eventually, for no other reason than lack of will, apparently, the director changed his mind – and slept like a baby that night, while Bush Sr. is unable to sleep a wink.
If you want to find some kind of HBO-esque smoking gun criticism of Bush, you won’t find it in W. You will see a man, a sinner, a father, a brother, and a leader who at times gets his words mixed up because he is trying to compensate for fears of inadequacy from years of emotional neglect by his father. You will see a man full of piss and vinegar who led as he determined God had desired, a passionate Christian who sacrificed popularity for his nation’s safety. A patriot who understands the sacrifice of his troops and was there for them as much as he could be.
What you will not see in W is any mention of the successes in Iraq – not the surge, nor General Patraeus. This irks me, because in typical Stone fashion he doesn’t want to see the other side, if the other side doesn’t fit into his hypothesis, this film released years after the surge was proven to work, months after stability in Iraq was achieved. Stone attack Cheney as the evil empire-building oil tycoon hell-bent on world domination, but I just found that scene to be uber pragmatic and forward thinking. I have been telling my friends for years now, Iraq and Afghanistan border Iran, what Stone has Paul Wolfowitz call the “Mothership of Terror” Bush wanted peace and freedom in the Middle East, that was what he wanted his presidency to be about after 9/11.
I humbly applaud Stone for showing what I have always posited about Bush, he sucks at dealing with the press and politi-speak, he should have led more from the seat of his pants, we would have less Bushisms, but knowing his roots, it is easy to see why Bush tried so hard to impress us with big words and bold moves, he wasn’t trying to impress us, he was trying to impress his father, his name. Yes, I have said it for years, Bush would mix up his words and his phrases, and some dolt actually claimed he was dyslexic [still an altogether evil word] because of the way he spoke. Maybe he just didn’t like having to be political while being a leader, and yes, even with an 80% approval rating, comedians still attacked his intellect at will. Stone shows him in earnest moments not coming across as a dolt, it is when he tries to seem grandiose that he falters.
I was glad to see scenes with Bush visiting with the troops in the VA hospitals, as even his fiercest critics would have to admit he was genuine and consistently a force for the wounded warriors of Iraq and elsewhere.
In the end Bush said it best while talking to Laura one night after having a bad day at the office, with a declining approval rating and the media hounding him about WMDs, he tells her that all he wanted to do was make this a better, safer world. He explains that good and evil exist, and you have to fight evil where it stands, you have to sacrifice your comfort for the greater good.
