W.

Saw W. this weekend and it would have been a good film if it wasn’t so damn implausible. I mean, does Oliver Stone really expect us to believe that a spoiled doofus manchild alcoholic failure who can’t utter a single grammatically correct sentence could actually become President of the United States, surround himself with sycophants and start a preemptive war with a country on the flimsiest of intelligence while almost becoming the first president to assassinate himself using a pretzel?

Nice try Mr. Stone. Nice try.

15 Comments

  1. via NetFlix I’ve been watching all of Oliver Stone’s movies and have come to the opinion that he is not a very good film maker. Nixon was just a mess. I don’t want to watch W. Mainly becuase the most important part of the story has not happened yet: His upcoming war crimes trials (and hopefully treason trials).

  2. I have yet to see “W.” However, I did see “Milk” this weekend, also featuring Josh Brolin. I really couldn’t help but think of him as Brand Walsh with a stylin’ sweatband on his head, peddling a little girl’s bike with training wheels down a hill.

  3. I agree. It was almost like Stone wanted us to feel sorry for Bush – like he had no agenda. The Bush family is evil to the core. Bush’s grandfather Prescott Bush was directly involved with the financial architects of Nazism during WWII. Not to mention the current family ties to the Bin Ladens. You would think a guy like Stone, who went to Nam, would feel a little betrayed by the bullshit war machine. Bottom line – Stone has lost his edge as a filmmaker.

  4. I kind of want to see this. Not sure yet. I liked Any Given Sunday and thought Natural Born Killers was interesting, although once is probably enough on that one. Comparing those two, you can definitely see a change in filmmaking.

  5. The most interesting parts about W. were the ones everyone knew about before even watching the movie. It’s like watching a movie someone made about your mom.

Comments are closed.