Finally a movie review that takes on Oliver Stone's "W." on its cinematic merits or rather the lack thereof.
Far from being "illustrated journalism" as Time's Richard Corliss lamented or "sunny and sympathetic" history as Newsweek's Alan Brinkley argued, it's simply an "old-fashioned train wreck," concluded Baltimore Sun Michael Sragow in his October 16 review.
The film critic -- who gave the film just one and a half stars -- cracked that the script sounded like recycled Maureen Dowd cartoons and scoffed at the "uneven pleasure" of seeing "first-rate" actors portraying political figures they "don't respect" (emphases mine):
Its shortcomings are remarkably similar to those of its major characters. Near the beginning, Donald Rumsfeld ( Scott Glenn) proclaims that he doesn't do "nuance." Neither, alas, does Stone.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓[...]
Stanley Weiser's script is like a bunch of Maureen Dowd's four-year-old "Oedipus Bush" columns stitched together.
[..]
In the end, though, all W. offers is the uneven pleasure of first-rate actors impersonating people they don't respect. Dreyfuss, so shrewd and compelling as Alexander Haig in The Day Reagan Was Shot, sets the pitch for this ensemble by playing Cheney with hunched shoulders and loathsome certitude; if Bush is the decider, Cheney is the dominator. Thandie Newton plays Condoleezza Rice as a marionette without strings, complete with a voice so rickety it seems to emanate from a ventriloquist somewhere behind her. She's either the worst impersonator or the one who best sums up Stone's view of the Bush inner circle as hollow men - and women. Elizabeth Banks brings a whiff of down-home sensuality to Laura, but like Jeffrey Wright's sage yet gutless Colin Powell, she can't square the independent character we meet at the beginning with the loyalist she becomes at the end.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Well, his career is over.
October 17, 2008 - 14:02 ET by mizflame98Michael Sragow made the mistake of criticizing a movie that was purposely released now in order to influence the election. How dare he!
“Anybody gone into Whole Foods lately and see what they charge for arugula? I mean, they’re charging a lot of money for this stuff.”
B.H. Obama
was this a tax shelter....??
October 17, 2008 - 14:32 ET by wizardjrI can't wait to see the weekend box office numbers. This will be the surge weekend as it is the fresh release. From here it is a near vertical drop to zero dollars a day. I bet he makes less than a Spike Lee movie.
You should all read the
October 17, 2008 - 15:06 ET by TEYou should all read the front page editorial in the Dallas Morning News written by uber kook fringe leftist conspiracy theorist and Keith Olbermoronn darling Wayne Slater. The headline for Slater's front page editorial reads: "Stone's Bush biopic is remarkably accurate." According to Slater: "Mr. Stone has created something Texans who saw Mr. Bush close-up will recognize as a remarkably accurate portrait." Slater, of course, does not identify the alleged "Texans who saw Mr. Bush close-up" because he is talking about the leftist freaks, like Slater, in the Austin press corps. For those unfamiliar with the Austin bureaus of the Dallas Morning News, Houston Chronicle, Fort Worth Star Telegram and Austin American Statesman, trust me: Those cesspools are just as infested with boilerplate, militant leftist political activists as the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Associated (with terrorist) Press, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, NPR, CNN, MSDNC, Time, Newsweek, U.S. News, al McClatchy, et al. BTW, the Dallas Morning News and Slater have labeled Slater's front page editorial: "Analysis". ROTFLMAO!!!
Not Very Statesman-like
October 17, 2008 - 15:39 ET by JoelCTEvery once in a while, a kid will come by and offer me an Austin American-Statesman subscription price so low, I can't refuse it. Like last time it was $1.50 a week, the price of the Sunday paper alone. I know I'll make back the $1.50 from the Sunday coupons, so I always fall for it.
The sludge that makes up the paper is so void of information, it shouldn't even be called a "newspaper". I am serious, you could read the whole thing, Page A1 to Page Z99, and when you got done, you couldn't remember anything you had read. So I always cancel when it comes time to renew.
When I lived in Fort Worth, trust me, the Star-Telegram was like the National Review compared to the Communist filth put out by the Dallas Morning News. They give the L. A. Times and the NYT a run for their money when spouting their Socialist-Communist claptrap.
Wow! Your post made me
October 17, 2008 - 22:11 ET by stratmanWow!
Your post made me disrespect the Cleveland Plain Dealer a little bit less.
Maybe things could be worse in Cleveland.
Keep your chin up JoelCT. We're here for your sanity fix.
Baltimore Sun is far from
October 17, 2008 - 15:41 ET by balboaBaltimore Sun is far from the only outlet to pan this movie.
ReelViews: It would be grossly unfair to criticize W. as a hatchet job - it's too clumsy for such a description to apply. This movie frequently feels like the shotgun marriage of Nightline and Saturday Night Live.
Superficial, uninformative, and inert, this two hour snoozefest isn't
even inflammatory enough to stoke a righteous anti-Bush brushfire. W. does for recent history what Oliver Stone's epic Alexander did for ancient times.
WaPo: W.," the title of Oliver Stone's new biopic of President Bush, most obviously refers to the subject's middle initial and frequent nickname, but it could just as easily stand for "Why?"
I will not pay...
October 18, 2008 - 14:00 ET by jawebster1my good money to see a movie about a Republican I admire made by a far left-wing Democrat and starring the son and stepson of two far leftist kooks, all of whom I can't stand. 'Nuff said. Jim Webster