Directed by: Oliver Stone.
Written by: Stanley Weiser.
Starring: Josh Brolin (George W. Bush), Elizabeth Banks (Laura Bush), James Cromwell (George H.W. Bush), Ellen Burstyn (Barbara Bush), Richard Dreyfuss (Dick Cheney), Jeffrey Wright (Colin Powell), Scott Glenn (Donald Rumsfeld), Thandie Newton (Condoleezza Rice), Toby Jones (Karl Rove), Bruce McGill (George Tenet), Ioan Gruffudd (Prime Minister Tony Blair), Noah Wyle (Don Evans), Rob Corddry (Ari Fleischer), Dennis Boutsikaris (Paul Wolfowitz), Randall Newsome (Paul Bremer), Jason Ritter (Jeb Bush), Michael Gaston (General Tommy Franks), Stacy Keach (Rev. Earle Hudd).
Oliver
Stone’s W. was greeted with a collective shrug, by both audiences and critics,
when it was released back in 2008 – and not enough time has passed for it to
get any sort of real re-evaluation. You can understand why people didn’t much
want to see the film then – it was released a month before the election that
would bring Barack Obama to the White House, and even Bush’s hardcore
supporters were getting tired of him, and wished he would pretty much go away.
The Conservative minded either ignored the film or attacked it as a hatchet job
– a lot on the Liberal side didn’t see it as hard enough on George W. Bush, and
many film critics who loved Stone’s Nixon the decade prior was disappointed
that Stone’s new film was simplistic by comparison. To me, that’s always been
one of the point of W., the film – that it is a far more simple film for a far
more simple man. No matter what one thinks of Richard Nixon, he was a
fascinating person, in many ways a brilliant one, who brought himself up from
nothing to become President, only to have it come crashing down around him
because of his own paranoia. That’s the narrative of a Shakespearean King. In
Stone’s view, Bush was nothing more than a spoiled rich kid, with daddy issues
– an average man who had the misfortune of being born into a great family, and
who was just smart enough to make himself into a great politician, but not
smart enough to realize that is the last thing he should have been. Basically,
Stone paints him as a man in way over his head, who has no idea what the hell
he’s doing. He takes a few cheap shots perhaps – but not many. The fact
checking brigade that has greeted other Stone films didn’t find much here – he
stays pretty close to the established record on this one. That makes the film
all the sadder. It is true that the film is flawed – that it rushes through
Bush’s life far too quickly, and has a supporting cast that are basically doing
little more than impressions of the famous people they’re playing (my favorite
is probably Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld – he may not be in the film very
much, but the way he eats pie will haunt me forever). Anchored by a great,
Oscar caliber performance by Josh Brolin though, and W. really is quite a good
film – one of the best “late phase” Stone films.
The
film basically moves back and forth in time, from Bush’s past, starting with
his drunken frat days, to his Presidency and back again. Yes, it is kind of
silly to see the middle aged Brolin playing a frat boy, but it’s only for a
scene (and at this point, because of Walk Hard, these types of scenes always
make me smile, so let’s role with it). It doesn’t take long to establish who W.
is – and what the relationship is like with his father (James Cromwell). His
father is stern, and lets his son know at every opportunity just how disappointed
he is in him, and how he wishes he could be more like Jeb – yet he’s also
always there to bail his son out of trouble (or jail). Their interaction always
reduce the usual over-confident machismo of W. into a little boy who has just
been caught with his hand in the cookie jar. The movie moves quickly through
W.’s “jobs” – none of which he lasts long in, as he always gets tired of being
bossed around and simply does not have the work effort to stick with it. When
he runs for Congress in the late 1970s – with little on his resume – he loses,
and vows right then and there that he will never be “Out Christianed or Out
Texased” every again – and he never is.
Brolin nails Bush’s voice and mannerisms – and not in a jokey, Saturday Night Live way, but in a much deeper one. He isn’t doing a jokey impression of Bush – which would be easy – but getting the man beneath that surface – at once brash and insecure. He is smart enough to know that those around do not think he is smart enough – and he doesn’t hesitate to put those around him down, albeit in a nice way, if he feels like they are stepping on his toes. He does the seemingly impossible with Bush – especially in 2008 – and makes him into a human being. A sad one to be sure, and one that he makes abundantly clear never should have been President (or really, in any kind of position of power) but a human just the same. The final shot of the movie – of Bush once again dreaming of being a baseball player in the outfield, only this time losing sight of the ball that never comes down is an apt metaphor for his life.
Stone
is on solid footing with Brolin as Bush, but he cannot help himself at other
times as he goes too far over the top. Richard Dreyfus, as Dick Cheney, has a
fairly silly scene in the Situation Room, where he goes on a long, drawn out
diatribe about all the things America needs to do become an Evil Empire
(without using that term obviously) borders on a scene more appropriate to a
film like Dr. Strangelove, except that it is played straight. In fact, none of
the rest of the supporting cast really comes into focus in any real way –
except Colin Powell should have probably sent Stone a fruit basket or something
as he comes across far and away the best of anybody in the film.
At the
time the film was made, many thought Stone had jumped the gun – that making the
film while Bush was still in office was a mistake, as it didn’t really allow
history to judge how he had done, and what the long term consequences of what
he did were. This had helped Stone in the past – who made films about Vietnam
more than a decade after the war ended, JFK’s assassination nearly three
decades after the event, and about Richard Nixon two decades after he resigned.
There is some truth to that complaint – and already, in just 7 years, as the
President after Bush is getting ready to leave office next year, the film may
have dated a little bit. And yet, in the larger scope, I’m not sure that the
film would be much different if it were made today – with some hindsight – as
it was back in 2008. If W. the film hasn’t really gotten a critical
re-evaluation yet, than neither has George W. Bush, the President. He’s still
someone Democrats hate, and Republicans distant themselves from – and the
historical record hasn’t really helped Bush out – nor has it hurt him more than
it already had back in 2008 (his screw-ups were already widely known). The
complaint about the film that is true is that it is nowhere near the complex
portrait of a President as Stone’s Nixon was. But Bush wasn’t nearly as complicated
as Nixon – which is a fact that Stone makes stunning clear. W. is an odd film
in many ways – but it remains a fascinating one for me – and one that
hopefully, some more people will give a second look to.
No comments:
Post a Comment