W.
Oliver Stone's biopic on the life and presidency of George Bush Jr. stars Josh Brolin (No Country For Old Men) as the titular Dubya. This even handed account of what drives the man takes off during his college years when he was fond of the bottle and the shame of the family, through his miraculous rise to President and eventual invasion of Iraq.
Bush's entire family and entourage come into play, including Condoleeza Rice (Thandie Newton), Colin Powell (Jeffrey Wright), Tony Blair (Ioan Gruffudd), Karl Rove (Toby Jones), Dick Cheney (Richard Dreyfuss) and Barbara Bush (Ellen Burstyn).
- Director:
- Oliver Stone ('Platoon', 'Wall Street', 'The Doors', 'JFK', 'Natural Born Killers', 'Any Given Sunday')
- Writer:
- Stanley Weiser
- Cast:
- Josh BrolinElizabeth BanksThandie NewtonIoan GruffuddRichard DreyfussJames CromwellScott GlennEllen BurstynJeffrey WrightRob Corddry
Reviews & comments
Flicks, Andreas Heinemann
flicksIt was inevitable that George W Bush, one of the most controversial and humorous political figures of the decade, would get his own biopic. That Oliver Stone, cinema’s great conspiracy theorist, would be the one to make it was similarly likely. The only shock is that it came out so immediately.
Not great, but still fascinating
This has an odd, almost flat feel and seems to dwaddle a bit in parts... but I still really enjoyed it. It didn't take a side or a strong opinion on Bush, but placed his character in between the two extreme views of him. I guess like they say - the truth is somewhere in the middle. He's such an interesting character - well meaning yet wildly out of his...
Variety
pressFor a film that could have been either a scorching satire or an outright tragedy, W. is, if anything, overly conventional, especially stylistically.
Total Film
pressPerhaps it’s just all too soon for this. With key personnel and events fresh in our minds, still appearing on the daily show that is the world news, W. occasionally plays like a bad Saturday Night Live sketch. Stone himself has said he felt that if he didn’t make the movie right now, it probably wouldn’t be made for a long time. Maybe, for all the entertainment value, that wouldn’t have been such a bad idea.
Time Magazine
pressThe movie is an X-ray of an invisible man -- by the film's end, the W. still stands for Who?
The New York Times
pressThe pleasure of Mr. Stone's work has never been located in restraint but in excess, a commitment to extremes that can drown out the world or, as in this film, give it newly vivid, hilarious and horrible form.
Roger Ebert
pressW., a biography of President Bush, is fascinating. No other word for it.
New Zealand Herald
pressUnintentionally hilarious dramatisation of the Bush White House is political history as burlesque.
Los Angeles Times
pressW. is not a dispassionate biography; it is an interpretation of personality intersecting with history, and as a piece of drama it is persuasive and perfectly creditable.
Hollywood Reporter
pressIt's a gutsy movie but not necessarily a good one. Its greatest strength is that it wants to talk about what's on our minds right now and not wait for historians.
Empire Magazine
pressDisappointing. Stone whipped this out in time for the US Presidential election, but it’s hard to see how it’ll make any significant impact on voters. Or why it even should.
Flicks, Andreas Heinemann
flicksIt was inevitable that George W Bush, one of the most controversial and humorous political figures of the decade, would get his own biopic. That Oliver Stone, cinema’s great conspiracy theorist, would be the one to make it was similarly likely. The only shock is that it came out so immediately.
Variety
pressFor a film that could have been either a scorching satire or an outright tragedy, W. is, if anything, overly conventional, especially stylistically.
Total Film
pressPerhaps it’s just all too soon for this. With key personnel and events fresh in our minds, still appearing on the daily show that is the world news, W. occasionally plays like a bad Saturday Night Live sketch. Stone himself has said he felt that if he didn’t make the movie right now, it probably wouldn’t be made for a long time. Maybe, for all the entertainment value, that wouldn’t have been such a bad idea.
Time Magazine
pressThe movie is an X-ray of an invisible man -- by the film's end, the W. still stands for Who?
The New York Times
pressThe pleasure of Mr. Stone's work has never been located in restraint but in excess, a commitment to extremes that can drown out the world or, as in this film, give it newly vivid, hilarious and horrible form.
Roger Ebert
pressW., a biography of President Bush, is fascinating. No other word for it.
New Zealand Herald
pressUnintentionally hilarious dramatisation of the Bush White House is political history as burlesque.
Los Angeles Times
pressW. is not a dispassionate biography; it is an interpretation of personality intersecting with history, and as a piece of drama it is persuasive and perfectly creditable.
Hollywood Reporter
pressIt's a gutsy movie but not necessarily a good one. Its greatest strength is that it wants to talk about what's on our minds right now and not wait for historians.
Empire Magazine
pressDisappointing. Stone whipped this out in time for the US Presidential election, but it’s hard to see how it’ll make any significant impact on voters. Or why it even should.
Not great, but still fascinating
This has an odd, almost flat feel and seems to dwaddle a bit in parts... but I still really enjoyed it. It didn't take a side or a strong opinion on Bush, but placed his character in between the two extreme views of him. I guess like they say - the truth is somewhere in the middle. He's such an interesting character - well meaning yet wildly out of his...
Share