Oliver Stone, W.

by Freeman Montaque
10/19/2008

If you’re looking for a lot of laughs from Oliver Stone’s new film, you’re going to be disappointed. If you thought the director was going to spend a little less than two hours assaulting President Bush, you’re way off. The Oliver Stone of the 90s, the man behind such risky, edgy films as JFK and Natural Born Killers, is no more. Now you’ve got the conscientious observer, the man behind World Trade Center, the director who just sees the facts and passes them along. With W., Stone had the chance to recall his earlier days and stare controversy in the face and smile. With Bush’s popularity at a historic low, it would not have been hard for Stone (or anyone, for that matter) to deliver jab after jab without shame or remorse. But instead, he doesn’t. He does the exact opposite: he humanizes Bush. He delivers up a story that is less concerned with plot and more involved with getting to know Bush the man from his point of view, and it’s a decision that ultimately pays off.

I’d be lying if I told you I was a huge of fan of the President before viewing this film. Or that I walked into the theater hoping for a fair assessment of the Commander in Chief. But I have to admit, the word “sympathy” creeps into my mind when I think of the right word to describe Bush according to Oliver Stone’s film. And most of that has to do with Josh Brolin’s portrayal. The actor, coming off a remarkable 2007 year, turns in what may be his best performance to date, making Bush likable and compassionate almost instantly. Brolin doesn’t resemble Bush much in his early years, but as the character ages, the resemblance becomes uncanny. So much so that once you see what looks to be actual footage of Bush landing his plane on a naval ship, you’d swear at first that you were glaring at the real man. It’s only after the camera closes in on Brolin’s face that you realize who it is.

The Bush that Stone shows us is the Bush most people who like him can relate to. He’s the frat guy who knows how to party or the smooth talker who’s got the looks and the charm to land any girl. He’s the guy who makes jokes during meetings and eats while he talks, even picking food out of his mouth while in conversation. But that’s not what gets him in with the audience. The major reason we can like him in this context has to do with his overbearing, always displeased father (James Cromwell). Bush Sr. never lets up on the son who took Jeb’s spot as President. It’s a recurring motif that won’t go away when the two Georges are mentioned in the same breath. Combine Bush’s earlier shown amiability with his now scarred son image, and you’ve got the makings of a character who can carry that empathy the audience has attained throughout the rest of the film.

There’s no question that Brolin carries the film, but the superb supporting cast doesn’t hurt either. Thandie Newton is almost unrecognizable as Condoleeza Rice. She both resembles and sounds like the actual Secretary of State, most of the time just looking without speaking, and that works all on its own. Just as pitch perfect in their role is Toby Jones as Karl Rove. He doesn’t miss a beat, pure and simple. Ellen Burstyn and Cromwell are both very believable as Bush’s parents, and Elizabeth Banks turns in her best work yet as Laura Bush. She plays the character with quiet grace and innocence, making her character as easy to like from the start as Brolin’s.

The rest of the cast is fine as well, but they don’t knock their roles out of the park. Richard Dreyfuss looks like Cheney, but he doesn’t have the voice (or the feeling of sheer terror the real Vice President exudes with such little effort). The usually reliable Jeffrey Wright doesn’t really work as Colin Powell, neither does Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld. None of them is particularly awful in their portrayals, but they’re just not as believable once you draw the comparison between their characters and the others.

In terms of technical aspects, the film has a nice pace to it. It doesn’t feel like it’s moving too fast or slow, and we never fixate on any one person or thing for too long. The real footage of past events and the way the actors are seamlessly integrated into the respective backgrounds adds to the film’s sense of realism. But even the fantasy and dream sequences work here, too. Taping into the mindset of Bush, showing him as the make believe hero of the Texas Rangers, may have been a risky choice, but it was an effective one nonetheless.

Now, the movie isn’t perfect. As was stated before, there is no actual plot, though you don’t get the sense that the movie is wandering aimlessly. Some of the lines are taken out of context (the “Fool me once. . .” speech, for example). And perhaps the biggest problem facing the movie is that there is no ending. But the good definitely outweighs the bad here. Despite what Stone’s name may suggest or what the previews may lead one to believe, this is a film any one from any party can enjoy. And while it may not change any opinions people have of Bush, it will definitely offer up a perspective that most other filmmakers would have more than likely decided not to explore.

Technorati Tags

Comments [post a comment]

more film

more from freeman montaque