Xixax Film Forum

Oliver Stone votes for 'Bush' project
Josh Brolin to play embattled president
Source: Variety

Oliver Stone has set his sights on his next directing project, "Bush," a film focusing on the life and presidency of George W. Bush, and attached Josh Brolin to play the title role.

The director has begun quietly shopping a script by his "Wall Street" co-writer Stanley Weiser.

Pic will be produced by Moritz Borman, who teamed with Stone on "World Trade Center" and "Alexander," and Jon Kilik, a producer of "Alexander" as well as "Pinkville," the pre-strike project about the Army's investigation of the My Lai massacre in Vietnam that Stone expected to direct until United Artists pulled the plug late last year.

Borman said Weiser's script was completed before the WGA strike and was ready to shoot and that many of Stone's "Pinkville" crew jumped right into "Bush." If financing materializes quickly enough, the film could start production by April and could be in theaters for the election or the inauguration.

One need only Google the words "Stone" and "Bush" to find plenty of the director's critical comments about the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq. Despite that, the director said he's not looking to make an anti-Bush polemic. His goal is to use seminal events in Bush's life to explain how he came to power, using a structure comparable to "The Queen."

"It's a behind-the-scenes approach, similar to 'Nixon,' to give a sense of what it's like to be in his skin," Stone told Daily Variety. "But if 'Nixon' was a symphony, this is more like a chamber piece, and not as dark in tone. People have turned my political ideas into a cliche, but that is superficial. I'm a dramatist who is interested in people, and I have empathy for Bush as a human being, much the same as I did for Castro, Nixon, Jim Morrison, Jim Garrison and Alexander the Great."

Stone declined to give his personal opinion of the president.

"I can't give you that, because the filmmaker has to hide in the work," Stone said. "Here, I'm the referee, and I want a fair, true portrait of the man. How did Bush go from an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world? It's like Frank Capra territory on one hand, but I'll also cover the demons in his private life, his bouts with his dad and his conversion to Christianity, which explains a lot of where he is coming from. It includes his belief that God personally chose him to be president of the United States, and his coming into his own with the stunning, preemptive attack on Iraq. It will contain surprises for Bush supporters and his detractors."

Stone said his NYU classmate Weiser did a lot of research as they worked for more than a year on the project before setting the script aside when Stone committed to "Pinkville." While UA partners Paula Wagner and Tom Cruise said they pulled the plug on that movie because of the WGA strike, Stone seemed to support widespread speculation that the strike was an excuse to kill another war-themed movie that UA was wary of making after its first release, "Lions for Lambs," flopped.

"On 'Pinkville,' I had a great script and one of the best casts on any of my films, with 40 young actors and Bruce Willis," Stone said. "It's a shame they lost faith in the film, and that they unemployed 500 people right before Christmas. We were three weeks from shooting."

Stone hopes to get his script back so he can revive "Pinkville" down the line.

Stone, Weiser and Borman had kept the "Bush" script under tight wraps, developing it under "POTUS" (President of the United States) and "Misunderestimated." Now they're aiming for a quick ramp-up to production, though both Stone and Borman believe the project will remain viable even after the presidential election.

"We've just gone out with it, and April is just around the corner," Borman said. "If we can get it done as an independent or with a studio, we can do it quickly, but nobody really knows what is happening with the SAG situation. We've found locations in Louisiana, but we will have to build sets, especially the White House. We could do it later, because it's not a film that has to be timed with the election; it's a character study of a man."

Stone looked carefully at actors before setting his sights on Brolin, whose career has drawn recent traction from memorable roles in "No Country for Old Men" and "American Gangster." Brolin just began work on the Gus Van Sant-directed "Milk," playing Dan White, the San Francisco pol who gunned down Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone. While Brolin won't make a formal deal until financing is sealed, he can be ready for an April start.

"Josh is actually better looking than Bush but has the same drive and charisma that Americans identify with Bush, who has some of that old-time movie-star swagger," Stone said.

easily my most anticipated film right now. what do you think , GT?

Quote from: cron on January 20, 2008, 10:25:39 PM
easily my most anticipated film right now. what do you think , GT?

I'm kind of conflicted. While it is an immensely more interesting project than Pinkville, Stone could be regressing by working with Stanley Weiser. He was the co-writer of Wall Street and my initial fear is that they could be working to make a film equal to their original success. Stone is well beyond Wall Street and should try to be more ambitious. If he makes a morality play as simple as Wall Street it could be lost in the shuffle the way John Sayles's attempt to define Bush was with Silver City.

On the other hand, Stone's description of the film is inviting. The events he describe that will take place in the film extend over much of his political life. Sayles (the mininamlist he is) allowed himself to be obscured when he only took on one part of Bush's political personality. He dealt with a subject that had larger interest for political buffs and cinephiles than the overall public. I think Stone will take on broader and deeper issues with Bush.

Ambitious also doesn't mean epic. I love love that he referenced The Queen. That film still astounds me for its ability to put so much into such a little story. It was one of the best filmed dramas of the last few years. And if Stone committs to a drama focused on the writing intangibles over the filmmaking intangibles it will show a clear progression for him. In a lot of ways he is his own version of Sam Peckinpah. He understands the greater dramatic purposes necessary within a film, but isn't always able to get past his cinematic tricks to show filly illustrate his understanding and appreciation of drama. Peckinpah wanted to progress beyond the action element of his filmography but couldn't. Stone has but he hasn't made simplified films that were able to match the talent of his filmmaking opuses in Natural Born Killers, JFK, Nixon and even Alexander Revisted.

I applaud him though for taking on a great subject. When he first described this film I thought he was going to make the story of Bush a comic affair, but I'm glad he's reconsidered the tone. It doesn't need to be as dark as Nixon, but it certainly doesn't need to be a new version of Natural Born Killers with lackluster characterizations and a focus on stereotypes.

i was unconsciously waiting for a new rivele /wilkinson collaboration with newspaper -film energy, so am not too excited about weiser either. i'm very happy with just the thought of stone MAYBE coming back to his personal-storytelling mode. the man's such a commited director when he wants to. nixon's so good it's daunting. this could be better because the world needs this movie. more american filmmakers need to prove right now that they haven't lost touch with reality. i  haven't seen 'the queen' because i want to check out 'the deal' first, but i guess i'll see both soon.

This sounds awesome. Another contemporary political character drama type movie from Stone coming up.....CAN NOT WAIT!!!!

Quote from: cron on January 20, 2008, 11:44:51 PM
i was unconsciously waiting for a new rivele /wilkinson collaboration with newspaper -film energy, so am not too excited about weiser either. i'm very happy with just the thought of stone MAYBE coming back to his personal-storytelling mode. the man's such a commited director when he wants to. nixon's so good it's daunting. this could be better because the world needs this movie. more american filmmakers need to prove right now that they haven't lost touch with reality. i  haven't seen 'the queen' because i want to check out 'the deal' first, but i guess i'll see both soon.

Yea, I'm excited as well. If I could project this as a 2008 release, I'd put it as my most anticipated. Considering the speed he made Nixon, I think he could do it. There is matters to take into consideration though. Stone always reminds people he has a hard time making political films about current subjects because this isn't his generation, but he's been so outspoken about Bush and current policies that it will open up his imagination. And unlike World Trade Center, he's not bound to strict interpretation of just one event. The politicial biography is his strong point.

I have a worry though. He's rushing this project so he can release the film at a topical date, but is the world ready for a major film about George W. Bush? Oliver Stone did make his film on Nixon some twenty years after the event so he was able to have a greater perspective of how the world came to be after Nixon left office. One political pundit said that Bill Clinton was a fascinating President in that he was popular but it would be hard to forecast what his legacy would end up being. The tides changed for Harry Truman as he left office and information about his Presidency started to come out over the years. Is there enough information about Bush to make a definitive film about him?

I ask that question because political films about our current situation and President have come out. I don't want this film to be another Lions for Lambs that considers itself important for the questions asked, but has a viewpoint and vision as limited as a 5 page essay. Nixon had a novel's worth of perspective. It was an encompassing portrait of a man. The hope is that he could somehow do the same for Bush even if he means to do it other ways.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/movieawards/2008-01-27-DGA_awards_N.htm

[A portion of the article]


Brolin was surprised to see director Oliver Stone, who recently cast Brolin as President Bush in his upcoming biopic, Bush, set to go before the cameras in April.

Stone said he cast Brolin in the role after seeing his 2007 body of work. "He's very rural, very American," said Stone, adding that the film will portray the president from his 20s through his early 50s, before the end of his presidency.

Brolin initially didn't want the role. "I was really against it — extremely," he said. "I came from a (anti-Bush) bias, like most people in this town. Plus it was Oliver, and I thought Oliver would be extremely biased, and I thought he had an agenda. He was telling me he didn't, and I didn't believe him. And then I read the script."

Brolin began flipping through the pages (written by Wall Street screenwriter Stanley Weiser) at 5 a.m. while on vacation with his family. "I was utterly blown away," he admitted. "It's a very unbiased bio about a guy who became president. You follow his life, and you're interested in his life. You feel for him, and you despise him and you love him and you're amazed how smart he is. And you're amazed how he's stumbling through."

Brolin said he has not yet discussed the film with his stepmother, staunch Bush criticizer Barbara Streisand. And what about the possibility of his father, James Brolin, playing the elder George Bush? Brolin got a wicked grin on his face and said, "No comment."

-------------------------------------------

Brolin chatted up THR about his latest project, "Bush," a biopic about George W. by Oliver Stone, while he waited for Lane to finish her red carpet entrance. Knowing Stone's rep as a conspiracy theorist of sorts, Brolin was hesitant to play the president, despite his political leanings or that of his famous father and stepmother. "I looked at the script and told Oliver, 'I can't do this.'" But Stone persisted, handing Brolin a refreshed script that he couldn't ignore and that apparently has something for every blue donkey or red elephant. "If you're a Democrat, you're going to say, 'I can't believe he's president.' And if you're a Republican, you're going to say, 'This is why he's president,'" Brolin said. The biopic follows Bush from his 20s to age 55 when he entered the White House, and includes his days as an oil executive, a baseball team owner and governor. Stone also tackles Bush's bout with alcoholism and becoming a Born-Again Christian.

this is exciting.

Isn't it?  Seriously.

Boo-yah! Film has been financed!


http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117979833.html?categoryid=13&cs= 1


In a move that makes the Oliver Stone-directed "Bush" a reality, QED has closed a deal to fully finance a drama that will begin production in April.

...

QED will finance a budget north of $25 million in partnership with Aramid, the U.K.-based hedge fund. Pic gives QED two plum titles, as the company is also financing "Peter Jackson's District 9," the sci-fi film that director Neill Blomkamp and producer Peter Jackson hatched after Universal and Fox unplugged their plan to team on "Halo." That also starts production in the spring, and Sony will distribute.

Elizabeth Banks joins 'W' as Laura Bush
Source: Hollywood Reporter

Elizabeth Banks is going from the world of adult films to the White House.

The actress, who recently wrapped shooting Kevin Smith's "Zack and Miri Make a Porno," is in final negotiations to portray Laura Bush in "W," Oliver Stone's biopic on the life and presidency of George W. Bush.

Josh Brolin already is on board to play Bush in the biopic, which begins shooting in late April in Shreveport, La.

Stone wrote the screenplay with his "Wall Street" co-writer Stanley Weiser.

Moritz Borman, who worked with Stone on "World Trade Center" and "Alexander," is producing, as is Jon Kilik.

Sorry, I just saw the news and had no idea this was even in the works. WTF? This is like hearing that Mel Gibson is going to South America to make a movie about the Mayans. Stone has lost it. How will anyone take this movie seriously? I am very excited at the same time because I love Brolin and think he'll be great no matter what. But this has me nervous.

This is an interesting development. I'm still optimistic though.

Oliver Stone casts parents of 'W'
Cromwell, Burstyn to play Bush Sr., Barbara
Source: Variety

Director Oliver Stone has set James Cromwell to play George Herbert Walker Bush and Ellen Burstyn to play former first lady Barbara Bush in "W," a drama about the formative years of their son, President George W. Bush.

Josh Brolin is playing the title character, and Elizabeth Banks will play first lady Laura Bush.

Stone will direct from a script by his "Wall Street" co-writer Stanley Weiser. Moritz Borman is producing with Bill Block and Jon Kilik.

Block's QED International is financing the film, which will begin shooting Shreveport, La., at the end of April.

Cromwell recently made another fact-based foray in a film about an iconic political figure: He played Prince Philip alongside Helen Mirren in "The Queen."

Stone was calling the project "Bush" when he began showing it to buyers (Daily Variety, Jan. 21), but the filmmakers are now calling it "W." The film is expected to be ready for distribution possibly by the November presidential elections and certainly before Bush leaves the White House in January.

Quote from: MacGuffin on March 27, 2008, 01:05:26 AM

Director Oliver Stone has set James Cromwell to play George Herbert Walker Bush

best casting ever

god this is going to be great on so many levels.

Fucking amazing!!!!!!

http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2008/03/george-w-bushs.html

EW.com is reporting that Jeffrey Wright is in talks to play Colin Powell and Oliver Stone is also trying to reach out to Robert Duvall to play Dick Cheney. If Robert Duvall was involved I'd go through the roof.

Oliver Stone Heads Back To The Oval Office For 'W,' A 'Fair, True Portrait' Of George W. Bush
'I have empathy for Bush as a human being,' director says of his upcoming project, starring Josh Brolin and Elizabeth Banks.
By Shawn Adler; MTV

Rarely is the question asked: Is our filmmakers learning?

Twelve years after he hit pay dirt with the critically lauded "Nixon," controversial director Oliver Stone is back in the Oval Office for "W," a look at the life and times of President George Walker Bush.

Co-written by "Wall Street" scribe Stanley Weiser, "W" has already corralled a cast that no one should misunderestimate, headlined by "No Country for Old Men" star Josh Brolin as the onetime prodigal son-turned-most powerful man in the world. Suiting up as his better half, first lady Laura Bush, is "Zack and Miri Make a Porno" actress Elizabeth Banks, while James Cromwell and Oscar winner Ellen Burstyn have signed on to play George's parents, former President George H.W. Bush and Barbara, respectively.

Among other roles, it is rumored that Paul Giamatti has been approached to play top aide Karl Rove, according to New York magazine.

While "Nixon" was a somewhat-critical look at the former president, Stone, a vocal critic of Bush's decision to invade Iraq, told Variety that this film aims to be a "fair, true portrait of the man."

"I'm the referee," he told the trade magazine. "It will contain surprises for Bush supporters and his detractors. It's like Frank Capra territory on one hand, but I'll also cover the demons in his private life, his bouts with his dad and his conversion to Christianity, which explains a lot of where he is coming from."

In that respect, Stone told Variety, the film will use "a behind-the-scenes approach, similar to 'Nixon,' to give a sense of what it's like to be in his skin."

"I'm a dramatist who is interested in people, and I have empathy for Bush as a human being, much the same as I did for Castro, Nixon, [Doors frontman] Jim Morrison, [JFK investigator] Jim Garrison and Alexander the Great," he added.

"W" is expected to reach theaters before January, when Bush will officially leave office, although it is unclear whether it will open before the 2008 presidential election.

Daddy Issues, War Lust in Oliver Stone's 'W'
Controversial Filmmaker's Early Script Depicts President Bush's Hard-Partying Youth and Feuds With His Father
By MARCUS BARAM; ABC News

It's a classic American story: In the prime of his life, a man who parties too much and lives in the shadow of his esteemed father turns his life around. He gives up alcohol, embraces religion and finds a new purpose in life.

Coming soon to a movie theater near you: controversial director Oliver Stone's "W," the life story of President George W. Bush, a warts-and-all portrayal.

Though the movie is scheduled for release in 2009, there is a chance that it might be pushed up to come out before the November election, say insiders.

The movie, which starts filming this month with "No Country for Old Men" actor Josh Brolin playing Bush, paints a humanistic portrait of the president along with plenty of embarrassing anecdotes from his life story, judging by a copy of an early screenplay obtained by ABCNEWS.com.

The film's script captures purported notorious moments in Bush's life:

*Rumors that his father pulled strings to get him into Harvard Business School.

*His arrest during college for tearing down the goalposts at a football game.

*Almost getting into a fistfight with his father when he comes home drunk one night in the 1970s.

*His vow to quit drinking when he wakes up with a wicked hangover soon after his 40th birthday.

It also covers plenty of his administration's lowlights -- from Bush's reported obsession with invading Iraq, which Stone will portray as a desire to avenge Saddam Hussein's assassination attempt on Bush's father and his frustration with the failed search for WMDs to his penchant for malapropisms and cheery optimism about the chances for civil war in Iraq.

Hard Drinking, Family Feud

The first scene, in which Bush and his advisers brainstorm different terms to describe their global enemies, from "Axis of Hatred" to "Axis of Unbearably Odious," is followed by an early glimpse of the hard-drinking young man when he was a college student at Yale.

Drinking vodka mixed with orange juice out of a trash can at the DKE frat house, Bush impresses the fraternity leader with his ability to memorize the names of his fellow pledges.

Asked whether he'll follow in the steps of his politician father and grandfather, Dubya quips, "Hell no, that's the last thing in the world I'd want to do."

Years later, after Dubya drains a pint of Wild Turkey and runs over a pile of trash cans while driving home, his angry father tells him to call Alcoholics Anonymous, prompting Dubya to sarcastically deride his dad as "Mr. Perfect. Mr. War Hero. Mr F-- God Almighty."

Stone, who mined psychological motives in his previous presidential movies, from the conspiratorial "JFK" to the dark character study of "Nixon," makes much of Bush's competitive relationship with his father and how it fueled his desire to invade Iraq.

When Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld purportedly confronts Bush in 2002 about his obsession with Saddam: "What's the big deal about Saddam? Bin Laden's the trained ape that wrought this hell on us," Dubya's response sounds like a line out of "The Godfather": "You don't go after the Bushes and get to talk about it. Ya got me?"

After his born-again experience, Bush says that he doesn't ask his dad for advice because "there's a higher Father I appeal to."

When his father cries after losing to Bill Clinton in 1992, Bush sticks it to his dad by telling him that he would have won if he'd ousted Saddam at the end of the first Gulf War.

When Bush's parents tell him to hold off running for governor of Texas until after younger brother Jeb Bush has a chance to wins Florida's top spot, Barbara tells him that he can't win because "you're loud and you have a short fuse."

Stone also portrays the president as stubborn and aggressive when it came to prosecuting the war in Iraq.

Before the invasion, he tells a shocked British Prime Minister Tony Blair about alternative plans such as baiting Saddam by painting a U.S. spy plane in U.N. colors and assassinating the Iraqi leader.

When he hears about French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac's desire to give weapons inspectors 30 more days to work in Iraq, Bush explodes: "Thirty days! I'd like to stuff a plate of freedom fries down that slick piece of s--'s throat!"

The Lighter Side of Bush

Stone includes many lighter moments, such as Bush's fondness for nicknames and teasing, like calling Colin Powell "Balloon Foot" and telling Paul Wolfowitz to trim his ear hairs.

In one scene, Bush practices his parachute landing in the White House pool but forgets to properly release the harness and sinks to the bottom. In another scene, Rumsfeld doodles a drawing of Condoleeza Rice standing on a piano with a globe spinning on her finger.

During the planning of the war, Bush and his top advisers are shown locking the war-wary Powell out of a room, erupting into laughter when they finally let him in.

Other times, Bush's light touch seems blithely out of touch with reality. While he munches on bologna and cheese sandwiches on white bread, he brags to Cheney about how his running time has improved since the Afghanistan invasion.

And he compares the troops' ordeal in the deserts of Iraq to his ability to run in 100-degree heat. At one point, Bush describes giving up sweets as "my personal sacrifice to show support for our troops."

He interrupts a meeting with Prince Bandar, in which he informs the Saudi ambassador about plans to invade Iraq, so that he can catch the rest of the 2002 Miami Dolphins-Baltimore Ravens playoff game. Bush is later shown choking on a pretzel and passing out during the second quarter.

But the film also strives to paint a humanistic portrait of the commander in chief, with Bush once telling the Rev. Billy Graham that "there's this darkness that follows me."

"People say I was born with a silver spoon, but they don't know the burden that carries."

Soon after a disastrous news conference in April 2004, Bush retreats to the White House den to watch a Texas Rangers game in the final scene of the script.

Popping open a nonalcoholic beer, he lapses into his favorite dream: playing center field for the Rangers. Hearing the crack of the bat, he looks up for the ball but he can't find it in the sky.

Is it Accurate?

Stone, who was accused of reanimating long-discredited conspiracy theories in "JFK" and bending the facts in his other films, might come under fire for his portrayal of Bush as an impetuous leader.

Already, one former Bush administration official objects to the accuracy of the film.

One explosive scene in the movie features press secretary Ari Fleischer complaining to Bush about longtime reporter Helen Thomas who questioned the run-up to the war in Iraq.

Bush explodes in a profanity-laced outburst , "Did you tell her I don't like motherf-- who gas their own people! Did you tell her I don't like a-- holes who try to kill my father! Did you tell her I'm going to kick his ... a-- all over the Middle East?"

"It's fantasy," said Fleischer. "He used to talk like that before he was president? But he never talked like that around me. He mentioned his father once, in a public setting, at a fundraiser in Houston in 2002. "

Fleischer doesn't blame Stone, explaining that the screenwriter did his research and that there are erroneous accounts of the administration in books and magazines. "Hollywood is Hollywood."

The White House declined comment on the movie and its portrayal of the president.

How Will It Do?

One film columnist, who has read the script, thinks that it's a well-written story that could do well.

"The lifeblood of this film is not content, there's nothing revelatory or stunning in it, but acting opportunities especially for Josh Brolin as Bush," said Jeffrey Wells, who runs the movie blog Hollywood-elsewhere.com.

"It's about a guy who's got a life-long identity crisis but he finds himself when he goes to war. He uses the Iraq War to assert himself and make him feel like he's his own man."

If the movie, which also stars "40-Year-Old Virgin" star Elizabeth Banks as Laura Bush, comes out before the election, it could have an effect because John McCain's support for the Iraq War remains a central part of his message.

"It's happened before where movies such as 'All the President's Men' have had an impact on an election," said Robert Brent Toplin, a professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington and the author of "Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11: How One Film Divided a Nation."

"That movie hurt Gerald Ford by revealing the investigation and focusing on the corruption of the Nixon administration. He lost by a few points in 1976 and the movie came out early that spring."

Moore's" Fahrenheit 9/11" came out before the 2004 election but it didn't prove to have much of an effect. "The right-wingers did a good job of discrediting the message and the messenger," said Toplin.

Many political movies, such as "Primary Colors" and "Wag the Dog," didn't have much of an effect and didn't do that well at the box office. "But if Stone can make this entertaining, the timing could be superb."

Thandie Newton, Ioan Gruffudd cast in 'W'
Source: Hollywood Reporter

The Bush administration is coming together -- and adding a key ally for good measure.

Oliver Stone has found the actress to play Condoleezza Rice in his upcoming "W," with Thandie Newton in final negotiations to star as the National Security Advisor-turned-Secretary of State.

Meanwhile, Ioan Gruffudd is in final talks to play former British prime minister Tony Blair.

Rice and Blair are the first non-Bush roles to be cast; Josh Brolin, James Cromwell, Elizabeth Banks and Ellen Burstyn had previously been cast as George W., George Sr., Laura and Barbara Bush, respectively.

Also notable is the fact that Newton, who was born in Zambia and raised in England, is a Brit, making her the first non-American to be cast for a role in the U.S. administration. Gruffudd is also a Brit and is, of course, playing one.

Newton has previously had roles in "The Pursuit of Happyness" and "Mission: Impossible II." She's currently in Picturehouse's "Run, Fat Boy, Run" and stars in Guy Ritchie's upcoming mob pic "RocknRolla."

Gruffudd, known for turns in "Titanic" and the "Fantastic Four" franchise, stars in the upcoming period fantasy "The Secret of Moonacre."

Stone's "W" is expected to start shooting shortly, with QED and Stone's own Ixtlan banner producing and QED financing. Bill Block, Moritz Borman and Jon Kilik are producers.

The movie will look at Bush's formative years and path to the president as well as his life inside the White House.

As one of the few cabinet members to serve during both Bush terms, Rice's role in the Bush White House is seen as pivotal. According to those who've read the "W" script, Rice is said to be in a key first scene as well as a number of scenes connected to the Iraq War. Blair also appears in Iraq-related scenes.

Stone has said he wants to draw a fair-minded portrait of the polarizing figure. Sources familiar with the script say Bush is depicted as an easily distracted figure predisposed to personal agendas, though they say the script occasionally shows a more sympathetic side.

Among the key "W" roles yet to be cast are Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and advisor Karl Rove.

Bush biographers mixed on script for Oliver Stone's 'W'
Source: Hollywood Reporter

President George W. Bush is a foul-mouthed, reformed drunk obsessed with baseball, Saddam Hussein and a conflicted relationship with his dad. Or at least that's how he's portrayed in the script for Oliver Stone's upcoming feature "W."

But how accurate is that depiction?

As the film preps for its April 21 start date, The Hollywood Reporter sent a copy of the screenplay to four Bush biographers for their comments. The draft is dated Oct. 17, 2007, and has recently been circulated to talent, though a person close to the film said the script has since gone through at least two drafts.

Naturally, what a director does with a script is how a movie is ultimately judged, but because this screenplay depicts a sitting president and the run-up to the war in Iraq, its authenticity is becoming a hotly debated subject -- not to mention the fact that any historical material Stone has touched has become controversial.

Reactions to the script from the biographers were mixed. They said specific scenes are largely based in fact but noted that the screenplay contains inaccurate and over-the-top caricatures of Bush and his inner circle.

"It leaves you with the impression that the White House is run as a fraternity house with no reverence for hierarchy, the office itself or for the implications of policy," said Robert Draper, author of "Dead Certain: The Presidency of George Bush." "Everybody calling everybody else nicknames and chatting about whether to go to war as if they were chatting about how to bet on a football game really misses the mark of how many White Houses, including this one, are run."

Jacob Weisberg ("The Bush Tragedy") was skeptical about Stone's claim that he wants to make "a fair, true portrait" of Bush. "His saying he is going to be fair to Bush is like Donald Trump saying he is going to be modest," Weisberg quipped.

"W," which is set to begin filming in Shreveport, La., with Bill Block's QED financing a budget of about $30 million, stars Josh Brolin and James Cromwell as Bush 43 and 41, respectively. The film is being closely watched in entertainment and political circles, in part because Stone has said his goal is to release it while Bush is still in office and possibly in time for the November election.

In the script -- then titled "Bush" -- the president's policy judgments are often manipulated by his White House staff, a depiction several of the biographers said did not ring true.

"The problem here is it goes to this notion of Bush as being the passive receiver of policy and the White House being run by (Dick) Cheney, (Donald) Rumsfeld, (Karl) Rove and others," Draper said. "Bush's adversaries have been ill-served by this belief that Bush is an observer to his own presidency. This notion that his schedule is driven by what's on ESPN is ludicrous."

The biographers were split on the accuracy of some eye-popping details in the screenplay, including scenes in which Bush nearly crashes a plane while under the influence of alcohol and another in which he tells wife Laura he wishes his father had not been elected president.

"That story was running around," said Skip Hollandsworth (Texas Monthly's "Born to Run" profile). "But he was extremely upset later about (Ross) Perot entering that race, and very angry. That doesn't make sense."

Stone declined to comment for this report. Screenwriter Stanley Weiser, who wrote "W" and also co-wrote Stone's "Wall Street," said: "I have no comment other than the fact that I have read 17 books on Bush."

"We've done our homework," said Moritz Borman, one of the film's producers. " 'W' will not be a documentary. It will be a compelling account of the actions and motivations of this president, fully guided by facts that have been established and documented."

What ends up in the final draft could have a big impact on the market for the film, whose financial prospects may actually depend on how many feathers it ruffles.

"Controversy can only help this film," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of boxoffice tracking firm Media By Numbers. "It's a tough marketing challenge because none of the politically charged films or films about the war have been doing well. But Oliver Stone's bread and butter is controversy. It's part of his brand."

Stone's previous presidential examinations, 1991's "JFK" and 1995's "Nixon," became cultural lightning rods. They grossed $70.4 million and $13.7 million domestically, respectively.

A film analyzing the life of a lame-duck president might be a tougher sell, especially if Americans are more interested in the man or woman who will replace him.

"But the country is in really rough shape," Dergarabedian said. "So maybe people will want to know how we got here and what Bush's legacy might be."

QED's Block acknowledged that controversy would help market the film, which he said he presold to some foreign distributors during the Berlin Film Festival in February and will continue to sell at the Cannes market next month.

The QED CEO, who is also one of the picture's producers, said he was in talks with a major Hollywood studio to distribute it domestically. He declined to name the studio.

Because no domestic deal is in place, it is uncertain whether the movie will be released in North America before November. Such a release date would drop the picture squarely into the presidential election debate, where it would likely be picked apart by commentators across the political spectrum.

All four Bush biographers cast doubt on one scene in which a wave crashes on a rocky promontory as Bush reveals: "There's this darkness that follows me ..."

"He doesn't think or talk like that," Weisberg said. "The darkness sounds like they've been listening to too much Springsteen. It doesn't ring psychologically true to me."

The movie, which intercuts between past and present and follows Bush from his twenties to the White House, begins in the Oval Office with the president and his staffers discussing the term "axis of hatred" and deciding that "axis of evil" sounds better.

"That phrase did evolve," Weisberg said. "There was a funny debate about who got credit, which is hilarious when you think what a disaster it was."

The biographers were torn over the portrayal of Bush's relationship with Cheney, depicted as far more competitive than generally acknowledged. "Just keep your ego in check. I'm the president. I'm the decider," Bush tells Cheney privately at one point, employing the term he actually used in a news conference.

"What that gets wrong is, Cheney has been absolutely astute in reading Bush's insecurities and Cheney knows very well how not to make Bush feel that his status as decision-maker is in doubt," Weisberg said.

Peter Schweizer ("The Bushes: Portrait of a Dynasty") disagreed. "I would say: true on the conflict," he said. "I don't know specifically about the 'ego in check.' But there is no question you are dealing with strong personalities, and there was tension and conflict, as there was between George H.W. Bush and Reagan."

All four biographers confirmed the accuracy of one striking scene in which a young Bush challenges his father to a fistfight after coming home drunk. And while they recognized the nickname "Turdblossom" for Rove, they were less familiar with "Balloon Foot," which Stone's Bush uses for Colin Powell. And some felt that "Pooty Poot" for Vladimir Putin was taken from New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, not Bush himself.

Overall, the biographers said they were not opposed to the story of America's 43rd president being told by Stone.

"I understand this is a movie, not pure history," Schweizer said. "But if Stone wants to portray this as an accurate accounting, he has some serious work to do."

Block, for one, said accuracy was vital to the filmmakers.

"When you embark on something as important as this," he said, "the truth is extremely important, and Oliver is relentless about the truth and facts."

Added Block: "It is not going to be simplistic at all. It is powerful and not trying to be skewed to the left, but to be real. The truth is surprising and, frankly, shocking enough."

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogsmithmedia.com%2Fwww.cinematical.com%2Fmedia%2F2008%2F05%2Few.jpg&hash=f390c3404fc8e14325aeba3e5a4ea1f20409adff)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.timeinc.net%2Few%2Fdynamic%2Fimgs%2F080507%2Fcover-story%2Fjosh-brolin_l.jpg&hash=b4ff49df83f3e507fd1dd3c08ef3306c1170739b)


First Look: 'W,' Oliver Stone's Bush Biopic
Entertainment Weekly goes inside the director's dark, comic, and already controversial movie about George W. Bush's rise to power, starring Josh Brolin
By Benjamin Svetkey

''Where is George Bush's bedroom?''

Oliver Stone is flinging open French doors inside an enormous brick mansion in Shreveport, La., inspecting locations for his new film about the 43rd President of the United States. ''This one is too small,'' he says. ''This one looks like George Tenet's bedroom. Where did we decide to put Bush's bedroom? It's around here somewhere, isn't it?''

Shooting begins in less than two weeks on W (or dub-ya, as it's spelled out in the initial sketches for the poster), but not everything is exactly where it should be, and not only here in the house where the First Family's residence will be re-created. The 32,000-square-foot soundstage the production is rent¬ing across town stands empty, waiting for the Oval Office and Cabinet Room sets to get trucked in from Los Angeles. The screenplay still needs work too. It's gone through two rewrites since an earlier draft leaked to the press last month (some skeptics took it as an April Fools' joke), but Stone would still like one more pass at it (''It's evolving,'' he says). And while most of the cast has been assembled and outfitted with prosthetic noses and hairpieces — Josh Brolin will play President George W. Bush and Elizabeth Banks will star as Laura — there is one major character still in search of an actor: a heavy named Dick Cheney.

Stone is famous for courting controversy with dramas like JFK (1991) and Nixon (1995). But with W, the 61-year-old filmmaker isn't merely courting it — he's grabbing controversy by the lapels and giving it a big wet smacker. For the first time, he's turning his cameras not just on a living president but on one who'll still be knocking around the White House when the movie premieres late this year. As if that weren't provocative enough, Stone could end up releasing the film as early as October, at the height of a presidential campaign in which one of the major issues will undoubtedly be the legacy of the guy on the screen. The movie has become a lightning rod before Stone has shot a single frame. If that bootlegged script is any indication, the film will feature such flag-waving moments as the Commander-in-Chief nearly choking to death on a pretzel while watching football on TV and a flashback of him singing the ''Whiffenpoof'' song as a frat pledge at Yale, not to mention scenes in which he refers to his advisers by dorky nicknames — ''Guru'' for Condoleezza Rice, ''Turdblossom'' for Karl Rove, ''Balloon Foot'' for Colin Powell — while discussing plans for the invasion of Iraq with the coolness of a late-night poker game.

This movie is still the biggest WHAT THE FUCK in my life right now. Why is Laura thirty-appearing years his junior????

they need to dumb his face up quite a bit.  they also revealed this way too early.

They should have gotten Frank Caliendo to be Bush... nobody does a better impression of him, even without makeup and fat he looks like W!

What if Brolin's face gets stuck like that? That's more squinting than any man should have to endure.

Oliver Stone making a comedy? Maybe, with Bush film

"W" may not be Oscar-winning director Oliver Stone's first political biopic or even his first controversial film, but it may be his first comedy.

Stone, who has made movies of past presidents including Richard M. Nixon, is now shooting "W," about President George W. Bush's life, and the film has already stirred up controversy in Hollywood for what Stone may -- or may not -- say.

His first words on the film: "Bush is funny."

"This movie can be funnier because Bush is funny," Stone told Entertainment Weekly magazine in the issue that hits newsstands on Friday.

"He's awkward and goofy and makes faces all the time. He's not your average president. So let's have some fun with it," Stone said.

The director, 61, is best known for Vietnam war films such as "Platoon" and "Born on the Fourth of July," as well as thriller "Natural Born Killers" and political dramas "JFK" and "Nixon," which met with controversy for his looks at John F. Kennedy's assassination and Nixon's doomed presidency.

"W" has snapshots of a 26-year-old Bush crashing his car into his parents' lawn in Washington, D.C., interspersed with Bush, as president, playfully stealing a mint from U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, according to the story in Entertainment Weekly.

"It's almost Capra-esque, the story of a guy who had very limited talents in life, except for the ability to sell himself," Stone said of Bush's life.

Frank Capra, of course, is the director of homespun American movies such as 1939's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" and 1946's "It's a Wonderful Life."

While "W" will not likely to redeem the increasingly unpopular president's image, it delves into a life overshadowed by events and people larger in stature than him. Stone even admits to admiring some of the president's attributes.

"The fact that he had to overcome the shadow of his father and the weight of his family name, you have to admire his tenacity" Stone said.

But Stone was unable to find funding for "W" from a major Hollywood studio, so he resorted to independent financing. He and his producers aim to have the movie in theaters before this November's presidential election and maybe as soon as October.

Stone signed Josh Brolin to play Bush and Elizabeth Banks, First Lady Laura Bush. Other cast members include James Cromwell as former President George H.W. Bush and Ellen Burstyn as former First Lady Barbara Bush. Thandie Newton plays Rice. One key figure not yet cast is Vice President Dick Cheney.

Richard Dreyfuss heads to the White House
To play Dick Cheney in Oliver Stone's upcoming "W"
Source: Hollywood Reporter
 
CANNES -- Josh Brolin has a vice president.

Richard Dreyfuss could soon make the trip to Oliver Stone's White House, entering final negotiations to play Dick Cheney in the provcateur director's upcoming "W."

The role is the last major position in the Bush administration to be filled; the West Wing is already occupied by the likes of Brolin (President Bush) Thandie Newton (Condoleezza Rice) and Elizabeth Banks (Laura Bush).

The 60-year-old Dreyfuss has never played a U.S. leader, but has had a few related roles. He starred as an opposition senator to Michael Douglas' commander in chief in 1995's "The American President," as Alexander Haig in a television movie about Ronald Reagan and played the president of a banana republic in the 1980s comedy "Moon Over Parador."

The QED-produced "W," which has been granted a waiver by SAG, begins shooting this month in Shreveport, La. QED has been selling territorial rights at Cannes' Marche du Film, with the idea that the movie will be released in October, before Americans elect a new president. A DVD release will follow in January timed to Bush leaving office.

He should have played Rove, given that he pretty much played him already in Silver City. Still, a good man to have on board. I'm so intrigued by this film: it's either going to be absolutely fascinating or one of the most embarrassing movies ever.

Quote from: children with angels on May 22, 2008, 05:44:57 PM
He should have played Rove, given that he pretty much played him already in Silver City. Still, a good man to have on board. I'm so intrigued by this film: it's either going to be absolutely fascinating or one of the most embarrassing movies ever.

I'm worried about the film myself. The problem is that Stone is making a biography film about a man that so many people already have preconceived ideas about that he's going to have go beyond the general story. Critics of the screenplay already say the film is too comedic and just makes Bush look like a frat boy, but Stone wants this film to exist between the confines of a comedy and a drama. He'll make the portrait of Bush schewed between the idea of  him being a goofball and a man chosen by God. Stone's best films have been about dual personalities that exist in people, but I fear Stone may under sell the Bush we know by not representing his huge errors and missteps enough. Stone will argue his outlook of Bush is strictly personal, but he'll need to convince people that the personal outlook he shows also signifies the public and political Bush we know. I'm worried Stone's Bush will not have enough representation of the real Bush.

It's good to make comedy out of political figures, but I always feel the issue is how you balance the comedic elements with the real life associations. Kubrick did excellent work with Dr. Strangelove. He knew he was taking liberties with ideas in the film, but he understood the nature of generals was that they were extreme characters of distinct insanity. It later became documented that politicians had to continually argue generals out of declaring war because it was their first instinct. Kubrick tapped into a real problem with his gross exaggeration. Then there is what Chaplin did with The Great Dictator. He took exaggerations of Adolf Hitler so far that there was no recognition of Hitler at all. It wasn't a subversive comedy because Hitler's real personality wasn't taken into account. I hope Stone is able to do what closer to what Kubrick did in W. (And the film is called W. Just the W on the thread looks weird.)

Duvall was such a perfect Cheney that Dreyfuss almost feels like a let down. However he's an awesome actor and I'm hoping he gets a chance to do something substantial, as Paul Sorvino did with Kissinger.

I didn't like Stone defining this story as "almost capraesque". But I'm glad everything is pointing in a direction more in Stone's usual vein: risky. No one really know what to expect this time, and the topic is so unfriendly with audiences that there's no way he's gonna jump the shark and do another WTC.

Who's making the score to this?

Interview: Oliver Stone 
Source: Mike Goodridge; Screen Daily

"America has defined itself in the early 21st century as a cowboy state. George W Bush has hyperbolically expressed all the cowboy mentality the world holds of America."

So says Oliver Stone from Louisiana, three days before he starts shooting W, his serio-comic look at the 43rd president of the USA and one of the most controversial figures of our time.

Sold internationally by QED International, W looks at the president from the age of 20 to 58, after the start of the Iraq war. Although the time periods will be mixed up throughout the film, it is, says Stone, a "three-act film" starting with Bush as a young man "with a missed life", then his transformation and "an assertion of will which was amazingly powerful" as he emerged from his father's shadow, and finally his invasion of Iraq. "He achieved what his father did not by getting re-elected," says Stone. "What he does with that is the question."

Stone says the tone of the film is "ideally in the vein of Network or Dr Strangelove. I was a young man when I saw Dr Strangelove and it still stays with me. It took a very grim subject and turned it into a serio-comic story and it worked. So those would be great models for the movie to live by."

Stone and his writer Stanley Weiser developed the project in early 2007 and Weiser worked on the screenplay while Stone prepared Pinkville at United Artists (UA). But when UA pulled the plug on Pinkville, Stone immediately switched his attentions to W, securing Josh Brolin to play the title character in December.

"He is one of the great characters of this time and I think he has had enormous impact on the world and our generation as well as future generations," says Stone, who points out that Bush's popularity in America's heartland remains enormous.

"I am sitting in the Bible belt and frankly there is a lot more affection for him than you think. Americans voted for him in quite big numbers in both elections. As someone told me the other day: he liked Bush because he doesn't try to pretend and try to be something he isn't; he tells it like it is."

Casting the cabinet

Joining Brolin in the cast is a rich ensemble of well-known movie actors including Elizabeth Banks as Laura Bush, James Cromwell as George Bush Sr, Ellen Burstyn as Barbara Bush, Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell, Thandie Newton as Condoleezza Rice, Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld, Toby Jones as Karl Rove and Ioan Gruffudd as Tony Blair. Richard Dreyfuss is in talks to star as Dick Cheney.

"It's about his inner workings and his people," says Stone, who adds that Saddam Hussein is characterised in the movie "in a pretty funny way".

Meanwhile Stacy Keach plays a composite of evangelical ministers, including Billy Graham and Jim Robison, who influenced Bush in his conversion to Christianity.

"Richard Nixon very much invoked the silent majority and the friendship of Billy Graham, but Mr Bush has taken (religion) further than ever (into government) and so we have to dramatise that," says Stone. "We must on the surface take his conversion seriously. It is the centrepiece of his change. At the age of 40, he was a drinker and he changed quite radically over a period of four years, so something happened to him. Whether he became the same person on the other side of the coin is an interesting issue and I examine that too. Some of the characteristics, however, never disappeared such as the temperament, the anger and the impatience."

The film, however, won't be an intense three-hour drama like Stone's 1995 biopic of Richard Nixon. "It's not as psychologically heavy," says the director. "I don't perceive George Junior as troubled or as psychoanalytical as Richard Nixon although there is a remarkable similarity in their presidencies. Nixon was more ambitious in scope and time. This is more of a souffle. You have to laugh a little bit at (Bush's presidency) because there are so many sad things in this. It's tragicomedy."

Stone seems more blase than he was earlier in his career about criticism. He is determined to make films which attempt to understand events and people from this era.

"I am still trying to understand America myself," he says. "I was born the same year as Bush and we went to Yale at the same time. I am of his generation and these are questions that concern me. As you know from my body of work, I love this country, I love what it stands for and what it's done. At the same time I have been critical of many of its policies publicly and in my films and I've taken my share of heat for that. I have been so trashed for JFK, Nixon and others that I just pass on and say, OK, I am just going to do my perception of what happened. I am flitting through my time and all I can do really is to reflect what I see of that time."

Inside the president's mind

Assumptions are that Stone and Brolin will be critical and mocking of Bush, but Stone begs to differ, arguing the actor is putting aside any personal political differences in an attempt to understand the character.

"Josh is professional and is trying to understand how (Bush's) brain works," says Stone. "Whatever you say about him as a human being, he has had his share of problems and obstacles to overcome. In the south, one of the reasons they like him is for his sense of family and his commitment to his faith. Those factors make him a very decent human being in the eyes of many people. Tony Blair for one fell for him and liked him a lot. Blair was a very sophisticated man who had traveled the world and look what happened, he was a big fan of George Bush. In fact, he has since declared his Catholicism."

Meanwhile Stone is pleased that Lionsgate has picked up rights in North America (as well as UK and Australia) to the film after a unanimous rebuff from all the major studios.

"It's ultimately better for the film because they won't be as pressured or intimidated by the corporate concepts," he says. "It was always a very good script but people would rather not be bothered. It is easier not to be bothered: 'Why should I make it because I work for a giant corporation and maybe in three months' time someone is going to come down and nail me for it.' It's really sad. It's a risk-free environment now. It used to be an environment where the studio chiefs were bosses and made up their own mind."

Instead, producers Jon Kilik, Moritz Borman and Bill Block assembled a complex financing structure for the $25m film consisting of Block's QED, Australia's Omnilab Media, China-based Emperor Group, Thomas Sterchi's Condor Films and Hong Kong's Global Entertainment Group.

Lionsgate plans to release the film on October 17 to coincide with the last few months of Bush's presidency, and Stone is confident that international sales will be strong on the back of fascination with the controversial Bush.

"We will do better overseas than people think. You think he will be done in January. Bullshit. His influence will be felt for many years. We will never forget him. He is not going to be a forgotten president."

Teaser poster:

http://themovingpicture.net/teaser-poster-for-oliver-stone%e2%80%99s-w

Havnt they been selling posters like these at Spencer's Gifts for years now...?

Oliver Stone vs. George W. Bush
Source: Los Angeles Times

It feels like moviedom's version of an Ultimate Fighting grudge match--Bush vs. Stone.

The two men were born into wealth and were briefly classmates at Yale, but since then, the twain has hardly met. One ducked out of military service, boozed and brawled until he found God, ran a baseball team and turned to politics, ending up as governor of Texas and a two-term president, though the last years, thanks to a disastrous war in Iraq, have been pretty much of a fiasco, with his party losing Congress and his popularity ratings at historic lows. The other earned medals in Vietnam before emerging as a bigger-than-life Hollywood filmmaker, tackling the Big Issues of the day ("Platoon," "Wall Street" and "JFK") before seeing his own career take a downhill slide of its own, the bumps in the road smoothed over with booze and psychedelics.

Now another chapter is being written. Down in Louisiana, Oliver Stone has been shooting "W," his very personal take on the psychological evolution of George W. Bush, the movie everyone in Hollywood is dying to see but no one was willing to fund. It stars Josh Brolin as Dubya, with Richard Dreyfuss as Dick Cheney and Elizabeth Banks as Laura Bush.

Our film reporter John Horn has just returned from steamy Shreveport, where he watched Stone filming a father-son scene between Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. set during Dubya's tenure as owner of the Texas Rangers, with a local football stadium standing in for the Rangers' home field. John's story will run this Sunday, but here's a sneak peek at some of his interview with Stone.

Horn writes: "Racing to film, edit and release the film before the November election, Stone was not always getting even five hours of sleep a night. Even though it was nearly midnight and the crew was just finishing its lunch break, the 61-year-old director grew increasingly animated talking about 'W.'

" 'I love Michael Moore, but I didn't want to make that kind of movie,' Stone said of 'Fahrenheit 9/11.' It ["W"] is not an overly serious movie, but it is a serious subject. It's a Shakespearean story ... I see it as the strange unfolding of American democracy as I have lived it.' "

Later on, Horn gets Stone to offer his own armchair psychoanalysis of the president:

"Stone, who was briefly a Yale classmate of Bush, is clearly no fan of the president's politics, but says he's amazed by his resilience and ambition. 'He won a huge amount of people to his side after making a huge amount of blunders and really lying to people,' the director said. What further fascinates Stone is Bush's religious and personal conversion: a hard-drinking C student who was able to become not only Texas governor but also the leader of the free world.

" 'We are trying to walk in the footsteps of W and try to feel like he does, to try to get inside his head. But it's never meant to demean him,' Stone said. 'We are playing with our own opinions and our own preconceptions of him. This is his diary--his attempt to explain himself in his own words.' "

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2008-06%2F40497430.jpg&hash=9b47f4f792a68dcc10b49a5fb07e5043c5701800)


Oliver Stone and 'W.,' a story of President Bush
The openly political director goes where some fear to tread.
By John Horn, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

SHREVEPORT, LA. -- IT'S A conversation any father and son might have -- a quick chat about baseball, families and world affairs. But when the speakers are President George H. W. Bush and his son George W. Bush, even a seemingly innocuous conversation can suddenly carry great weight, especially when Oliver Stone is at the controls.

With sweat cascading down his face on a steamy June night in Louisiana, the Oscar-winning director was directing James Cromwell (playing the elder Bush) and Josh Brolin (starring as President Bush) through a critical moment in "W.," Stone's forthcoming -- and potentially divisive -- drama about the personal, political and psychological evolution of the current president. Although the father-son patter was ostensibly friendly, the subtext was anything but, hinting at the intricate parent-child relationship that Stone believes helps to explain George W. Bush's ascension.

While the Bushes in this scene from 1990 were talking about the Texas Rangers (of whom George W. once owned a share) and Saddam Hus- sein (against whom George H. W. was about to go to war in Kuwait), there was much more at stake, as Stone and screenwriter Stanley Weiser saw the fictional conversation unfolding.

"You need to back him down and take him out -- like you did Noriega," George W. tells his father about Hussein. The elder Bush wasn't sure he was going to be that rash. "You know I've always believed in leaving personal feelings out of politics," the 41st president told his son. "But Saddam -- this aggression cannot stand. Not gonna allow this little dictator to control 25% of the world's oil."

As the architect of the outspoken dramas "Platoon," "Salvador," "Wall Street," "Born on the Fourth of July" and "JFK," Stone stands apart as one of the most openly political filmmakers in a business where it's usually the actors who wear their beliefs on their sleeves. A longtime backer of Democratic candidates (recent donations include a gift to Sen. Barack Obama), Stone is either the oddest person to chronicle the life of the current president or the most inspired.

Whatever the verdict, the marriage of director and subject has left nearly as many people running for the sidelines as wanting to be a part of the director's undertaking.

Indeed, "W.'s" combination of story and filmmaker and the poor track record of recent biographical movies scared off at least three potential studio distributors and any number of actors, including, initially, star Brolin, and even Major League Baseball, which declined to cooperate with the production.

Yet as Stone guided Cromwell and Brolin across Shreveport's Independence Bowl stadium, doubling for the Rangers' home field, it was possible to see that "W." could be, in a complicated way, sympathetic.

The father was belittling a son, George H. W. cautioning George W. to stick to simple things: "Maybe better you stay out of the barrel," the senior Bush told his son, and leave the family's political legacy to younger brother Jeb. "Well, son, I've got to say I was wrong about you not being good at baseball," the father ultimately said, tossing him a scrap of a compliment.

The future president didn't quite get what the reproving "barrel" idiom meant, but he realized his father didn't respect him. Brolin took in the snub, but then his bearing grew determined: George W. would have to prove himself beyond anyone's imagining.

Stone said it's part of what drove the younger Bush into the White House: to show his doubters wrong. "Someone who could step into that path and out-father his father," Stone said in his air-conditioned trailer during a break in filming. Racing to film, edit and release the film before the November election, Stone was not always getting five hours' sleep. Even though it was nearly midnight and the crew was just finishing its lunch break, the 61-year-old director grew increasingly animated talking about "W."

"I love Michael Moore, but I didn't want to make that kind of movie," Stone said of "Fahrenheit 9/11." "W.," he said, "isn't an overly serious movie, but it is a serious subject. It's a Shakespearean story. . . . I see it as the strange unfolding of American democracy as I have lived it."

Stone, Brolin and the filmmaking team believe they are crafting a biography so honest that loyal Republicans and the Bushes themselves might see it. Given Stone's filmmaking history, coupled with a sneak peek at an early "W." screenplay draft, that prediction looks like wishful thinking.

Still, it's a captivating challenge: Can a provocateur become fair and balanced? And if Stone is, in some way, muzzling himself to craft a mass-appeal movie, has he cast aside one of his best selling points?

Locating an inner voice

DRESSED IN a suffocating Rangers warmup jacket earlier on that scorching June day, Brolin kept running into an outfield wall, trying to make a heroic catch as part of the film's baseball-oriented fantasy framing device.

Stone worried the leap wasn't quite athletic enough and chose to add the baseball's falling into Brolin's mitt through visual effects -- allowing the "No Country for Old Men" star to throw himself into doing everything else.

Brolin spent countless hours studying the president's speech patterns and body language but said he wasn't trying to concoct a spitting-image impression, which ran the potential of becoming a "Saturday Night Live" caricature.

"It's not for me to get the voice down perfectly," the 40-year-old Brolin said, even though he came close. More important, the actor said, was to unearth Bush's inner voice -- "Where is my place in this world? How do I get remembered?"

Like other actors approached for the film (including Robert Duvall, who was asked but declined to play Vice President Dick Cheney), Brolin had more than vague misgivings about starring in "W." He was, in fact, dead set against it. "When Oliver asked me, I said, 'Are you crazy? Why would I want to do this with my little moment in my career?' " Brolin recalled. Then, early one morning during a family ski trip, Brolin read Weiser's original screenplay, which covers Bush from 1967 to 2004. "It was very different than what I thought it would be," Brolin said, "which was a far-left hammering of the president."

Brolin said many friends still weren't buying it. "There were a lot of people I tried to get involved, who were very, very reluctant to do the movie," Brolin said. In addition to Cromwell, the cast includes Elizabeth Banks as Laura Bush, Richard Dreyfuss as Cheney, Toby Jones as Karl Rove and Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld.

While noting Bush's low approval ratings (23% in a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll released this week), Brolin, like Stone, said "W." isn't intended to kick the man while he's down. "Republicans can look at it and say, 'This is why I like this guy,' " Brolin said. "It's not a political movie. It's a biography. People will remember that this guy is human, when we are always [outside of the movie] dehumanizing him, calling him an idiot, a puppet, a failed president. We want to know in the movie: How does a guy grow up and become the person that he did?"

Stone, who was briefly a Yale classmate of Bush, is clearly no fan of the president's politics but said he's amazed by the man's resilience and ambition. The movie is basically divided into three acts: Bush's hard-living youth, his personal and religious conversion, and finally his first term in the Oval Office.

"He won a huge amount of people to his side after making a huge amount of blunders and really lying to people," the director said. What further fascinates Stone is Bush's religious and personal conversion: a hard-drinking C student who was able to become not only Texas governor but also the leader of the Free World.

"We are trying to walk in the footsteps of W and try to feel like he does, to try to get inside his head. But it's never meant to demean him," Stone said.

The movie has hired a former Bush colleague as an advisor, and labored to get the smallest details right. For all the historical accuracy, though, "W." is clearly a work of fiction.

"We are playing with our own opinions and our own preconceptions of him," Stone said. "This is his diary -- his attempt to explain himself."

A project gains priority

THIS wasn't the movie Stone was supposed to be making. Instead of "W.," the film was going to be "Pinkville," a look at the Army's investigation into 1968's My Lai massacre in Vietnam.

Only days before filming was set to begin, with many sets already built and department heads in place, "Pinkville" star Bruce Willis pulled out of the film last fall, unhappy with a script that couldn't be rewritten because of the writers strike. Stone flirted with casting Nicolas Cage in the lead role, but enthusiasm from United Artists -- whose war movie "Lions for Lambs" had just flopped -- had waned on fears that "Pinkville" was too violent.

At the same time, Stone had been working on the "W." script with screenwriter Weiser, the author of Stone's 1987 hit "Wall Street." Stone was at first worried the topic was almost too timely -- "When I made 'Nixon,' " the director said, "he had died."

Said "W." producer Moritz Borman: "He wasn't sure. He worried, 'Is there enough material about Bush? Or will there be more once he's out of office?' But then a slew of books came out."

Soon after "Pinkville" imploded, Stone returned to "W.," and by early 2008 he was convinced it was not only the right time to make the movie but also imperative the movie hit theaters before the next presidential election, because its impact would be greatest then, when everybody was obsessing over our next president. But that early release date created a post-production timetable that would be half of Stone's most hurried editing schedule. Before he could set up his cameras, Stone and his team first had to answer a key question: Who in the world was going to pay for it?

"You put the two names together -- Bush and Stone -- and everybody had a preconceived notion of what the film would be. But look at 'World Trade Center,' " Borman said of Stone's commercially successful 2006 movie about two Port Authority policemen rescued from Sept. 11 rubble. "There was an uproar when it was announced and then, when the movie got closer to release, the very people who protested it preached from the pulpit that it was a film that had to be seen."

Still, Borman and Stone knew few studios would commit to the movie, especially given the desired October 2008 release date, because studios often plan their release schedules more than a year in advance. What they needed was an independent financier, someone not afraid of challenging material -- a person like Bill Block.

Block had formed QED International in 2006 as a production, financing and sales company interested in the kind of highbrow drama that studios increasingly shun. Block saw in "W." not a troublesome jeremiad but a crowd-pleaser, and QED colleagues Kim Fox and Paul Hanson quickly assembled the "W." deal.

"What Oliver is making is a splashy, commercial picture," Block said. "This is not a static biopic. It's kinetic."

In addition to footing the film's $30-million budget, QED also raised money to underwrite its prints and advertising costs upon release. Any distributor committing to "W.," in other words, would have no money at risk: It could release the film, take the distribution fee of about 15% and move on. "I think it's a no-brainer," Stone said. All the same, "W." could spark a potential inferno inside the White House. "You never know exactly why" a studio rejects a movie, Stone said, while noting that all the major studios are small cogs in global conglomerates. "But at the highest levels, it didn't pass. Some would say it's too much of a risk and too much of a hot potato politically." Stone declined to name names, but two people close to the film said among those considering but passing on the film were Paramount, Warner Bros. and Universal.

Harvey Weinstein's Weinstein Co. aggressively pursued the "W." deal, but QED, Borman and Stone picked Lionsgate Films in part because of its strong balance sheet. Also, because it's not part of a larger studio, Lionsgate is one of the only truly independent distributors left.

Lionsgate worried about fitting "W." into its October schedule and has discussed a post-election release if the film isn't ready in time. But whenever it comes out, the company is ready for any backlash -- after all, it's the distributor of the "Saw" and "Hostel" films.

"To the extent there is going to be heat," said Joe Drake, president of Lionsgate's motion picture group, "we can take the heat. That won't be a problem."

Brolin, Wright, others in film crew arrested

Actors Josh Brolin and Jeffrey Wright, along with members of a crew filming an Oliver Stone movie, were arrested during a bar fight Saturday morning, police said.

Shreveport police Sgt. Willie Lewis said Brolin, Wright and five others were arrested just after 2 a.m. at a club called the Stray Cat bar.

A call to deal with a rowdy patron drew interference from other patrons, Lewis said.

The Times of Shreveport reported that Brolin was booked and posted $334 cash bond to be released. Police could not say Saturday night whether he or the others had been released. The paper said they are part of the crew on an Oliver Stone film, "W," about President George W. Bush.

A call to Brolin's publicist was not immediately returned Saturday night.

"W" began filming in May in Shreveport. Brolin plays President Bush and Wright plays former Secretary of State Colin Powell.

The cast also includes Elizabeth Banks as first lady Laura Bush, Ellen Burstyn and James Cromwell as the elder Bushes and Thandie Newton as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Brolin appeared in three films last year, "In the Valley of Elah," "American Gangster" and "No Country for Old Men," which won the best-picture Oscar.

Wright won a Tony Award for "Angels in America" on Broadway and a Golden Globe for the same role in the television miniseries. He also has appeared in "Syriana," "Ali" and "Casino Royale."

"W" is Stone's third presidential film, following "Nixon" and "JFK." He also directed the Vietnam sagas "Born on the Fourth of July" and "Platoon," which won four Oscars including best picture and director.

The Academy Award-winning director only began shopping his script for financing in January, but has quickly captured the interest of investors and Hollywood.

Stone has said the film, which will focus on the life and presidency of Bush, won't be an anti-Bush polemic, but, as he told Daily Variety, "a fair, true portrait of the man. How did Bush go from being an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world?"

This threads hilarious. Someone saying Frank Caliendo should have been cast as W and being serious about their suggestion, the teaser poster being a Spencer's poster, the fact that some people can't wait for this movie.

I hope it's a comedy.

teaser: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJh7Md5KuWc

Oh man, giddy is the right word for me. Looks like it strikes a great tone.

haha wtf? no.

my favorite moment of the trailer is richard dreyfuss doing whatever the hell he's doing with his face.

anyone knows who sings that version of what a wonderful world?

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 27, 2008, 07:21:09 PM
Oh man, giddy is the right word for me. Looks like it strikes a great tone.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if you LOVED it and the rest of us write scathing reviews of the film, just to spite you for writing your negative deconstruction of 'There Will Be Blood' and 'The Dark Knight'? Or maybe it will be just Modage and Pete who will do that.

Just joking, my prediction is that you'll enjoy huge sections of this magnificent film but not the film as a whole.
I'll LOVE it and buy it right away when comes out on Blu-ray next late february early march.

trailer is gone :(

edit: here i found it again http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeMOjQhfgAM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEyJ2kdaaTQ

I think Cron pretty much locked GT into having to like this movie by asking him what he thought of it in the second post. GT answered in essay fashion. He's not one who enjoys wasting time, so I predict 6 stars from him (out of 5)

It looks perfect. Dreyfuss seems to be eating everyone alive and he doesn't even speak in the trailer.

Quote from: Stefen on July 28, 2008, 09:13:49 AM
I think Cron pretty much locked GT into having to like this movie by asking him what he thought of it in the second post. GT answered in essay fashion. He's not one who enjoys wasting time, so I predict 6 stars from him (out of 5)

I most definitely do like wasting my time writing, but as much as I look forward to this project, I don't know how much I'll like it. By Stone's admission this film is a chamber piece compared to his bigger projects and he's a filmmaker who does better with size because it increases his ambition. How the script works as far as capturing the Bush the public knows will determine a lot of the success. I doubt W. will be the best film of the year, but it could be my favorite since I do admit geekiness in loving Stone's work. But hell, Iron Man will be tough to beat, haha.

New 'W' trailer: A walk on the wild side with Bush
Source: Los Angeles Times

It was just a couple of weeks ago that conservative commentators were all saying that liberals were humorless dolts, offering as Exhibit A the outraged reaction to the New Yorker's hilarious Barack Obama as Muslim terrorist cover cartoon. So I'm betting those same commentators will heartily embrace Lionsgate's first teaser trailer for Oliver Stone's "W," which just posted today on YouTube (with the admonition: "This is not a fake"), focusing on the young Dubya, acting like he's starring in a boozy remake of "Old School."

The reason "W" got turned down at every big studio in town wasn't because anyone was politically nervous about making the movie--Bush is too unpopular today to worry even the most timid Hollywood studio chief. In fact, the studio that came closest to saying yes was the Rupert Murdoch owned 20th Century Fox, which figured that having Fox release a wild-eyed anti-Bush movie would cause so much buzz that it would be a unique marketing ingredient unto itself.

The real worry has always been that the story itself was HBO docudrama material, with too many talky scenes set in White House war rooms. The Lionsgate trailer shrewdly explodes that notion. It opens with Dubya (played by Josh Brolin) being dressed down by his dad ("I remember correctly, you didn't like the sporting goods job...") before careening off into hard-partying, tail-chasing territory, ending up with the infamous drunken-driving incident that prompts another stern lecture from Bush Sr. (played by James Cromwell), who says derisively: "Who do you think you are, a Kennedy? You're a Bush. Act like one." To make sure we get the point, the scenes are accompanied by George Thorogood's version of the roadhouse standard "One Bourbon, One Scotch, One Beer."

The music then shifts to the serene "It's a Wonderful World," which plays as the trailer poses a question that could perhaps make us curious enough to see the movie in a theater. It asks: "What Drove George W. Bush ... From Here ..." (Dubya brawling with his old man) "To Here?" (Dubya in the Oval Office, cowboy boots cockily propped up on his desk). Movie executives always preach, ad nauseam, that a successful film needs a hero who overcomes a series of obstacles, making him a very different person at film's end from what he was at the beginning. "W" sounds like it fits the bill quite nicely, as long as you grade on a curve when it comes to the part about overcoming the obstacles. 

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F896%2F896361%2Fw-oliver-stones-bush-biopic-20080804030516216_640w.jpg&hash=8a1adb894fa1e5ba7a317b55b3dc024f9c6f25ed)

"We just have a few questions for your hair, Mr. President!"

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F899%2F899749%2Fw-oliver-stones-bush-biopic-20080818020901020_640w.jpg&hash=232f771f3f5c109d8a4b2cbd35ac62864d0c7e14)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F899%2F899749%2Fw-oliver-stones-bush-biopic-20080818020904239_640w.jpg&hash=f6ed44684376d83f22314a598ed10c6df6f8d099)

admin edit: even better pics

http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/w/behind-the-scenes


Behind the scenes footage. Get to see Brolin more at length speaking as Bush, but you can't tell much. Unlike Hopkins as Nixon, he does sound like Bush which (for a comedy) is probably important.

clip: w meets laura
http://www.traileraddict.com/clip/w/george-met-laura

i'm really liking brolin.

fuck yeah, this is looking pretty good. 

fantastic clip.

my most anticipated film right now.

It's a good clip, but still way early to tell. The surprise is that the film has the interest in realism that it does. A tragic-comedy usually has a staged feel. I say that because the stories usually take notice of their artificiality and play with it. Dr. Strangelove has as much to say about genre as it does about the socialogical implications of its story.

But Stone makes the filmmaking flow with the nuances of the scene. The actors have very naturalistic dialogue. It's odd to see the approach in the Queen will be done to fit a comedy. It looks like themes in the story will either be entirely personal or political, but still focused within the story. There will not be any overt style considerations. It will be interesting because a number of scenes in the film are insane. I haven't read the script, but I've read about numerous scenarios. The clip here is pretty standard because the film does become pretty comedic. If the film keeps with the tone and approach in this clip it will enter some very interesting tonal structures as it goes along.

I think a very memorable film is going to be made. I also think it will alienate half of the audience.

'W' actress: Laura Bush's beauty isn't appreciated

NEW YORK - Elizabeth Banks, who portrays Laura Bush to Josh Brolin's George in the upcoming film "W," considers the first lady an underrated beauty.

"For some reason, I don't think people appreciate just how beautiful a woman that she is," said Banks, sitting pretty in a party room at Manhattan's Gramercy Park Hotel, where Women's Health magazine honored the 34-year-old actress' October cover Monday night.

"I think it's partially just because I think she needs a mini-makeover — but if she were wearing super stylish Phillip Lim dresses and had long, blond hair, I think you'd really be stunned by just how gorgeous a woman she is," Banks said.

Plus, Banks gushed, "She has everything that goes into a great face: great cheekbones, beautiful eyes, great smile."

Oliver Stone's film about the life and presidency of George W. Bush is to be released Oct. 17. Banks and Brolin head a cast that includes Richard Dreyfuss, who portrays Dick Cheney and Thandie Newton, who plays Condoleezza Rice.

Banks said Brolin, son of actor James Brolin, is "perfectly cast."

"I mean, people forget that he is a sort of cowboy who went into the same profession as his own father and lived in his dad's shadow, and is now creating his own career outside of the family."

Banks, whose credits include "The 40-Year-Old Virgin" and the upcoming "Zach and Miri Make a 34, Porno," has breezed through New York Fashion Week, making appearances at the Fashion Rocks concert at Radio City Music Hall and Peter Som's runway show.

On Monday, the slim, blond actress channeled Audrey Hepburn in a black sheath, headband and heels to mingle at the Women's Health party. She's the first-ever celebrity to grace the cover of the lifestyle magazine, which hits stands Sept. 16 and will now feature famous faces rather than hard bodies to represent its message of promoting a positive body image.

"I'm really glad it's not like a picture of my super-flat abs, which I don't have," said Banks, who was otherwise pleased with the shot of her looking fresh in jeans and a white tank top. "I don't work on my abs. So I'm glad it didn't make a big deal out of me being a workaholic at the gym — because that's not the case."

What's her secret?

"I have nice, natural genetic good looks and I try and lead an active lifestyle and eat healthily," said Banks, who stays fit by taking walks, swimming in her pool and playing tennis with her girlfriends.

She said she avoids soda, ice cream and fried food, but admits to three other vices: cheese, cupcakes and cookie dough.

"Every once in a while my craving for cookie dough overwhelms me, and I will stay up late and make cookie dough," she said. "But I will just eat the dough, put it away in the fridge and cook it over the next couple days!"

New TV spot:

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=49038

Shocker? The film will be rated PG-13.

no bush?

where do i check which limited theatres will show it on october 17?

if you're in LA, there is a huge possibility, like 95% chance that LA will have it.  more like 99%.

Quote from: cron on September 20, 2008, 02:25:51 PM
where do i check which limited theatres will show it on october 17?

How do you know it will be a limited release?

I'm curious enough to check this out, but I'm afraid it's going to be a shallow extended SNL skit.  Let me guess the theme:  Bush sucks.  How novel.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on September 20, 2008, 03:18:56 PM

Quote from: cron on September 20, 2008, 02:25:51 PM
where do i check which limited theatres will show it on october 17?

How do you know it will be a limited release?

USA  17 October 2008 (limited)
Belgium  29 October 2008 
France  29 October 2008 
Netherlands  30 October 2008 
Iceland  7 November 2008 
UK  7 November 2008 
Turkey  14 November 2008 
Sweden  5 December 2008 
Finland  2 January 2009

Quote from: MacGuffin on September 21, 2008, 02:37:02 AM
Sweden  5 December 2008

yay sweden, the only cinema it will show on will be an outdoor shithouse! :yabbse-wink:

yay mexico!!! oh...right.

Another tv spot:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/22/oliver-stones-w-movie-an_n_128195.html

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.usatoday.net%2Flife%2F_photos%2F2008%2F09%2F24%2FWx-large.jpg&hash=d59d63656da15b6c63012fbbfd56ec4ce95009fb)

First look: Oliver Stone's 'W.' is not quite out of left field
By Anthony Breznican, USA TODAY

LOS ANGELES — A man stands in the middle of a sunny baseball field, beaming a smile as the roar of an approving crowd is heard.

An echoing announcer's voice calls out his name: "Ladies and gentlemen, the 43rd president of the United States ..." But as the camera pans back, the cheering fades, and the stadium is revealed to be empty.

With outstretched arms and raised head, the character's body forms an unmistakable symbol: W.

It's the opening scene of Oliver Stone's movie of the same name, which he is still racing to finish in time for its debut Oct. 17. Stone chronicles the youth of George W. Bush, his rise to the White House and the crises he has faced over the past eight years. And it's a comedy.

Though dramatizing culture and politics is familiar ground for the director of JFK, Nixon and World Trade Center, this film's satiric tone is something new for him. Not that he thinks the actual history is funny.

"It was so painful for me. The reaction is to laugh a little because the pain would be too much," he says, sitting in his office after showing the first act of the movie in his editing bay.

The baseball stadium intro?

"We all have retreat fantasies," Stone says with a laugh. "He did have the express desire to be baseball commissioner, and I think some people, historically, would say if he had become baseball commissioner, it would have saved us a lot of problems."

Cast of big names

W. features an all-star cast playing the White House's highest-profile figures: Josh Brolin as the president, Elizabeth Banks as Laura Bush, Richard Dreyfuss as Vice President Cheney, Jeffrey Wright as Secretary of State Colin Powell, Thandie Newton as Condoleezza Rice and James Cromwell as George H.W. Bush.

Stone, an outspoken liberal, Vietnam War veteran and longtime cinematic provocateur, is not an admirer of the president. And he's prepared to be dismissed by Bush die-hards.

But he insists he and screenwriter Stanley Weiser (who also wrote 1987's Wall Street with him) "tried to stay human and true to this man. It's supposed to be a fair and true portrait. People get me confused with my outspoken citizen side, but I am a dramatist first and foremost."

He already has been criticized by the administration. White House assistant press secretary Emily Lawrimore told the Los Angeles Times last month that the president would ignore the movie. "Oliver Stone is an accurate historian like Gilligan was an accurate navigator," she said.

But Stone also says those with an extreme dislike of the president will be disappointed if all they want from W. is an attack.

"I'm not interested in that radical 15% that hate Bush or the 15 to 20% who love Bush. That's not our audience. Those people probably won't come," he says. "I'm interested in that 60% in the American middle who at least have a little more open mind."

The movie portrays Bush as charming, spiritually devout and well-intentioned but also reckless, a kind of daddy's boy, always relying on his father, wealthy friends or Bush family connections to launch his career forward or extract him from trouble. He's also depicted as overly trusting.

'Cheney is a brilliant player'

In one scene, Cheney presents him with an executive order authorizing "enhanced interrogation techniques" of detainees. The president approves the idea but warns, "Just remember, though, we don't use torture in this country." He then doesn't want to read a long report with the details, tosses the document on the table and says, "Only three pages. Good!"

Dreyfuss' Cheney manipulates the president through praise and whispered asides, and his presence is always looming. At one point, Bush lashes out for upstaging him during a national security meeting, though Cheney hardly said a word.

"I think Cheney gamed him and gamed the whole system. Cheney is a brilliant player," Stone says. He adds that the recent book Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency by Pulitzer Prize winner Barton Gellman backs up the depiction.

Along with the public record, a host of books provided background. Stone rattles off a list: Bob Woodward's State of Denial, James Risen's State of War, Ron Suskind's The One Percent Doctrine, Stephen Mansfield's Faith of George W. Bush, Bill Minutaglio's First Son, about his early years.

Stone also read Kitty Kelley's The Family, a gossip-heavy account of the Bush family, for insight into the father-son dynamic but did not include the book's allegation that the president, who has acknowledged that he had a drinking problem, once used cocaine.

"We didn't have to take cheap shots, and we didn't want to be malicious. We're very careful. We didn't want to go over the line," Stone says, though he acknowledges sometimes tiptoeing perilously close.

In a scene set in the early 1970s, before Bush was married, he is confronted by his father, who asks about a rumor that a girlfriend may be pregnant.

Stone notes the character emphatically denies it ("That's a dang lie, Poppy!"). Despite the character's refutation, it's clearly a "Do you still beat your wife?" kind of jab.

"Some of this stuff is not specific," Stone acknowledges. He says he plans to create a website with footnotes explaining either the source or the rationale for such controversial moments.

Reputation as a radical

Even so, many are bound to disregard W. simply because of the filmmaker's reputation.

"Stone is seen as such a left-wing radical by everyone on the right that the danger is people dismiss this film immediately as just Oliver Stone trying to ruffle our feathers," says Syracuse University film professor Kendall Phillips, author of Controversial Cinema: The Movies That Outraged America. "But he's good at getting under everybody's skin. He has consistently been able to push the right button to set people off on both the right and left."

New York Post film critic Kyle Smith, who often writes about political themes in movies, says Stone has little credibility with those right of center. "I think Oliver Stone, if he directed your kid's kindergarten school play, he would turn it into a demented fever dream about the failure of American ideals," Smith says. "I expect the movie to be totally demented, and around the bend, and I look forward to it. It will be entertainingly ridiculous."

Stone's reputation is a mixed blessing from a box-office perspective, says BoxOfficeMojo.com analyst Brandon Gray. For every hit (JFK, Platoon, Born on the Fourth of July), Stone has had some financial misses (Alexander, Nixon, U-Turn).

"Oliver Stone is one of the few star directors. And it's his most provocative pictures that tend to be his more popular ones," Gray says. But "this president has been lampooned many, many times. What is this movie offering beyond being just about Bush?"

Though the movie is released in the thick of an election season, Stone says he doesn't expect W. to have any effect. "I went to Vietnam, and then I did three movies about it. Didn't do (anything), right?" Platoon and Born on the Fourth of July won him Oscars for best director, but he says the anti-war message always fades. "They went to Iraq the same way, same length of time, and the media was beating the drum."

He says W. is not a polemic but a character study about a man who is simply interesting.

"Bush is not a lightweight. He has determination. What did I learn? I really learned how powerful the willpower and discipline is that he has," Stone says. "I'm not making political judgments. We're not looking to condemn. He says what he says and does what he does. You're going to like him, and at the same time, you're going to be horrified by some of the stuff he does."

Scenes featuring Bush involved in binge-drinking and fraternity hazing are contrasted with a scene of him cavalierly setting the stage for armed conflict in a 2002 Oval Office meeting where the term "Axis of Evil" is crafted.

Powell warns that such bellicose language may commit the nation to three simultaneous wars. "I'm not saying war, I'm saying 'Lay down the law!' " Bush barks, propping his shoes up on the desk and leaning back in a style that suggests an Old West sheriff.

Stone also depicts warmer qualities in the character: "Faith, family and friendship," Stone says. "You could argue he is a good born-again Christian. He has been good with his family. There's a scene where he goes to the hospital and talks to the soldiers, and we honestly looked at the stuff he said and did."

But neither is Stone forgiving.

The Laura Bush character, upon meeting her future husband at a Texas barbecue, refers to him playfully as a "devil in a white hat."

"I think Bush is going to be accountable to history in a big way," Stone says. "These people who dismissed this movie, who wouldn't give us the money to make it — especially the American studios (the film was independently produced and picked up for distribution by Lionsgate Films) — had this attitude that he's too hot a potato, and at the same time, he's going away in January, so 'who cares?'

"Who cares? I'll tell you what — his policies are going to be still paying off 20 years from now. ... He's not gone, baby."

There are certain parallels between the lives of the filmmaker and his subject. Both had powerful fathers; both started at Yale in 1965 (Stone quit two years later to join the Army); both did military service, Stone taking combat duty in Vietnam while Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard and remained stateside.

"And drugs. And alcohol. And women," Stone says, making his own list of comparisons. Bush was arrested for DUI in 1976, and Stone was, too, in 1999 and 2005.

The two men obviously turned out far differently. Stone bristles when asked whether he found anything about Bush to like.

"Empathy is understanding, it's not liking. ... Why can't you just try to understand somebody? This whole polarizing 'Do you hate him? Do you love him?' doesn't work for me."

So how does he see the president? "Ever notice how impatient Bush is at press conferences with questions, like, 'What right do you have to ask me a question?' " Stone says, noting the comical names the president makes up for reporters, friends and colleagues. "I would say he's a bully. It's classic bully syndrome. The nicknames, for instance, are bullying."

When Stone met Bush

Bush and Stone never met during their time at Yale, but they did encounter each other face-to-face in 1998 at a Republican breakfast in Los Angeles when Bush was governor of Texas.

"I was the token liberal who was invited. It was hilarious. Not hilarious, it was scary," Stone corrects himself. "He was talking about tough love and justice in Texas because he was known as a guy who executed all these people.

"He brought me up (to his hotel room) afterward. I didn't know he'd been to Yale with me, so he told me that. He knew more about me than I knew about him! He was definitely a charismatic guy. I knew he'd be president because there was no question that guy had absolute confidence."

He says Bush introduced himself by laying an arm around his shoulder and shaking his hand tightly, grinning with a twinkle in his eye and asking, "How are ya?"

Did he give Stone a nickname?

The director thinks for a moment, then flashes his gap-toothed smile.

"Not yet," he says.

Theatrical:http://video.yahoo.com/watch/3575908/9880120 (http://video.yahoo.com/watch/3575908/9880120)

Still only a little over a minute long but it's certainly got me excited. But really how can you make a film about these guys that's PG-13? 

lol i love this already.

i dont think any kids will want to see this, so yeah they could have made it R with no problem and spice it up

Stone's Bush biopic 'W' in cinemas before elections

It's an "improbable story" about a simple man who somehow becomes the most powerful leader in the world, says director Oliver Stone about his new movie "W" a biopic of the current US president.

And always the provocateur, Stone is due to release the movie on October 17, fewer than three weeks before the nation votes to decide who should collect the keys of the White House from President George W. Bush.

But Stone, who at 62 is the same age as Bush, insisted the biopic was "not a hatchet job," contrary to expectations that it will depict the US leader, whose approval ratings have plummeted to historic lows, in a negative light.

"W" is a "fair" portrait, argued Stone, who went to Yale University at the same time as Bush in the mid-1960s, before dropping out to serve in Vietnam.

Instead the director, whose previous films include the political biography "Nixon" and the satire on American violence "Natural Born Killers," said he wanted to shed some light on Bush's true character and his story.

"Fifty million people voted for him on two occasions," Stone told AFP. "He was in the same league for a long time as Ronald Reagan, until he became so offensive."

He told USA Today he had "tried to stay human to this man. People get me confused with my outspoken citizen side. But I'm a dramatist first and foremost.

"I am not interested in that radical 15 percent that hate Bush or the 15 or 20 percent who love Bush," he said.

"That's not our audience. Those people probably won't come. I'm interested in that 60 percent in the American middle who at least have a little more open mind."

In the much anticipated movie, Stone revisits the tumultuous youth of a man who came from a wealthy, oil family and whose father, George H. Bush, was also president.

When news broke that "W" was in production, Stone told the movie industry newspaper Variety that he wanted to get behind the man, to paint a personal portrait, and to answer the central question: "How did Bush go from an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world?"

Bush, a former Texas governor, has never hidden the fact that he once battled alcoholism, but says he quit after a particularly heavy night on his 40th birthday in 1986 and has not touched a drop since.

He was elected to his first term in a disputed election in 2000 when he narrowly beat Democrat Al Gore, and won a second term in 2004 over John Kerry.

But his eight years in office have been scarred by the trauma of the September 11, 2001 attacks, and weighed down by the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the legacy of a bloody, costly war which will be inherited by his successor.

Actor Josh Brolin portrays the 43rd president with a realism that he brought to 2007's acclaimed Coen brothers thriller "No Country For Old Men," and actress Elizabeth Banks fills the role of First Lady Laura Bush.

The movie was made for 30 million dollars -- relatively cheap by modern movie standards. Millions of dollars were shaved off the budget with tax cut incentives from filming in Shreveport, Louisiana.

It was also made quite quickly. Stone brought the movie from draft script to release in less than 12 months.

But Stone told AFP it was not an easy process. "Nobody wanted to finance this film. Every studio said no. You'd be surprised to know the number of people in the business who don't want to have their name associated with politics. This thing almost never got made."

Stone has often chosen to recount pivotal moments in American history through his movies. He has confronted the Vietnam War in "Platoon," the Kennedy assassination in "JFK", president Richard Nixon's disgraced resignation in "Nixon" and the attacks of September 11, 2001 in "World Trade Center."

He has won three Oscars: best screenplay for "Midnight Express" in 1979, and best director in 1987 and 1990 for "Platoon" and "Born on the Fourth of July."

Longer theatrical trailer:

http://www.myspace.com/trailerpark

Looks better and better with each new piece of footage.

yeah, i'm psyched for this movie... from the footage we've been shown, and the people involved, i'm expecting this to be a commercial and critical success... this has oscar written all over it.

but the only problem i have with it is the casting of james cromwell as bush senior. and i love james. if you asked me my favorite character actor of all time, he'd be up there.. but i just can't see him as bushes dad.... it seems that they made a point to cast people that actually look like the people they're portraying, but when it came to bush sr, apparently they didn't give a fuck.

There are pics online where Cromwell is donning Bush's famous thick glasses and he looks like the former President a lot more. I personally don't care that there is little resemblance. Stone proved with Nixon that it isn't important and all that matters is whether the actors can capture the character. That being said, Cromwell looks to be a good choice.

I got pretty annoyed when they showed the trailer for W before Pineapple Express, and you have all these cool san francisco liberal kids hooting and hollering during the trailer simply because people looked like the people they played.  They were actually applauding and laughing at the resemblance.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on September 28, 2008, 10:39:49 AM
There are pics online where Cromwell is donning Bush's famous thick glasses and he looks like the former President a lot more. I personally don't care that there is little resemblance. Stone proved with Nixon that it isn't important and all that matters is whether the actors can capture the character. That being said, Cromwell looks to be a good choice.

i've know the pic you're referring to, and yes he does show a resemblance there. but only there.

and i do think looks are important when you're making a film about real people who actually exist. especially of this magnitude. and like i said before, it seems that this was something they were going for. i mean, it's erie how much some of these actors look like their counterparts... but bush sr sticks out like a sore thumb to me.

i completely understand where you're coming from when you say the actors don't need to look like the people they're playing as long as they accurately portray their essence. i just happen to disagree with you there.. hell, oliver originally wanted kevin costner to play jim morrison in his doors movie. how well would that have worked out?!

Does Scott Glenn really look like Donald Rumsfeld? Does Ellen Burstyon really look like Barbara Bush? Or what about the actor who plays Tony Blair? I don't think the filmmakers were going for exact replications at all. In fact I think a few of those actors look less like their counterparts than James Cromwell does to his, especially the Blair actor. 

I understand the Kevin Costner point, but he would have been wrong for the role no matter what he looked like. I believe he is a good actor, but he lacks the personality to fit into a Jim Morrison incarnation. This has nothing to do with his looks. Josh Brolin looks as much like George Bush straight as Kevin Costner does Jim Morrison. Changes could have been done to make him resemble Morrison more, but it never would have been right.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but theater has already established that physical resemblance to real people matters very little. They have hundreds of years of history of representing that tradition. Oliver Stone showed it worked in film with Nixon so I don't think it's that big of a deal. A moot complaint, I would say.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on September 29, 2008, 12:05:28 AM
especially the Blair actor. 

His name is Ioan Gruffudd: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0344435/ Credits include King Arthur, Black Hawk Down, Fantastic Four, and The TV Set.

Director Oliver Stone talks about why he made "W."
Source: Los Angeles Times

Director Oliver Stone spoke to a star-studded audience last night at a special screening of "W.," his controversial and much-anticipated biopic of President George W. Bush.   

Before the screening in West Los Angeles, Stone spoke to the glitterati about the journalistic sources for the film's story and why he felt compelled to make this film. In the audience were the film's star, Josh Brolin, his father, James Brolin, and stepmom Barbra Streisand, as well as Richard Dreyfuss, Al Pacino, Noah Wyie, Jodie Foster, James Woods, Paul Haggis, Sid Ganis, Brett Ratner, Bill Maher, Ellen Barkin, Casey Affleck, Ed Zwick, James Mangold and Maria Bello.

"First, let me tell you that this is based on a true story, despite what many of you may believe," Stone said. "We did a lot of research to bring to light some of that murky stuff that has taken a long time to come out. In that vein, I have to thank all the investigative journalists, the dozen or so that really broke the ice, including Bob Woodward, David Corn, Michael Isikoff, Ron Suskind, Jane Mayer, Barton Gelman, Frank Rich. So many of them worked very hard, and that raw body of work was the basis from which to simplify and condense into our movie."

As well as dramatizing the agenda behind the Iraq war, and why no WMD were ever found, Stone's film deals with the complex rivalry between George W. Bush and his disapproving father, former President George H.W. Bush.

It also portrays W.'s wild, unfocused youth, his failures and ambitions, and his conversion to 'born again' Christianity, a move that ultimately helped get him elected as governor of Texas and later, as POTUS.

Dreyfuss is chilling as VP Dick Cheney, while Thandie Newton is transformed into a gawky, glowering Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. As W., Brolin gives an astonishing, layered and -- many attendees suggested -- Oscar-worthy performance.

But even Stone admits that there's much more about George W. Bush to be learned.

"I think there's more to come out, but I think there's enough here to start," Stone said. "And in that vein, I have to ask, we had to ask ourselves why we made this movie. That question leads to where we are as a country and where are we going. And a large part of the answer lies here, in the character of George W. Bush."

At the post-cocktail party, Stone, Dreyfus and Brolin were congratulated and thanked for making a film that was called "astonishing" and "terrifying."

"One of the most frightening films I have ever seen," said one film producer.

The timing for Stone's film could not be better, as we face yet another presidential election in which religious beliefs will again play a heightened role in deciding who ultimately runs this country.

As one party-goer noted, "The problem with 'W.' is that the people who really need to see this film probably won't.

Extended Trailer here. (http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810026489/video/10092410)



Fact-Checking Oliver Stone's 'W.' — Is The Film True To Life?
Did President Bush get a girl pregnant? Does he love 'Cats'? We separate fact from fiction.
By Larry Carroll; MTV
   
Over the last few elections, a new post-debate tradition has sprung up as fact-check teams jump on air mere moments after the candidates say goodbye, eager to tell us why candidate X won't save us as much money as he claims, or candidate Y is lying about his voting record. After seeing next week's Oliver Stone film "W.," you might wish those guys were standing in the theater lobby, eager to walk you to your car.

Although the film proudly walks the line of bipartisanship, several scenes depicting our current president contain background details sure to raise some eyebrows. Did George W. Bush really once get a girl pregnant? Did he drive his car into a garage door in a fit of anger? And is his favorite piece of theater really one of the goofiest musicals of all time?

Below are several assertions presented in "W.," as well as the real-life facts.

W. Once Got a Woman Pregnant

Film: A young, still irresponsible Bush (Josh Brolin) gets caught up in a relationship with a woman named "Fran" (Marley Shelton), promises to marry her, then jumps up onto a bar with her to dance in celebration. Later, W. goes to his father for help, and George H.W. Bush (James Cromwell) says he'll "take care" of it.

Fact: The rumor has haunted Bush for decades but most closely resembles an allegation made by Hustler publisher Larry Flynt, who claimed in 2000 to have uncovered a 1971 relationship between Bush and an old flame. Flynt has alleged that the pro-life Bush arranged for an abortion, which at the time was illegal in Texas; the president has not commented either way.

W. Loves "Cats"

Film: When Bush gets down over the state of the country, Laura (Elizabeth Banks) cheers him up by saying that she'll get tickets to his favorite play. In early screenings, Los Angeles audiences have been chuckling over the revelation that it's "Cats," the Andrew Lloyd Webber musical often viewed as something less than high art.

Fact: " 'Cats' was one of his favorite plays," Stone insists of a fact uncovered by his research team. "I think this movie is better than 'Cats,' but I don't think he's going to see this." In 2006, Bush paid tribute to Webber at the prestigious Kennedy Center Honors ceremony.

Rumsfeld Doodled During Staff Meetings

Film: While Bush's advisers are discussing their 9/11 response and coining the infamous "Axis of Evil" moniker, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (Scott Glenn) is obliviously sketching a cartoon of Condoleezza Rice, who is sitting nearby.

Fact: "Whether he doodled Rice is an issue, but he doodled," Stone admitted. "He would express his arrogance and indifference [often]. He hated meetings with people he did not see at his level, and he was famous for his doodling, among other things."

W. Regretted Trading Sammy Sosa

Film: During a flashback conversation with his father in 1990, Bush cites his approval of the trade involving baseball star Sammy Sosa as an example of his poor judgment.

Fact: Although Bush did allow the trade of Sosa (who would go on to hit 609 home runs) while serving as owner of the Texas Rangers, the future slugger didn't become an above-average player until 1993. In 1990, Bush would have likely been proud of unloading a man who would only hit .233 that season.

Jack Hawk Loves the Administration

Film: During scenes depicting George W. Bush's notorious "Mission Accomplished" speech, Stone cuts to a program called "Spinball" hosted by a right-wing, full-of-praise talking head with the too-hilarious-to-be-real name Jack Hawk.

Fact: "It's a condensed character of the American reporters," the director said, denying that fake names were used because Bush-friendly channels like Fox News may have been unwilling to help Stone's movie. "[It was the way] many of them were at the time."

W. Crashes His Car

Film: After stumbling during an early campaign, a furious Bush rams his vehicle into a garage door, frightening Laura.

Fact: According to a 2000 USA Today article, "After a few speeches, he asked [Laura] — coming up the driveway on the way home from one — how his delivery was going over. Terrible, said the forthright wife. George W. drove his Pontiac Bonneville right into the garage wall."

Throwing Incaution to the Wind, Stone Paints Bush
By RICHARD L. BERKE; New York Times

IMAGINE these fantastical sequences from "W.," the Oliver Stone portrayal of President George W. Bush that opens on Friday: The president is not alone with his dogs when he chokes on a pretzel and tumbles from the sofa; Saddam Hussein is in the White House family quarters with him. Later Mr. Bush flies over Baghdad on a magic carpet as the bombs rain down. And finally Mr. Hussein returns for another cameo, this time to shout insults at the president and his father.

These depictions would hardly be a reach for a director who is fond of monkeying with history. In "JFK" Mr. Stone suggested that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by a cabal of gay anti-Communists. In "Nixon" he made that president so epically loathsome that even his Irish setter turned on him.

But "W." contains no airborne Bush; Mr. Stone cut the scene. And the pretzel incident has no Iraqi dictator, only the two first dogs, Barney and Spot.

"It was wacky stuff that at the end of the day took us out of the movie," Mr. Stone said in a recent interview in a back corner of the restaurant at the Royalton Hotel in Manhattan. "We wanted to focus on the mind-set of this man. We don't change anything in his true story. Don't have to, because it's a great story. Dickens would do it. Mark Twain would write a great book. This guy who is basically a bum becomes president of the United States."

The surprise about "W." is that its left-wing creator made a movie that is not so much operatic or hysterical as utterly plausible.

Yes, there are soapy oversimplifications and embellishments (and some hallucinatory camera work involving baseball stadiums and showdowns in the Oval Office) that Bush loyalists will seize on as reprehensible distortions.

But all in all, the straightforwardness of "W." suggests that Mr. Stone set out to make a critical biography but was somehow spooked. The director who has built a career on vowing to unearth hidden truths made a movie that feels more familiar than revelatory.

For all of his fascination with what he calls Mr. Bush's demons, Mr. Stone has demons of his own. After "JFK" and "Nixon" he was ridiculed by historians, journalists and partisans for, as he put it, "brainwashing the young." Maybe now he is chastened, not wanting critics to dismiss the movie as another hatchet job that would scare off audiences.

Did he excise the Saddam Hussein dream scene, for instance, out of fear that it would cost the movie some credibility?

"Yes, I think so," he said.

As a result Mr. Stone retreats to the most familiar, widely accepted aspects of Mr. Bush's biography, gliding through the stations of the Bush cross that pop up in countless books and articles, from his fraternity hazing to his mano-a-mano fight with his father to his struggle with alcohol and his road to religious redemption to his decision to invade Iraq.

So faithful is this rendering that a scene of Governor Bush behind his imposing desk in Austin, Tex., stirred a reporter's memories of what it was like to interview Mr. Bush in that very setting nearly a decade ago. The Bush then, with his boots on the desk, his playful sparring with aides and his conversation sprinkled with the eager invocation of "God almighty," was uncannily similar to the one played by Josh Brolin.

But there are commercial and artistic risks to hewing so closely to the record. Given that his subject is the most dissected sitting president in history, his two terms picked over by insider memoirs and the never-ending chattering of the 24/7 media world, many viewers will want and expect Mr. Stone to whip up something fresh. Then there is the complication for Mr. Stone of basing a movie on a president presiding over an economic collapse and two wars. John Kennedy and Richard Nixon were long gone before Mr. Stone tackled them in his epics.

Asked to explain what audiences will learn about the president in "W.," Mr. Stone was more vague than provocative. "I think you understand George Bush much better when you see the movie," he said. "After two hours you walk in his path. You understand his worldview and how he got there and how he became the man he was."

Mr. Stone has never succeeded at divorcing his powerful point of view from his filmmaking, and he readily acknowledges that he hopes his $25 million movie — to be released less than three weeks before the presidential election — will somehow help Barack Obama, though he is not sure how.

To make its pre-election release date, Mr. Stone completed "W." in 46 days, much faster than most movies, after he found himself with some free time once United Artists backed out of another film he was set to direct, "Pinkville," about the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. ("There's really no better time to release a politically themed film than right now," said Tom Ortenberg, Lionsgate's president for theatrical film. "We all thought it would be a question mark as to the level of interest after the election, or certainly after the inauguration.")

With this film, Mr. Stone — a decorated Vietnam veteran who directed "Platoon" and "Born on the Fourth of July" — intended to focus attention on how Mr. Bush bequeathed us the Iraq war. "It's breathtaking," he said, "to go through your lifetime and see the second set of mistakes again." (The movie doesn't address 9/11 or Hurricane Katrina.)

Mr. Stone's distaste for the president rears itself even when Mr. Stone is reminded that they are both 62 and followed in their fathers' footsteps by enrolling at Yale. "I got A's," he said. "He was a C student, and I think you cannot overlook that. I don't think he's a fundamentally educated man." (He neglected to note that he, not Mr. Bush, was a Yale dropout.) And speaking of the Bush name, he said, "I don't think the name can recover."

Such remarks will only fuel Republican rebukes that the movie is an anti-Bush vendetta. Karl Rove, Mr. Bush's political guru, who is played in a bit role by Toby Jones (whose last star turn was as Truman Capote), said the trailer was such a caricature that he'll never see the movie.

"I don't think they made any attempt to have this conform to any reality except that which exists in the cerebral cortex of Oliver Stone, which is a brain with only a functioning left side," Mr. Rove said. "This is a political film that is an attempt to influence an election that is about four years too late."

Told of that comment, Mr. Stone said Mr. Rove would enjoy the movie because Mr. Bush "looks good in many ways." While he considers Mr. Rove "one of the most devious men," he gave him "the benefit of the doubt," he said, though adding that he wished Mr. Jones "had been taller like Rove, and fatter."

Despite Mr. Stone's politics, there is room for some nuance in his portrayal of Mr. Bush. A lunch with Vice President Dick Cheney (Richard Dreyfuss) starts off with the makings of a Stone mockery: Mr. Bush seems the impatient simpleton who does not want to bother reading a three-page memo about authorizing "enhanced interrogation techniques" of detainees. "Only three pages — good!" he says. But Mr. Bush makes clear he is no stooge.

Bush family dynamics are so oversimplified that at every turn Mr. Bush's father (James Cromwell) seems to be wagging his finger at his son for besmirching the family name. Mr. Stone would have you believe that Mr. Bush ran for governor of Texas, and then president, only to fix Daddy's mistake of not taking out Saddam Hussein once and for all — and to show his parents that their preference for his brother Jeb was misplaced. Still, the Oedipal tensions are not a complete concoction; George and Barbara Bush hardly concealed their amazement that George W., the Bush black sheep, became a governor before Jeb.

During the interview earlier this month Mr. Stone was so determined to make the case that his movie was faithful to the facts that he brought a stack of boldfaced annotations and references to books and articles about Mr. Bush (some reputable; others, not so much). But in resisting most of his fanciful impulses, he has ceded to others the job of delving more deeply (though more subjectively) into the psyches of the Bushes.

In her new novel, "American Wife," for example, Curtis Sittenfeld let her imagination run free through the mind and heart of Laura Bush but had to do so by making her a technically fictional character — by renaming her (as Alice Blackwell) and relocating her childhood (Wisconsin suburbs for Texas). At the story's end Alice is in full-throated rebellion — privately — over the Iraq war. Accurate? Doubtful. Insightful? Maybe. Engaging and provocative? Yes.

But Mr. Stone described himself and the screenwriter, Stanley Weiser, as so inundated with compelling "raw data" that he had no reason to manufacture any. He even cut out a scene (true story) where Mr. Bush was flying a faltering Cessna over Texas with his friend Don Evans, who was later commerce secretary. Who remembers reading about that?

"People don't know a lot about him," Mr. Stone said. "That presidency was veiled and hidden from the public view for three years. Remember, there were very few press conferences. There were staged rallies that very few people were invited to."

In the next breath Mr. Stone undermines his notion of Bush the phantom president by reeling off all the books written by Bush insiders turned outsiders. "We have so much information now," he said. Among others, he cited books by Paul H. O'Neill, who was the treasury secretary; Richard A. Clarke, the counterterrorist adviser; and journalists including Bob Woodward, Ron Suskind, Jane Mayer, James Risen and Bill Minutaglio.

His challenge, Mr. Stone said, was to go deeper into the character of Mr. Bush. He even tosses in some satire, like the president's senior aides trying in vain to tag after him on a brisk hike at his Texas ranch.

"I hope you laughed a bit," he said. "We did keep it at a tonality that was lighter because he's not Richard Nixon. He's not gloomy, paranoid and dark like Nixon."

Some will appreciate that Mr. Stone has abandoned his polarizing, facts-be-damned tangents for a bit of lightness. Larry King, for one, assured his viewers the other night that audiences of all political persuasions would like "W." That's just the endorsement studio chiefs love to hear.

But it's a departure for a director who has always been a provocateur who prides himself on creating movies "that make you think."

Which is, then, the final question about the film. Can a fictional "W." inspire a re-examination of the life and times of George W. Bush, even as the nation finds itself captivated by Sarah Palin — and Tina Fey?

It is opening wide this week. Will hit 2,000 screens.

I dont know if its the whole election frenzy but I'm super excited about this film and I cant wait to see it Friday...

I decided to go see this at the London Film Festival.  It'll still be a week after you guys get to see it, but a couple of weeks before it opens in the UK.

Looking forward to it!

source: hollywood-elsewhere
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhollywood-elsewhere.com%2Fimages%2Fcolumn%2F101008%2Fdevilangel460.jpg&hash=11a53a6131cee43ef676f960685c2bd0d7ab63bd)

i've seen those all over the place.  pretty neat idea, fake street art on the real posters.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogcdn.com%2Fwww.cinematical.com%2Fmedia%2F2008%2F10%2Fsitting-presidentmain-%282%29.jpg&hash=eefdb28553d14f15da9da9df49916424e6e32f7e)

Just a Minute With: Oliver Stone on George "W." Bush

Director Oliver Stone has never shied from controversy in his 30 years making movies, tackling issues ranging from the Vietnam War in movies like "Platoon" to violence and society in "Natural Born Killers".

A three-time Oscar winner, Stone's latest subject is President George W. Bush. His movie "W." opens in the United States on Friday, less than three weeks before Americans elect their next president on November 4.

Oliver Stone, 62, talked to Reuters about what drove him to make "W." and to release it at this time.

Q: Why is it important to release "W." so near to the 2008 U.S. presidential elections when President George W. Bush is not running for office again?

A: "We are dealing with the phenomenon of Bush and whoever wins the election, his impact is going to be in the shadow of this huge presence that existed for eight years and which changed the world. I think a lot of people should come because it's good for them, before the election, to think about who they elected in the last eight years, and about where we are as a country right now."

Q; Which is the legacy of the Bush administration that most concerns you?

A; "This man has left us with a legacy of three wars -- the war in Iraq, in Afghanistan and the war on terror -- and the policy of the preemptive strike. These are all very dangerous things in terms of foreign policy.

"Internally he has assumed privileges for the executive that were never taken in such extremity before or over such a long period. He has violated laws and not enforced laws that he did not agree with."

Q; Why didn't you make this movie four years ago, when President Bush was running for reelection?

A: "We did not have the information. The 2000-2003 period (of the Bush presidency) was a veiled Orwellian masterpiece, where they closed off all documents and fired anyone in the inner circle who talked to the press. This guy was infallible for three years. It was only in about 2004-2005 that this was starting to come out. Without all the investigative reporters, where would we be?"

Q; What in your opinion was the driving force in Bush's life?

A; "Bush grew up under the curse of being the first son and the black sheep of the family and he had to prove himself stronger (than his father). So for him, winning a second term was crucial and above all finishing the job in Iraq. I think Bush personalizes a very complex series of world situations and makes them into issues of his own ego, which I call cowboy or John Wayne-like."

Q; What will people find most surprising in this movie?

A; "We put our hearts into it. I think it is compassionate and I think people may be surprised it is compassionate."

Close to greatness, if not quite there.

It's almost exhausting, too. Which I really think it should have been. As it stands, even with it's over two hour running time, it ended up feeling a bit fleet.

I almost couldn't sleep last night in anticipation of seeing this. Which was strange considering my expectations were rather low. I expected a much more rushed effort. It seemed like, even during production, Stone was already apologizing for making such an immediate film. What he ended up making was a surprisingly clear-eyed portrait of a sitting president. Balancing empathy and condemnation without seeming pedantic or pious.

It's almost the reservation that Stone experimented with in World Trade Center, but executed so much more effectively. It's a sober analysis of the first Bush term and, by reaction, the second one, too. All the while wrapped in a very cinematic, often told story about patriarchy and generational obligation.

Maybe it's because I just recently rewatched it, but this film echoed The Furies in ways I wouldn't expect.

And a golf clap for Toby Jones, while I'm at it. I expected Brolin's GW to stick with me, but was really surprised by Jone's Rove and Wright's Powell.

Initial reactions...

W. seems to be a major accomplishment for Oliver Stone. As a filmmaker of a distinct personality and temperament, he's always wanted to transition to more dramatic and personal stories. He wanted to deal with stories that are more classical and not rooted in complex character and sociological structures. World Trade Center was his recent attempt. While I liked portions of it, I think I did because I was an exuberant fan who took notice of good filmmaking moments over the complete whole. Too many moments in the film were just too dry for his imagination potential.

W. is the perfect embodiment of a lucid and imaginative storytelling structure for Stone in a smaller, more dramatic work. The story goes between different moments of Bush's life, but it is about an erratic character of different extremes so it has to set a style and purpose of storytelling. The major thing he does in W. is lose conventional set ups. There are very few exposition shots to introduce new locations and the camera seems to always be on the move, going in between the action. Sometimes it shows the actor talking and sometimes it doesn't, but it creates a movement or pace where we understand the wavelength of Bush's mind.

It also sets up a tone where scenes begin to bleed with each other like natural progression. Because Stone has little interest to set up new scenes properly we begin to take in each new scene like it was still part of the last one. The fast movement of the story forces us to do so. Critics have said that this tone was Stone being physically rushed to get the film done and include as much as possible, but I believe the point is to have a thematic continuation. We are better to link moments in his past with actions he takes on as President because the scenes are so closely tied together.

The beautiful thing is that Stone films a story that is the equivalent of a chamber drama over the course of 40 years. The story encompasses numerous things about Bush's life, but deals with everything on a specific personal and political level. The Bush we see as a relative kid still feels like the one we see as President. The details the film focuses his development on felt like a stage work, but the film broke the stage boundary by giving the story a wild timeline for progression of events. The audience is supposed to take events that happened to Bush on the oil rig in his 20s as key indicators for when he became President. The closeness of the events in the film's storyline makes it feel like a story that is happening over a very short period of time.

The Queen compressed a lot of themes and ideas of British rule and history into a simple story. It elicited all the details through the characters in the film. W. comes out of the Queen in that it shares a similar approach to story, but Stone goes so much further. He compresses a lot of events, history, themes, and story in a relatively simple storyline. The fact that it has an intimacy similar to the Queen is astounding.

I don't rate W. with Stone's major epic works. For one they are incomparable and the film is too new for me, but it has numerous storytelling similarities to great smaller works like Born on the Fourth of July and The Doors. I believe W. is a really good work, but I want to see how it ages with me. The fact I watched a Stone film in theater that didn't initially disappoint me is shocking so I hope my second viewing tomorrow will be just as good. I think it will.

I'm glad John complimented the story for being exhausting. Critics are calling it Stone being boring, but he has always meant to do this. In The Doors you feel the wear and tear of everything Morrison has done by the end. The film had no major moments where it was appeasing critics by saying this was the distinguishing moment in Morrison's career. Events and life circumstances were documented, but nothing was zeroed in as being a pivotal moment. For Stone the whole was more important than the sum of its parts.

Too many filmmakers today are critic conscience where they want to imply the themes way too often and want to have pay off moments. It's funny, but one of the things I like most about Stone is that he means to discourage critics and give them little pay off. He wants to be so close to the story it's like an experience for him. I like it because he gets better results from the story usually.

i think he should have saved it for a more epic work as opposed to this almost pointless movie (the how he got there stuff making it not completely pointless). 

Thandie Newton... i was like, "why aren't they giving her any lines in these scenes?"  then when they finally did, i was like, "why don't they stop giving her lines in this scene?"  annoying as hell, not even worthy of an SNL performance.

Yeah, she was terrible. The movie itself felt a lot like a SNL skit at first, except without the funny parts. Even Jeffery Wright's Powell was a caricature. Once it stopped being weird, it just got kinda boring.

huh, i thought it was quite successful in avoiding snl-like impersonations, thandie newton included, and overall i found the film fascinating. my immediate beef (an obvious one no doubt) would be i felt it ended a bit prematurely, as did a few other peeps in the sold-out theater i was in. one guy even screamed "keep going!" after it cut to black. now this doesn't mean i'm in the camp that felt stone should've waited a few years to make this. knowing the real W is still alive and kicking in the oval office made the film all the more powerful and zeitgeisty.

stone's films are always appreciated more in retrospect, so the polarized reviews aren't that surprising. the film definitely reconfirmed my love for stone, particularly his balls (heh) in tackling daring, difficult subjects most chicken-shit filmmakers and studios wouldn't dare consider.

side notes
- mad props to josh brolin, who's newfound ability to disappear into roles rivals PSH and, hell, even DDL.
- dug the photography much. great hand-held work.
- i think the rushed post-production was most evident in the scoring, which was a hodge-podge of soft pianos and guitars that didn't do much of anything. i did enjoy a lot of the music selections though, and almost which they just ditched the score and stuck to source (a la any given sunday).

Police: Arkansas TV anchorwoman attacked in home

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – A popular local TV anchorwoman who had a small part in the Bush biopic "W" was in critical condition Monday after being beaten in her home, and police said they are investigating possible motives.

KATV anchor Anne Pressly, 26, was found about 4:30 a.m. Monday by her mother, who went to the house when her daughter didn't answer a wake-up call, Little Rock police spokesman Cassandra Davis said.

Davis said investigators are talking to Pressly's co-workers to determine whether she "has had any problems." Davis said Pressly's purse was gone and that robbery was among the possible motives being explored. Davis would not discuss specifics of what the investigation revealed.

Pressly was found unresponsive in her bed and a police report said she was bleeding from her head. Davis said Pressly was in critical condition at an hospital.

Davis said Pressly was stabbed, but KATV cited investigators later in reporting that all of her injuries were from being beaten in the head and upper body.

Pressly appeared briefly in Oliver Stone's new movie about President Bush that opened over the weekend.

She portrays a conservative commentator who speaks favorably of President Bush's "Mission Accomplished" event on an aircraft carrier shortly after the start of the Iraq war. She won the role after being noticed by the casting director when she went to Shreveport, La., where the movie was filmed, to work on a story about it and the city's film industry.

Spokeswoman Kate Hubin for the film company Lionsgate confirmed Pressly's role but declined to comment further.

KATV's Web site notes that Pressly's most notable interview was with Vice President Dick Cheney. Traveling through an Arkansas town, she found the highway blocked in front of a hunting goods store because Cheney was inside. Pressly asked for an interview, which she conducted on the ammunition aisle.

During its 11:30 a.m. newscast, anchor Jason Pederson read a story about the attack.

"We would ask that you keep Anne in your thoughts and, especially, in your prayers," Pederson said.

Early Monday afternoon, a man answering a phone number for Pressly's mother, Patricia Cannady, said the family had no comment.

Quote from: Ghostboy on October 20, 2008, 03:46:58 PM
Yeah, she was terrible. The movie itself felt a lot like a SNL skit at first, except without the funny parts. Even Jeffery Wright's Powell was a caricature. Once it stopped being weird, it just got kinda boring.

I call it a chamber drama as far as structure goes, but I also believe it is meant to be an unfunny comedy. I consider that to be a type of story onto itself. Comedies believe in their characters because they can find some genuine warmth in their misdeeds. Unfunny comedies (like How I Won the War) play everything to a superficial and critical level. Nothing is genuinely funny because the storytellers see little redemption in the characters so they tell the story with their problems amplified to a comedic level but keep it unfunny because they want the story to act as an examination of the character's short comings. How I Won the War is superficial about nuclear war, but frames a lot of things in a context that give the best summation of our obsession with nuclear war.

Stone announces that the film will be light hearted and superficial when he opens the film with a credit sequence straight of a 1930s or Woody Allen film. In interviews he speaks about Bush as being a provincial character and that his rise to fame comes straight of a Frank Capra story. There are tides within the film that are serious, but the general overall point is that Stone doesn't believe in Bush as a person. He genuinely believes he represents the caricature of a real politician.

Now considering all of Stone's best films deal with duality, the dueling things within W. is the need for Bush to be his own developed person and how he always fails at it. The comedy of his antics offset his attempts to be deft. We get scenes that repeat lingo of his from press conferences because that does say something about him. Then we get little known pieces of personal information that hint at him being something more, but the constant struggle through out the film is that he is never that. The tone of the film always changes between light and serious because Bush is never who he wants to be. He is not the complete man. He is controlled by handlers and always undermined with his opinions and will never be good enough for his father. So the film goes between a dull comedy and a heartfelt drama. I found the mix of tones and perspectives about Bush to be fascinating.

This film was fine being made now. To worry about the complete picture of who he is until death is to give into general things that people expect in a biography. Stone isn't concerned about what he does through out his lifetime, but what he becomes and how he does so. That's why major events like his winning the election were unnecessary for inclusion in the film. W. does have themes about who he is as a man goes and what it meant for the country. He's already done enough as a President to convey that.

Quote from: Ghostboy on October 20, 2008, 03:46:58 PM
Once it stopped being weird, it just got kinda boring.

lovely.  i felt the same way and had a difficult time summing it up in a way that mirrored the laziness and indifference the movie seems to have been made with.  flaccid and mediocre to the core, though the performances are exceptional.  instead of adding to the brolin praise--all deserved--i'll say that i really loved elizabeth banks.  stupid as thandie newton was her presence was a welcome distraction.

This was nowhere near as good as Nixon or even That's My Bush, but it's still pretty good. 

Quote from: samsong on October 22, 2008, 08:06:05 PM

Quote from: Ghostboy on October 20, 2008, 03:46:58 PM
Once it stopped being weird, it just got kinda boring.

lovely.  i felt the same way and had a difficult time summing it up in a way that mirrored the laziness and indifference the movie seems to have been made with.  flaccid and mediocre to the core, though the performances are exceptional.  instead of adding to the brolin praise--all deserved--i'll say that i really loved elizabeth banks.  stupid as thandie newton was her presence was a welcome distraction.

i have not seen the film. but indifference is definetely not the word i get from the oliver stone interviews about this film. i get indifference when ridley scott says that shooting body of lies was a piece of cake, but not this. also, a film with exceptional performances can't really be mediocre.

Quote from: Ghostboy on October 20, 2008, 03:46:58 PM
Yeah, she was terrible. The movie itself felt a lot like a SNL skit at first, except without the funny parts. Even Jeffery Wright's Powell was a caricature. Once it stopped being weird, it just got kinda boring.

The film is just a collection of a recreation/reconstruction of certain moments, but nothing binds them.  There's no overarching theme that we haven't heard before in other forms.  Also, we get Bush choking on a pretzel but not 9/11?

Brolin and Dreyfuss were particularly effective.  Thandie Newton's performance bordered on parody.

I agree most strongly with the views of john and GT.  I am blown away by this, not because of who they are, but because every person after them has reached the conclusion that this wasn't a good film.  And I thought it was classic Stone, as in uneven and overstated, and also insightful, revealing, and dramatic.  I'm sure this has much to do with my apathy for Bush as a political figure and my interest in him as a person, meaning that for me I was able to view this film without readied conclusions about his character and personality.  On drinking, personal and professional development, and family relations I thought W. was truthful and wise, and if Stone hurried through the temporal reality of the situation she definitely didn't make many missteps about the emotional truths, there.

I refer to the scene between W and his pastor after he finds sobriety, the scene between W and his parents when he announces his candidacy for Texas governor, even the Yale Frat scene to the Quitting His Job scene, and also when W was eating a sandwich with Cheney.  Those scene stand out for me as examples of why the film was successful.

There's nothing more to say: w/o horse, john and GT hit it right on the head. I'm looking forward to the DVD as I know GT is as well. Whether there is a Director's or Extended Cut is still up for debate of course but I loved it and I left wanting more.

spoils

the sum is greater than the parts. some of the parts are a little off or simplistic or on the nose. powell's speech and cheney's oil rebuttal being one of them. some of the parts are excellent. the final image really sticks with me. it sums up this interpretation of bush pretty well and feels incredibly, strangely heartbreaking.

thandie MESSED UP and totally misunderstood the movie she was in. i also agree 9/11 should not have been ignored. especially considering the structure of the film it would've been easy to include at least a few moments. Bush in the classroom, being told the country was under attack could've been an obvious but great moment with the right placement. i also thought the placement of the pretzel scene could've been stronger later in the film. i agree waiting a little bit longer to make this would've been a good idea.

Brolin was absolutely incredible. i would love if he got a nom for this. don't think he will though. Cromwell was freaking GREAT too. the relationship with laura was handled incredibly well. you could understand her love for him, and the sacrifices she made for him. not just personally but philosophically... this review is very scattershot and i think that's a tribute to how meaty this thing is. it missteps here and there, but the more i think about it the more i NEED to see it again.

Josh Brolin Calls Playing George W. Bush The 'Ultimate Risk' And 'Ultimate Reward'
Brolin's bold decisions and leading-man leap make him one of the actors we're thankful for in 2008.
By Josh Horowitz; MTV

The leaves are falling, and the turkey is practically in the oven. Yes, according to the calendar, it's time to take stock and give thanks. So that's precisely what we're doing by talking to the actors and filmmakers that made 2008 a memorable year at the movies — a year filled with self-loathing kick-ass superheroes, Manolo-wearing women and the return of a very familiar man in a hat.

How did Josh Brolin get here? Two years ago, he was best known as Sean Astin's big brother in "The Goonies" and Barbra Streisand's stepson. Today, he's sitting on a body of work that in the last two years is virtually unmatched by any other film actor alive. Sure, 2007 was great too, with scene-stealing supporting turns in "American Gangster" and "Grindhouse" and a captivating (if nearly wordless) leading performance in "No Country for Old Men," but 2008 took it to another level.

First, he took on the unenviable task of portraying a sitting president in Oliver Stone's "W." and crafted a full-bodied, complex and, yes, thoughtful performance. And next week, he brings more of that humanity and complexity to what could have been an easy target in "Milk" as Dan White, the man who murdered the famed San Francisco politician in 1978.

Brolin took a look back at the year that was 2008 with MTV News, revealing how his friends and famous family felt about his role in "W.," whether that infamous bar fight in Louisiana was a regret, and why 2009 might see him become an action hero.

MTV: I'm guessing taking on a role like George W. Bush came with some skepticism among your friends and family.

Josh Brolin: Everyone said, "Why would you want to do that?" And most of my friends continued to ask "why" until it came out. I don't know how we're getting the praise and accolades we're getting. It's amazing to me. It was the ultimate risk, and it's the ultimate reward.

MTV: Is it true that your stepmother, Barbra Streisand, wasn't thrilled about you taking the role on?

Brolin: Not true. I know — it's no fun, right? OK, I kicked every cop's ass in Shreveport, and she hated that I was doing this movie. No, we really didn't talk about it in the beginning. About three weeks ago, she saw it and loved it. She called me last night and told me that Bill Clinton had seen it and loved it.

MTV: Can you point to one moment as the highlight of your year?

Brolin: There were a couple. The reviews that I got that I didn't expect for "W." made me very happy. And Oliver [Stone] and I in a dark room coming up with about five different versions of the film and picking the one that we did.

MTV: You mean there were different cuts of the film?

Brolin: Yeah. There was a more satirical version. A more sardonic version. One that was more darkly humorous. A more pathetic one. We were really scrambling to find the right tone.

MTV: Would that bar fight and arrest in Shreveport be considered a low point in the year?

Brolin: No. That was just pathetic. Nothing went on. I keep saying that, but people go, "It was Brolin. Something went on." But nothing went on. They're really out to get me right now. They need to figure out what the f--- they want to do. There's this contrasting thing [in Shreveport] of a tax incentive where they welcome all these movie people, and then on the other hand, they have a police force that says, "We don't care for strangers in our town." My feeling is, everybody should let Shreveport be Shreveport, and let's film someplace else.

MTV: Your "W." co-star Richard Dreyfuss recently called Stone "a fascist."

Brolin: Richard needs to be quiet. He played Cheney, who's a laconic guy, and that's almost impossible for Richard. So now he's overcompensating. Now he has it out for Oliver, which I don't understand, because he should be so thankful that Oliver cut together the performance that he did. Why the guy is turning on him, I have no idea.

MTV: A lot of people thought you deserved an Oscar nomination last year for "No Country for Old Men." Were you disappointed when it didn't come?

Brolin: Absolutely not. Nobody believes me. I feel good about the decisions I've made since then. I had an opportunity to do other movies. My bank account isn't happy, but I am, ultimately. And now I'm thinking about doing this movie next year, and it's something people won't expect at all. It's really [about] having fun with a movie and getting a director that's phenomenal.

MTV: You're talking about "Jonah Hex"?

Brolin: I love it.

MTV: What's intriguing about that project?

Brolin: The absurdity of it. It almost allows you to create a new genre. I love going back into the spaghetti-Western idea and completely turning it around.

MTV: When are you going to decide whether you'll do it?

Brolin: Soon. In the last couple months, I've been going back and forth about it. I went back to my gut: "Is it a sellout? What is it I like about this movie?" When I first read it, I thought, "Oh my God, it's awful!" And then I had a moment a week later, and I thought, "Why is it awful?" Maybe the thing to do is to do the most awful movie I can find.

MTV: What's so awful about it?

Brolin: It's so tongue-in-cheek. It's so ridiculous. But once I started putting people in my mind and saying, "What if I put [John] Malkovich in this role? Then what does this movie become? Now let's put this producer and director on it and think about how it plays out." Then it becomes fun. Now I love that movie. If you have a great filmmaker come in, then suddenly, these gags and characters become interesting.

MTV: Are the filmmakers behind "Crank" still directing it?

Brolin: I don't know. It's all up in the air.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedigitalbits.com%2Farticles%2Fmiscgfx%2Fcovershd%2Fwbrd.jpg&hash=9639cd61e7d276f144deff3da3a7931278cb3c50)

Lionsgate has set Oliver Stone's W. for release on DVD and Blu-ray Disc on 2/10, including director's commentary, deleted scenes and 2 featurettes (Dangerous Dynasty: The Bush Presidency and No Stranger to Controversy: Oliver Stone's George W. Bush).

I dig that cover art and wish had more of a desire to see the movie again. Commentary makes it at least worth a Netflix.

i sit like george bush. :ponder:

Quote from: Hedwig on December 03, 2008, 07:20:09 PM
i sit like george bush. :ponder:

Fascist.

I've seen this a few more times and I further liked the film as a filmed drama. Stone's best filmmaking comes in the small moments between the actors in scenes that would have been filmed straight by anyone else, but Stone's camera always wonderfully captures the corner of the screen to notice moments in other actors or things that add layers to the meaning of the scene.

The film has multiple characters that are famous, but the film shows little interest in most of them. Some critics are attacking the film for not making true characters out of Bush's henchmen, but like I said before, the film is a smaller work for Stone. JFK and Nixon were epics not only in length, but also structure. They took on subjects on numerous levels. There is multiplicity to W., but it exists only within Dubya himself. A film like the Doors was also about just Jim Morrison. It hardly defined other members of the band even though the title suggested it should.

A note against the film is the dream sequences. It is variations of Bush standing alone in a baseball field. I don't think the scenes were necessary because they paint ideas that were already conveyed well enough in previous scenes. Plus the lack of variety to them isn't good. The metaphorical fight Bush has with his father in the oval office is a lot better, but the film definited its tone and structure with the realistic scenes. Most of the dream sequences seemed like Stone being characteristically himself with the filmmaking when he didn't need to be. This was a transitional work for Stone so the entire film should have reflected it.

One scene I do like when looking back is the walk along the dirt road Bush and his advisors go on. The walk seems to go on forever and with no purpose. Certain shots of everyone walking in stride hopelessly to nothing reminded me of Luis Bunuel's Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoise, specifically the continuous repititions of the scenes were the dinner party is walking together and to nowhere in particular. They all seemed lost in their own world. Stone referencing this makes thematic sense. Besids, it's believable that the homage was conscience. Stone has said that Luis Bunuel was one of his favorite filmmakers.

still haven't seen it, but i already made a version in my mind where the ending of the presidency and the movie is bush being thrown a pair of shoes. he makes a little joke after being protected by the NSA guys and then asks for a moment of privacy, walks to the mirror and has a little   howard hughes -the aviator - dirk diggler boogie nights moment.  that incident was one of those fantastic cases of life becoming art. kudos to oliver stone for setting the tone in which bush jr's presidency will be remembered in books.

What the hell, cron?

I watched this yesterday and really enjoyed it.  The first half drug a little bit, but it picked up the pace once the movie focused in on the White House gang.  GT, I picked up on that "Discreet" nod during the Crawford Ranch hike too.  That was probably my favorite scene.  I didn't feel that the caricatures were over the top like others thought around here.  Newton's portrayal was a little awkward, but not distracting.

The movie had a nice balance of comedy, drama, and terror; an efficient morality play on the abuse of power.   

Oliver Stone On Why He Was 'Lucky to Survive' Bush Biopic 'W'
Source: MTV

He's made movies about pornographers and serial killers, tortured 'Nam soldiers and tortured 'Nam vets, assassinated presidents and disgraced presidents. But to hear Oliver Stone tell it, his last film might have been his riskiest.

"I'm lucky to have survived," the Oscar-winning director told MTV on the eve of the DVD release of 2008's George Bush biopic "W." "It was a movie that was dangerous to make." What could be risky about depicting a sitting president, dramatizing events still fresh—and sometimes painful—in viewers' minds and hustling crazily to release the film less than a month before the election? Oh, right. "It could have gotten killed," Stone went on. "We survived the onslaught."

In fact, that onslaught turned out far different than anyone imagined. When news of the project first surfaced, talk among pundits, politicos and film fans centered on how thoroughly the famously liberal director would trash the president's already tarnished image. But once the film hit theaters, Stone said, "If anything, people criticized it for being fair."

All this focus on Bush-the-film-character obscured the larger point Stone was trying to communicate. "People are saying, 'I hate Bush,' 'I love Bush,'" he said. "Who cares? The whole point is where is the American mentality at? We feel entitled to dominate the world." He points to a crucial scene late in the movie in which the Cabinet is discussing a possible war against Iran—and, implicitly, the expansion of the American empire—as the true centerpiece of the film.

But the title is "W," not "American Empire," and inevitably the film's critical reception would hinge on the strength of Josh Brolin's portrayal of the 43rd president. Brolin threw himself into the role, quitting drinking for eight months and often staying in character on set. The critics were kind, but he was ignored during awards season. "I wish he had gotten more attention," said the director. "It's a valid piece of work. It's not dripping with hate, which I think is good in the long run."

Oscar voters may not have taken notice of Brolin as Bush, but did Bush himself take notice of Brolin? "I can tell you from two reliable sources that he did see it," said Stone. "He apparently liked Josh Brolin. I asked this high source who knows both the father and son very well if they think I had the Oedipal connection down. He thinks it's pretty accurate."

While "W" ends in 2004, leaving an entire four-year term unexplored, Stone has no plans to make "W, Part II." "The seeds of the man are laid in how he becomes an emperor," said the director. "He says it all with Iraq. There's no point in going into all the misdeeds. There's not much growth of character there."

Stone may not be revisiting Bush and Co. again, but that doesn't mean the former president will be out of his life forever. "I think he's laughing now," says Stone. "I don't think this guy is going into the sunset with any doubts. I think he's going to be a force in the opposition. Those guys will be around in different shapes and sizes, in Sarah Palin disguises. They're here to haunt us."

I just finished this, and i wish i didn't have to be at work in five minutes. All i really have the time to type is, i really enjoyed that ending. 


****Spoiler****



Blinded by the lights on a routine pop-fly. Nice.

I think finally me and GT can agree on a film in pretty much every respect. Totally got the chamber drama vibe from the moment it started, thinking it was odd that the only main credits were the star, the writer and the director.

It really works as a drama but then again the irony of W. never really achieving his one goal of being taken seriously by his father turns it into a kind of morbid comedy.

I really liked the cinematography and the whole visual design of the film, you can tell a true master is behind this from start to finish. I agree with the comment about the score being kind of a rushed effort. The song selections were better and they should have kept it like that.

I don't get at all the "impersonations" comments. Didn't notice anything, didn't get annoyed by anything. Thandie Newton was ok.

With Nixon, Stone was making not only an epic of one man's soul but also a study of power and of the times the film took place in it, of AMERICA, if you will. Nixon was a reflexion of what was going on around him. W. is just this guy who has to be in the shadow of his father forever and can't even receive a film titled Bush because he would be confused with him. The last shot of the film is brilliant.

Enjoyed the idea Bush probably would have liked this movie. Very gratified that he really did. Very funny Bush's elaboration is that he thought there were sad moments.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/t-magazine/02well-cover.html?scp=4&sq=oliver%20stone&st=cse

NYT: I think you're the only person who has portrayed a president while he was still in office. Before or after filming, did you ever meet George Bush?

Brolin: No, but somebody came up to me during the "Milk" premiere and said, "W's seen 'W.'— George has seen your movie." Then Oliver Stone, the director of "W.," ran into Bill Clinton in China. Clinton told Oliver that he had loaned Bush his DVD copy of "W." He said W liked it very much. He said W thought there were sad moments.

also in that article, he says he finds megan fox less attractive than richard jenkins:

QuoteAnd, now, in "Jonah Hex," you have your first-ever nude sex scene, with Megan Fox.

Richard is much more attractive to me than Megan Fox! Was I nude in "Jonah Hex"? I guess it was my first nude sex scene. Megan was very nervous. I was nervous. The sex scene is pretty risqué and nerve-racking. It's hard to act when you're naked.

Quote from: Reinhold on March 17, 2010, 02:04:36 PM
also in that article, he says he finds megan fox less attractive than richard jenkins:

QuoteAnd, now, in "Jonah Hex," you have your first-ever nude sex scene, with Megan Fox.

Richard is much more attractive to me than Megan Fox! Was I nude in "Jonah Hex"? I guess it was my first nude sex scene. Megan was very nervous. I was nervous. The sex scene is pretty risqué and nerve-racking. It's hard to act when you're naked.

I don't know what this means.  But, i were W. and I watched this film about my shitty docile life, I would get sad in places too.

Post script: I act naked all the time.