|
W. (15)
Directed by Oliver Stone
Written by Stanley Weiser
Screening at from 7th November
2008
Reviewed by
As George Walker Bush slumps out of office almost universally hated,
with much of the American electorate believing they have just rejected
everything he ever stood for in electing the much loved but little understood
Barack Obama, we get the first Dubya biopic. So how has Hollywood liberal
Oliver Stone portrayed the most despised man on the planet? Well, apparently
he’s a basically well-meaning goofball kinda guy who’s had
a really difficult job and sometimes feels that’s it’s all
a bit too much. Cue tinkling piano and heart-rending pillow talk with
Laura. Cry me a river.
Hardly anything important rings true. The major players – Cheney,
Rove, Rumsfeld, Powell and Rice are all here – behave exactly the
same in private White House conversation as they do on the world stage,
as if there’s no such thing as a ‘public face’ for politicians.
It seems that Josh Brolin (as the President), Elizabeth Banks (as his
First Lady), and especially Thandie Newton (as Condoleezza Rice) spent
many hours getting impressions of their respective characters’ nuances
and mannerisms down pat, without ever thinking about motivation. Toby
Jones (as the man known as “Bush’s Brain”, the noxious
Karl Rove), and Richard Dreyfuss (who seems to have been playing Dick
Cheney all his life), fare better, but they are working with a dead script.
Political junkies might notice that someone – presumably Stanley
Weiser – has copied memorable quotes from the various characters’
speeches and crowbarred them into conversation. Is this all a joke, or
are we trying to establish why major figures do the things they do?
But I forget; Oliver Stone has his reason why George done a bad thing.
He was haunted by the long shadow of his ex-President father, and wanted
to gain his respect, or outdo him, or both. But this isn’t anywhere
near enough. And even by his own standards, Stone has failed. Speaking
to the Guardian, the director summed up his film by asking "How did
Bush go from an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world?"
Unfortunately, W. leaves this question far from answered, because he has
completely ignored social forces. Rewind eight years and we don’t
see Bush – or rather the people behind him – stealing an election,
though they actually did and it was really important and stuff. Those
people clearly had their own agendas, and thought that they had found
the perfect ”folksy”, “compassionate conservative”
empty vessel to manipulate in their own power games. Still, Bush can’t
be understood as an innocent out of his depth. In his own clumsy, bumbling
way, he has played his part in the killing of hundreds of thousands, the
impoverishment of millions more, and the virtual shredding of the United
States Constitution, amongst countless other outrages against humanity
and the environment. He is – and is set to remain – an obscenely
wealthy man.
Sensing the US empire needs serious corporate rebranding, many of the
same powers who backed Bush have placed their trust in calmly eloquent
newcomer and now President-elect Obama. Meanwhile, a sadistic, murderous
gangster exits stage right, leaving a trail of blood behind him. But then
again, poor thing, isn’t he just a bit of a drunk who has issues
with his “papa”? History will surely judge him more critically.
|