AshUnow
This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.
Juana
what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.
dallasryan
I think a lot of people felt that Stone was really going to lay into Dubya but he didn't. Instead Stone made Dubya look as if he was really trying to do good and that due to bad circumstances things unfolded the way they did, unintenionally. In the end you be the judge for what you want and don't want to believe. But overall if the viewer looks at W. as a film of fiction and nothing else, it's not half bad. Brolin is a fantastic actor and he was superb in this one as Dubya. Worth the watch for Brolin's performance.
susanandbillymorris
It was Thanksgiving night and we were tired, full and wanted something to watch that would be entertaining. We are both democrats and interested in politics but thought this might be fun and to our honest surprise it was. We enjoyed it which was easy to do more than 10 years after the events. Comparing the real life characters to the actors really made it and we both thought the acting was good at worst and brilliant in some cases. Then suddenly it ended.... just like that with no 9/11. How on earth can any film about dubya not include the biggest event in National history. We were left shouting at the screen. I am glad we watched it but were left feeling let down.
Amy Edwards
As as I'm not a true big fan of the man, I haven't taken the time to watch the movie before now. I was afraid that this movie would serve as a way to restore a little the image of George W. Bush and it's not falling far from here as I now saw it.I've seen many biopics about the famous people who were an active part of the history of the country. Every time, it was treated with depth and kept being really objective. But there, it's looking like unfinished.Most of his career is overlooked. Not any mention about his oil businessman success story. His governorship is really depicted poorly. We don't even see him getting elected president. 9/11 was the most important event of his presidency, the one which changed it all and made it what it was but still except of mentioning it during several exchanges with his cabinet, we don't see any scene about that day nor his declaration of war against Afghanistan. The only real focus was the war in Iraq explained in a very simplistic way. About that fact, I have also my grief. Oliver Stone wants to make us believe that Bush was just a puppet of his cabinet. Someone who just jumps in because he's told so. I have my doubt about that. Sure W is not very bright but come on he is not that gullible even from my point of view. He was a governor and a pretty acclaimed one before he was elected to the Presidency. He inspired some leadership. He must have had some control of his policy as President of the United States.The only thing they got their part right is Colin Powell who was maybe the smartest of the Cabinet and the only one who expressed doubts about the WMDs in Iraq but was shut off by Cheney, Rice and ultimately Bush. That was the only part I really liked. But the rest seems to be pure propaganda.I feared that it could be that way and i wasn't wrong. Like the real President himself, this movie will definitely not be a part of my favorites.
david-sarkies
I think the best description of this film would be 'Shakespeareian' in the sense that it is the tragedy of a boy trying to please his father and failing abysmally, and the action being played out on the world stage. I guess, in a way, this is an interpretation of the reasons behind what some have considered to be one of the most disastrous presidencies in the history of the United States. The main reason as to why this presidency was disastrous can be pointed at one particular event and that is the invasion of Iraq, however in many other cases it appears to be the actions of a boy who, in his younger life, has repeatedly displeased his father, and has overcompensated in his attempts to win back his father's favour, however in doing so he has further alienated his father and the respectable name of his family.The other sense that it is Shakespearian is that it is played out in the background of what some could consider to be a noble household. To suggest that the United States has a form of nobility would be repugnant to many Americans who consider such a structure to indicate the lack of the ability to advance where they consider that the unique nature of the United States is that one can go from being a beggar on the street to a millionaire, all that it requires is hard work (and there is certainly evidence that this has happened).However, it is not the lack of mobility that I am referring to in my commentary, but rather the nature of entrenched wealth. In this film the characters speak of the various houses, such as the Kennedy's and the Bush's almost as if they were noble houses in and off themselves. One could even add the Rockefeller's to that list (and I am sure there are others). They are families who live in the upper echelons of society in which they have access to both wealth and power, and the children of which receive privileges that many of us do not get (such as the best skills, connections, and access to the best jobs). This is much more so in American where there is an inbuilt reluctance to receive handouts, and a belief that people are no oppressed or exploited (because if they were to actually realise that then they would be out on the streets protesting, when in reality it is only a handful of left wing intellectuals).As for the film, I think that W is actually a pretty good film that portrays Bush in a much different light than many of the others would, and it in both ways not too hard, and not too supportive. For a director that was pretty much opposed to the policies and actions of this particular administration, I believe he actually does a pretty decent job, along with throwing in some rather amusing scenes that is typical of a class of people who have effectively lost touch with the common person. As for the portrayal of Cheney, it is clear that he is the villain of the piece who is carefully playing an easily led and misguided boy for his own particular goals. With the exception of Cheney, who is clearly a villain, the rest of the cabinet are all portrayed in a farcical and quite satirical way.
