The GOD AWFUL movie "W"

  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Oct 27, 2008 7:41 PM GMT
    My mom and I made the mistake of going to see the movie "W" on Friday night. While we both wanted to leave about 1/3 of the way through we, regrettably, stuck it out to the end. I can honestly say that it was probably one of the most excruciating cinematic experiences I have ever had to endure. I don't know if I ever even want to see another JOSH BROLIN movie again, let alone one directed by OLIVER STONE.

    Anyone else see this piece of cinematic crap?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 7:56 PM GMT
    Um... Was it a really bad, poorly made movie? Or are you just upset that it was anti-Bush??? (and how could you not know it was going to be anti-Bush before you went in to see it? I didn't think they made that a huge secret) I have not personally seen the movie, so I can't pass judgement one way or the other; I was just curious as to what you hated about it the most.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 7:57 PM GMT
    A lot of people are mistaking it for Cheech and Chong's Up in Smoke.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Oct 27, 2008 8:01 PM GMT
    Oh, Gr8pics, we went in knowing full well that it was going to be anti-Bush. I mean, after all, it was an Oliver Stone movie. That said, I expected at least a little bit of cinematic integrity from Oliver Stone. The characterizations were ridiculous bordering on the absurd -- George Bush constantly talking with food in his mouth, Condi Rice like a meek little mouse, Karl Rove looking and acting more like Truman Capote. It was truly horrendous, and judging from the moans in the audience during the movie, the several people who actually DID walk out during the movie, and the comments I heard from movie goers as we were leaving the theater, this movie will be a huge flop -- and deservedly so.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Oct 27, 2008 8:05 PM GMT
    I would assume anything involving or about "W" is going to be awful. I doubt that it could be improved....
  • Thirdbeach

    Posts: 1364

    Oct 27, 2008 8:18 PM GMT
    I think you should have been the good son and taken your mother to see
    "Saw V" instead....




    (Sorry couldn't resist icon_razz.gif)
  • cowboyathlete

    Posts: 1346

    Oct 27, 2008 8:24 PM GMT
    Oliver Stone is the same guy who had bad reviews of his movie about Alexander the Great, so I have no desire to see this one. Besides, Josh Brolin looked hot in No Country For Old Men, and I have no desire to have that image tainted. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 8:26 PM GMT
    I understand the working title for this during production was "Peewee's Big Adventure".
  • kinetic

    Posts: 1125

    Oct 27, 2008 8:27 PM GMT
    I'll wait for DVD.. Thnx for the heads up!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 8:59 PM GMT
    Does it seem like there are increasing numbers of bad films, songs, bands, foods, cars - etc.? This makes me look for quality and classics in each of these areas. For instance, I much prefer great films, songs, bands, foods, cars - even if they are from years back - just so long as they are the best!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 9:20 PM GMT
    I can't imagine why anyone would want to see the movie. People fall into two camps; pro-Bush and anti-Bush. Pro-Bush people wouldn't want to see him in a bad light and anti-Bush people wouldn't want to sit through two hours of George W. Bush. 8 years was enough.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 9:26 PM GMT


    I was going to see this movie .. it sounded interesting , and after you said these things I wonder why they give a poor director make such a movie like this ..
    Is it techincally bad or is it the storyline /idea ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 9:35 PM GMT
    Oh c'mon. You are a republican bush supporter so of course you aren't going to like this movie. I wouldn't say it was horrible but I wouldn't recommend it. It was fluff. My issue with it was how Stone used some of Bush's famous malapropisms and misstatements in scenes and times in which they didn't occur - like inserting some dumb thing he said at a press conference into a board room scene.

    Fortunately I watched it on the internet so I didn't lose any money over it. lol
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 9:39 PM GMT
    I was interested from the trailers, but everything I've been hearing about it from both sides of the fence has pretty much indicated that it's not worth watching. Kind of a shame, really.

    HndsmKansan saidI would assume anything involving or about "W" is going to be awful. I doubt that it could be improved....

    Oh, snap!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 9:54 PM GMT
    Stone had two choices: a) release the movie while W is still president, leveraging the overwhelming anger and frustration the country has with him. Or b) wait until enough years have passed that folks are able to stomach anything Bush-associated again.

    Once he's out of office, I think nearly everyone will want to completely forget about him for a while.

    I've heard mixed reviews about this flick. Based merely on what I've read about it, I think someone other than Stone could have done a better, more accurate, and ultimately more scathing job.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Oct 27, 2008 10:03 PM GMT
    I would have been fine with it being even more scathing had it had at least a morsel of truth in it. It was pure fluff and propaganda, and the characters were nothing more than caricatures that took away from anything even remotely interesting about the movie. It took the movie-goer for an idiot, and I found that offensive and I wish I would have left halfway through or never gone at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 10:36 PM GMT
    I can imagine anti-Bush people seeing the film, even though I have no interest in it.

    It's like a joke I heard today:

    On January 21, 2009, a man approaches the marine guarding the White House. He says, "I want to see President Bush."

    "I'm sorry," the marine explains kindly, "President Bush is no longer in office." So, the man goes away.

    The next day, the man returns. He approaches the guard again. "I'd like to see President Bush," he says.

    "I told you before," the guard says patiently. "He's out of office now." And the man goes away again.

    The very next day, the man returns again. "I'd like to see President Bush," he says.

    The guard says, "As I've told you, President Bush is NO LONGER IN OFFICE. Why do you keep asking?"

    "I know," the man says, "I just like hearing it."

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 10:38 PM GMT
    a co-worker of mine went to see the movie. He highly recommends it. He does say it is a 2 hour movie that feels like 4 because it is all dialogue, but he says it really makes Bush far less of a demon than it could. It wasn't a love fest by any means but he, like I, is completely anti Bush and anti republican but he said it really humanized Bush and thought that it portrayed him honestly and without malice. Of course no Bushite would agree because it doesn't put W on a pedestal at all. I am not surprised that many americans won't like it either. You have to pay attention and have an attention span longer than a commercial. You also have to approach the movie with an open mind and not be a bigot on either side. Hard to come by after eight years of that douchebag.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 10:57 PM GMT
    I will probably rent it when it comes out on DVD. Not one to spend money in the theatres on.

    George W. Bush's reputation is already in the dumpster, even among many Republicans. I don't know why this movie was even made. Perhaps a movie made 15 to 20 years from now (like "Nixon") would be more interesting. We are too close to the history right now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 11:04 PM GMT
    I've already seen "Less Than Zero" and "American Psycho". What more needs to be seen?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 11:15 PM GMT
    You don't want to see Josh Brolin?
    ¿noʎ ɥʇıʍ ƃuoɹʍ sı ʇɐɥʍ
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 27, 2008 11:31 PM GMT
    He's a republican, of course he didn't like it.
  • vindog

    Posts: 1440

    Oct 28, 2008 12:01 AM GMT
    1969er said
    ¿noʎ ɥʇıʍ ƃuoɹʍ sı ʇɐɥʍ



    WOW! How did you do that?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 28, 2008 12:03 AM GMT
    Oliver Stone seems to be either senile or unabashedly exploiting stereotypical liberal sympathies.
  • Koaa2

    Posts: 1556

    Oct 28, 2008 2:38 PM GMT
    I can hardly wait for the sequel, when they convict him of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, and throw all the bastards in prison!