I finished watching "W" today. I thought it was way too kind to some characters.

[Lil Missy]

I already understood how haunted W is by being such a fuck up and feeling like he is is the shadows of his father. I was surprised it was honest about W getting a gal pregnant, his DUI, and AWOL history.

It did not nearly dwell enough on how much control Darth cheney or Rove really had, or how fuckin' evil he is. The portrayal of Condi was rather pitiful. And it sorta blasted past how much influence Laura had on insisting he quit drinking, and his drug abuse.

I thought it was a whitewash, and way too kind.

[AllentownJake]

1. I could only get to the Iraq war planning part

I was getting to fucking angry reliving that and thinking about how people were about to needlessly die as Cheney and him discussed it over sandwhiches even thought it was a dramitization...I just couldn't watch anymore.

[Lil Missy]

6. I don't believe for a second they didn't know there were no WMD's in Iraq.

And it irritated me that they spent little time on the fact that Iraq had nothing to do with 911. And that cheney lied and wanted to make it so.

I knew that was bullshit before the war started. But of course I was considered nuts at the time. Made me sick.

[S n o w b a l l]

2. They all seemed like cartoon characters to me...

I honestly couldn't take it seriously.

And there was nothing in there that I didn't know before so it was just like a comic book redundancy.

[Lil Missy]

7. It certainly did leave out a lot, didn't it.

[AlCzervik]

3. I'm glad i saw this post, i've been thinking about renting it but i think i'll just

wait until it shows up on HBO.

Will Ferrell as Bush doing his one man show was really good.

[Lil Missy]

4. It's not a bad movie. I'd say rent it.

I just thought it was kind of a blow job, and glossed over too many details.

[AlCzervik]

5. i'll wait, i'm sure HBO will have it on a few months.

[Boojatta]

9. So, it is a porn movie that you're recommending now?

[Lil Missy]

11. Nice try. I didn't say it was a porno flick. Do you have a point?

I gave my honest opinion. Have you even seen the movie?

[Lil Missy]

14. And BTW,

I thought your comment was jackass.

[Boojatta]

26. My comment was just regarding the detailed wording

after your words: "I just thought it was kind of a..."

At least my comment wasn't unmotivated. It was supposed to be in the category "grammar Nazi points out embarrassing slip."

[Flaxbee]

10. wait for HBO, or, just skip it.

I actually got depressed all over again watching it. The actors like Ferrell, Dreyfus, etc., are fun to watch, but to revisit all that scheming and cynicism and greed and bloodlust just was almost too much for me.

If you're not a glutton for punishment, skip it. We already lived through 8 years, and will have to suffer for a lot longer.

[AlCzervik]

12. i'm not, i actually went through all my books from the last 10 years and donated

almost everyone about Bush to the library, i ended keeping maybe 10. Bush out.

[Kali]

8. I actually saw it about a week ago

and I never watch anything. I was up in the big city at my sisters and my son had purchased it so we watched. I agree completely with you - it was too soft. Too sympathetic. The country - hell the whole world fucked up by that moron CHILD and his enablers. :puke:

[Lil Missy]

13. I thought it made him look more engaged in "events" than he real was. cheney was running the show.

What a pitiful bastard.

[libodem]

15. I thought Barbara was too pretty

and too kind. She strikes me as a snotty, spoiled bitch. And I think they should have shown Pickles running down her old boyfriend and killing him. Didn't show enough of 'W', hanging around with the Saudis, either.

[Lil Missy]

16. I thought Barbera was portrayed to nicely too. I thought most of the movie was bullshit.

[jobycom]

17. I thought it was a very good movie, but I don't think it was very accurate about W.

It's one of the views people have of Bush, but I don't believe that he and his cabinet really believed nor cared whether there were WMDs over there. Judging from the confessions of former cabinet members like Paul O'Neil, and from discoveries like the Niger forgeries and the Downing Street Minutes, I think it's clear that most if not all of the cabinet knew that the evidence was false, that they were twisting facts to justify an invasion.

It is still somewhat up in the air as to whether everyone believed that they had WMDs. Some may have believed they did, and presented bogus evidence thinking that they were still telling the truth--like a cop so convinced of someone's guilt that he plants evidence.

And I have no idea what the power balance really was between W and Cheney. Given his inability to speak at debates or press conferences, I have doubts he was really that much in charge. On the other hand, I've known people who have worked with him, and though none of them accuse him of being a rocket scientist, some say he really does have the ability to command. All of the nicknames and insults he uses are his way of keeping people under him off guard and making them look foolish in front of others, and that's how he controls people and pressures them to do what he wants.

Anyway, I don't know if Oliver Stone believed he was portraying events accurately or not, but I think he was more interested in the Greek tragedy of the whole situation. An Oedipal figure riddled with insecurities and paradoxically full of hubris persuaded a mighty nation to go to war, only to lose the war and bring the mighty nation to its knees. It's a good story, and if it's not literally true, it's still an interesting morality play.

Anyway, I really liked the film, even if I don't think that's the way it happened. Not that anyone's still reading this. :(

[Lil Missy]

18. I don't believe for one second they thought WMD's were there.

And what's the difference anyway? Iraq had nothing to do with 911. It was all about oil fields and world dominance. And there still are more dangerous countries.

I knew that was bullshit.

I do think cheney was in charge for most of that bonehead presidency. Makes me sick.

[jobycom]

19. I don't think anything's that simple.

Bush got elected to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, that's why he surrounded himself with all the people who were trying to get Clinton to invade Iraq and overthrow the Taliban. But I don't know how much the rest were in on it. I can see some of them being told "We know they have WMDs, even nukes, but we can't prove it without revealing our secret sources, so we are going to use made-up evidence to convince people." I can see people like Bush not really even wondering whether it might be true or not. They wanted to invade to get the oil and build the pipelines and secure our presence in the region (the Cheney speech in the movie was perfect), and they didn't much care what excuses they offered, or whether the excuses were true or false.

And I don't know how much Cheney called the shots, and how much Bush did. I don't think it matters, since I think they were in lock-step. I can see Bush leaving the details and management to Cheney, and Cheney leaving the sales pitch to Bush, much like the movie portrays. I don't think Cheney was as disconnected as the movie portrays, though.

But the whole idea that Bush and the others just sat around at their leisure discussing these issues and relying on each others' assurances is too simple. Each of them had entire staffs giving them information, and no doubt each staff had its own internal squabbles, and the information the cabinet members was getting didn't all support Bush. Intelligence would have been consulting with appropriate cabinet members--it was all just too simplified.

That's why I don't think Stone was really arguing what he think happened. It was all shorthand. Powell represented one argument for the invasion, Rumsfeld another, Cheney his own. Each was more of a segment of American politics than an individual. Bush was the mythical king who had to decide, and his own shortcomings caused him to decide badly. It was a morality tale of how an insecure, unprepared leader can mislead so many.

Think about Hamlet, and the great tragedy. What isn't in the play is how all of that affected the common folk. The peasants and city dwellers would all have been thrown into turmoil with such a power struggle happening. That's what we saw with W: the games the elite play, without regard for the people.

I thought it was a classical telling of a modern tale. It wasn't history, though. Stone doesn't do history, he does mythology.

[Hippo_Tron]

20. Actually the Taliban were our allies in the war on drugs before 9/11

The Bush Administration even gave them money.

[jobycom]

21. No they were never allies, unless you want to go back to the pre-Taliban mujahadin era

The only countries who officially recognized the Taliban were Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. The US was trying from 1996 to get the Taliban to turn over Bin Laden, who Clinton was obsessed with. In 98 when Bin Laden blew up the African embassies, Clinton fired missiles into Afghanistan to hit Bin Laden. After that, the Taliban protected him openly, and that made them our enemy. They also chased the UN out.

There were rumors we were giving them money to not grow opium, and there were rumors that Bush was negotiating with them for the capture of Bin Laden in early 2001. But they were not our allies.

[Auggie]

22. I want a movie on Darth. Starting from the Reagan years, birth of the PNAC,

all the way up to invasion of Iraq. We need a tell-all movie for mainstream distribution -- if only to have a permanent record for history.

Let Spike Lee produce and direct it. He'd do a great job.

[Lil Missy]

28. I doubt we'd get an honest movie. Just like "W", it would be bullshit.

[Auggie]

35. Not if Spike did it.

[Lil Missy]

36. Point taken.

[NV Whino]

23. I watched it recently

It was better than I anticipated. But I agree with you it short changed the influence of Cheney (good performance by Dryfuss) and Rove. It did point out the antipathy between W and Cheney, though. Condis' portrayal was wimpy, but in fact, it is how I see her so I can't complain about that. I thought the Laura character was a washout--totally unmemorable.

[Lil Missy]

27. I agree. for the most. I think cheney was mostly in charge. And maybe Rove.

I thought the condi portrayal was wimpy, but that is how I see her too.

Laura had more personality than I've ever imagined with her. I've always considered her very dull and more like a stepford wife.

[graywarrior]

24. I was uncomfortable thru the entire movie

Richard Dryfuss as Cheney freaked me the fuck out.

[Lil Missy]

25. Good casting then, cause cheney freaks me the fuck out IRL.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

29. It was an Oliver Stone movie -

For that reason alone, view it as a fairy tale or a slapstick comedy.

Never talk Stone's work seriously. This is the guy, after all, who did "JFK," a colossal piece of crap if ever there was one. Yet, sometimes he does good work - "Platoon," "Born On The Fourth Of July," and "Talk Radio."

But when he goes off, man, does he go off! "W" was a joke.

[Lil Missy]

30. He did mention some things. Like,

W getting a gal pregnant, (although not the abortion). And also the AWOL and DUI, and that he was a major fuck-up.

Sorry but I thought the rest of the movie was bullshit. It didn't portray the true influence of cheney or rove, and made w look all of a sudden more smart and engaged. That's crap!

[jeff30997]

31. And don't forget Nixon.

I thought that was pretty much a joke too.:puke:

[Lil Missy]

32. By Oliver Stone? What was the name of it? I have Netflix.

Off to Google ...

Edit: I found the one by Oliver Stone. (Directed) Not one that could be watched online, so I have to rent it.

[jeff30997]

33. The tittle was simply Nixon.Short tittle like JFK or Alexander.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113987/

I thought it was not truly bad but too caricatural IMHO.

[jeff30997]

34. I only recently learned about that movie....

I was reading a magazine in the Dentist's waiting room and I saw an article about the DVD

release of "W directed by Oliver Stone".I couldn't believe it.JFK and Nixon I can understand

but Chimpy ? I don't think I will watch it,especially after reading this thread.

[PRETZEL]

37. I think part of it was that the movie was about Bush,

and his "biography".

It was definately worth watching but since you can only put in so much it did gloss over some major events in his life. AWOL, DUI, the pregnant girl are true events basically fixed by Poppy but given the amount of time Stone wanted to give to the entire film, it wasn't given the time.

Same is true for the relationship between Bush and Cheney. The more I read about this relationship tells me that Cheney's agenda was his own mainly because Bush let him. In that regard I'm specifically talking about Iraq and energy. Cheney's agenda (which may or may not have overlapped) and the relating policies would have made for a much better film, but it would have been at the expense of other events in Bush's life.

What I think Stone did with the other people (Rice, Rumsfeld, Powell, etc.) was basically let them remain in the backround and he stayed with whatever perception people had of them going into the film stay.