The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

Despite obvious humor, W. lacks relevance

In fierce political atmosphere, Oliver Stone’s look at current president fails to offer timely critique of George W. Bush, falling back instead on cliche

Today, our country is gripped by economic hardship, drained by the war in Iraq and glued to CNN as we watch the most important election of our generation unfold. We are in the midst of what could be a significant and life-changing turn in our nation’s (and the world’s) history. Maybe this is why watching W., Oliver Stone’s new political flick about George W. Bush’s life and presidency, was so irrelevant and difficult to watch.

We’ve all heard the buzz surrounding W. It’s controversial, it’s bold and it’s critical of the Bush presidency. Commercials showcase Stone’s Bush grunting and gaffing over the Talking Heads’ “Once in a Lifetime,” a song known for its existential angst. At a time when the president’s approval rating is among the lowest of any president in history, we welcome another chance to watch how this administration screwed us over. We want it, we crave it — not only for vindication, but also because some of us can’t believe it’s gotten this bad. A film that includes shots of Bushie drinking and getting bailed out of jail before struggling to the White House may just be the thing we need.

In January, Stone told The Wall Street Journal that the film portrays how Bush went “from an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world.” In this regard, it’s certainly lacking. It opens with Bush (Josh Brolin) during his first term right before America went to war in Iraq in 2003. The film jumps between that first term and Bush’s past through flashbacks and dreams. The focus is on Bush’s cabinet as it searches for the infamous weapons of mass destruction in Iraq only to come up short, throwing the war off track and eventually out of Bush’s control. The perplexing part is that the film merely follows Bush on his road to the White House and into Iraq, and it doesn’t explore how his past influenced his presidency. So he was a drunk. So he found Jesus. Did this influence his presidency? Stone has a different theory — Bush has daddy issues.

Bush’s troubled relationship with George H. W. Bush (James Cromwell) pushes Bush the Younger to abandon his series of menial jobs and get into politics. His losses, his elections and his policies all go back to dad as W. seems to constantly struggle in his father’s shadow. Stone lays on Bush’s Oedipal dilemma to the point of overkill — Bush’s dream sequence during which he screams “Get out of my life!” at his father was predictable and borderline cliché.

In fact, almost everything about W. was overkill, especially the caricatures of Bush’s cabinet. Scott Glenn plays a diabolical Donald Rumsfeld, while Jeffrey Wright made Colin Powell the upholder of morality and justice. Thandie Newton made the most obnoxious Condoleezza Rice I’ve ever seen, while Elizabeth Bank’s Laura Bush was bland and overly sympathetic. Brolin’s Bush could have been a cartoon — snide, stupid, confused and childish. Stone makes sure to sneak in all the famous “Bushisms” he can, and even has Mr. President eating Cheetos as he discusses torture tactics with Vice President Dick Cheney (Richard Dreyfuss’ Cheney was, surprisingly, chillingly good).

Cheetos and accuracy aside, the film did little else than replay all those “Oh my God, Bush is an idiot” moments for us. Here’s the thing — this is stuff we already know. Stone’s story of Bush’s life fails to tell us anything new about our bumbling 43rd president, nor does it contain any surprises as Stone promised. Stone is a director who loves conspiracy, who is excellent at unwinding and unraveling history to the point where we don’t know what really happened. JFK was praised and condemned for this in 1991. Yet all the conspiracies and secrets of Bush’s life and presidency aren’t really conspiracies or secrets — we know what happened in the White House, on the Crawford, Texas ranch and in Iraq. If Stone really wants to unravel a historical mystery, perhaps a character study of the people who elected Bush for his second presidency should be the subject for his next film. Thanks Ollie, but we didn’t need a film to remind us that we’ve had enough of W.

Local Savings

Comments

Latest Video

Latest Podcast

Four Lawnies share their experiences with both the Lawn and the diverse community it represents, touching on their identity as individuals as well as what it means to uphold one of the University’s pillar traditions.