"Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks." -Doug Larson
Oliver Stones, ‘W.’ is a biographical take on George W. Bush’ life, from his carefree, alcoholic days in college to his military service, government of Texas, leading to his 2000 campaign for president and his four years to his 2004 re-election campaign. It also shows the few weeks that led up to his decision to invade Iraq. I do not know much about American politics, so I took this movie as a chance to learn a little about George Bush.
The film seemed to have an underlying focus on the characters relationships, particularly between George and his father. Stone portrayed George Bush as somewhat of an underdog who relied on others to get through life and a need to impress his father. For example Bush relied on other people such as his parents in his campaign. However, Bush’s deciders were shown to be undermining his authority by misinforming him of important decisions, which made Bush seem quite ‘stupid’.
The film is not necessarily pro or con Bush, however, Stone seems to try to change America’s opinion of him, from an authority figure to an ordinary man with many weaknesses. Bush genuinely thought he was a good person evident on his becoming sober, he thought he was doing the right thing for his country and did not see that he was a laughing stock.
The film was made very close to the actual events and some critics are saying it is too soon. There are so many themes in the plot that seem to mesh and draw to a close, this could have been deliberate, however the plot becomes chaotic and all over the place making it not easily understood to someone like me who does not know anything about American politics. The non-linear structure is quite wild adding to this chaotic feel. Stone may have been trying to link the past to the present making the present a product of his early life, however, there was not enough background information for the audience to really engage emotionally with Bush. It also focuses too much on the negatives of Bush’s life making the audience not able to connect to him emotionally.
From an acting perspective, the audience cannot connect to the story, as it is not believable. The casting seemed to be focused more on trying to imitate the real life pet habits of the characters rather than concentrating on reacting with each other.
I believe a story about political issues needs to have something extra that draws in the attention of the non-politically minded; I lost interest almost straight away.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment