"W." Film Review

“W.” Stands For Waste
By Jessica Maas

Hands up in the air in the first scene of the film “W.”, George W. Bush, played by Josh Brolin, creates a “W” with his head. A display of this nature would generally proclaim the man’s individuality; in this film it does anything but. In Oliver Stone’s 2008 “W.,” Bush is characterized as a puppy lusting after his father’s approval in an unnecessary and painful two hour and nine minute tale of former president George W. Bush’s life.

The film follows Bush’s life as president after 9/11, and uses flashbacks as far back as his college days to lead up to his residence in the White House. These scenes allow insight into the person behind the public façade, through jobs he held, his problems with alcohol and inability to succeed in the eyes of his father, and his relationship with wife Laura.

Bush is cast in a sympathetic light throughout the film. He seems lost in life until he decides to do something about his father’s disappointment with him and then becomes comically transformed into a born-again Christian who follows in his father’s political footsteps and awkwardly forces time for prayer before he closes any meeting. Stone takes a few stabs at Bush’s use of language and overall intelligence, but they’re infrequent, and his character is mostly left untouched.

The best part of the film is its performances. Brolin slides easily into the role of the former president and executes it as if he’s the real man himself. As W.’s father, James Cromwell depicts the senior Bush as a genuinely tired but commanding man who evokes a poignant sympathy. Elizabeth Banks brings a refreshingly light presentation of Laura Bush to characterize life outside the White House, and Richard Dreyfuss leads the rest of the supporting cast as the compellingly patient and intelligent Dick Cheney, who Stone uses to present a contrast to Bush’s character.

Editing of the film seems to flounder, though. The change in time periods from President Bush to young Bush could keep the film fresh and are clearly meant to give more of Bush’s personality, but they fail to convey significance at times, especially when left to stand on their own. One example of this is a scene in which Bush’s run one morning ends with him lying passed out in a ditch but then the screen flashes forward a few years to the White House and no allusion to the scene or its importance is made again.

Stone has the opportunity to take a stand on Bush’s presidency with his film, but lets the moment pass unclaimed. It is unclear what the purpose of it is as a whole, or as released prior to the 2008 presidential election. Neither President Barack Obama, nor any of the general population, needs to see this film in the hopes of securing undisclosed information on what it means to be president or anything that has happened in the last eight years. The only thing “W.” provides is a waste of time.