ABOUT TEST PATTERN

Don't touch that dial: Test Pattern tunes into television, movie, music and pop culture links, as well as gossip and idle chat from around the Web.

Every week, msnbc.com entertainment producers Gael Fashingbauer Cooper, Denise Hazlick, Paige Newman, Kurt Schlosser and Anna Chan weigh in on topics ranging from TV commercials to movie hype to the latest celebrity blunder. We're not ashamed to admit our love for bad TV or reveal what's on our iPods, and invite you to join the conversation via your comments.



Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Posted: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 7:00 AM by Kurt Schlosser
Filed Under:

Nothing stirs the masses like a good political debate, and aside from Michael Moore, the one person we can count on to get red and blue blood boiling is director Oliver Stone.

Stone, who brought us the presidential films "JFK" and "Nixon," is back with "W," a film about the life and presidency of George W. Bush. The film stars Josh Brolin as the president, Elizabeth Banks as first lady Laura Bush, Thandie Newton as Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, Richard Dreyfuss as Vice President Dick Cheney and many more. Stone reportedly did a major rush job on the making of the film in order to have it ready before the November election. Brolin and Jeffrey (Colin Powell) Wright made news this month when they were arrested following a bar brawl on location in Shreveport, La.

The first trailer for the film hit the Internet this week and it shows Brolin, as a young Bush, using a beer bong. He also gets yelled at by his father. That's it. Roll credits. (OK, there's a little more to it than that, but those parts stuck with me). Stone has said the film won't be an anti-Bush polemic, but, as he told Daily Variety, "a fair, true portrait of the man. How did Bush go from being an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world?"

I'm not going to get into the politics of political movies. I've seen a few I like and a few I didn't over the last eight years. Generally when I seek out a political film, I look for documentaries so I don't have to suspend so much disbelief and forget that Hannibal Lecter is playing Richard Nixon. I am curious about whether you think Oliver Stone can make a decent movie here. Is it the wrong time to explore this subject -- a sitting president? Is there a political film you'd point to as top notch in the genre? Do you plan on seeing "W."? Cast your votes in the comments.

 

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

If this film is typical Oliver Stone, it will be a visual thrill ride and mix shards of truth about the subject with a lot of imaginings. As to making a film about a sitting president, I think he has the perfect right to do so -- both sides of the political spectrum use all manner of media to sell their issues and candidates. Bush has managed to successfully dodge the questions surrounding his alcohol and drug abuse and it will inevitably be explored by various filmmakers, book writers, etc. No single movie, no matter how reverent or irreverent will provide a final and complete view of any subject -- Bush will be examined in both positive and negative lights. That Stone is getting to the finish line before anyone else is a matter of his own zeal and will not preclude others from expressing their opinions in film and in print.

James Fisher, Greensboro, North Carolina (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:21 AM)

I personally have seen enough of "W" to last two lifetimes don't need to see more

Howard S.Kmak (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:24 AM)

This trailer looked like a joke. Is this supposed to be a comedy? Because that's what the calibur of acting seems to be.

Cheri Scha Philadelphia, PA (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:24 AM)

I will watch the film and sure George HW Bush will not be shown spanking his Rogue son. Too Bad for that.

Richard McGinnis, West Bath Maine (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:28 AM)

Well, if anything, it's got a great cast.  I've liked most of Oliver Stone's films but I doubt very much that I'll be dropping 10 bucks to see this.

Scott Crayne, San Francisco, CA (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:39 AM)

I think the timing of it, right before a national election is pretty divisive.  It seems pretty transparent that it is an Anti-Bush message.  It is so sad to see Hollywood once again using its "power" to try and win an election.  Hopefully the public will be able to see right through Oliver Stone and his bias.

Lyn Lemke, Topeka, KS (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:51 AM)

What a waste. Oliver Stone needs to move on with his life!

AMC (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:58 AM)

Mr. Stone will accomplish the impossible.  He will actually make W into a victim.  I can think of nothing more inappropriate.

James Megrail, Wichita KS (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:08 AM)

Me too, Lyn Lemke, but then I was hoping that the public would be able to see right through George Bush and his lies and we gave him 8 years!  So, let's now get our hopes up with regard to public intelligence.

E. C Moore (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:15 AM)

This will be a 'renter' but I will definitely see it. Actually, I think Will Ferrell would have made a better GWB.

Bearclau (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:19 AM)

I do not believeit is humanly possible to cast Bush in a worse light than he has cast himself in over the last seven years.

Pablo (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:20 AM)

Not sure I'll see it but if it get's this "sitting on  his brain" president out of office along with anyone like him then this movie is worth it

Cynthia Phillips (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:21 AM)

Some people claim its anti bush and maybe some of the truths of his past are contrary to his current character but i dont think this is being putting out as a election year tactic becuase bush isnt running for re-election, but i feel its the best time to sell movie tickets for a political movie right before and election. I wouldent take it other than that.

John Roofus (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:22 AM)

I loath Bush with tremendous passion so I am very intrigued to see a film about his transgressions through the years.  Also, it doesn't matter that the film is being released before the Nov. elections because more than 70% of the country disapproves of his policies anyway so I doubt the film will have any political impact on John McCain. Siding with Bush right now is political suicide.

Joe Schmo, St. Paul, MN (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:24 AM)

When is Mr. Stone going to make a movie about someone that has a really entertaining past like Bill Clinton.  Too bad he lets his political party preference determine who he wants to make a joke out of.  

Brett Warren, Knoxville, Tennessee (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:36 AM)

American public amazes me! G was an "donkey rear" before he became president (lower case intended). And then we re-elect him!!!! We have no one to blame but ourselves.

Jon Durham, Huntsville, AL (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:47 AM)

From above:

How did Bush go from being an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world?"
---------------

I've been asking the same question for 8 years!

Tony (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:52 AM)

Oliver Stone is a brilliant director. I am looking forward to "W." I'm sure this movie will raise some eyebrows, but like every other political caper, it will be viewed with an eye towards skepticism. Republicans will say it's an exaggearated attempt to foil the election, while Democrats will say it's gospel. The end result will be a feud between political activists along the lines of "recount;" it will surely raise an eyebrow, but it's no Da Vinci Code. The general populous is, unfortunately, too blinded by yelllow journalism and far too undereducated to see the truth. I urge people to go see "W" and draw your own conclusions. You can help yourself by asking questions like why would Oliver Stone make this movie? Keep in mind that the information has to be true or else he would be sued for slander and libel. Ask yourself, what kind of person would destroy the lives of an entire class of people within his own country for the profits of a few? And remember that Prescott Bush ("W"'s Granddaddy) made his fortune by selling steel to Germany during WWII after America decided the stop exports of steel to Germany. Why? because he would make a fortune. The Bush's have sold out America's best interest for profit and have the nerve to call themselves Americans! Free your mind people. It's time to wake up.

John Doe, Seattle, Wash (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 11:58 AM)

It's a shame that Oliver Stone did not make this film before the last election instead of this election. Maybe then we Americans would have seen Bush for what he is and not have elected him for another four years!

Mary Ann Whitt, Greenwood, South Carolina (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 12:02 PM)

Oliver Stone is a great filmmaker and it's a shame he chose to make this film at this particular time.  If he had waited 10 or 15 years maybe it would be taken seriously, but because it's so soon it's going to be hard to take it as anything more than a parody.  

Plus, I just lived the last 8 years.  I don't want to relive it without a little distance to make it not sting so much.

Jane Stafford, LA, CA (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 12:23 PM)

I will be adding this to my wishlist to rent, but will not see in the theater.  Oliver had some great films in the past, but has not matched them recently.  I would rather have seen him do a film on great president like Lincoln, Washington or one of the Roosevelts.  And why in the heck has no one done a big budget film on a great president!  

Marty, Saint Louis, MO (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 12:28 PM)

George W. Bush will judged as a great president by historians contrary to what the populist opinion is today (same happened with Truman)... The war in Iraq almost was tactical failure prior to the surge through mismanagement, but make no mistake, going into Iraq was a brilliant strategic move with or without WMD. Every aspect of our lives depends on oil and that will not change for years to come no matter how hard we embrace alternative energy sources. It will take DECADES to wean ourselves off the massive oil based economic infrastructure we have built over the last 100 years. Now, thanks to the strategic vision of our president, we have military bases in Iraq and have a lethal enemy, Iran, surrounded on one side by Afghanistan and the other by Iraq.... Brilliant geo political move strengthing our vital petro interests for the foreseeable future.

Scott, Liberty, SC (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 12:30 PM)

First of all, I want to clearly state that I am NOT a fan of the Bush legacy. I have a few friends who worked on this film and were in fact present during the media-hyped situation in Louisiana. According to what I heard, this film will humanize Bush and show the public that he's not all different from the rest of us. Despite what has happened over the last 8 years, this film should actually show everyone some likable facets of this simple man. Watch without prejudice and decide for yourself.

Avgwellinformedcitizen, Los Angeles (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 12:50 PM)

The rushed release date removes any inkling on my part to view the film.  It is a shame Stone is not willing to let the film stand on its own, rather than attempting to use it as a "tool" to influence an election.  Let's see, "Bush is an idiot, so all Republican's are idiots".  I think that kind of nonlogic was discussed in 5th grade.  I won't go see the film, since it is obviously intended as a political agenda, not an exploration of how this all happened, anyway - a story that, as an independent, I would have been interested in.  Hollywood needs to learn a little about sublety, they might could swing me if they left off the big bashing....

tess, texas (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:05 PM)

Doesn't take a genius to figure this one out.  Stone and his quiet DNC/MoveOn.org backers want to whip up the Bush Derangement Syndrome crowd before the election with a bit of propaganda that panders to the wild-eyed left, and maybe even snags a few "undecided" voters in the process.  In other words it's "Fahrenheit 9/11" in a more direct form.  What other reason is there for the mad rush to get this thing out before the election?  The problem, of course, is that a.) most of the haters really don't have that much desire to see Bush on the big screen, and b.) everyone else is smart enough to see through this obvious political ploy.  In other words this is going to bomb big time -- just like every other propaganda movie the libs have churned out since "Fahrenheit"...

Ron (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:13 PM)

I had the privilege of voting in 2 presidential elections in my lifetime, and in both elections I voted against Bush.  I definitely will see it on DVD, but I already wasted two days of my life going out and voicing my opinion about Bush.  I don't wish to waste another day and $10 to do the same.

Jon, WV (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:16 PM)

The selling off of and destruction of an entire class of people for profit by a bumbling, incoherent alcholic trying to one up his father sounds like a movie plot doesn't it?

Those who are already enlightened will see the movie and those who have closed their eyes to the lies will not want to face the truth of how they willingly helped to sell off their neighbors children and their children's children and avoid it like the plague.

While it won't help get this one out of office...let's just pray that the other brother doesn't attempt to come and help out our country like he did with the election.

Glad this is coming out before THAT!

Deborah Stamford, CT (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:16 PM)

Only if it's a true and accurate depiction of what an utter failure the past two terms of presidency have been will it be worthwhile.  Of course the people that should watch it - diehard republicans - won't...too bad, they might then make a different choice in November and get this country out of the slump and disgrace it's in.

Theresa, Portland, Oregon (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:21 PM)

I am always a little suspicious of political films, even some documentaries. The filmmakers' slants always skew the finished product.

However, that does not mean that political films are bad or unworthy.  Even if you think Stone is a conspiracy quack, JFK is excellent when you consider how many variant alternative theories he managed to weave into a cohesive narrative.  Primary Colors is brilliant in it's honesty and how it handles how we as a country elect our leaders. The most applicable political film, Wag the Dog, is the most insightful film on the media manipulation that is required to win and maintain the office.

W looks more like a hit job than an interesting film.  If Stone were interested in making a good film, getting it done before November would not matter.  In fact, I'd prefer he make a better film and release it after W left office.

Tony, St. Paul, MN (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:33 PM)

Maybe if he'd made the film and opened it before the 2004 election, it might have an impact, but W is done and "W" will have little or no relevance to the 2008 election except to remind us that we'll no longer have a slacker idiot as President.

Bilverado, Silverado, CA (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:38 PM)

I refuse to give Bush one more cent of my money - it's bad enough that I'm paying $4 a gallon for gas -why in the world would anyone actually pay to see a movie about the absolute worst president in American history?!!!!

Michelle Hood, Dunkirk, Maryland (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:40 PM)

If W. is anything like JFK and Nixon, this will be a fantastic movie.  As controversial as JFK's behavior and Nixon's deception were, think of how much material W. has left Stone to work with.  I think this will be a classic.

Scott, Montgomery Village, MD (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:54 PM)

I am so sick of the anti-Bush party poopers who insist that the whole country is brainless because Bush was re-elected. By making that gross generalization, you are including yourself among the stupid populace. Get a clue and an education folks! The United States population is not stupid or to blame for the re-election of Bush. The Democrat Party is to blame. They had two chances to find a candidate strong enough to beat Bush, and they couldn’t do it. Both elections the Democrat Party presented America with weak candidates with no vision or substance during their campaigns. Obviously Bush was going to win when you consider the jokes he was up against who couldn’t inspire registered voters to support them. So quit whining and consider the fact that it is not “America” who is brainless, but the Democrat Politicians, as they twice failed to encourage any Democrat of substance to run against Bush.

With that said, I really don’t get the point about making a movie about a president whose term has not yet ended and whose legacy (good or bad) is decades away from political historians ability to assess it. If the point of the film is to illustrate W’s transformation from alcoholic WASP to President of the most powerful country in the world, I think the effect of that is better determined once W leaves the White House. The preview for this film looked like a joke. It could have been a Lifetime movie from what I saw. It isn’t worth $10 bucks from me, and I’m sure most of the USA will feel the same way.

Heather, Cville, VA (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 2:01 PM)

This is in poor taste.  It is clearly a politically motivated move by the liberal Hollywood crowd to attempt to embarrass President Bush.  I can see no good reason for a movie to be released about a sitting president, regardless of party or political leanings.  Whatever happened to respect for the president and the presidency!?

Randy Cole, Stafford, VA (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 2:08 PM)

Stone's next movie should be why the Democrat Party was so incompetent that they couldn't nominate a candidate that could beat W handily!

As for W being a alcoholic... yup.  Unfortunately there are a lot of drunks in DC.  They just hide it better.  Anyone remember Clinton getting drunk with Greg Norman and stumbling and hurting his knee?

BTW, this movie won't sweep W out of office, terms limits did that so we don't have to.

Mike B, Lynnwood, WA (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 2:22 PM)

I have a better idea for a movie - examining the stupidity of the American people. What on earth made them re-elect this overbearing, hateful, uncaring little turd? Obviously there are more than a few brain cells missing from the majority of people here in the US.  Unfortunately I come from one of the states that went red, however, I am proud that my city voted blue. History will state that Bush was the worst president - hands down! Another thing - why are people putting up with all the corruption and problems being created by this government. Shame, shame on all of us. If the people living today had been living during the days of the American Revolution - we would still be drinking tea and singing "God Save the Queen". Thank God our forefathers were not as gullible as we are.

Kathy Kramer, Boulder, Colorado (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 2:38 PM)

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."


- Hermann Goerring

Jon Durham, Huntsville, AL (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 2:57 PM)

"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.  How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar."

- Julius Caesar

Jon Durham, Huntsville, AL (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 2:59 PM)

I think Oliver Stone was hoping to make a film about a sitting President.  I do hope he realized that Bush checked out about 6 months ago.

By the way - who is the President?  

Paul Sousa (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:15 PM)

I find it ironic that "a fair, true portrait of the man" would be considered anti-Bush, by someone who supports Bush.  You mean that behind all the Rove white-wash there maybe something less than the hero of a nation?  Wouldn't "a fair, true portrait" in fact bolster the Republican party by revealing what a great man our current President is?  Or do his supporters know in their heart of hearts what peeling back the gilding will reveal?

Apparently, even his supporters don't really want to see what lays under the layers of Rove and Cheney applied lipstick.  Perhaps the Bush league are afraid they will finally see the pig their cognitive dissonance has been hiding these last 8 years.

Mark Leutwyler, Austin, Texas (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:15 PM)

This is ridiculous and perfectly ill-timed. Need I remind everyone, including Oliver Stone, that George W. Bush isn't running for president?! This film is just going to distract people from the actual election. Everyone will be like, "Yeah, get rid of Bush!" but Bush is gone no matter what! It makes no sense to release this movie for political reasons and that it was rushed to be released before the elections is just ridiculous and irresponsible. He should have waited for the election between the candidates, none of whom are Bush, and then released the film, if he want's to rush, maybe in early December or something. I think that this is just plain stupid. Who cares about Bush anymore?! He's gone!!

Jonathan, Brooklyn, NY (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:34 PM)

Can. Not. Wait. I intend to thoroughly enjoy myself at the movie theater when W comes out, laughing out loud, whooping it up, throwing my flip-flops and popcorn at the screen. I despise that man so intensely I just can't wait to watch portrayals of his failures and moronic behavior. Shame on the Repuke party for foisting this psycho on the nation, not once but twice. Warning to GOP--your days are numbered.

poopsie (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:35 PM)

To John Doe, RE:  "Keep in mind that the information has to be true or else he would be sued for slander and libel."  Ever heard of FICTION

Mary, Columbus, Ohio (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:41 PM)

I think the issue here with those that will not see the movie due to incorrect fact checking or "poetic license" is not that the facts have been manipulated, but that they are facts that they do not want to see.  An alcoholic bum did become the most powerful man in the world.  We have no one to blame but ourselves and our political systems, and the corruption thereof.  We became blindsided by fear induced patriotism and allowed people with ill intentions to get away with things that we would never have stood for thirty years ago.  And as far as the Dems not running people worth voting for-didn't one of them just win the Nobel Prize?
Regardless, the movie should be great. It shouldn't sway the election, the last 8 years have done that for us.  Bush's legacy will not be tainted by a trifle of a film made by a Hollywood director, it will be tainted by his actions and poor decision making.  

Jessica, Batavia, NY (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:54 PM)

I am not a fan of Bush but isn't this like Rush Limbaugh making a film about Bill Clinton?  How could anyone take this film seriously?

D. Johnson (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:58 PM)

I'm a Republican who thinks things are bad for now.  I like to hold both parties accountible for their mistakes.  But, anyone who believes Oliver Stone isn't trying to use this movie to influence the election in favor of the Democratic Party is just fooling themselves.  

As far as Stone's question about how an alcoholic bum became the most powerful figure in the world, I'd have to say, that's a great question.  But, does Stone have the honesty to ask how a draft dodger became president? (Clinton)  Or, would he be honest enough to ask how a man who admits to being friends with a man who bombed the Pentagon could become president?  (Obama and William Ayres) Stone never will, because he's a closed-minded, partisan hack.

Hollywood is in the back pocket of the Democratic Party, and anyone who disagrees with their politics is characterized as "evil."  If you don't believe me, watch movies like The American President, or television shows like The West Wing.  It's the same reason Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth won an Oscar, despite nine major scientific mistakes, or why Al Gore won an Emmy before his network even hit the airwaves.

I, for one, am tired of the one-sided blindness coming from Hollywood.  Please, be critical of both parties, not just one.

Paul, Salt Lake City, Utah (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 4:00 PM)

Time the world got to see the real W.---way to go Oliver!!!!

Dusty Hansard (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 4:01 PM)

A simple statement sums up what Bush and his one time control of Congress has done for the people of the Unites States: Largest monetary surplus in the history of the US when Bush was sworn in, to the largest monetary deficit (projected) in the history of the US as he leaves office.

Craig, California (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 4:05 PM)

Just like every other president..people like or hate the president in office!  Now if someone wants to make a movie about Hillary and Bill..I'm sure it would be good....most likely a comedy!!!  That is their life!

Sue (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 4:47 PM)

Ask any political science professor if they think Stone can make a decent film about a president.  Many of them would like to be able to bill Stone for the time they waste each semester de-bunking JFK which most incoming freshmen believe is factual.  It is not.  I happen to know that because my Dad's first cousin is Billie Sol Estes.  The fastest way to debunk Stone's JFK? Have the kids google up Billie Sol Estes, and LBJ.  After reading just the known facts from that search subject, you would really have to be dumber than a mud fence to think that Stone's JFK has any basis in reality.

Mark McKee, Albuquerque, NM (Sent Wednesday, July 30, 2008 5:05 PM)



SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

 Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://testpattern.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1229740