Who, what, when, where and 'W'

James Fisher, Greensboro, North Carolina — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:21:03 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Howard S.Kmak — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:24:14 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Cheri Scha Philadelphia, PA — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:24:32 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Richard McGinnis, West Bath Maine — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:28:37 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Scott Crayne, San Francisco, CA — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:39:40 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Lyn Lemke, Topeka, KS — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:51:55 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

AMC — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:58:50 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

James Megrail, Wichita KS — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:08:24 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

E. C Moore — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:15:25 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Bearclau — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:19:02 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Pablo — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:20:56 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Cynthia Phillips — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:21:31 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

John Roofus — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:22:11 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Joe Schmo, St. Paul, MN — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:24:17 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Brett Warren, Knoxville, Tennessee — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:36:17 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Jon Durham, Huntsville, AL — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:47:47 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Tony — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:52:53 GMT

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!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:58:10 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Mary Ann Whitt, Greenwood, South Carolina — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:02:41 GMT

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!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Jane Stafford, LA, CA — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:23:54 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Marty, Saint Louis, MO — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:28:35 GMT

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!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Scott, Liberty, SC — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:30:51 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Avgwellinformedcitizen, Los Angeles — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:50:34 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

tess, texas — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:05:43 GMT

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....

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Ron — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:13:23 GMT

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"...

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Jon, WV — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:16:02 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Deborah Stamford, CT — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:16:44 GMT

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!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Theresa, Portland, Oregon — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:21:44 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Tony, St. Paul, MN — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:33:31 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Bilverado, Silverado, CA — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:38:13 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Michelle Hood, Dunkirk, Maryland — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:40:50 GMT

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?!!!!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Scott, Montgomery Village, MD — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:54:09 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Heather, Cville, VA — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:01:26 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Randy Cole, Stafford, VA — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:08:59 GMT

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!?

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Mike B, Lynnwood, WA — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:22:37 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Kathy Kramer, Boulder, Colorado — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:38:42 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Jon Durham, Huntsville, AL — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:57:17 GMT

"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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Jon Durham, Huntsville, AL — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:59:49 GMT

"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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Paul Sousa — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:15:26 GMT

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?

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Mark Leutwyler, Austin, Texas — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:15:46 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Jonathan, Brooklyn, NY — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:34:55 GMT

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!!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

poopsie — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:35:14 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Mary, Columbus, Ohio — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:41:17 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Jessica, Batavia, NY — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:54:47 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

D. Johnson — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:58:37 GMT

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?

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Paul, Salt Lake City, Utah — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:00:57 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Dusty Hansard — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:01:52 GMT

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

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Craig, California — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:05:38 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Sue — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:47:15 GMT

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!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Mark McKee, Albuquerque, NM — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:05:16 GMT

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.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Steve, Canandaigua, New York — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:12:46 GMT

I will LOVE seeing this film:

Stone is a fabulous, fun, cool, and devoted film maker, and I don't give a hoot whether he makes films that assert his opinions or films that pretend to be "objective," whatever that could possibly mean, anyhow; he makes fabulous films either way.

Hollywood is full of fabulous and courageous souls who make true ART, and all the (Republican) BS Political philistine, fascist uptightness and fear and anger about such entertainment and instruction is poppycock.

"W" Bush is one of the worst human beings in the history of our species. There is nothing even remotely more repugnant than him, his administration, and the last hellish eight years of brutality and suffering and pain he's given humanity, so there is nothing remotely wrong about making a film that makes us laugh (a little, hopefully, anyways) at his derangement and abominally low character, for we have done nothing but cry for eight years, and we will suffer at least thirty more years from the destruction he and his cabal have wreaked upon our once miraculously bright and innocent planet.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Darryll, Washington — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:23:31 GMT

When we read or watch a news story about someone who was lost in the throes of alcohol or drug addiction, got themselves out of it and eventually made something decent of their life, we are inspired by their courage, fortitude and resolve. With this in mind, why in the world do we crucify Bush for the mistakes he made in his past? And now we’re going to see all of them on a giant screen in a room full of people? Is there a single person out there that has NO skeleton in their closet? Is not the “silver lining” of making mistakes in life the lessons to be learned from them and the personal inner strength gained in doing so? Would you really want a leader who has never done anythng wrong or has never failed in anything in life prior to being elected? It would be naïve to think that such a person exists, or that anyone close to that “ideal” would be fit to run this country and make the hard decisions that are required on a daily basis. Obviously, when someone enters the public arena and serves in a highly visible position, there are concessions to be made with regards to their privacy. On the other hand, it doesn’t seem like this gives us the right to attack these people on such a personal and vindictive level. Whether you believe in the Bible or not, I think we would all do well to remember that if we are without sin, only then do we have the right to consider throwing stones. I know that I wouldn’t want the mistakes I’ve made in my past on that big screen…

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Bill, Texas — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:24:36 GMT

If Stone knew the truth it might be dangerous but since he doesn't were okay. He is an artist and they can say and do anything (like lie continuously) with creative license. This movie will be crap and I will not see it but hey I am sure moveondot.org will love it.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Mark Brinkerhoff, Dallas, TX — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:42:13 GMT

Oliver Stone bills 'W' as "a fair, true portrait of the man." But yet he editorially brands George Bush "an alcoholic bum," which seems to belie his previous assertion entirely. If this is how he hopes to dispell the notion that his film is an anti-Bush polemic, it doesn't bode well for the finished product. Nice try, Olie.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Mark Brinkerhoff, Dallas, TX — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:48:59 GMT

Hollywood already did make a movie about Bill and Hillary! 'Primary Colors' came out in 1998. And albeit velied, it definitely used the former first couple for inspiration, if not source material. (And yes, it was a comedy -- a brilliant one I might add.)

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Glenda Bush, Bessemer, AL — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:58:15 GMT

Why in the world would anyone want to see a movie about the way someone "used to be"? At this point in my life, I'm not what I ought to be, and I'm not what I'm going to be, but thank God, I'm not what I used to be. The U. S. Presidency has not been George's forte, but what does that have to do with a kid who partied really hard? He doesn't anymore. Is Oliver Stone trying to tell us "boomers" that all of us who partied hard years ago grow up to be "bad" people? Come on, Oliver, there are those who remember you "back in the day".

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Curtis, Tulsa, OK — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:24:34 GMT

Bush's legacy won't be known for decades to come. History will show that he was a great President. Yeah Right! When Pigs Fly!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Bob, Sparks, NV — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 23:44:01 GMT

The bottom line here is the majority of the American people are stupid! Our government knows that they can blatantly lie to us and the morons will get off their couch, pick-up a flag and believe. The next time we error and pick a president that does not stand by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, lies about invading another country, drive our country into a depression, has a history of drinking...and the list goes on....DON'T VOTE HIM IN FOR A SECOND TERM...NO MATTER WHAT THE REASON...VOTE FOR THE OTHER GUY!!!

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Julie, Buffalo, NY — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:13:02 GMT

In response to "Heather" (above), get a clue. No good democratic candidate to run against Bush??? Have you forgotten the travesty that was the 2000 election??? Don't get me started! GORE should have won that election, it would have taken the country in a totally different direction. Having Bush as president makes me embarrassed to be American. Having said THAT, Heather, I will rent this movie when I feel like watching a comedy, which is what Bush has done to American politics.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Gary/Houston TX — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:20:46 GMT

The good news is that W will finally be uncovered for at least some of his blunders and indescretions, and hopefully for some of the bush family horrors.
The bad news is republican conservative talk shows will try to use this film and its timing against the Democrats in their bid for the White House as a propaganda ploy; and it well may work. The only people who this film might sway againt voting for the Republicans will be the Evangelicals, who blindly followed bush in both elections because of his lies about his pious beliefs. He lied to the Evangelicals. If they can see what a rogue and hippocrit he is, then maybe there's hope for the Evangelicals. For the Buschnazis, they will not watch the film, just as they refused to watch Michael Moore's F9/11, dismissing it as propaganda.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Dusty in Milford, ME — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:59:23 GMT

Obviously this is not the place for legal nitty-gritty, but let us be clear in that any text, reegardless of its quasi-fictional inclinations, is liable to be scrutinized by the polis if it is based around the life of a living person (or even a recently deceased one). So Stone's film will have to walk a fine line between a Ray-esque biopic and a Primary-Colors-like satire, especially since satire is an acceptable and essentially libel/slander-free literary and filmic trope. In other words, let's give Stone and Co. a chance with their creation, and decide what we think once we've seen it. That's usually the way it goes with, you know, movies.

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

M. Luce Kansas City — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 01:17:14 GMT

To Scott from S.C. Please, you need to read something not written by Victor Davis Hanson. We are not in a better position "geopolitically" because we have invaded and then occupied Iraq. We attacked pre-emptively, a violation of every international standard. The war has weakened our position in Europe and the Arab world and left us alone. Iran! China and India are huge challenges, Iran can't bankrupt us in a few days, China can. We have lost 4.000 of our brothers and sisters, and gained $4 gas. great victory. Oh, guit playing Risk, think like an adult

Who, what, when, where and 'W'

Ralph Rupert — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:40:58 GMT

Julie: You're embarrassed to be an American? Why don't hit the road and head to Canada? I have one more question, why is it that liberals are always so much more extreme about their opinions?? All you ever hear is complaining about EVERYTHING, go get a job and help the economy instead of sitting around on your lazy asses waiting for people who made money to give it to you.