Just watched it and actually sat through the entire commentary, which is something I don't think I've ever done.

I get that it's fiction, and Stone frequently admits in the commentary that things aren't perfectly accurate, but it's really something else and certainly worth watching if for nothing else other than Dreyfuss and Cromwell.

It's really a downer when you think about it. Even if you're 100% pro-Bush Doctrine or whatever, it is amazing how he managed to get into office and course his life took. Really, I should say depressing - you have a guy who has every opportunity in the world handed to him, barely gets through school, fails at almost everything he does, but eventually swindles his way into a baseball ownership and eventually the office of the presidency - all on a family legacy.

God, color me a Kool-Aid drinking hippie.

I realize the movie was meant to make us feel sorry for him, but all it did was reinforce for me how happy I am that he gets to go to his grave knowing that he will go down in history as one of our worst presidents ever... and how very much that must eat away at his incredible pride.

_________________

I thought this whole movie was made to bash bush? That Recount movie was also pretty neat.

I haven't seen it all the way through, but it's pretty sympathetic toward him, just as Orme describes.

I've always thought if I actually met him I'd actually LIKE the guy. He seems very personable and even somewhat kind-hearted. I think in that sense someone could feel sympathetic towards him. His politics and decision-making abilities were completely assbackwards, though(and of very questionable intelligence). He'd be quite tolerable so long as we didn't put him in any position of leadership, and so long as he didn't open his mouth about important issues

I am going to make a stick figure cinema with Bush as my main star. It will be all the rage at Cannes.

Any of you able to do a good Bush impression for voice overs?

i think this is a good movie, which is surprising since oliver stone has made one bad film after another since natural born killers. this bush is really pretty sympathetic, and the most damning portrayal is of dick cheney. it's kind of terrifying the way that guy reinvented the role of vice president.

_________________

If you have the chance, listen to the commentary - it is really amazing how much contempt Stone has for Bush. Also, Stone appears to have done a lot of research.

Stone makes it clear that it wasn't his goal to do a hatchet job. Instead, he wanted to create a character and explain where he came from. He describes it basically as 3 acts to a tragedy:
I. The Intro and prodigal nature of Bush
II. The redemption/return of the son
III. The fall

You are certainly entitled to have some affection for Bush, but unless you've seen it, I can't buy that characterization. It's really much more robust than that and certainly hard to argue against (IMO).
It is certainly not a perfect movie, but an interesting look into his psyche.

For example, the last press conference of the movie, a reporter asks Bush what he considers his biggest mistake since 9/11 and Bush stammers for several moments and simply cannot give an answer - cannot admit any fault or error whatsoever. IT really is fascinating. The scene is so painfully uncomfortable that I had to YouTube it to see if it was real - and it was, almost word for word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haQzdW7hg4A

I also saw it...on cable as I really didn't have an interest in seeing it, as I assumed it would be something like what Bello mentioned.

I also was surprised at how good it was, and how indepth it was. I suspect that if you dislike Bush, you'll find some sympathy for him as a human being while grinding your teeth at many other things. If you're not a fan of Bush I think you'll find the movie seems to try too hard to go 'lightly' on Bush and make him sympathetic. (I actually don't think it does, I think it's pretty accurate and it's a good reminder that these people are PEOPLE). I think if you're a fan of Bush you'll see it as showing the truth, but in an unkind and perhaps deceptive way. Or you'll think that some of the things talked about or shown are too personal and shouldn't really be shown (in an 'airing dirty laundry' way).

One of the things I really liked about it was I think it accurately showed Bush as a 'True Believer'. The problem with these people is...how to put it...when something works for them (such as the 12 step program and Jesus) they believe EVERYONE ELSE'S experiences will be the same. It was X for them, it must be X for all. Everyone has this flaw to varying degrees, but I've found 'True Believers' are really blind with it. The other problem with True Believers is 'The One True Way' fallacy. They think they have 'The Truth' and so become pretty closed minded to anything else.

The worst thing about them? They often have the best of intentions and sincerely believe they are right. This can allow them to do really terrible things. Kinda falls under the saying 'The road to hell is paved with good intentions'.

All of us of course have these flaws to usually much lesser degrees. We may have found paths we think are right, or best (for us) but hopefully most of us keep an open mind on things too. We can, of course, be wrong. And we can believe that something really good for us will be great for others...but most people can see or understand that wouldn't be necessarily universal.

People like Bush can't, and don't. I think he lives in a very black and white world. Many of us have at some point, I think most young people think the world is made of absolutes, especially late teens/early twenties. Some people never mature beyond that.

Which is one thing if it's Bob the bricklayer. Quite another when that person reaches the heights that GWB did.

But I find the older I get the more cynical I am about the 'mob', and I'm grateful we have a Republic. And the fact that I think that saddens me a bit too.

_________________

Umm...I was totally just kidding. I just thought it would be a silly thing to say.

Honestly though, I have no desire to watch W. I really don't care enough about the man to watch a movie based on him, regardless if it painted him as a saint or a sinner, an invalid or a superman, or an intellectual or a retard. I'd rather spent those two hours staring at a wall.

No, it has some good insight into him, and it paints a fuller picture than we got over the course of time. It's easy to forget things when it's spread out over so many years, but when you see it compressed...it clarified some things for me.

_________________

Watching it right now, and so far I seriously dislike the "character" of Bush. I don't think there's a mannerism he has that doesn't irritate me on some level. It's almost as if he's being portrayed with that in mind. I don't find him sympathetic at all, so I don't know what everyone else is seeing with that.

_________________

I didn't say it worked. Just that it was present. The most immediate one to spring to mind was the Rove/Cheney scenes of:

Bush: Remember, I'm the one in charge.
Rove and/or Cheney: Of course you are. *wink at the audience*

Along with all the "just a guy who wanted his daddy's approval" crap.

_________________

I guess it depends on how you define sympathetic. The movie is certainly unkind to him - he is portrayed as an unhappy buffoon who stumbles through life only making it because of his name. He ultimately becomes a tool of people more intelligent (and possibly more sinister) than him.

I think what some liberals wanted to see was Bush open up baby skulls and eat the brains out. I think a lot of people wanted a Michael Moore type production where Bush is identified as the root of all evil.

The reality is, he's a clownish little man who bit off way more than he could chew (which is the obvious symbolism of him eating throughout the movie).

I think they movie could have been MUCH better had the Colin Powell figure been played better as an opposing voice and really shown how Powell ultimately caved. In the end, I sorta see Powell as the most noble person in the administration, but also the most responsible for its errors. Again, listening to the commentary is fine because Stone suggests Powell is simply "being a good soldier" even though he knows he will be remembered for the bungle. Stone also notes that had Powell shown the courage to resign, the war would have probably been stopped.

It is fiction loosely based on reality. To me it is as close to being real as The Davinci Code/Angles and Demons is to being real. I have no desire to see it, and that probably surprises no one here.

So I assumed before seeing it. You're incorrect.

_________________

I don't believe your faith is so fragile