W.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that George W. Bush has been the most catastrophic and controversial president in the history of the United States of America. It is therefore understandable for a director with a pedigree such as that of Oliver Stone to set out on yet another film-making journey on the biography of George W. Bush himself. What is incomprehensible however, is the fact that he and screenwriter Stanley Weiser have failed to clearly emphasise Bush's shortcomings as a President, and most importantly, failed to highlight the astronomical impact this has had globally. I do not doubt W. attempts something far bolder than a simple mocking, however its invective is far too subtle, too ‘nice'.

Bush's Rebellious Behaviour

Starring Josh Brolin as Junior Bush and James Cromwell as ‘Poppy' Bush, W. presents us with a younger Bush as an amiable goof who relentlesly and unsuccesfully tries to please his disapproving and disdainful father George Bush. A frat boy who never grew up, Bush's rebellious behaviour towards his father and his unwavering faith in a mission from God, unwittingly leads him to the White House.

Brolin's performance is worthy of an Oscar. From his mannerisms and his walk, to the way he speaks with his mouth full as a man who has bitten off more than he can chew, he manages to provide the proper mix of swagger and insecurity of a man who is battling to escape the shadow of his father. It was also amusing to see how he mastered the art of shaping his mouth and chin into a downward frown.

His chief manipulators are shown to be Dick Cheney (Richard Dreyfuss) and Karl Rove (Toby Jones), together with Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld, Thandie Newton as Condoleeza Rice and Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell. These are his closest advisors, and Stone's depiction of their ‘decision making' reunions is almost satirical. It is hard to believe (or maybe not) how ghastly decisions such as the ones they made with regards almost everything during Bush's presidency, were made in such an almost casual manner. It is probably even harder to believe how the American people chose to vote him into office for a further term.

The film switches between a young and old George W. Bush, and is far from a chronological record. It attempts to focus more on the development of his personality, and this is how Stone has organised the scenes. It recalls cringe-worthy moments like the one where he states "Rarely is the question asked, ‘Is our children learning?'", and even though it does little to further highlight his inadequacies, I doubt Bush himself would feel flattered by the manner in which he is portrayed in the film, unless he is unable to blame himself for this.

'Delicate' Matters

Stone might be expecting the viewer to read between the lines, whilst he tip-toes around the ‘delicate' matters, leaving much to the imagination. For a film that has been highly anticipated, it seems to have come at an irrelevant time, Bush is now history, bad, ancient history, and people are moving on by focusing on Obama, making sure they familiarise themselves more with everyday politics by watching less of American Idol - at least, this is what the rest of us are hoping.