I’d Give “W.” an F

Don't waste your time or money on Oliver Stone's new film, "W." As Ed Moed would say, "…it blows!"

Having enjoyed, if not put much credence in Stone's previous presidential films, "JFK" and "Nixon," I was psyched to see "W."George_w_movie_poster

But, from start to finish, W, like the man himself, disappoints. The acting is mediocre, the casting questionable (Colin Powell's character looks more like an aging member of The Jackson Five) and the plot is painfully slow, uneven and rambling. 

Aside from suggesting a dysfunctional relationship between W. and H.W. (or, 43 and 41, if you prefer), there's no new light shed on the subject. And, the movie itself ends in 2004, with no mention being made of Hurricane Katrina, the current economic meltdown or our country's horrific global image, all of which, along with Iraq, should assure W's being remembered as our worst president.

Instead, we see a quasi-sympathetic, almost always bumbling, W. who first finds Laura and then the Lord, recreates himself and shocks the world (and his family) by becoming president. 

The now-famous malaprops "Fool me once…" and 'I honestly can't think of one single mistake I've made…" are taken out of historical context and placed in the wrong settings (presidential news conferences instead of debates with Sen. John Kerry). Clearly, like the focal point of his movie, Oliver Stone is not up to the task in W.

So, do yourself a favor. If you're trying to make a choice whether to stay home next weekend or invest in seeing W., do what "Geo" should have done back in 2000: stay home on the ranch.

One thought on “I’d Give “W.” an F