W.

W.

By Jonathan Fisher, March 4th, 2009


Oliver Stone's W. is expertly crafted, acted and directed. Its problem is that it's an impersonation, bereft of any real insight or intrigue. I watched and admired Josh Brolin as George W. Bush in several stages of the man's life, I appreciated Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell, and thought that Richard Dreyfuss' turn as Dick Cheney was almost Oscar-worthy. But despite all of its meticulousness and glossy entertainment, W. lacks what I watched the movie expecting to find -- new insight.

Brolin is the titular character, and the movie begins in the middle of Bush's presidency, letting us into a key meeting between the President, Condoleezza Rice (Thandie Newton), Karl Rove (Toby Jones), Colin Powell (Jeffrey Wright), and Donald Rumsfeld (Scott Glen) -- the meeting in which the term 'axis of evil' was first coined. The scene, much like the rest of the film, is enjoyable as an exercise in character acting, dialogue and smooth, West Wing-like direction. What is missing is any real in-depth exploration of the motivations of each character -- what makes them tick, and why they are acting in this way. W. doesn't have that answer -- the entire film skates along at the same enjoyable but relatively superficial pace of the opening scene.

The film hurtles back and forth in Bush's life, from his days as a college drunk, to his introduction to Laura (Elizabeth Banks, from Zack and Miri Make a Porno last week), to his discovery of Christianity. The dominant figure in his life is his father, George Sr. (James Cromwell), who weaves in and out of the story at varying points of his own political career. At one point he meets with George W. in his congressional office, at another he breaks down after losing the 1980 primary to Ronald Reagan in a crushing fashion. George W. longs to make his father proud, but just can't seem to do it, and George Sr. is there at every corner to remind him of how much of a lout he is. The basic thesis of W. is that George W. has done everything in his political career to gain the approval of his father (we all remember his infamous line regarding his position on Iraq in 2001: "Remember, this is the guy that tried to kill my Dad"). It's a potentially interesting thesis, but Stone doesn't do much more with it than show a few scenes of Bush Sr. shouting at Bush Jr.

Stone and his cast are nearly perfect in embodying the main characters, but some don't fare so well, in part because when they are compared to the spot-on depictions of Bush and Cheney they look amateur. Scott Glen isn't particularly convincing as Donald Rumsfeld, and while Thandie Newton looks the part of Condoleezza Rice, she stammers through her lines stiffly in a way that the real cool, calculating figure never does. James Cromwell (one of my favourite actors) is serviceable as George Sr., but he makes almost no attempt to mimic the distinct voice of the 41st President.

Just about the most intriguing aspect of the film is the depiction of Colin Powell. Anyone who has followed American politics of the last decade knows that Powell is a supremely intelligent and able Republican, at one point touted as a potential candidate for the first African-American President (that is, until Bush's successor beat him to it). He was, we imagine, the voice of reason in Bush's cabinet, advising against an invasion of Iraq. The dynamic between Powell and everyone else in W. is fascinating. They speak down to him, one after the other, putting down his unfaultable logic and forcing him to cower in the corner. What was Powell to do? He was outnumbered, and deep down must have known that he was in the cabinet as a symbolic gesture by Bush more than anything.

W. is not a bad movie -- I would even watch it again to admire the attention to detail in recreating this time that we all know so well (after all, it was only months ago that Bush was still in office). But considering that its subject matter is so topical, and that the film was released when George Bush was still in office, it feels curiously dated. I didn't feel that the story of George W. Bush, at least when told in this fashion, really had much to say to me about who and why the 43rd President is. I'm not entirely sure if that's a comment on Oliver Stone's film-making, or George W. Bush's legacy.