| ||||
Civil War Interactive Discussion Board > The Lounge > Non-Civil War Books, Movies, Music, etc. > Oliver Stone's New Film "W." |
| ||||
Civil War Interactive Discussion Board > The Lounge > Non-Civil War Books, Movies, Music, etc. > Oliver Stone's New Film "W." |
| Moderated by: javal1 | Page:   1 2 |
|
|||||||||||||
| Oliver Stone's New Film "W." | Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Sun Oct 19th, 2008 05:20 pm |
|
21st Post |
|
CleburneFan Member 
|
Back to the movie "W." It is my practice to read reviews AFTER I see a movie, because I don't wnat some crtic to color or predjudice my feeling for the movie. SO if I care enough about the movie, I do read reviews afterward to find out if there is nay consensus between my impressions and that of the pros. I did read about six reviews of "W." Almost agreed that Stone had gone unusually "easy" on George W Bush. I feel the same way. I expected a much harsher picture and the movie's trailers thais summer did lead me to expect a scouring. It wasn't there. In fact, the movie was pretty much a rehash of everything we've been seeing since W first took office, including some of his better known "Bushisms." Thus, for the Stone haters here, I would have to say this movie is not vintage Stone. It is Stone gone mellow. Critics and I also agree that Stone seemed to stop the story too soon. We did not get any hint of Katrina or "Brownie" and certainly not this economic meltdown which did not hit hard until well after this movie was ready for distribution. We didn't see the humiliation when George W Bush has remained pretty much of an unspoken word in the McCain campaign because it seemed the better stategy to run as if the current Bush presidency never existed. One is left longing for more of the story--maybe Part Two, as I have said before. I think some who do not like Oliver Stone might enjoy the movie anyway. Well, maybe not, given the level if dislike he has generated by his past movies.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Sun Oct 19th, 2008 09:03 pm |
|
22nd Post |
|
pamc153PA Member
|
If I didn't know better, I'd think maybe Stone was paying you all under the table to incite people to go see the movie, based on the reaction out there. I already knew people on here feel "strongly" (understatement) about the topic of Bush, et. al, but um guys, it's a MOVIE. . . Delawares has a good point back on the first page. Pam
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Oct 20th, 2008 04:06 pm |
|
23rd Post |
|
David White Member 
|
Texas Monthly likes it? That's all I need to know that the Oliver Stone tiger hasn't changed its stripes. If it trashes the elder Bushes and say they didn't encourage W or favored JEB over him, that's BS.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| You have chosen to ignore JDC Duncan. click Here to view this post |
|---|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20th, 2008 06:49 pm |
|
25th Post |
|
TimK Member
|
I'm not a big fan of Stone - in fact I can't think of any of his movies that I thoroughly enjoyed. I can separate fiction from fact and understand dramatic license. Lord knows I'm not a fan of the last eight years, and made that clear on my mail in ballot. However, I'm taking CleburneFans advice and am looking forward to seeing it with an open mind. I read it was much more even handed than what any of the critics thought it would be beforehand.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Oct 20th, 2008 09:19 pm |
|
26th Post |
|
ole Member 
|
I read it was much more even handed than what any of the critics thought it would be beforehand. If it is close to evenhanded, they really ought to re-evaluate their promotional trailers. The trailers depict GW as a clownish dunce. That might appeal to the anti-Bush crowd, but it most certainly turns off those who might go to see an evenhanded treatment. So. What are the promoters thinking? ole
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Oct 20th, 2008 09:29 pm |
|
27th Post |
|
javal1 Grumpy Geezer 
|
Ole, the difference however is that while the film is made by Stone, trailers are made by the marketing folks. Presently a large % of the people oppose Bush - hence, "anti-Bush" trailers. If pols were vice-versa, the trailers would emphasize the more even-handed aspects. Also, one final word to those who claim (sometimes indirectly) that those who don't like Stone's work just don't "get" Stone's work. Um, I "get" it. I just don't like it. Simple really, his approach isn't really as breath-takingly innovative or as intellectually challenging as he or his supporters make it out to be.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| You have chosen to ignore JDC Duncan. click Here to view this post |
|---|
| You have chosen to ignore JDC Duncan. click Here to view this post |
|---|
| Posted: Mon Oct 20th, 2008 10:03 pm |
|
30th Post |
|
TimK Member
|
Marketing is designed to attract people with a certain level of intelligence. I would guess that is why the trailers are what they are - to try to attract GWB bashers with the IQ of a fifth grader. I would like to think I am, and most people on this board are above this level. I still think I'm going to listen to CleburneFan and give it a shot. Maybe this will be the first OS movie I enjoy - or maybe it won't be. But I know the subject interests me, and as I said earlier, I can separate fact from fiction easily enough.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Oct 21st, 2008 02:17 pm |
|
31st Post |
|
CleburneFan Member
|
An update on the movie: "W." finished FOURTH in ticket sales this week. The best performing movie of the last three weeks has been "Beverly Hills Chihuahua" which finsihed first for two weeks and second for last week, significantly outselling "W." I don't know what sociologists would have to say about the meaning of the ticket sales for these two very distinct films.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Oct 21st, 2008 04:19 pm |
|
32nd Post |
|
David White Member
|
I'd rather see Beverly Hills Chihuahua with all the other Lemmings too. But instead, I'll pass on most of the films Hollywood puts out. I've only seen two new films this year and could have lived without those too. HBO puts out better original stuff than Hollywood, which is just retreading old films or plotlines and adding more bad language, sex, gore and innuendo. Is it just because I've gotten old? Maybe but I think not.
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Current time is 03:19 pm | Page: 1 2 |
| Civil War Interactive Discussion Board > The Lounge > Non-Civil War Books, Movies, Music, etc. > Oliver Stone's New Film "W." | Top |
