New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

W.

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
Teaser Trailer:

YouTube - W.
post #2 of 24

Re: W.

"This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Lionsgate"..

Looking forward to this one. Great actors and Stone.
post #3 of 24
Thread Starter 
post #4 of 24
Thread Starter 

Re: W.

So, this is actually a comedy? Has Oliver Stone done comedies before? I don’t remember.
post #5 of 24

Re: W.

I believe it's played straight.
post #6 of 24

Re: W.

I have concerns about this because I know they wanted it out by Nov.

Stone was my favrotie fillmaker for years (Platton - Nixon), so I still have hope that he has a few really great films left in him.

My brother missed his big chance. He should have auditioned People tell him he looks like Powell all the time.

http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/2...ypowellrc2.jpg
post #7 of 24

Re: W.

Just saw it on another link from YouTube.

I can't believe I'm about to say this, but I'm actually looking forward to this movie now, and this is coming from someone who can't stand him.

See it while you can before it is pulled again:
YouTube - W. - Teaser

The use of "What a Wonderful World" alone is very heartfelt.
post #8 of 24
Thread Starter 

Re: W.

Quote:
My brother missed his big chance. He should have auditioned People tell him he looks like Powell all the time.

Wow, he does.

With Oliver Stone I have noticed that he doesn’t care that much if the characters look like their real life counterparts or not. He actually always casts known famous actors that resemble them a little! Just look at JFK and Nixon.
post #9 of 24

Re: W.

Looked pretty good, surprisingly so. And other than the title and the ironic use of "What a Wonderful World", looked like pretty straight docudrama. When you think of how Dubya transformed himself from a reckless fratboy to a president elected twice by the states and once by the people, it's a hell of a story. Loved Cromwell's line as H.W. about acting like a Kennedy.
post #10 of 24

Re: W.

I'm not a fan so this movie would have to get great word of mouth before I'd see it.
post #11 of 24

Re: W.

my opinion on bush won't be a factor on if is see this movie.

my opinion on what i think of Stone is.

I'll see it.
post #12 of 24

Re: W.

Not a fan of Bush; haven't been a fan of Stone's work in about 17 years.

But I will see this.
post #13 of 24

Re: W.

I don't think you need or don't need to be a fan of Bush to find his story fascinating (if done well of course). Oliver Stone is a hit or miss with me.. especially with his "bio"-pics. I'm a fan of JFK and Nixon (and Born on the Fourth of July if that can count) but not so much The Doors and Alexander.
post #14 of 24

Re: W.

It's subject matter he feels passionately about, taking place in a time period he understands well- a good sign, as this seems to be when he makes his best pictures.

Obviously, being a fan of the main character isn't necessary to appreciate the film (Travis Bickle, Richard Nixon, Tony Montana, and so on).

Been waiting for Stone to 'bounce back' for a few films now- I keep hoping he's just in his "Kundun/Bringing Out the Dead" phase and about to come back in a big way, as Scorsese has.

Except WTC, Stone's output still fascinates me, but it's his impressive skill on his 80s/90s films that just can't be ignored. Even if he makes turkeys for the rest of his career, JFK and Nixon will remain favorite films of mine.

The only "if" factor is the ludicrous production schedule- his best films seem way too complicated to make in such a short time frame. We shall see.

Regards,
Nathan
post #15 of 24

Re: W.

I've always liked Stone (mid-80s till late 90s), but I think Josh Brolin is the real draw for me here.

Hope this continues his streak from last year (He also has Gus Van Sant's "Milk" this year).
post #16 of 24

Re: W.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan V
It's subject matter he feels passionately about, taking place in a time period he understands well- a good sign, as this seems to be when he makes his best pictures.

I would say on a certain level Stone might even relate to Bush directly even if they don't share politics. They both come from privileged families, attended Yale, had strained relationships with their fathers. It's an interesting compare-and-contrast.
post #17 of 24

Re: W.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Davatchi
Has Oliver Stone done comedies before? I don’t remember.
One could make the case that Natural Born Killers is a comedy. A very dark comedy, but a comedy.
post #18 of 24

Re: W.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SD_Brian
One could make the case that Natural Born Killers is a comedy. A very dark comedy, but a comedy.

To me, Natural Born Killers is a satire which differs significantly from being a dark comedy.

Naturally a satire can have humorous elements as can a dark comedy. But I think that the filmmakers are providing a witty commentary on the media and our use of the media rather than going for or providing laughs. C'est la différence.
post #19 of 24

Re: W.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rich_d
Natural Born Killers is a satire which differs significantly from being a dark comedy.
Quote:
Satire –noun
1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.
3. a literary genre comprising such compositions.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
Quote:
Dark Comedy –noun
1. a play, movie, etc., having elements of comedy and tragedy, often involving gloomy or morbid satire.
2. a comedy based on problems of a personal or social nature.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. (emphasis added)
So it's six of one and a half-dozen of the other.
post #20 of 24

Re: W.

Here's what to expect from W.:
Quote:
"We had a lengthy discussion with Oliver, who told us it would be an entertaining film, and the thing that appealed to us was it's very accessible, very broad and doesn't bamboozle you with any politics -- it even humanises George W., and you think 'What an incredible story'."

Source
post #21 of 24

Re: W.

Well, if Stone says it will be highly entertaining and apolitical, that's good enough for me.
post #22 of 24

Re: W.

CNN has a clip up from the movie between Brolin and Banks. Looks pretty good.

The CNN exclusive: ‘W.’ shows when George met Laura « - Blogs from CNN.com
post #23 of 24

Re: W.

I read, that Josh Brolin first said "no" to the film, but then properly read the script. Since it wasn´t overly political film (or just "Bush-bashing"), Brolin then agreed. You may or may not like the man, but taking the "Michael Moore approach" with this film would´ve probably been disaster. I think that with every biopic (or related to "biopic"), you kinda need to "humanize" the main character(s).

Stone in Wikipedia:

"I want a fair, true portrait of the man. How did Bush go from an alcoholic bum to the most powerful figure in the world? It's like Frank Capra territory on one hand, but I'll also cover the demons in his private life, his bouts with his dad and his conversion to Christianity, which explains a lot of where he is coming from. It includes his belief that God personally chose him to be president of the United States, and his coming into his own with the stunning, preemptive attack on Iraq. It will contain surprises for Bush supporters and his detractors."
post #24 of 24

Re: W.

Excellent clip. I can't wait to see this one.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movies (Theatrical)