Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oliver Stone Commits Foul Play with W.
Newmax ^ | 10-17-08 | James Hirsen

Posted on 10/17/2008 8:51:05 PM PDT by holy joe

“W.” is a “fair and balanced” movie, says its creator, Oliver Stone.

“I think in this present political state, the real George W. Bush might not approve of this movie,” Stone told the Chicago Sun-Times. “But this movie tries to understand George W. Bush: the good, the bad, and the ugly.”

Stone definitely puts the emphasis on the “ugly” in the film, which opened in theaters Friday. He basically acts as cinematic shrink and psychoanalyzes the parent-child relationship between elder George H.W. Bush and junior George W.

Stone presents the son as a twisted foul-mouthed drunk with a daddy complex who becomes a religious zealot and accidentally ends up being leader of the free world.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: hollywood; left; libel; moviereview; oliverstone
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-87 next last

1 posted on 10/17/2008 8:51:05 PM PDT by holy joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: holy joe

you couldn’t pay me to see that movie.


2 posted on 10/17/2008 8:52:23 PM PDT by ken21 (people die and you never hear from them again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

I haven’t seen any of this “fair and balanced” in the trailers. I’ve seen nothing but Bush bashing. Sorry Ollie. I’m gonna pass.


3 posted on 10/17/2008 8:53:09 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (I'm just going to spread YOUR wealth around - Barack HUSSEIN Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe
Stone is obviously jealous of the close, personal relationship of GWB and GHWB. Stone had not such a relationship with his father. He must denigrate what he values. Also, does he think anyone will embrace his selection of far Leftwing loonys to portray the Bush inner circle? This picture will be a disaster just like all the other Leftwing loony pictures of the recent past.
4 posted on 10/17/2008 8:56:20 PM PDT by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken21

“you couldn’t pay me to see that movie.”

I’ll waste two hours for a thousand bucks, but I wouldn’t promise not to snicker.


5 posted on 10/17/2008 8:57:14 PM PDT by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

Critics, even liberal ones, such as on NPR, are basically savaging this movie.


6 posted on 10/17/2008 8:57:31 PM PDT by gracesdad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken21

And they were angry.
Because we’ve just been taking it and taking it.


7 posted on 10/17/2008 8:57:35 PM PDT by coconut47
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

He should have made this movie 3-4 years ago at the height of Bush hatred.


8 posted on 10/17/2008 8:58:22 PM PDT by noob4palin (That's Governor Palin to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe
and psychoanalyzes the parent-child relationship between elder George H.W. Bush and junior George W.

As Michael Medved pointed out in his review, almost all of Stone's films feature ugly, fractured father-son relatonships.

V.S. Naipaul said once that nonfiction writers may lie, but fiction writers always tell the truth...about their own psychological problems.

9 posted on 10/17/2008 9:00:03 PM PDT by denydenydeny ("[Obama acts] as if the very idea of permanent truth is passe, a form of bad taste"-Shelby Steele)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe
Stone’s own mother might disagree. Evidently, she is a Republican who doesn’t think too much of the film. Stone confessed to the Los Angeles Times that she “didn't really like the movie.”...Sounds as though it isn't "W" defining himself against a parent with whom he's in conflict, but Ollie himself......
10 posted on 10/17/2008 9:01:57 PM PDT by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe


See 'American Carol'

Actors Jon Voight, left, and Kelsey Grammer during a dream sequence on the set of of David Zuckers' new comedy "American Carol" in Los Angeles.
11 posted on 10/17/2008 9:03:46 PM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life ;o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe
Stone's Nixon cost $44 million to produce and made a grand total of $13.5 million in domestic sales. Hopefully “W” does the same.

Josh Brolin is the son of James Brolin, who gave a truly terrible performance as Ronald Reagan in a made for TV movie from a few years back.

12 posted on 10/17/2008 9:04:35 PM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Valance
We really enjoyed the movie. Some sophomoric humor, like in ‘Airplane’ but laughed a lot anyway.
13 posted on 10/17/2008 9:05:45 PM PDT by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: holy joe
Did you know that the phone lines were cut at 1 pm on the east coast the day JFK was shot? well, may be only in Oliver’s head but not in reality. In Hollywood they call that “dramatic license”, in Washington they call it spin, and everywhere else it's called lying your ass off!

Stone should have stayed in the grassy knoll.

14 posted on 10/17/2008 9:08:15 PM PDT by jpf (go phillies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Josh Brolin is the son of James Brolin, who gave a truly terrible performance as Ronald Reagan in a made for TV movie from a few years back.


Brolin’s father is married to Barbard Streisand, who once was a singer and is now a stunt double for Joy Behar.


15 posted on 10/17/2008 9:08:15 PM PDT by Senator Goldwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

***Stone’s Nixon cost $44 million to produce and made a grand total of $13.5 million in domestic sales. Hopefully “W” does the same.****

So how does O Stone keep getting funding for these duds?


16 posted on 10/17/2008 9:08:26 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (We're not supporting clean coal --- Joe Biden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: noob4palin
Welcome to FreeRepublic.

He should have made this movie 3-4 years ago at the height of Bush hatred.

Huh??? PRESIDENT Bush won re-election by a VERY comfortable margin 4 years ago. The BDS has reached epic proportions this year, even on FR.

17 posted on 10/17/2008 9:09:35 PM PDT by Just A Nobody (PISSANT for President '08 - NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

watch for movie theaters being bought out with no one in them in order to insure its not a complete flop


18 posted on 10/17/2008 9:16:42 PM PDT by sten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
So how does O Stone keep getting funding for these duds?

Are you kidding? The people funding him are leftists, authors of the "let's give mortgages to the illegal aliens who are unemployed! Just because they can't pay their bills doesn't mean they shouldn't live in a big house!" business model!

Mark

19 posted on 10/17/2008 9:16:59 PM PDT by MarkL (Al Gore: The Greenhouse Gasbag! (heard on Bob Brinker's Money Talk))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

Stone is a two time Oscar winner for best director.

They love him in Hollywood. Funding is no problem.


20 posted on 10/17/2008 9:20:10 PM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny
V.S. Naipaul said once that nonfiction writers may lie, but fiction writers always tell the truth...about their own psychological problems.

Interesting observation.

21 posted on 10/17/2008 9:23:57 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

To Oliver Stone this is fair and balanced, hey he didn’t have anything in the movie about Bush plotting 9-11 or blowing up levees in New Orleans.

I saw Josh Brolin, Oliver, and Charlie Rose just laughing their asses off about Bush with some serious conversation about his evangelical believes that Stone believes he violated.

Of course the Brolin’s step-mother is Barbara Mega-Streisand and his father played Ronald Reagan in a more dispicable movie about the Reagan’s.


22 posted on 10/17/2008 9:27:01 PM PDT by TheEaglehasLanded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

No liberal can understand George Bush. Liberals don’t even understand the country they’re living in.


23 posted on 10/17/2008 9:27:28 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

I find it amazing that people bother to watch this guy’s films at all.


24 posted on 10/17/2008 9:32:24 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

On a happy note : Josh Brolin and some more of these PUKES

got their asses kicked Good in a bar in downtown

Shreveport,Louisiana,,,

Then got thrown in Jail!!,,,

This Ca. Trash is always in the way...


25 posted on 10/17/2008 9:37:50 PM PDT by 1COUNTER-MORTER-68 (THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

He probably makes plenty of money from distribution to America-haters around the world.


26 posted on 10/17/2008 9:39:42 PM PDT by skr (May God confound the enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ken21

I think Nixon was Stone’s last good movie. If this was Stone at the peak of his talents it might be worth seeing, purely for the spectacle, but from the reading of the reviews it looks like Stone shot this straight down the line, not much flair.

But even if this was a masterfully directed movie, what is the point of seeing it. We know Bush’s life story, this movie is not bringing anything to the table. It is like a television movie of the week. There is no point.

Forget about Stone’s politics for a second, the early part of his career, he made great movies, I don’t know what happened to him but his recent movies have stunk, even with flawed screenplays, a good director can sometimes make it interesting, but Stone’s recent movies bring nothing, they don’t even have the quality, the cinematography, the interesting techniques that Stone started his career with.

If you want to see a good movie, check out Appaloosa, nothing great but a satisfying Western, a little slow at times but very well made.

Something happened in the 90’s, Hollywood used to make entertaining films, now they are few and far between.


27 posted on 10/17/2008 9:42:19 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

There’s a reason that Hollywood is so Liberal. It’s because most of the people in the industry are so self-absorbed with themselves that they can’t stand anyone who either disagrees with them, or, who can’t help them get into a movie or a 3-picture deal to help further their pathetic careers.

I think that Milli Vanilli has had more hits than Oliver Stone.


28 posted on 10/17/2008 9:44:09 PM PDT by Beaten Valve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holy joe
I know how much the right despised Clinton but BUSH DERANGEMENT SYNDROME has made those 8 years seem like a love fest.

I have lived through every President since Roosevelt [don't remember him but do remember Truman] and if you take all the hate, anger, vitriol and vilification of all them added together, it would be just a fraction of what has been levied on President Bush.

I don't believe that history, which is often kinder to unpopular Presidents, will lessen the HATE felt for this President.

The nadir disrespect and hate of a sitting President is reached when there is a movie about his assassination and another which depicts him as a stupid, evil, autocrat drunkard!!

29 posted on 10/17/2008 9:45:12 PM PDT by PISANO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

That’s not true, his recent spate of bad movies that have done horrible at the box office has him out of favor.

World Trade Center was made with controversy because it was his chance to get back in the good graces of Hollywood, if I’m not mistaken he had a tough time getting the nod to direct it.

There are other reasons that I have forgotten but Stone is definitely not someone who can get big budgets from a studio.


30 posted on 10/17/2008 9:45:18 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dr_who

“Liberals don’t even understand the country they’re living in.”

So very true. That is the crux of the problem.


31 posted on 10/17/2008 9:46:04 PM PDT by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, Call 'em what you will, they ALL have Fairies livin' in their Trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com

I meant to say that WTC was a NON controversial movie because Stone knew it was his chance to prove he could make a movie that would appeal to the masses.


32 posted on 10/17/2008 9:46:25 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: PISANO

Holy Joe, how about Nixon’s presidency, how was the environment then???

Also what about LBJ during the heart of the Vietnam War, from what I have read and seen you actually had protesters burning the images of LBJ and Nixon at protests, I don’t quite think we have seen that in this country directed at Bush, but I do agree that the Left hates Bush with a fury.


33 posted on 10/17/2008 9:48:59 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

Technically Bush won in 2004 by about 140,000 votes in Ohio, I think it was the closest re-election in history.


34 posted on 10/17/2008 9:50:49 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

Most of the funding for “W” came from overseas, including about $3.5 million from some Chinese company.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122368662544925207.html?mod=todays_us_weekend_journal


35 posted on 10/17/2008 9:53:04 PM PDT by Strzelec
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ken21

me either. Toyko Rose Media is betraying this country. whispering lies and blaring false images into our minds. dangerous pysch ops against the good by the evil.

Fox News has this commercial every 10 minutes. Back away from Fox News regain your peace of mind. Be strong and right with a mind free from propaganda.


36 posted on 10/17/2008 9:54:08 PM PDT by TurtleStink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

Mr. Stone:

“The man who does not love is still in the realm of death.” 1 John 3:15.


37 posted on 10/17/2008 10:05:01 PM PDT by mtntop3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com
>>>>>That’s not true...

Hollywood doesn't love Oliver Stone? Since when? LOL Not just anyone could have gotten funds to make "W". Stone is the activist film maker.

Never said anything about big budgets. Although his heyday is over, Stone will always be able to get funding for his films. Btw, Alexander had a huge budget and it turned a profit.

38 posted on 10/17/2008 10:10:29 PM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/arts_entertainment/oliver+stone+pokes+fun+at+w/2161847?intcmp=rss_news_itnnews

But Stone was unable to find funding for W from a major Hollywood studio, so he resorted to independent financing. He and his producers aim to have the movie in theaters before this November's presidential election and maybe as soon as October

39 posted on 10/17/2008 10:16:33 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com

And “technically” Al Gore won in 2000. You know, if you throw out the electoral votes.

Bush won handily in 2004.


40 posted on 10/17/2008 10:19:31 PM PDT by Terpfen (To all you knee-jerkers: remember Rick Santorum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

Ha, I don’t understand, Bush won the electoral college by one state, what is your definition of handily.

1988
1984
1972
1996
1964
1956

Those are examples of winning handily.

2004 was a very close election.


41 posted on 10/17/2008 10:22:08 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: holy joe

We plan on seeing “An American Carol” this weekend to counter Stone’s movie.


42 posted on 10/17/2008 10:22:45 PM PDT by hocndoc (http://www.LifeEthics.org (I've got a mustard seed and I'm not afraid to use it.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Alexander was partially financed from the French.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=alexander.htm

Budget was 155 million. made 34 million domestically if you include the world it made 167 million. It did not turn a profit, you have to make 3 times your budget to turn a real profit, at a minimum twice your budget, now of course it all depends on how much money goes into advertising, so those are not hard and fast rules, but no way 12 million above budget turned a profit for this movie.

43 posted on 10/17/2008 10:24:45 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com

Maybe I will get attacked for saying this here but I think Stone should get credit for volunteering to go to the Vietnam War, he could have stayed in college and avoided it.

I’m sure we can all agree that we don’t like many of his political views but the beauty of this country is he has the right to say them and for what it is worth I have a high amount of respect for his military service. How many Hollywood types can you picture volunteering for a war, and for the infantry, here is a blurb from Wikipedia:

A veteran of the Vietnam war, Stone served with the U.S. Army from April 1967 to November 1968. He specifically requested combat duty and was assigned to the 25th Infantry Division and the 1st Cavalry Division, and was wounded twice in action. His personal awards include the Bronze Star with “V” device for valor for “extraordinary acts of courage under fire”, and the Purple Heart with one Oak Leaf Cluster.


44 posted on 10/17/2008 10:31:54 PM PDT by MikeFrancesa.com (www.war69.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com
World Trade Center was actually a very good movie. Well done. Respectful.

A fluke, no doubt.

45 posted on 10/17/2008 10:48:30 PM PDT by TheWriterTX (Proud Retrosexual Wife of 15 Years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com
>>>>>>Alexander was partially financed from the French.

Okay. Hollywood and the French have good relations. BFD

The $155 million budget I took to include advertising. The $167 million I took to be the profits. Wrong. According to The Numbers website, Alexander lost over $71 million. The 14th biggest bust on their chart.

Per Bloomberg, the production budget for "W" was $30-miillion. With another $30-million in distribution costs. Stone can still get funding for his films.

46 posted on 10/17/2008 11:08:14 PM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com

You gave examples of landslides. Might as well cite the elections of Washington and Monroe while you’re at it, just to further skew the numbers.

Bush won by 3% in the popular vote and by 34 electoral votes. Given the fraud and the money spent by Kerry and other interested groups, Bush won handily. Certainly he crushed Kerry compared to the 2000 election.


47 posted on 10/17/2008 11:09:47 PM PDT by Terpfen (To all you knee-jerkers: remember Rick Santorum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com
Its not what Stone did back when. Its his hardcore liberalism of today that bothers conservatives. His hatred of Republicans and his anti-American politics. And the fact that he made a lot of money by exploiting the Vietnam War, with his leftwing viewpoint.
48 posted on 10/17/2008 11:11:42 PM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MikeFrancesa.com

I loved his movies when I was younger. When I go back and watch them now, I see nothing but wall-to-wall propaganda.

Nixon was his best film, though. He’s been completely unhinged since U-Turn.


49 posted on 10/17/2008 11:23:24 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (youtube.com/wptg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Josh is a superb actor (he was great in “American Gangster” and “No Country For Old Men”), but something tells me this is not going to be one of Oliver Stone’s good movies.


50 posted on 10/17/2008 11:27:02 PM PDT by karnage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-87 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson