Now For Something Completely Different: A Review of W.

I would imagine that when people heard the Oliver Stone was releasing a movie about George W. Bush, many thought it would be a "left-wing" smear job with little to no objectivity. But "W." is much more evenhanded than I would have expected, especially coming from Oliver Stone.

For those who are big fans of the Bush administration, this is not a movie you will enjoy as Stone depicts Bush's young adulthood as a period of alcohol abuse and directionless for the future politician. Depictions of his cabinet and closest mentors, as well as the relationships within his family will probably also make you upset.

For those who have not been impressed with the Bush administration, I think many will see Bush in a different light and that Stone is not bashing him but trying to understand why Bush made the decisions he did.

The movie focuses on the time period from Bush at Yale to Bush just after the break out of violence between Islamic sects in Iraq. It is not chronological; it jumps between the "present" and the past throughout the movie but almost always with the clear identification of what time of Bush's life we are in. As I said before, Bush's young adulthood is depicted as a time of recklessness, especially concerning alcohol, as well as being directionless. He is in trouble with law and under the constant pressure of trying to live up to his father's expectations.

Stone shows Christianity as playing a vital role in Bush's life and in a positive light. When we first see Bush praying after a strategy meeting in the first 10 minutes of the movie, we laugh a little bit because it seem facetious or at least out of place among a room full of less devoted Christians. But when we witness Bush's conversion and his following meetings that end in prayer, we see Bush's devotion as genuine and meaningful to him. Stone treats it with respect and not as a weapon with which to attack Bush's character.

This movie is not kind to Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, or Karl Rove. All of them are acted very well, especially Richard Dreyfuss as Cheney. An excellent depiction and an incredible visual likeness. Josh Brolin is also excellent as Bush, mimicking his mannerism and speech, so that it is somewhat difficult to tell the difference in a few shots.

Overall, I left the movie feeling sympathy and compassion for Bush, seeing him as the victim of poor circumstances rather than a conniving dictator or malicious politician. Stone paints him as a devoutly religious man who wanted deeply to have a positive impact in the Middle East and across the world. Bush's weaknesses were allowing himself to be driven by associates with ulterior motives and being unable to stand under the weight of his father's expectations.

I don't know how much of the movie is factual, but honestly, I don't care. This movie isn't intended to be a strict retelling of Bush's life or a definitive biographical movie. It is a character study about a complicated man who became president, and it focuses on specific parts of Bush's life that can shed some light on his psyche. He is a round, dynamic character as are most of the other characters; only Cheney and Rumsfeld stay fairly static, and they receive the harshest treatment from Stone's retelling. It was a fascinating journey, and an enjoyable movie to watch that left feeling a little more sympathy for Bush than I would have expected.