[LUconn]

Not a joke.


http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/07/27/oli ... r-trailer/

[Hold My Own]

What's the odds that this movie is a fair and balanced movie coming from Oliver Stone

[belcherboy]

Looks like it will be a hit job. Showing a wild partying GWB, who becomes president with the song "What a wonderful world" seems to give me that inclination.

[Ed Dantes]

(Full disclosure: I liked 'Nixon' & 'JFK', and I've heard that 'World Trade Center' was well done)

Stone says that the movie is going to make some libs think twice about Bush, and the same for conservatives... Still, it's a hit job.

[Rocketfan]

(Full disclosure: I liked 'Nixon' & 'JFK', and I've heard that 'World Trade Center' was well done)

Stone says that the movie is going to make some libs think twice about Bush, and the same for conservatives... Still, it's a hit job.

Yeah plus the guy who plays W. ( Josh Brolin i think) was involved in a drunken fight with cast members last week i think.....

[Fumblerooskies]

Uh, guys...it ain't exactly difficult for anyone to put a hit job movie out on the <del>Cheney</del> Bush presidency.

[LUconn]

Uh, guys...it ain't exactly difficult for anyone to put a hit job movie out on any presidency with absolutely no time passing by to let history be the judge.

[Fumblerooskies]

Uh, guys...it ain't exactly difficult for anyone to put a hit job movie out on any presidency with absolutely no time passing by to let history be the judge.

I think 7 years has been plenty of time...it only took 4 for Carter....and Reagan was a legend by the time he left office.

[Ed Dantes]

Uh, guys...it ain't exactly difficult for anyone to put a hit job movie out on the <del>Cheney</del> Bush presidency.

True. Very true. But I feel as if this isn't a hit job on the Bush presidency insomuch as it is a movie about the liberal perception of the Bush presidency. There is a difference, albeit slight.

Conservatives see Bush as a guy who had good intentions, but was just unable to be an effective leader.

Liberals see Bush as someone who is the root of all evil.

[mrmacphisto]

Liberals see Bush as someone who is the root of all evil.

What liberals? I've heard Cheney spoken of this way, but not Bush.

Those of you calling it a hit job realize that most critics actually watch the movie before offering what appears to be an informed assessment, right?

[Ed Dantes]

Liberals see Bush as someone who is the root of all evil.

What liberals? I've heard Cheney spoken of this way, but not Bush.

Those of you calling it a hit job realize that most critics actually watch the movie before offering what appears to be an informed assessment, right?

What liberals? Dude, type in 'Bush is a Nazi' into google and you'll get over 7 million hits. Type 'hitler was a nazi' and you get 8 million -- only slightly more than Bush, and Hitler actually WAS a nazi!

[belcherboy]

Uh, guys...it ain't exactly difficult for anyone to put a hit job movie out on any presidency with absolutely no time passing by to let history be the judge.

I think 7 years has been plenty of time...it only took 4 for Carter....and Reagan was a legend by the time he left office.

I was fairly young when Reagan left, but I remember hearing a lot of criticism about him when he left. He was going senile, he was just a puppet, he left tons of debt, 1987 wall street crash, trickle down economics only worked for the rich, Iran Contra, he was a war hungry president who made the world unsafe (i.e. nuclear weapons), etc. It wasn't nearly as bad as Bush, but as I recall he wasn't a legend by any stretch. His legendary status seemed to really come into play when the Soviet Union collapsed and the Wall in Germany came down. Of course I was in elementary/middle school during those years so my memory could be faulty.

[belcherboy]

Liberals see Bush as someone who is the root of all evil.

What liberals? I've heard Cheney spoken of this way, but not Bush.

Those of you calling it a hit job realize that most critics actually watch the movie before offering what appears to be an informed assessment, right?

ha ha. So we can't judge guys like Michael Moore and Oliver Stone by their previous works? I mean, perhaps Stone will put out a good portrayal of GWB, but are you saying we have to pay money to see the movie before we can judge it?

[RagingTireFire]

I was fairly young when Reagan left, but I remember hearing a lot of criticism about him when he left. He was going senile, he was just a puppet, he left tons of debt, 1987 wall street crash, trickle down economics only worked for the rich, Iran Contra, he was a war hungry president who made the world unsafe (i.e. nuclear weapons), etc. It wasn't nearly as bad as Bush, but as I recall he wasn't a legend by any stretch. His legendary status seemed to really come into play when the Soviet Union collapsed and the Wall in Germany came down. Of course I was in elementary/middle school during those years so my memory could be faulty.

Completely correct. Reagan was completely reviled by the "media types" until the day he left office. They didn't give him a minute's slack until Bush I was inaugurated.

[ALUmnus]

Liberals see Bush as someone who is the root of all evil.

What liberals? I've heard Cheney spoken of this way, but not Bush.

Those of you calling it a hit job realize that most critics actually watch the movie before offering what appears to be an informed assessment, right?

Dude, are you serious? Have you been paying attention to anything? Facts about this movie have been coming out for months, and it is in every sense of the phrase a hit job.

And what's with people honestly thinking that Cheney has as much power as Bush? I've never really understood that type of paranoia.

[Ed Dantes]

Here's the thing...

George W. Bush partied hard as a youth, underwent a conversion, and became President. This movie is about that -- with a focus on how "improbable" it is (see 'W' teaser posters & also how the trailer has 'What a Wonderful World' playing underneath it).

Yet... do you think that if they made a Barack Obama movie, it'd be the same? He did cocaine as a youth. Would a movie about Barack Obama predominantly feature his days as a blow-snorter named Barry?

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

[ALUmnus]

Here's the thing...

George W. Bush partied hard as a youth, underwent a conversion, and became President. This movie is about that -- with a focus on how "improbable" it is (see 'W' teaser posters & also how the trailer has 'What a Wonderful World' playing underneath it).

Yet... do you think that if they made a Barack Obama movie, it'd be the same? He did cocaine as a youth. Would a movie about Barack Obama predominantly feature his days as a blow-snorter named Barry?

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

That's a nice way of saying it's a liberal trying to explain to other liberals why a person they think is a complete idiot is an idiot. He can't help it, he's been that way his whole life.

[qkslvrsrfrboy]

Whats funny to me though is that More stoners dont love Bush because of his past. I would think hed be the most popular president because of that.

Has anyone on here heard/seen this before, its pretty funny

[mrmacphisto]

Liberals see Bush as someone who is the root of all evil.

What liberals? I've heard Cheney spoken of this way, but not Bush.

Those of you calling it a hit job realize that most critics actually watch the movie before offering what appears to be an informed assessment, right?

What liberals? Dude, type in 'Bush is a Nazi' into google and you'll get over 7 million hits. Type 'hitler was a nazi' and you get 8 million -- only slightly more than Bush, and Hitler actually WAS a nazi!

Weak. Just because someone uses the word "Bush" and "Nazi" on a website (1) doesn't mean they're talking about the current administration, (2) doesn't mean they're being literal and (3) doesn't mean they're what you would consider to be liberal. People throw the term Nazi around very loosely nowadays.

So we can't judge guys like Michael Moore and Oliver Stone by their previous works?

Sure you can. It doesn't make it right. The fairer way to go about it it to judge each work independently. If you want to judge the filmmaker personally, that's a different issue.

I mean, perhaps Stone will put out a good portrayal of GWB,

At least you admit it's too soon to tell.

but are you saying we have to pay money to see the movie before we can judge it?

Whether or not you pay money is up to you, but yes, in order to pass an informed judgment on a movie, it helps to actually see it.

Dude, are you serious?

Yes, I'm serious. And don't call me Shirley.

Have you been paying attention to anything? Facts about this movie have been coming out for months, and it is in every sense of the phrase a hit job.

I haven't seen anything that suggests this. Stone has admitted to taking some liberties with details, but overall it seems to cover actual events. I'm not suggesting a bias isn't at play, but it's a little early to be calling this film a hit job.

And what's with people honestly thinking that Cheney has as much power as Bush? I've never really understood that type of paranoia.

You mean the type of paranoia that thought Hillary was pulling strings during the Clinton administration? It's not my position either, but I've heard actual liberals say they think Bush is an idiot and Cheney is pure evil.

[belcherboy]

What liberals? I've heard Cheney spoken of this way, but not Bush.

Those of you calling it a hit job realize that most critics actually watch the movie before offering what appears to be an informed assessment, right?

What liberals? Dude, type in 'Bush is a Nazi' into google and you'll get over 7 million hits. Type 'hitler was a nazi' and you get 8 million -- only slightly more than Bush, and Hitler actually WAS a nazi!

Weak. Just because someone uses the word "Bush" and "Nazi" on a website (1) doesn't mean they're talking about the current administration, (2) doesn't mean they're being literal and (3) doesn't mean they're what you would consider to be liberal. People throw the term Nazi around very loosely nowadays.

So we can't judge guys like Michael Moore and Oliver Stone by their previous works?

Sure you can. It doesn't make it right. The fairer way to go about it it to judge each work independently. If you want to judge the filmmaker personally, that's a different issue.

I mean, perhaps Stone will put out a good portrayal of GWB,

At least you admit it's too soon to tell.

but are you saying we have to pay money to see the movie before we can judge it?

Whether or not you pay money is up to you, but yes, in order to pass an informed judgment on a movie, it helps to actually see it.

Dude, are you serious?

Yes, I'm serious. And don't call me Shirley.

Have you been paying attention to anything? Facts about this movie have been coming out for months, and it is in every sense of the phrase a hit job.

I haven't seen anything that suggests this. Stone has admitted to taking some liberties with details, but overall it seems to cover actual events. I'm not suggesting a bias isn't at play, but it's a little early to be calling this film a hit job.

And what's with people honestly thinking that Cheney has as much power as Bush? I've never really understood that type of paranoia.

You mean the type of paranoia that thought Hillary was pulling strings during the Clinton administration? It's not my position either, but I've heard actual liberals say they think Bush is an idiot and Cheney is pure evil.

I got a feeling you are going to be really wrong on this, but I like that you give everyone a fair chance, no matter what they've done in the past. Let me know your thoughts after you see it, because I have no plans at giving a dime to Oliver Stone. I honestly do hope he does a good job giving an accurate portrayal of GWB, I just don't believe he will.

[Ed Dantes]

And what's with people honestly thinking that Cheney has as much power as Bush? I've never really understood that type of paranoia.

Simply, they think that what's happened over the last few years was a intricately-orchestrated plot, with the gov't causing 9/11 so they could invade Iraq and upset the global oil market.

However, it's a little strange to say "Bush is an idiot!!! But a evil mastermind, too." So, they say Bush is an idiot, and that Cheney is the puppet-master.

Duh.

[belcherboy]

We also got to make sure we don't judge movies like this http://hypemovie.com/index.html before we actually see them. We really can't make a fair assessment until we watch the movie.

[mrmacphisto]

I got a feeling you are going to be really wrong on this, but I like that you give everyone a fair chance, no matter what they've done in the past. Let me know your thoughts after you see it, because I have no plans at giving a dime to Oliver Stone. I honestly do hope he does a good job giving an accurate portrayal of GWB, I just don't believe he will.

I probably won't see it at the regular theater. I might catch it at Movies 10, or at the very least on Netflix. My hope is that this film will serve to humanize Bush. We're all familiar with the caricature that the media portrays, but hopefully we'll see more of the person in the film, and that will make people think twice about who he really is.

On the other hand, I can see this being like his Primary Colors. I don't remember such a fuss being made about that film, and it didn't exactly paint Clinton in a completely positive light.

Simply, they think that what's happened over the last few years was a intricately-orchestrated plot, with the gov't causing 9/11 so they could invade Iraq and upset the global oil market.

It's a very vocal fringe group that believes this. I hope you don't think this is the view of most on the left.

However, it's a little strange to say "Bush is an idiot!!! But a evil mastermind, too." So, they say Bush is an idiot, and that Cheney is the puppet-master.

Bush often gives off the appearance of a bungling idiot, but anyone who watched the second debate between him and John Kerry should know that isn't true. He wiped the floor with Kerry.

We also got to make sure we don't judge movies like this http://hypemovie.com/index.html before we actually see them. We really can't make a fair assessment until we watch the movie.

The difference here is that The Obama Effect makes its intentions known up front, much like Fahrenheit: 9/11 did. Because the film's intentions are clearly stated, we can comment on that part of it, although if you want to criticize the facts covered in the movie, it would help to see it. Everything I've seen about W seems to suggest that it's a biopic. This Obama movie admits to being something else.

[belcherboy]

We also got to make sure we don't judge movies like this http://hypemovie.com/index.html before we actually see them. We really can't make a fair assessment until we watch the movie.

The difference here is that The Obama Effect makes its intentions known up front, much like Fahrenheit: 9/11 did. Because the film's intentions are clearly stated, we can comment on that part of it, although if you want to criticize the facts covered in the movie, it would help to see it. Everything I've seen about W seems to suggest that it's a biopic. This Obama movie admits to being something else.

I still disagree that you cannot criticize a movie solely based on who is directing/producing it. How many new movies from/starring Robert Redford, Sean Penn, etc. do we have to see before we realize they have an agenda? If the movie has any political theme to it, it will lean heavily toward the left. Honestly are you saying that you REALLY believe that this movie will not lean left/liberal? I have no problem with those who give the movie a chance, but I see nothing wrong with criticizing him based on his previous movies, without seeing his current one. I've been doing the same thing with M Night Shamamlongdingdong movies lately. They've all been massive dissappointments, IMO, since Signs. That is why I pretty much expect the worse, and would be happily proven wrong. I'm just not going to give him a dime of my money till then.

[belcherboy]

I got a feeling you are going to be really wrong on this, but I like that you give everyone a fair chance, no matter what they've done in the past. Let me know your thoughts after you see it, because I have no plans at giving a dime to Oliver Stone. I honestly do hope he does a good job giving an accurate portrayal of GWB, I just don't believe he will.

I probably won't see it at the regular theater. I might catch it at Movies 10, or at the very least on Netflix. My hope is that this film will serve to humanize Bush. We're all familiar with the caricature that the media portrays, but hopefully we'll see more of the person in the film, and that will make people think twice about who he really is.

On the other hand, I can see this being like his Primary Colors. I don't remember such a fuss being made about that film, and it didn't exactly paint Clinton in a completely positive light.

Are you honestly comparing a fictional Primary Colors, to a movie that is suppose to be an accurate account of a current president?? Wasn't Primary Colors promoted as a comedy? I never saw it, but I looked at it like I would look at a sketch on Saturday Night Live. "W" is portrayed as the actual story of GWB.