Friday, March 28, 2008


There's only 297 days left of Bush's presidency (too long!) and I can't imagine anyone being able to suffer him for 298. Which is why I find the whole notion of a W. movie suspect [tangent: my sympathies go out to Starwood Hotels]. It's so soon. Still the cast that controversy magnet Oliver Stone has gathered is appealing. Josh Brolin as the worst president ever (albeit before he was president), Soon to be 'it girl' Elizabeth Banks as Laura (previous coverage of Bank's big year here), and now Academy Award nominee James Cromwell as H.W. and Oscar Winner Ellen Burstyn as "Barbara Bush"... that's a hefty lineup.

This is sure to be Burstyn's most frightening role since The Exorcist, the malevolent refrigerators and pill popping of Requiem for a Dream be damned.

Ellen Burstyn's troubled screen children

[Tangent #2: So, Burstyn will get her seventh Oscar nod for this, right? That'd move her up to tied for 5th place of all time in Oscar's actress hierarchy (a spot currently deadlocked between Ingrid Bergman, Jane Fonda and Greer Garson with only Fonda having a very remote chance of breaking the tie). Burstyn is currently in a nine-way tie for 6th place of most nominations from a female actor. The top four, in case you're wondering is composed of: 1. Meryl Streep, 2. Katharine Hepburn, 3. Bette Davis, and 4. Geraldine Page.]

Do you want to see this W. picture despite or because of all that's gone by... or maybe you would rather forget this dynasty forever? How do you feel about Oliver Stone's presidential films: Nixon and JFK?


Catherine said...

At least a possessed Regan could string a sentence together correctly, right?

Anonymous said...

Isn't Vanessa Redgrave also a six-times nominee ?
Just wondering.


yes. BURSTYN is tied with 8 other women at six nods a piece who are...

(still working)

(passed on)

there's 11 women right below them including nomination magnets Blanchett & Winslet

Anonymous said...

Nathaniel, will you marry me?
Big fan of Ellen Burstyn right here and she's perfect for Babs Bush.

It'll be nice to see Oliver Stone tackle a controversial subject like Dubya after the tame yawnfest that was World Trade Center. Granted, I'm not a huge Stone fan, but I like him to be himself and I think he's truly Oliver Stone when he's out there, being batshit crazy. I want to see this film BECAUSE of everything that went down. Just in case people have forgotten by then.

My only concern is forever equating the awesomeness that is Josh Brolin with the WORST president since Tracy Flick.

Check out my article on the prospects of the upcoming Gus Van Sant film "Milk"

Catherine said...

Regan can swear and projectile vomit, Dubya can...erm...bumble his way through State of the Union addresses and get jiggy wit 'it, but neither of them compares to Burstyn's greatest ever screen child: Alfred Lutter. "Shoot the dog"

Oh, and btw - my previous comment in this post was supposed to be joking about Bush's inability to speak, not Nathaniel's. In case that was construed wrongly. Oh, this is way too complex for a Friday.


anon all marriage proposals must be accompanied by a (nude) photo, a 1000 word essay extolling the virtues of Michelle Pfeiffer and a list of your top ten films of all time so to as to ascertain your skills of discernment.

-thank you,
the management

all i really singled out Burstyn because I love her but a biopic of very familiar characters could mean a nomination for each of these actors. a four way if you will...

Cinesnatch said...

Oliver is over. Not interested.


fair enough. I mean, WTC was a stinker

SusanP said...

Interesting choice for Brolin. I love the fact that his great 2007 work doesn't look like it will exist in a vacuum and he's continuing to get meaty rolls. I hope he can continue to mix-up the creepy and/or morally reprehensible roles (he's definitely good at those) with the more righteous ones.

As for Stone, I have very mixed feelings about him. I've never seen Nixon but I thought JFK was a brilliantly made film. He's sort of like the Michael Moore of fictionalized historical dramas, full of editorializing and throwing out as many conspiracies as he possibly can... whatever one thinks of the veracity of his films, they are usually well made.

But even though this sounds interesting, I wish that Stone would make something completely different, just to shake things up.

Anonymous said...

Loved "JFK", liked "Nixon", can't wait to see "Recount", and will check out "W" just to see what kind of yarn Stone has spun around this story. It's all ripe for some kind of big-screen treatment, and even though Stone has been far off of his A-game lately, this might be his way back into people's good graces. Not sold on the Elizabeth Banks casting.

NicksFlickPicks said...

The juxtaposition of those two photos wins the Hilarious Award for this week.

ryansumera said...

another casting coup with burstyn as b.bush just like allen in nixon. a sure supporting actress nom.

Anonymous said...

Considering Stone's turnout in recent years, I wouldn't bet on a nomination for Ellen Burstyn yet. I still remember when everyone seemed to agree Colin Farell was a lock for a Best Actor nomination - until the highly anticipated Alexander was finally released and everyone saw what a mess it was.

Then again, I really suck at long-term predictions (I think roughly a year ago I told everyone how no one would even remember Marion Cotillard's Piaf-performance around Oscar time...), so I may be wrong about that, too.

ryansumera said...


well, in this case. it's not the part that's oscar bait. it's the actor. farrell as alexander was faaaar from being a perfect fit.

Anonymous said...

I don't think I'd be interested in a ficiontalized Bush biopic no matter who was at the helm (especially if you know, the Democrats lose). Like Nathaniel said, it's too soon. Additionally, I'm not sure how interested I am in watching anything about young Bush.

Oliver Stone? I really don't know. His record from 1978's Midnight Express (screenplay) up to 1995's Nixon is a fascinating run. I don't love every film he did (hated Natural Born Killers, bored with Heaven & Earth), but it's definitely a fantastic group. It would be great if something political got his spirit reved up again (particularly since JFK is his best film, and even if it's all crap, it's a film that's over three hours that still gets me on the edge of my seat).

A wait and see one for me.

Anonymous said...

Sooner is better than later in my case. Right now, I'm accustomed to suffering daily doses of "W". If I'm going to suffer through an Oliver Stone movie about it, too, I'd like to do it with that stamina still intact.

The Bush administration will, I predict, seem even worse in retrospect than it does now.

Glenn Dunks said...

I'd be less interested if his political bios weren't so good. Still, if it gets bad reviews then I'll skip. Stone is definitely one of those directors where if he's off his game he's really off and vice versa.

Anonymous said...

someday, we'll come to realize he wasn't such a bad president as all the left-wing media wants us to believe. i'd rather have saddam rotting in hell vs. lurking around. too bad no one had the balls back in the 30's to put an end to hitler before he began his carnage. i'll leave it at that. no need to respond.

Anonymous said...

i'm very intrigued by this project. i've been talking about it all week long. frankly, i can't wait to see it. it has too much potential camp value.

Anonymous said...

After the synthetic blandness of WTC I'm anxious to see Stone tackle an even more challenging topic. He has insisted that while he dislikes W, the film will be somewhat sympathetic to him, just as Nixon gave its lead character depth and compelexity against all odds. In a cultural climate prone to hyperboles, such a feat with this project seems nigh on impossible.