More Behind the Scenes of Oliver Stone’s W.

Access Hollywood has another behind-the-scenes feature on Oliver Stone’s W. They are on the set for a scene where George Bush practices an emergency water landing before the now infamous “Mission Accomplished” speech. I have yet to read the script, but I find it interesting that they would choose to include a little moment like in this story. And I think that might tell you a lot about Stone’s film. Josh Brolin relays a funny story of his initial reaction to Stone’s offer to star in this film. I wish they had asked Stone what he said to convince Brolin to change his mind and take the possibly very controversial role.

  • Windmillninja
    "I find it TYPICAL that they would choose to include a little moment like in this story"

    fixed
  • J.D.
    I think Stone said: "Hey, do you want a job? We'll pay you. And lunches will be catered."

    Seriously, can Brolin afford to pass up anything he gets offered?
  • igroveman
    I watch videos like this and consider America's historical context, and then I chuckle to myself at how blind Hollywood is to how chock full of political bias and nonsense it is. Give me a break. They are as sold out and "whipped" by leftwing nuts as any social and artistic endeavor in the history of mankind. The fact that they even have to make this movie in the time that they are doing so proves to me that they are very insecure in their perspective on world politics, and will go as far as they possibly can to defame the person they like to blame for everything. View this movie independent of the politics, and you may be able to divorce it from the controversies and ultimate lies within, but the fact is, it is obviously nothing but highly publicized and polished slander, and propaganda. I haven't even seen it, and there's already so much arrogance and hoity-toity politicizing bleeding from its every pore, it makes me want to puke. I hope whoever eats it feels sick like they just ingested a banana split after a double round of fast food. Someday, maybe in "valhalla" Bush will get his due - which is honor for every step he has taken since 9/11. The only people that will like this movie are leftwing nuts, vain-glorying intellectuals, and kiss-ups, who are already so divorced from reality, they are a dying breed anyway.
  • JD: Brolin is at a stage of his career where he can be very selective. And a role like this could turn off half of this country and effect the rest of his career. You have to think long term.
  • akumi okuda
    igroveman, you're criticizing the movie for having too much of a left wing agenda, yet by the mere act of criticizing it after having seen only two scenes that for all we know might not be included in the movie...
  • Israel Groveman
    All I need to see is the poster and the taglines, along with the fact that the movie is even being made at the time that it is coming out.
  • Clerks-Girl
    Though I don't completely agree with Igroveman in terms of bush deserving "honor for every step he has taken since 9/11" .. But I must say that I really have had it with liberal hollywood bitching and defacing every aspect of cultural that America has. We have Bill Mahr (sp?) going on about religion, in terms of election every celebrity bad mouthing the candidate they think is wrong for the country(Personally I'm a firm believer that this is an abuse of fame and they shouldn't be buying votes for a candidate because they were in a somewhat enjoyable blockbuster; they should shut up about there opinion rather than brainwashing the fans), and NOW despite the fact that his term is almost over and he's out the door Stone now decides to release/ make a movie defacing W (as well as every Moore film) .

    But Hollywood is just repeating themselves, over and over again with these points. Okay we get it, You don't like bush and need to make a movie about how he did us wrong. Okay we get it, you're an atheist, or maybe the exact opposite and need to make a movie about how the whole of religion is wrong. Right I follow that you think it's horrid that people in third world countries die of hunger and would like us to send money, when I much like other college student's thrive on our 10 cents ramen packets. Hollywood is so completely enthralled with themselves and how they should "use there power for good" when in all reality all this complaining has done nothing. What are we supposed to do and how are we supposed to react to these films and publicity? Shake our heads and nod? Somehow come to a NEW opinion that Bush is whatever kind of president when the facts are already there? Give a damn about the 30th goodmoral cause when the 1st one already took us for what we got, then blame ourselves because not continuing support of that 30th..

    Sorry to rant Peter, But really isn't it all enough? I'm tired of all these films defacing well...culture. They are not really proving anything, or saying something not said before..it's a broken record by now and I'm tired of it
  • I think this looks like a very ambitious movie. You have to give Oliver Stone props for having the balls to go forward with a movie like this.

    I'm actually really looking forward to seeing this...then I'll voice my opinion on it.
  • Gajonka
    NEHIND THE SCENES SUCKS! "THE MAKING OF" - CRAP LIKE THAT IS THE WORST.

    bOOOOOO! GIVE ME A TRAILER. BOY!
  • Wintermuted
    All I can say here is that I truly wished that Stone had made this two years ago at the latest. But kudos to Brolin, truly.
  • akumi okuda
    I don't think it's liberal to use the tagline, "A Life Misunderestimated," although I don't know what other taglines have been used. That's simply referencing the fact that he often mangles the English language during speeches and interviews, which is inarguably true. It's also saying that he was underestimated, which I don't think many people of any political persuasion would argue. The man has significant flaws, and if you don't think so... well I guess you must be a mindless drone. And come on, a tagline does not decide the tone of a movie. Making a judgement based on a poster is worse than making a decision based on a couple clips, which is worse than making a decision based on a trailer.


    I don't care whether or not you give this movie a chance, but logically you should at the very least wait for a trailer or read some neutral reviews before deciding that it's a fluffy piece of propaganda-filled garbage.
  • Clerks-Girl
    or you could just look at the Director's filmography list....Lord know's Stone has really built up a ..reliable..one to be sure.

    Alas, I pass
  • Pook
    Well, Clerks-Girl, you have the right-wing "An American Carol" coming out in October, filled with Hollywood conservatives and their ideology proudly on display.
  • Clerks_girl
    Well said Pook- perhaps my real qualm here is that celebs need to just stop fucking around on patriotism all together. Perhaps I just feel that Liberals tend to shit more on culture, and conservatives tend to overly complain and feign insult when really it shouldn't be applicable. Though I suppose, these are the ways of the universe.
  • David E
    How about we keep it to the movie. Who the hell cares what anyone's political beliefs are.

    How about the fact that Oliver Stone's movies have become horrible.

    His movies are hard to watch because they are awful, regardless of th story line.

    He employs his "shake the camera to make it look like its really happening technique" in just about every other scene.

    The thing I don't understand is that we know in all of this quasi historical figure movies (JFK, Nixon, and now this piece of trash movie) he fills the script with make believe and innuendo.

    So, regardless of whether I'm right wing lunatic or a left wing nut, my opinion is that Oliver Stone has become a pathetically horrible film maker.
  • David
    It is irritating in the extreme that folks who haven't even seen the film assume it's going to be an exercise in extolling left-wing idiocies about Bush. Certainly, Stone could have done a hatchet job on Nixon, but didn't. I have enough faith in Stone as an artist to believe that W will not be ideologically warped.
  • Clerks_girl
    Well, once again Stone's filmography, in my opinion solidify's his left wing ideologies on projects, including this one. Stone definitely put a lot of time into the proect in terms of research but also is very open about his biasism about not agreeing with Bush on subject of well, anything. That being said- I really don't see this flick showing Bush in a positive light, and as for a Stone showing pure facts...well, we all know that isn't his style either. This film is being made with a point. And i don't think it's to show Bush in a great presidency light. Which hey, cool is his choice, but I myself am sick of it. Just my opinion, and Lord knows I don't exspect anyone to be riding that wave with me.
  • qwertz
    Why should he try to show in a positive light such a horrible human being as Bush?
  • Clerks_girl
    I reaqlly am not trying to get into the politics- and I apologize if I have brushed that line to closely. My point is more along the fact that Enough is enopugh, whether left wing,right wing, independant or whatever else. I find this project void of anything useful to say other than the bitching of yet another film maker tying to prove a point that really is useless. It achieves nothing. I just wish for a break from all these shitty political films that are made for no other point than to vent out their frustrations and show people,culture,religion ect in a mocking way by having a pissing contest with the public for no other reason than to feel right.

    i'm sorry guys, I'm stubborn. You cannot and will not convince me that Stone went through with this project with unbiasism in hopes to tell it like it is. Will I see it eventually, I'm sure when it hits the HBO scene in a few years,yes. Will I pay for it? No effin way.
  • Clerks_girl
    Further more-sorry for the typo's. haha, accidentally hit the submit.
blog comments powered by Disqus