Pasithea

Went to see W last night with centauress and prickvixen

I confess, I had reservations about seeing this film because, as I put it to PV, I already know Bush is an idiot and if I want stupidity, there's Beverly Hills Chihuahua and Max Payne. But I also wanted to spend an evening out with friends and I felt like seeing a movie (which is rare)


As it turned out, I didn't care for the film but for entirely different reasons than I thought I would when I went into it. I had expected to go in, see a gallery of abomination, and come out with clenched fists and teeth gnashed.

Instead... I found myself spending a lot of time considering the portrayals of the different characters. I had a difficult time with the portrayal of W. The actor's face was all wrong for me. His hair is much frizzier and he has a much more square jaw and a very different nose. It was interesting to realize that a lot of what I dislike about Bush Jr is in his face shape. His real face screams fratboy. He has a hawkish nose and a permanent sneer. He's the sort of person who always looks like he's laughing at you behind your back.

Brolin's body language was also off in his portrayal of Bush. Bush's body language is actually rather confident and relaxed, nearly catlike in some ways. Brolin's portrayal of him was more like a teen-ager, body too big for the person, fumbling and awkward. It felt like he was trying to make Bush seem more awkward and ill-at-ease in his environment than he actually is.

Moreover, as the main character of the film, there was something off in either the direction, writing, or acting (or some combination thereof) as the audience, I was never inside his head. I never identified with him. We were a spectator to his life, always kept at arm's distance, never knowing the man at all. I can see where this might be required for the film. We can't get too intimate with an image of a living person based on external views because as a director, making people love or loathe a living person based on such an external view may feel irresponsible. However, it really doesn't make for good story telling. It was like watching someone else's collection of home videos of their children.

In the movie, W _could_ have been a sympathetic character to me. His relationship with his father, both from this portrayal, and what I have seen in the news has some painful resonance with my relationship with my family.. In particular, they expected me to fail, told me to fail, put all their faith in their golden son. Early in my life, I made a lot of mistakes and stumbled a lot and because of some of my choices, they had condemned my life, and in part that's always haunted me and driven me to be more and better than the golden child. There are also times when I feel overwhelmed by my life, like I'm out of my league. I despise Bush as a president, and I doubt I would get along with him as a person, but I could easily sympathize with the struggles in his life. I could feel joy for him for beating his alcoholism, admire him for having the courage to reach for his dreams, but the film didn't give me that opportunity. As I said, lousy story-telling.

For the other characters... Letsee. Dr. Rice's character was really negative. The body language and appearance were spot-on. The performance was excellent, but she was written to be so one-dimensionally conniving and just plain evil that it put me off.

The writing and portrayal of Colin Powell was probably the kindest in the film. He was easily the most sympathetic character in the film. The acting was excellent and treated the man with decency and respect.

However, I must confess that Dreyfuss stole the show with his portrayal of Cheney. He was utterly chilling. I think this was one of the most frightening performances I've seen since like Jack Nicholson in The Shining He was totally convincing and completely evil. While I don't know Dick Cheney, I do tend to read a lot from body language and mannerisms (and I find it interesting that the film made me aware of this) Dreyfuss' portrayal of the off-camera Cheney is very much what I imagine him to be like.

For most of the other characters.. They didn't get a lot of screen time or didn't make enough of an impression on me to really form any opinion. This is particularly interest with regard to Rove. He was in a large chunk of the film, but always the background character. I suspect this was directorial choice and intentional.

Finally, I suppose the roll I felt most mixed about was Bush senior. Again with the noses. Actually, a whole nose theory here. I found him very appealing, a kind, gentle, thoughtful old man. Interestingly, I realize that a big part of this is because of his nose. Men with the hawkish nose the Bush family has are very off-putting to me. Guys with a big schnoz have an automatic point of likability for me. I think this could be due to spending some of my formative years around retirees or because of cartoons, Mr. Hooper in Sesame Street, and MASH (Hawkeye and Klinger have serious nose. Charles has a sharp little nose) My dad also has kind of a big nose. This is something I'm going to have to think about and maybe play around with a bit. Neat thing to learn about myself. Always interesting to learn when you're forming opinions about people based in part on something they have no control over. Subconscious prejudices.

Back on Bush Senior... Like Powell, he was treated with decency and respect and I appreciated that. However, (perhaps I'm projecting a bit) I actually found him a little 'too' decent with regard to his son. I feel like in part, he was sainted in the film to make W seem more incompetent and fumbling. I see a lot of my grandfather in the real Bush Senior and I imagine him to be a hard man. Both his mannerisms and those of W suggest this to me. I did not like the senior Bush as a president, though I did respect him. Bush Jr, I have neither liked nor respected as president, but on the whole, I felt the film was a little unkind to him in some ways; particularly the interaction with his family.

All in all, this ended up being a very thought-provoking film for me in terms of body-language, mannerisms, acting, story development, and how I project pieces of my own life onto others and make certain assumptions about them. On that level, it was excellent. However, as a movie... It was pretty boring and didn't engage me.

Heh. How weird is this? I'm writing a review of a film about Bush and saying, "He was portrayed somewhat unfairly.", "I have biases.", and "I wanted something a bit more Hollywood.". Lest the sharks smell weakness, I assure that this is the core of being a free-thinking liberal. When I find prejudices in myself, I examine them. There are no angels or demons in my world. Just people.