Metascore
56

Mixed or average reviews - based on 36 Critics What's this?

User Score
5.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 93 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring:
  • Summary: Whether you love him or hate him, there is no question that George W. Bush is one of the most controversial public figures in recent memory. In an unprecedented undertaking, acclaimed director Oliver Stone is bringing the life of our 43rd President to the big screen as only he can. W.Whether you love him or hate him, there is no question that George W. Bush is one of the most controversial public figures in recent memory. In an unprecedented undertaking, acclaimed director Oliver Stone is bringing the life of our 43rd President to the big screen as only he can. W. takes viewers through Bush’s eventful life -- his struggles and triumphs, how he found both his wife and his faith, and of course the critical days leading up to his decision to invade Iraq. (Lionsgate) Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 14 out of 36
  2. Negative: 1 out of 36
  1. 100
    W., a biography of President Bush, is fascinating. No other word for it.
  2. The pleasure of Mr. Stone's work has never been located in restraint but in excess, a commitment to extremes that can drown out the world or, as in this film, give it newly vivid, hilarious and horrible form.
  3. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    75
    The performances are good (some scarily realistic), and the movie is enjoyable to watch. But as a probing analysis of the 43rd president, it falls short.
  4. The intrepid one is the outstanding Josh Brolin, who does such a phenomenal job in the title role that he carries every scene he's in to a place of subtlety and integrity far beyond what Stone needs to make his attention-grabbing noise.
  5. 50
    Superficial, uninformative, and inert, this two hour snoozefest isn't even inflammatory enough to stoke a righteous anti-Bush brushfire. W. does for recent history what Oliver Stone's epic "Alexander" did for ancient times.
  6. In spite of Josh Brolin's heroic efforts, W. is a skin-deep biopic that revels in its antic shallowness.
  7. 38
    The movie plays like a dunk-the-clown game at a carnival. Through intent or ineptitude, he sets up the Bush family and administrations as caricatures.

See all 36 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 38
  2. Negative: 17 out of 38
  1. McBushMaverick
    Oct 17, 2008
    10
    Eight years of Bush is not enough! Americans like me love this movie because we demand more wars, a bigger deficit, and a president as Eight years of Bush is not enough! Americans like me love this movie because we demand more wars, a bigger deficit, and a president as intelligent as Bush who is buying up more private sectors than a communist regime! Those who hate this film are Expand
  2. AlexH
    Oct 18, 2008
    9
    The reviews seem to be mixed, first of all, because lots of critics are automatically suspicious of Oliver Stone, as they have been for The reviews seem to be mixed, first of all, because lots of critics are automatically suspicious of Oliver Stone, as they have been for years. But "W" doesn't include much of the speculative ('unofficial history') material characteristic of "JFK" and to a lesser extent "Nixon". Secondly, everyone has their own strong opinion of Bush and what a movie about him should be like in terms of its political slant. Those in his devoted ~20% fan base won't be happy, but neither will liberals eager to see an angry hit piece. The film is a real, human drama that is both funny and tragic, and focuses primarily on the relationship between father and son. But while I'll argue that the film is generally accurate and sympathetic, I won't say it's entirely unbiased or apolitical. Two sequences seem for me to be especially relevant to the current election: W's reaction to his loss in a 1978 congressional race ('I'll never be out-Texaned or out-Christianed again') and Cheney's explanation of his real motives for invading and occupying Iraq. Expand
  3. patrickh.
    Oct 14, 2008
    8
    Conflicted but entertaining.
  4. Rea
    Oct 25, 2008
    4
    I was hooked by the trailer and Director Oliver Stone's reputation. Both disappointed. Though the image was painstakingly crafted to I was hooked by the trailer and Director Oliver Stone's reputation. Both disappointed. Though the image was painstakingly crafted to show characters, there was a lack of spirit moving through it. It was basic 'ambulance chasing'..Jerry Springer material. It struck me as low level made-for-TV rather than incisive film making. About an hour into it, I wondered if someone bought off or threatened Stone to do that script, which didn't even begin to scratch the surface of the truths around that family and their politics. Brolin's portrayal was terrific, but the script was so devoid of any real meat, he didn't have enough to work with. Why were W's inner conflicts and demons displayed like dirty laundry without addressing where the dirt came from? This was like a Jerry Springer invites Geo to his show. I imagine there are compelling reasons for Stone to not go beyond painting a sort of distorted Lord's Supper casting W surrounded by his own 'disciples', but I was hoping for something that was less a shallow marionette show of exquisitely crafted puppets for more of HOW this man came to be in that office and WHY. The film was too one-dimensional for me. We are not fully described by our image/presentation--we are also described by the effects we produce, and our relationships. Stone hinted l at the relationships but didn't allow the supporting cast much range to show his reflection-effect in them. Real statements about that vs. constant harping on his mannerisms and weaknesses was the contribution I was looking for...and didn't find. Expand
  5. JonT.
    Nov 2, 2008
    2
    No plot, not point. Very poorly made, and an extreme let down.
  6. TopiasI
    Jan 4, 2009
    1
    Horrible. at least when ur not from USA. cant say good things about this movie.
  7. PaulS.
    Oct 10, 2008
    0
    When will people stop giving Oliver Stone money to make movies. Given the subject material he totally fails to do it justice. A five year old When will people stop giving Oliver Stone money to make movies. Given the subject material he totally fails to do it justice. A five year old with a camera could make Bush look bad, yet somehow Stone manages to bungle it. And more importantly, go to the movies to be entertained, which this movie totally failed to do. Expand

See all 38 User Reviews

Trailers