W.
- Thread starter Agent Richard07
- Start date
I've been hearing comparison's to Burton's biopic of Ed Wood. If that's the route that was taken, and if the film succeeds on that level, then it should be fantastic.
And count me as a fan of Nixon, especially that delightful Director's Cut.
And count me as a fan of Nixon, especially that delightful Director's Cut.
Surprised, no. Gravely disappointed, yes.
It's like looking at the eggs, flour, sugar and milk and then judging the finished cake before it's even started.
--Ted
You can tell if it's a cake you'd be interested in eating, if the ingredients are any good. Like if a film has Brett Ratner attached, it's like throwing a nail into the middle of a chocolate cake... Suddenly I'm not so interested.
Basing your decision to see a film on a script review is a bad idea but you can absolutely learn a lot of useful information about a film from the script. Is it tonally interesting to you, do you like the characterizations, what about the overall plot? I wouldn't let that be the only factor governing my decision to see a film but I'll take it into consideration, especially on a film I have a lot of curiosity in.
Anyway, I will definitely be seeing W. and Max Payne this weekend. I'm finding myself pretty anxious to see both films.
I wasn't huge on Nixon but I enjoyed JFK and Born on the Fourth of July (although perhaps enjoy isn't the right word for this one).
So if an actor is offered Battlefield Earth and There Will Be Blood, he should do them both because he can't possibly know what's good based on just reading the scripts?
I can understand wanting advance information before you see a film, but reading the script is just ruining it for yourself. It's like x-raying your Christmas presents rather than just shaking the box.
And it's also depriving the filmmakers of the chance to present the story to you the way they intend it to be presented. I don't think that's very fair to yourself or to them.
And it's also depriving the filmmakers of the chance to present the story to you the way they intend it to be presented. I don't think that's very fair to yourself or to them.
I'm surprised they made this before Bush left office. I mean, we don't even really know how the story ends yet.
Brolin seems OK as W (although he doesn't bear as close a physical resemblance as Nick Nolte). But what are they thinking with James Cromwell as Bush Sr.? The voice alone is so totally different that it should disqualify him.
Brolin seems OK as W (although he doesn't bear as close a physical resemblance as Nick Nolte). But what are they thinking with James Cromwell as Bush Sr.? The voice alone is so totally different that it should disqualify him.
"A Life Misunderestimated"
Yep. That's our Prez.
I read somewhere that this movie was supposed to come out next year, but Lionsgate threw a lot of money into the production so they could fast track it out before the elections.
I really want to see it but it seems I'll have to wait until it is released on DVD since I can't convince any of my friends to see it. The trailers look awesome, and did anyone catch Oliver Stone on the Colbert Report last week? Steven was great with him!
Good Will Riker
Admiral
James Cromwell is closer to the mark for the original George H.W. Bush than he ever was for the original Zephram Cochran.
So, in that regard, Cromwell's casting is a brilliant move.
Hope you realize it was fiction...or, to be less kind, full of crap.
What, Dana Carvey wasn't available...?
Hmm, if he wasn't way too young, that might have worked.
Hey, if Tim Bottoms can play GWB both as a comedy (That's My Bush!) and serious (DC 9/11: Time of Crisis), Carvey could probably manage as well.
Although, in my mind, Carvey will always be John McLaughlin.
^WRONG!!!!!
Issue number one, what did you all have for breakfast this morning? MORTON!
