W.
 

Even the long term relationship between Cheney and Powell is demonstrated. Stunning is how W. so accurately depicts how we got there.

In a stunning scene, with a map of Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan on a projection screen, one can appreciate how Cheney, Wolfovitz, Tenant, Rumsfeld, Rice, W., etc came to a consensus. Not only Powell's position based on logic and knowledge. Not only how Powell eventually become so forceful and isolated in those meetings. But also how resulting decisions were achieved. Numerous meetings condensed into one to make the movie. But a meeting that accurately demonstrated how that consensus was achieved AND how various personalities interplayed.

I was struck by how accurately each person was portrayed making it so obvious who was who. Moreso I was blown away when I finally realized who played Cheney - a stunning performance.

Appreciate the deep seated knowledge that Powell provided. How Rumsfeld was so skilled at manipulating or spinning facts. How Condi Rice routinely offered nothing of substance. The mystery or conundrum of George Tenant. How George Jr's life experience brought him to the conclusions he made and the subtle relationship with Cheney. How George Sr was always so opposed to "Mission Accomplished" and how George Jr would only learn of this through third parties. How George Jr and Laura probably had a unique and supportive relationship.

W. demonstrates how George Jr's administration achieved decisions as documented by numerous authors including Bob Woodward. Woodward was given unprecedented access to George Jr's administration. Also well documented are the confrontations between Powell and others.

Although condensed for the movie’s benefit, George Jr finally asks a damning question in a 2003 meeting. Who is in charge of looking for WMDs? No phase four planning becomes obvious in that answer.

Also portrayed is David Kay’s confession.

Demonstrated are George Jr's tremendous ability to remember names. How he turned his life around. How Rove et al taught him the art of answering questions by identifying keywords with automatic responses. His relationship to George Sr. And, of course, how George Jr suddenly appreciated what George Sr meant about staying out of the barrel (which probably occurred about the same time that Laura bluntly corrected his cowboy attitude with productive results).

Necessary to justify war are a smoking gun, a strategic objective, and an exit strategy. Especially telling is the answer to, "What is our exit strategy?"

Like any movie telling history, much is condensed into single scenes. However to appreciate how we and they got there, W. portrays the greatness and the limitations of George Bush Jr. It tells a story that I suspect a majority never knew. Not just a story about George Jr. It also tells the story of George Sr.

Missing are important characters such as Karen Hughes, Ashcroft, Garner, Armitage, Ridge, Judith Miller, Feith, Mylorie, and Congress, the chaos of 11 September, the daughters, Katrina, a total meltdown of international relations, and other events. This is a historical story of how George Jr got where he is and why he did. Told by limiting its plot to what led up to "Mission Accomplished". Based upon extensive reading and insider interviews, this movie is an accurate depiction - a story we should all understand to appreciate how and why even the most absurd can happen. This is not a story with a political agenda. This is a story of triumph and tragedy based in historical fact.

Thanks for your post tw. I still have no desire to see it, but I appreciate reading your take on it.

I actually appreciated the fact that they left out 911. I thought it showed some class. I usually don't get caught up in family drama, but if there is any truth to this "poppy" stuff, I am going to have a real guffaw. I liked how George Senior was played as a real leader, and somehow jr. could never measure up. I totally see that in real life. I also never knew that Bush lost an election early on, and I still need to see if there is any truth to it.

Not that I believe for one minute he actually memorized the names of everyone at his sorority house. The automatic shoe-in is more believable.

One thing the film inspired for me was pity. If only for a couple of hours I felt sorry for W. That is movie magic I did not expect, and could not keep myself from doing. I feel my suspension of disbelief is appalling in that regard. I just could not stop myself.

I think it's a good watch. I think it's strange that people here "couldn't be paid to watch it". Considering what they are willing to watch on the average. huh. Quirky. Must be "election and vote cellar". "version 2008."

I wont for the same reason I didn't go see Fahrenheit 911...I feel that I have already had plenty of access to the information.

I'll see it if J wants to go, but Oliver Stone...

Did you refuse to watch JFK too? Or did you have all the information and access to it? I love it when you guys get high brow all of a sudden. All of a sudden everyone becomes very discriminate about what they watch and what they do, when I know they have been on the cellar. lol! Love it!

I think you are talking about me, but I said exactly the opposite. That I could be paid to watch it.

Cic...jeeze...highbrow?

The reason I gave was how I initially felt, I dont see why its highbrow though. I really dont want to see it...I probably wont even rent it when it comes out on DVD. Its too soon for me. Im not interested in someones take on his life after all these years of hearing about him.

Yes, completely different.:smack:

I am really interested in the opinion of people that have watched it, myself. What was your impression as a viewer? I agree with the t-dub. The meeting scene was especially great, and condy playing the *cute* "yeswoman" was fabulous. The disappointment that Powell showed was fantastic. I never thought he "fit in" with that particular group, how it played out, or the possibilities, was on my mind.

I wondered if he just acquiesced, so he would be able to know what they were going to do anyway, not wanting to be shut out of the "people in the know" group.....Trying to stay in the loop of a group that stands by "either for or against" policies. I mean, wouldn't you feel responsible to stay in the group just to babysit to see what they were going to do next? If you say no and you are made to resign, you won't have any control whatsoever of their crazy-making in the future.

I like Powell. I've never understood any of his dealings with that administration. He seems like he isn't nuts. How did he manage is a great question, and I like that this movie attempted the small answer.

I have enjoyed these reviews, though...:D

Well, I don't want to watch it because I lived through it and didn't enjoy living through it. So I don't want to live through it again, even in a movie.

Maybe in 5 years.

Powell is a Republican. He entered office to service a Republican administration. But the Republican party that Powell (and Simpon, Specter, McCain, Snow, Gingrich, etc) work for is not the same party that was in the White House.

One does not know the story about vulcans pushing America into "Mission Acccomplished" until one grasps the confrontation in that meeting. Powell's arguments that were so correct, so well presented, and so obviously based in historical lessons; instead got no traction. Armitage has noted Powell's frustration elsewhere. But to appreciate what Armitage said, one must watch the scene. I cannot even begin to explain the social interplay. See it to appreciate how we got where we are.

We know so little about Laura or Goerge Tenent. I can only suspect this movie accurately portrayed both. Especially well captured is the contradiction that was CIA's Tenent. What we lived through is completely different from what those inside the administration lived through.

W. is a completely different from the same story we lived through. A completely different perspective that should be seen to be appreciated.

Cic, Oliver Stone is not exactly a documentarian.

Same way I feel about all the 9/11 movies.

exactly. I didn't watch those either. The dramas or the Michael Moore one.

Yea. I'm not taking it as a documentary. I am wondering how much is true and how much is false....

But I watched it. So I get to sit here and wonder how much of it came from a research team and enhanced, and how enhanced it became....

From the tone, I was getting, I can imagine some things were brought to light in the film to make some of the audience say, how you know daaa? Especially Bush. I am thinking some details were thrown in that were hard to come by. That's just how it seems and I will never know, because I don't have any researchers, or insider first-hand knowledge.

Read what so many authors have published and what so many insiders have said in interviews. For example, nobody really knows what Tenent actually knew or was trying to say. Nobody really knows the true relationship between George Jr and Laura.

But we do know the outline of a relationship between George Sr and George Jr is accurate. We know Goerge Sr never approved of "Mission Accomplished". We know George Jr never consulted his father for advise (because even George Jr says so). We know the confrontation existed between Powell and a united team of Cheney, Wolfovitz, and Rumsfeld. Also demonstrated is how George Jr would often wait for Cheney to tell him what to decide. It was not done overtly.

Obviously, the meeting that decided who America should attack was more than one meeting. Obviously, that room was chock full of assistants and advisers. The movie shows only a few people and everything conducted in only one meeting. So they Hollywoodized history.

They also eliminated many who were just plain dumb such as Feith and Mylorie. We never saw the confrontations between Armitage and Feith that were so agressive as to be all but a fist fight. Those were eliminated because they distract from the story. It was Hollywoodized.

Apollo 13 also Hollywoodized the event, in part, to make it easier for you to understand. But Apollo 13 also accurately portrayed that event.

Underlying facts in W. are predominately accurate. Did Condi Rice say exactly what she said in the movie? Doubtful. Little is known about what she said other than she never had anything of leadership quality to contribute. She did not do her job of vetting National Security Information - and the movie notes that.

Many have documented those facts. And then Woodward, who was provided unprecedented access to the White House confirms those stories in his books.

How accurate are all the details? Irrelevant. The movie depicts overall relationships. To appreciate those relationship or how they probably existed is most stunning in one 2003 meeting that Hollywoodizes how the decision was made on "Mission Accomplished" and suggests why Admiral Fallon says he stopped an American attack on Iran. Demonstrated is how Powell had so little traction. From those scenes one can appreciate why George Jr fired him.

twdub says so, it must be treww.