The Great Debate?

Well, this is weird. A biopic of George W. Bush? While he’s still in office? That’s got to be some kind of a first. I dearly hope we get some kind of (minor) media coverage here. Please tell me we’ll get MST3K from the White House screening room. (”Heheheheh…gonna watch a movie. About me. Heheheheh.” [/Jon Stewart])
I guess the first question I have here—of many, obviously—is…this is a drama, right? (Or do biopics necessarily divide into the traditional comedy-or-drama bins in the first place? Could this be Dubya: The Dramedy?) The pointedness of the release date, just before the general election and just in time to remind the nation of exactly what’s gone on during this Administration, suggests that it could go either way, depending on Oliver Stone’s level of rage. Want to warn people away from four more Republican years? Denounce President Bush with a strongly worded political drama. Want to vent a carefully tended head of steam and inspire the admittedly already-convinced liberal voting base? Let loose with a scathing satire, Thank You For Smoking-style, only with better jokes. Either way, there’s no shortage of material.
And let’s discuss this nutty all-star cast, shall we? We’ve got Josh Brolin—Josh, not James, mind you—as the man himself, which makes a weird kind of Texas-y sense, except that Josh Brolin is badass cowboy Texas and George W. Bush is Southern Gentleman-meets-Skull-and-Bones Texas. Brolin was born in 1972, which indicates that much of the movie might be pre-Presidency (speaking of Skull and Bones…); also, Elizabeth Banks will play Laura Bush, which seems like an apt choice, considering neither of them has left much of an impression on my consciousness at all. The rest of Bush’s cabinet seem well cast (though disproportionally British), with one particularly hilarious choice standing out from the crowd: Rob Corddry as Ari Fleischer? That’s genius, plain and simple. He’ll make the movie; mark my words.
The concept of a major Hollywood film hitting so close to the White House—in ways that feel so obviously politicized—carries with it, in my mind, a tiny twinge of wrongness, like there should be some kind of divide between Movies and State. Gross sense of national discontent or no, should Stone and Emperor, the company making the movie, interfere with the political process, especially for a profit? On the other hand, why shouldn’t they? Stripping moviemaking of its political clout and its potential as a personal vehicle for free speech—seems like the worst and most obvious kind of censorship, or at least like relegating films to some kind of cultural vacuum. And neither of those are good options, either. So I guess we’ll see what Stone comes up with: sharp, relevant critique (or, who knows? An enthusiastic pat on the back?), or two of the most tedious and hope-quenching theater hours of all time. As someone once said, History will tell.
W, W., George W. Bush, George W. Bush movie, Josh Brolin, biopic
May 14th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
You are right: Rob Cordrry as Ari Fleischer will be AMAZING!
Funny really that movies aren’t more political. It’s probably kinda like textbooks when you think about it. You’ve got to make one movie that as many people as possible will want to make it pay. The truly polemical ones rarely make it big in the action/drama kind of way.