Oliver Stone To Direct George W. Bush Biopic

[Hunter Rider]

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/oliver-stone-to-direct-george-w-bush-biopic-3694

Date: January 20, 2008

By: Kellvin Chavez
Source: Variety

According to Variety, Oliver Stone has set his sights on his next directing project, "Bush," a film focusing on the life and presidency of George W. Bush, and attached Josh Brolin to play the title role.

The director has begun quietly shopping a script by his "Wall Street" co-writer Stanley Weiser.

Pic will be produced by Moritz Borman, who teamed with Stone on "World Trade Center" and "Alexander," and Jon Kilik, a producer of "Alexander" as well as "Pinkville," the pre-strike project about the Army's investigation of the My Lai massacre in Vietnam that Stone expected to direct until United Artists pulled the plug late last year.

Borman said Weiser's script was completed before the WGA strike and was ready to shoot and that many of Stone's "Pinkville" crew jumped right into "Bush." If financing materializes quickly enough, the film could start production by April and could be in theaters for the election or the inauguration.

​

One need only Google the words "Stone" and "Bush" to find plenty of the director's critical comments about the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq. Despite that, the director said he's not looking to make an anti-Bush polemic. His goal is to use seminal events in Bush's life to explain how he came to power, using a structure comparable to "The Queen."

"It's a behind-the-scenes approach, similar to 'Nixon,' to give a sense of what it's like to be in his skin," Stone told Variety. "But if 'Nixon' was a symphony, this is more like a chamber piece, and not as dark in tone. People have turned my political ideas into a cliche, but that is superficial. I'm a dramatist who is interested in people, and I have empathy for Bush as a human being, much the same as I did for Castro, Nixon, Jim Morrison, Jim Garrison and Alexander the Great."

 

[Apollo]

hmmm... i never thought they'd make a movie about Bush..i'd probably check it out.

 

[Joker]

...Why? He never did anything spectacular, and all it's going to do is cause a bigger split in the american population, no matter how they do it. Plus, really, who gives a f**k at this point?

 

[cookiva]

Guh, please no! Not Josh Brolin.....

Hopefully he will act like Doc Block and take some shizz...

 

[Kent]

...Why? He never did anything spectacular, and all it's going to do is cause a bigger split in the american population, no matter how they do it. Plus, really, who gives a f**k at this point?

Agreed. Completely.

 

[BatMatt]

Bush sucks, Stone sucks, should be a fun movie :

 

[Catman]

This will be interesting...

 

[Joker]

He should go the Alexander route with it. Have Colin Farrel play Bush, not drop his accent, and be totally historically innacurate. Angelina Jolie can play Barbra Bush

And then after it sucks and everyone hates it, release a directors cut that's actually shorter. Then, when THAT sucks and everyone hates it too, release yet another cut of it that still sucks and everyone will hate.

 

[Superhobo]

He should go the Alexander route with it. Have Colin Farrel play Bush, not drop his accent, and be totally historically innacurate. Angelina Jolie can play Barbra Bush

And then after it sucks and everyone hates it, release a directors cut that's actually shorter. Then, when THAT sucks and everyone hates it too, release yet another cut of it that still sucks and everyone will hate.

I'd watch it.

 

[daywalker2007]

if they really want to do this,

anthony lapaglia is the only choice for this role,

he looks just like Bush.

t:

 

[Joker]

if they really want to do this,

anthony lapaglia is the only choice for this role,

he looks just like Bush.

t:

What about...Frank Langella? In full Skeletor make up

 

[Darkly Dexter]

...Why? He never did anything spectacular

Platoon
Wall Street
Born on the 4th of July
JFK


All great movies.

 

[Kent]

^I think he was referring to George W. Bush?

 

[Super_Ludacris]

...Why? He never did anything spectacular, and all it's going to do is cause a bigger split in the american population, no matter how they do it. Plus, really, who gives a f**k at this point?

t: @ this....

 

[chamber-music]

wow the most unnecessary movie about a president. I don't think anyone was begging for a movie about Dubya, even if they do or don't like him a dramatization of his life doesn't sound like a very intresting prospect.

 

[DocHoliday]

This'll be interesting. Josh Brolin is good stuff as is Stone (usually).

 

[The Senator]

Chances are, this movie will be three and a half hours long, filmed like an epileptic's nightmare, and will try to paint Bush as some sort of anti-hero who suffers from some sort of psychological disease, ala 'Nixon.'

Not to mention, none of the actors will look like the people they are supposed to be.

 

[Matt]

How is Timothy Bottoms not playing Bush?

 

[DocHoliday]

How is Timothy Bottoms not playing Bush?

haha...I remember that show!

 

[fu manchu]

imo, the most interesting Bush is the Bush twins.

 

[terry78]

^You know the maid is the voice Ms. Krabappel in The Simpsons.

And Brolin could do it. Everyone else that has taken the role has basically been a cariacture.

 

[Matt]

But seriously, this movie is going to be horrible.

1) Who really wants to see a movie about a spoiled rich kid who uses daddy's power and fortune to buy his way through Yale and become president? Where is the adversity? Where is the challenge? Where is the triumph?

2) I agree with Joker. How can this movie serve any purpose? Bush isn't even out of office. And he won't be out of office long enough to have any real reflection upon his presidency and the long term effects for at least 20 years. That means anything in this movie will be partisan nonsense that is made to serve the political agenda of Stone.

3) Who cares? Bush's presidency had two major events. The Iraq War and 9/11. The Iraq War is again, too soon to start making movies about as there has been no real reflection period to look on it historically. And 9/11 was pretty much a glorified photo-op for Bush that he really did nothing for. Even the invasion of Afgahnistan was put together by much smarter men and pretty much any president would've done the same thing. I mean, what about Bush really warrants a movie? His life and presidency just isn't that cinematic.

4) Keeping number 3 in mind...will this start a new trend of useless president bio-pics? Whats next? A Franklin Pierce movie? Maybe a Warren G. Harding bio-pic?

 

[scifiwolf]

I agree with Matt that this movie needs to let history sort out Bush's presidency in the grand scheme of things. However, I'm reminded of how soon movies like All the President's Men and Apocolypse Now came out after their respective events, and they were both very good and still pretty relevent today.

 

[Apollo]

George Bush and Laura Bush make out scene anyone??? t:

 

[Timstuff]

...Why? He never did anything spectacular, and all it's going to do is cause a bigger split in the american population, no matter how they do it. Plus, really, who gives a f**k at this point?

My thoughts exactly. Bush, love him or hate him, is going to be yesterday's news by the time this movie comes out. We're going to have a new president in 12 months, and even the people who are critical of the president will have moved on by then. If you're going to do a biopic about George W. Bush, I think that it would be much more prudent to wait another 10 or 15 years, until we actually have some context to put his administration into.