Oliver Stone is set to begin production on his film, W., about George W. Bush soon. Now, considering Stone has spoken glowingly of the end of Bush, should we take him or his film seriously? The fact is, history's leaders are judged after many, many, MANY decades and generations after the fact. This is jumping the gun to interject personal hatred into a lame-duck president while Americans still harbor feelings of resentment and anger against him. Of course, all of Stone's films have been box-office flops, but still, he isn't going to be "objective". Many Bush biographers have looked at pieces of "leaked" script and said it was riddled with inaccuracies, making Bush look like he ran the White House like and frat house and he cared more about watching Sport's Center on ESPN than he did about running the country. It's been called "daring" and "cutting-edge". No it isn't. People are already sick of Bush, so why do you need to remind those who are sick of him that, yes, they are infact sick of him? It's like making a movie on the horrors of stomach flu. We know it's bad, and these people think they "know" George W. Bush is the root of all evil throughout the world. Hollywood obviously knows more about foreign policy and running the most powerful nation in the world waaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyy more than those who actually ARE running it. So, we should definatley listen to them. The same people who feined over Castro. The same people who have shown admonishment for anything the US does around the world, when it pertains to protecting the US's and its allies interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment