asily one of the most eagerly anticipated films of the year, Oliver Stone’s W. hits screens with some very lofty expectations. Bush haters want to see Stone viciously attack the absurd administration that’s been running the U.S. for the last 8 years, while the ever-dwindling but vocal group of Bush supporters are already attacking Stone for inaccuracy. In the end, the movie will not appease either group of extremists. The movie presents a far too rounded portrayal of the pathetic president to upset anybody. Oliver has hardly made a pro-Bush movie here, but it isn't the balls out attack that everyone predicted and the trailers suggested either. However, W. is also a far better and more complicated movie for it.

The movie chronicles Bush’s journey from a rowdy frat boy at Yale to the worst president in history with detail and compassion. We see how George’s unyielding desire to appease his father and top his brother led to him seeking a position in politics that he was nether qualified to take on nor intelligent enough to fake his way though. Bush is presented as a rich boy who never grew up and was constantly trying to prove himself to his family. It’s not a flattering portrayal, but it is certainly an intriguing angle to take. By the end of the movie, the audience understands who Bush is and why he made the decisions he made, regardless of whether or not they agree with him.

This back story is further enhanced by being carefully interwoven with scenes depicting Bush’s reign at the White House. It’s bold narrative strategy and one that pays off quite nicely. We get to see Bush’s unfortunate legacy and the life experiences that led him there side-by-side, creating an instant understanding of why he made such terrible decisions. It’s inevitable that right-wing commentators will be picking apart the anecdotes that Stone has uncovered over the next few weeks, but they shouldn’t really be complaining. There’s no denying that the man made some serious blunders during his time in the White House and this movie hardly presents a cardboard villain in charge of the button. It’s a very fair portrayal of a president along the lines of Stone’s brilliant Nixon and while W. isn’t nearly as rich or complex as that film, that’s entirely appropriate. George Bush is not nearly as complicated a human being as tricky Dick.

But while Stone’s conception of the movie is quite solid, it never would have worked without a strong cast to bring his ideas to life. Fortunately, Stone managed to assemble an excellent group of actors. James Cromwell and Ellen Burstyn brilliantly embody George Sr. and Barbara Bush, creating a perfectly emotionally abusive environment to foster Dub-ya. Scott Glenn’s Donald Rumsfeld and Toby Jones’ Karl Rove perfectly embody the sleazy political backbone of Bush’s White House, while Richard Dreyfus is clearly having a ball portraying the subtle evil of Dick Cheney. Jeffrey Wright also does a wonderful job of playing Colon Powell as the only dissenting voice in Bush’s cabinet and Elizabeth Banks perfectly captures the vapid indifference of Laura Bush Thandie Newton deserves special notice for her creepy embodiment of Condoleezza Rice, even if she’s also the only performer to verge dangerously close to caricature. And then there’s Josh Brolin, who so thoroughly embodies Bush that it’s almost creepy. He not only nails the voice, facial ticks, and mannerisms of the president, but also manages to create a fully formed character beneath all of the easily parodied Bush-isms. It’s a wonderful piece of acting that proves why Brolin’s stock has risen so quickly in Hollywood.