We like the simplicity. But if the goal is to recreate some semblance of authentic reality, a little background mise-en-scene might be nice, yeah? Is the bowed head and downcast expression supposed to trick us into thinking Brolin resembles Bush by any reasonable stretch of the imagination? By casting his averted eyes in shadow, hidden behind an anonymous arm, are we expected to believe Brolin will look up and miraculously morph into whatever they’re not showing us? (Because omigod, in just the right light, Josh looks exactly like… James Brolin! It’s uncanny!) I want to believe Stone chose this teaser shot to carry some meaning deeper than, “Look! they’re manufacturing an image!” — like maybe a subtle retaliation for the Right’s harping on John Edwards very bad hair day. But for me, every new artifact from “W” makes it look more and more like a 2-dimensional cardboard cutout than any attempt to tell the real story.
As mild as the tagline “Get Ready” may be in terms of amping up expectations, does our real-life experience of Bush on camera really make anyone tingle in restless anticipation? At the very least, the framing and starkly-lit emphasis does seem to confirm one thing we learned from the trailer: “W” will be a fabulous latex showcase spotlighting a fascinating array of fake noses. Nope, not wild about this one-sheet, in spite of its one impressive achievement: It does make us feel like we’re up-close and personal, smack in the middle of the action, in the most intimate proximity to the President. Maybe that’s why I feel a little queasy.
Who was born on Jan. 4?
Obama just had a birthday on Aug. 4, last Monday. Big deal in the news.
He took office on Jan. 4, 2005.
geez all I share a birthday with is Audrey Hepburn, Lance Bass and Pia Zadora…:(
* Born January 4, Barack Obama shares a birthday with Sir Isaac Newton, R.E.M.’s Michael Stipe, and Doris Kearns Goodwin (author of Team of Rivals: the Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln)
Holy Beercaps Batman,
The guy was born in ’36. I stand corrected.
Old, Senile & Arrogant.
Hey, we could invade Panama, too. Great!!!
You could be right, C.B. DeMille.
I didn’t fact-check, but now that I do, the dates I find are:
Cindy McCain – May 20, 1954
John McCain – August 29, 1936
That looks like 17 years, 9 months younger.
But we’re probably all wrong because it wouldn’t surprise me if one or both of them lies about their age 😎
2 decades younger has a nice ring to it.
(Funny you would call McCain Capt. Jacko. Guess what other Jacko’s birthday is August 29th? yep, The Gloved One.)
Ryan,
I think Cindy is 16 years younger than Capt. Jacko but 18 sounds much better for dramatic effect.
They will always have Budweiser and Ms. Buffalo Chip…..
The ad definitely has potential!
Cheers
I don’t understand why people are so determined to hate this movie. This is nothing new from Stone and yet JFK and Nixon had far more defenders than W. I’m not expecting anything besides an entertaining, well-acted hatchet job at a man I think we all despise. Will it be fair? Probably not, but again, what the hell do you expect?
Ryan, one-sheets really talk to you.
Its great.
I’m looking forward to seeing what Oliver Stone does with this.
I believe viewers need to be begin to come to terms with exactly how bad this film is going to be. Sad…didn’t have to be.
Stones zeal has really overshadowed his talent for the last 15 years.
I think this poster is doing what it’s supposed to be doing – provoke. I personally love the poster.
Now, if only, the conspiracy theorist that Stone ended the movie with W getting arrested for the war crimes he’s been committing over the last 6 years.
” I do not have any idea what GWB is like. Does that sound like anyone we know in this election cycle? “
Anyone? How about everyone?
Since Obama seems to be resistant to the same negative campaigning that’s keeping McCain afloat, a helpful reader at Salon.com has offered his idea for a 30-second spot:
===========
===========
I like it.
Actually, Josh Brolin as W looks exactly like Martin Landau (as in Oscar winner for Ed Wood).
The poster works well without being provocative. It’s a picture that shorthands a message and tells a story. As a onesheet, it’s very effective.
I cannot wait to see this movie if only because Oliver Stone is such an effective storyteller. Also, he was very sympathetic to Richard Nixon in Nixon. I’m afraid I might like GWB after watching this movie. Afterall, GWB is
just thea face of the administration to which we know that has been designed (propped up) by the likes of Rove, Cheney, etc. Is GWB the blank slate that the Republicans put up to get to their brand of Republicans in the White House because GWB is the kinda guy that you’d like to have a beer in a summer barbecue? I do not have any idea what GWB is like. Does that sound like anyone we know in this election cycle?So, I’m looking forward to seeing this movie because there’s a story to tell and Oliver Stone is capable of doing that. But I’m scared that I might feel some compassion about a President that I do not like.
After the craptastic trailer I’m surprised the poster is actually this good.
it ain’t just you, Ryan. everyone and their mom seems to take every chance they get to say this will be the worst film since battlefield: earth or something. people are entitled to their opinions and all, but enough is enough for chrissakes!
I’m actually quite interested in this film. optimistic, not so much, but you can’t argue that the idea of a film concerning one of the most controversial political figures of our time (certainly THE most, in the western world) while said figure is still in office isn’t an interesting one.
as for the poster, I liked it a lot. simple, understated and gets its point across.
“W” is just my summer chew toy, Markku. I’ll be the happiest guy around if it turns out to be a great movie. I’m a huge fan of Stone’s work (on and off) over the years, and nothing would tickle me more than for “W” to be a dead-on bullseye.
I do genuinely appreciate how the poster takes us right up close, within spitting distance of the guy. If it’s not a violation of homeland security to say “spitting distance” 😎
I know the minimalist background is an artistic choice, but it reeks of artifice to me. It’s as if the shot can’t make up its mind if it’s Annie Leibowitz or Theodore White.
Did somebody forget to flick the switch on the greenscreen? Where is he standing exactly? In the unfinished basement of an undisclosed location? Why does the production value of every shot we’ve seen from this movie make it look like a BBC series from the ’70’s? 😎
ok, I promise to stop now. Just want to be clear with everybody: I know I’m picking on this movie, but I want to be wrong.
Just seems to me unlikely that it will be what I want it to be. But that doesn’t mean it won’t be what a lot of other people want it to be. I hope it is.
Jesus.. enough with the W hating. Move on
Despite our disagreements over this project (and this poster, it seems), I would interpret the image in a way you mentioned there: keeping the spotlight slightly off Brolin, trying to amp up the expectations.
Although they’ve released a lot of material of and about the film recently, apart from the brief flash in the trailer, we’ve yet to see Brolin in action, doing present-day Bush, arguably the hardest and most crucial part of the project, given that the we see Bush on tv practically every day. It does make one wonder about the end result.