Offical website
Blu-rays, DVDs & more
eBay affliate link
Art of the Movies
Buy posters on MoviePoster.com
IMDb
W. movie stills
Reviews provided by RottenTomatoes
Manohla Dargis, New York Times: W. does something most journalism and even documentaries can't or won't do: it reminds us what a long, strange trip it's been to the Bush White House. Read more
David Edelstein, New York Magazine/Vulture: In the midst of these tumultuous times, in the midst of this tumultuous election, Stone has delivered his most tepid film. Read more
J. R. Jones, Chicago Reader: This is a familiar and facile take on the president, attributing the Iraq war to his oedipal problems with H.W. and treating him alternately as an object of fun or pity. Read more
Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal: In spite of Josh Brolin's heroic efforts, W. is a skin-deep biopic that revels in its antic shallowness. Read more
Moira MacDonald, Seattle Times: Ultimately W. feels flat, despite the good work of the cast. Read more
Jonathan F. Richards, Film.com: As Poppy Bush says, and says again,"You disappoint me, Junior." Read more
Scott Tobias, AV Club: Had Stone realized he was making Dr. Strangelove, W. might have been an absurdist hoot, but that would require the sort of dramatic choice he stubbornly resists making. Read more
Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic: Whatever you want W. to be, you'll almost certainly be disappointed. Read more
Ty Burr, Boston Globe: Leaving the theater, you may have the sudden sense that, really, it is too early for this movie to have been made, as sharp and as complicated as some of its pieces are. Read more
Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times: Perhaps the crucial reason W. succeeds as much as it does is the surprisingly empathetic work of Josh Brolin. Read more
Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: The film may be ill-timed, arguably unnecessary and no more psychologically probing than any other Stone movie. But much of it works as deft, brisk, slyly engaging docudrama. Read more
Andrew Dansby, Houston Chronicle: Instead of satire, W. works best as a filmmaking allegory. That going into a production unprepared is a lot like doing so with military conflict. The execution was off before the first camera started rolling. Read more
Peter Rainer, Christian Science Monitor: Perhaps Stone believed that the only way you can make sense of the George W. Bush debacle is by presenting it as a goof -- a Freudian cartoon. But if that's the case, he erred on the side of caution. Read more
Lisa Kennedy, Denver Post: Despite a talented cast that includes James Cromwell as George H.W. Bush, a.k.a. 'Poppy', and Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell, W. achieves the depth of a TV miniseries. Read more
Tom Long, Detroit News: As a film, it simply attempts too much, consequently accomplishing little. Read more
Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly: The moments Stone and Weiser select to sketch Bush's character are more of a jumble than a natural progression. Read more
Rick Groen, Globe and Mail: Unsure where to aim or what to hit, Stone appears flummoxed, even flaccid, content to holster his own opinions and recycle others, mainly the tried-but-tepid notion that, hey, Junior has a Daddy complex. Read more
Tom Maurstad, Dallas Morning News: Rather than throwing gas on the fire, the in-the-moment, history-as-it's-happening framing of W. throws a bucket of water on the experience. This movie doesn't explode; it fizzles. Read more
Amy Nicholson, I.E. Weekly: Oliver Stone stirs up a new emotion: Nostalgia. Oh, the halcyon days of 2003! Read more
Christy Lemire, Associated Press: Brolin's so good, he almost makes us feel sorry for Bush. Almost. Read more
John Anderson, Newsday: Oliver Stone doesn't do comedy, intentionally. But perhaps he should: The half-baked, hayseed Hamlet he's created in W. feels alive only when it ventures into the comically absurd. Read more
David Ansen, Newsweek: W. might have had some impact had it been made four years ago. But it's both too late and too early for a movie about our sitting president. Read more
David Denby, New Yorker: W. feels poorly timed: too late to have any effect on the public, most of whom long ago checked out on the President, and too early to provide more than a schematic interpretation of who he is. Read more
Stephen Whitty, Newark Star-Ledger: It's Stone's faith in himself that's the stumbling block here, first convinced he has something new to contribute to the already exhaustive Bush-analysis business, and then rushing to get the film out in theaters before the election. Read more
Bob Mondello, NPR.org: We're awfully close to the real events in W., still feeling the effects of this presidency. ... So the concentration on personality flaws feels a little off-point somehow — insufficient, almost frivolous. Read more
Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News: W. is not the hatchet job some may have expected (or hoped for). It is instead a measured and thoughtful meditation on a leader who, this terrific movie believes, inadvertently made the world as roiling as his soul. Read more
Lou Lumenick, New York Post: More of a hastily executed charcoal sketch than a portrait, Oliver Stone's W. is nonetheless an often compelling, tragicomic psychological analysis of Dubya, viewed through the prism of his relationship with an allegedly disapproving father. Read more
Andrew Sarris, New York Observer: I recommend it to everyone, but I am afraid it will end up as a seedless sermon for the already converted to Bushophobia.f Read more
Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel: It doesn't stand with Stone's acknowledged masterpieces. The history is too fresh and under-digested. But W. does show a master filmmaker plunging into the history and politics that have been his passion for much of his career. Read more
Steven Rea, Philadelphia Inquirer: W. offers a failed mix of political satire, psycho-biography, SNL-style mimicry, and Shakespearean tragedy. Read more
James Berardinelli, ReelViews: W. does for recent history what Oliver Stone's epic Alexander did for ancient times. Read more
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: Oliver Stone's W., a biography of President Bush, is fascinating. No other word for it. Read more
Stephanie Zacharek, Salon.com: Stone may not lead the charge against George W. Bush as viciously as he might have. But he doesn't misunderestimate him, either. Read more
Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: In the end, W. makes up in immediacy what it lacks in objectivity. Read more
Dana Stevens, Slate: If Stone's portrait of George Bush is laid on with a trowel, maybe it's because God seems to have engineered the real Bush's life with a similarly crude sense of irony. Read more
Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune: Timid, toothless and tepid, this episodic comedy-drama suffers from the one shortcoming I never thought I'd encounter in Stone's work -- failure of nerve. Read more
Peter Howell, Toronto Star: W. is an engaging and sometimes revealing watch. At the very least, it's a change from the mindless Bush-bashing that has become so tedious. Read more
David Fear, Time Out: Stone searched for an inner life within a public figure who's only scrutinized in opinionated sound-bite punditry; endeavors this even-handed and entertaining shouldn't be misunderestimated. Read more
Dave Calhoun, Time Out: 'W.' is neither coruscating nor edifying - but without the benefit of hindsight, it's probably the best we can hope for. Read more
Christopher Orr, The New Republic: This may be the most overdetermined psychological profile since Hitchcock wound up Norman Bates and let him go. Read more
Claudia Puig, USA Today: Although clearly not the definitive biography of Bush, W. is absorbing and amusing to ruminate over. Read more
Todd McCarthy, Variety: The film is unable to achieve any aims higher than as a sort of engaging pop-history pageant and amateur, if not inapt, psychological evaluation, due to the unavoidable lack of perspective and a final act that has yet to be written. Read more
Ann Hornaday, Washington Post: W. is a scattershot attempt at stylized portraiture that plays like a half-baked editorial cartoon. Read more