Quelle surprise...
Un film d'Oliver Stone basé sur ses géniales intuitions plutôt que sur la
réalité, ce serait bien la première fois...

Vous lirez ceci :
- "Une controverse de plus pour Oliver Stone" :
http://www.cinemovies.fr/news_fiche....titreactu=4971
- "Le prochain film d'Oliver Stone sur Bush crée la polémique",
http://anthonymarechal.wordpress.com...-la-polemique/
- "Le scénario de W. sur le gril",
http://www.toutlecine.com/cinema/l-a...r-le-gril.html

"Selon le Hollywood Reporter, le scénario aborde le fait que les
jugements politiques du Président sont souvent sujets à des manipulations de
la part de certains de ses proches, ce qui serait pour le moins contestable.
« Le problème, explique l'un des biographes, réside dans le fait que le
cinéaste veut nous montrer un président passif laissant entendre que la
Maison Blanche serait en fait dirigée en sous-main par Dick Cheney
(vice-président), Donald Rumsfeld (ministre de la Défense), Karl Rove
(l'ex-conseiller du Président) et d'autres. Cette thèse d'un George W. Bush
simple observateur est grotesque. » "

=> L'article complet, en anglais (bravo pour ce travail de journalisme, ce
n'est pas Le Monde ou Libération qui iraient contredire leurs dieux, Michael
Moore ou Oliver Stone) :

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...6286155ef704a6

> President George W. Bush is a foul-mouthed, reformed drunk obsessed
> with baseball, Saddam Hussein and a conflicted relationship with his dad.
> Or at least that's how he's portrayed in the script for Oliver Stone's
> upcoming feature "W."
> But how accurate is that depiction?
> As the film preps for its April 21 start date, The Hollywood Reporter
> sent a copy of the screenplay to four Bush biographers for their comments.
> The draft is dated Oct. 17, 2007, and has recently been circulated to
> talent, though a person close to the film said the script has since gone
> through at least two drafts.
> Naturally, what a director does with a script is how a movie is
> ultimately judged, but because this screenplay depicts a sitting president
> and the run-up to the war in Iraq, its authenticity is becoming a hotly
> debated subject -- not to mention the fact that any historical material
> Stone has touched has become controversial.
> Reactions to the script from the biographers were mixed. They said
> specific scenes are largely based in fact but noted that the screenplay
> contains inaccurate and over-the-top caricatures of Bush and his inner
> circle.
> "It leaves you with the impression that the White House is run as a
> fraternity house with no reverence for hierarchy, the office itself or for
> the implications of policy," said Robert Draper, author of "Dead Certain:
> The Presidency of George Bush." "Everybody calling everybody else
> nicknames and chatting about whether to go to war as if they were chatting
> about how to bet on a football game really misses the mark of how many
> White Houses, including this one, are run."
> Jacob Weisberg ("The Bush Tragedy") was skeptical about Stone's claim
> that he wants to make "a fair, true portrait" of Bush. "His saying he is
> going to be fair to Bush is like Donald Trump saying he is going to be
> modest," Weisberg quipped.
> "W," which is set to begin filming in Shreveport, La., with Bill
> Block's QED financing a budget of about $30 million, stars Josh Brolin and
> James Cromwell as Bush 43 and 41, respectively. The film is being closely
> watched in entertainment and political circles, in part because Stone has
> said his goal is to release it while Bush is still in office and possibly
> in time for the November election.
> In the script -- then titled "Bush" -- the president's policy
> judgments are often manipulated by his White House staff, a depiction
> several of the biographers said did not ring true.
> "The problem here is it goes to this notion of Bush as being the
> passive receiver of policy and the White House being run by (Dick) Cheney,
> (Donald) Rumsfeld, (Karl) Rove and others," Draper said. "Bush's
> adversaries have been ill-served by this belief that Bush is an observer
> to his own presidency. This notion that his schedule is driven by what's
> on ESPN is ludicrous."
> The biographers were split on the accuracy of some eye-popping details
> in the screenplay, including scenes in which Bush nearly crashes a plane
> while under the influence of alcohol and another in which he tells wife
> Laura he wishes his father had not been elected president.
> "That story was running around," said Skip Hollandsworth (Texas
> Monthly's "Born to Run" profile). "But he was extremely upset later about
> (Ross) Perot entering that race, and very angry. That doesn't make sense."
> Stone declined to comment for this report. Screenwriter Stanley
> Weiser, who wrote "W" and also co-wrote Stone's "Wall Street," said: "I
> have no comment other than the fact that I have read 17 books on Bush."
> "We've done our homework," said Moritz Borman, one of the film's
> producers. " 'W' will not be a documentary. It will be a compelling
> account of the actions and motivations of this president, fully guided by
> facts that have been established and documented."
> What ends up in the final draft could have a big impact on the market
> for the film, whose financial prospects may actually depend on how many
> feathers it ruffles.
> "Controversy can only help this film," said Paul Dergarabedian,
> president of boxoffice tracking firm Media By Numbers. "It's a tough
> marketing challenge because none of the politically charged films or films
> about the war have been doing well. But Oliver Stone's bread and butter is
> controversy. It's part of his brand."
> Stone's previous presidential examinations, 1991's "JFK" and 1995's
> "Nixon," became cultural lightning rods. They grossed $70.4 million and
> $13.7 million domestically, respectively.
> A film analyzing the life of a lame-duck president might be a tougher
> sell, especially if Americans are more interested in the man or woman who
> will replace him.
> "But the country is in really rough shape," Dergarabedian said. "So
> maybe people will want to know how we got here and what Bush's legacy
> might be."
> QED's Block acknowledged that controversy would help market the film,
> which he said he presold to some foreign distributors during the Berlin
> Film Festival in February and will continue to sell at the Cannes market
> next month.
> The QED CEO, who is also one of the picture's producers, said he was
> in talks with a major Hollywood studio to distribute it domestically. He
> declined to name the studio.
> Because no domestic deal is in place, it is uncertain whether the
> movie will be released in North America before November. Such a release
> date would drop the picture squarely into the presidential election
> debate, where it would likely be picked apart by commentators across the
> political spectrum
> All four Bush biographers cast doubt on one scene in which a wave
> crashes on a rocky promontory as Bush reveals: "There's this darkness that
> follows me ..."
> "He doesn't think or talk like that," Weisberg said. "The darkness
> sounds like they've been listening to too much Springsteen. It doesn't
> ring psychologically true to me."
> The movie, which intercuts between past and present and follows Bush
> from his twenties to the White House, begins in the Oval Office with the
> president and his staffers discussing the term "axis of hatred" and
> deciding that "axis of evil" sounds better.
> "That phrase did evolve," Weisberg said. "There was a funny debate
> about who got credit, which is hilarious when you think what a disaster it
> was."
> The biographers were torn over the portrayal of Bush's relationship
> with Cheney, depicted as far more competitive than generally acknowledged.
> "Just keep your ego in check. I'm the president. I'm the decider," Bush
> tells Cheney privately at one point, employing the term he actually used
> in a news conference.
> "What that gets wrong is, Cheney has been absolutely astute in reading
> Bush's insecurities and Cheney knows very well how not to make Bush feel
> that his status as decision-maker is in doubt," Weisberg said.
> Peter Schweizer ("The Bushes: Portrait of a Dynasty") disagreed. "I
> would say: true on the conflict," he said. "I don't know specifically
> about the 'ego in check.' But there is no question you are dealing with
> strong personalities, and there was tension and conflict, as there was
> between George H.W. Bush and Reagan."
> All four biographers confirmed the accuracy of one striking scene in
> which a young Bush challenges his father to a fistfight after coming home
> drunk. And while they recognized the nickname "Turdblossom" for Rove, they
> were less familiar with "Balloon Foot," which Stone's Bush uses for Colin
> Powell. And some felt that "Pooty Poot" for Vladimir Putin was taken from
> New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, not Bush himself.
> Overall, the biographers said they were not opposed to the story of
> America's 43rd president being told by Stone.
> "I understand this is a movie, not pure history," Schweizer said. "But
> if Stone wants to portray this as an accurate accounting, he has some
> serious work to do."
> Block, for one, said accuracy was vital to the filmmakers.
> "When you embark on something as important as this," he said, "the
> truth is extremely important, and Oliver is relentless about the truth and
> facts."
> Added Block: "It is not going to be simplistic at all. It is powerful
> and not trying to be skewed to the left, but to be real. The truth is
> surprising and, frankly, shocking enough."

X-No-Archive: Yes
"P***lp***tine" <padawanebr1***hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
45d4e805-ade5-4b93-ba27-fa4ba17b75db...oglegroups.com...
> Tiens , un film que vous allez aimer :
> http://mongol.ctb.ru/site/en/about/
> http://www.videosift.com/video/Gengi...e-movie-Mongol

Ici, le film ne sortira qu'en mai. Je suivrai cela avec attention, car il
semblerait que l'on ait enfin décider de réhabiliter ce très beau peuple,
dont l'empire était, ce que peu de gens savent, tolérant et libéral...

"Conquérant de la moitié de l'Asie, Genghis Khan (à ne pas confondre
avec Attila le Hun) a souvent été décrit comme un guerrier sanguinaire et
sans merci. C'est pour corriger cette image arbitraire que le réalisateur
russe Sergei Bodrov, encouragé par le succès de son long métrage Le
Prisonnier Du Caucase (nommé aux Golden Globes puis aux Oscars, dans la
catégorie Meilleur Film étranger), a entrepris une ambitieuse trilogie
autour du créateur de la nation mongole. Ne vous fiez pas à l'affiche et à
la bande annonce donnant à voir l'épopée militaire de Genghis Khan, car ce
premier volet de la trilogie s'intéresse avant tout à la jeunesse souvent
méconnue du futur chef de guerre." (
http://www.commeaucinema.com/film=mongol,93990.html )


--
p.s.: quelqu'un a-t-il vu le film avec John Wayne (Le Conquérant) ? Que
vaut-il ?