Oliver Stone discusses the narrative of his latest film, W., in this Slate e-mail dialog. Stone is criticized by two of the writers who participated. Specifically it is alleged that Stone's version of W's relationship with his father is exaggerated, and that Stone misconstrues Cheney's justification of the invasion of Iraq. I think Stone does a good job defending himself, and it sounds like he put a lot of effort into the script. If anything, Stone comes across as the best writer of the bunch. Reporters and biographers don't necessarily have to be great technical writers, but you don't expect to see them bested by a Hollywood director. Then again, Oliver Stone isn't your ordinary Hollywood director.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
The Epistolary W
Oliver Stone discusses the narrative of his latest film, W., in this Slate e-mail dialog. Stone is criticized by two of the writers who participated. Specifically it is alleged that Stone's version of W's relationship with his father is exaggerated, and that Stone misconstrues Cheney's justification of the invasion of Iraq. I think Stone does a good job defending himself, and it sounds like he put a lot of effort into the script. If anything, Stone comes across as the best writer of the bunch. Reporters and biographers don't necessarily have to be great technical writers, but you don't expect to see them bested by a Hollywood director. Then again, Oliver Stone isn't your ordinary Hollywood director.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Stone miscontrues Cheney's reasons for invading Iraq? Were these biographers in the war room with Cheney or something? How do they know any better than Stone?
And hey, what's with the lack of pics, tags, and occasionaly titles in all these recent posts? Are we getting lazy here people?
Yeah, or at least you are, since you haven't posted anything in a week.
Did I just get burned?
I've had two projects for school I've been working on, both due this Friday. I'll have a post up this weekend though, I swear!
Oh, come on, I'm just playing. But don't dish it out if you can't take it!
The tag criticism is deserved. I nitpicked LE about that and then forget to include them in half my posts. I'll try to be more vigilant.
Concerning the pics - I decided that quick posts that provide a link with only minimum commentary don't need a picture. They do make the blog more interesting visually, but I think we have enough pictures to do that already. A few pictureless posts in between won't kill us, and they draw the reader to posts with our personal creative content.
If you guys think pics are essential I'll try to look for more. However, I felt myself searching for pictures that didn't seem necessary and I thought I'd try it without them. Maybe tell me what you think after a few weeks.
In other news, are you playing Fallout 3 Zrbo? I've only had a chance to play the first hour or two, but I'm enjoying it so far.
More pics! I would say any post about W must have a pic, no matter the length. Especially if it is one of him dancing or something like that. Tags I don't care about, titles yes, because posts sans titles mess up my reader and its hard to click on the posting... help me out here.
More pictures of Bush? I'm not sure about this.
Now see what you've done?
What in God's name? I'm going to try to fix the size of it at least.
I totally understand not having a pic for every post, it's just that there's been like 4 posts in a row without pics. And LE, that pic in the Joaquin post isn't loading for me.
Haven't got Fallout 3 yet, I got LittleBigPlanet instead. Hell, it's the reason I bought a PS3 and I must say it's pretty awesome. Honestly I'm still working on Oblivion, I could just play that for a few more years before moving on to Fallout.
Post a Comment