In this week's video review, Peter Travers focuses on the surreal Oliver Stone-helmed George W. Bush biopic W, as well as the Hollywood-baiting Robert De Niro comedy What Just Happened and the nonsensical video game adaptation Max Payne. Which movie is most deserving of your dedicated movie dollars in these lean economic times? Click below for the rundown from the Rolling Stone film critic.
• Film Review: What Just Happened?


Email
Stumble
AIM
Del.icio.us
DiggThis
Fark It!

- Portions of Album Content Provided by All Music Guide © 2009 All Media Guide, LLC.
Me | October 19, 2008 9:54 PM
Not surprising that Travers didn't like Oliver Stone's W. If you check his history with Stone, the guy always criticized his films negatively. When Oliver Stone was in his hay day ("crazy" era as Travers' puts it) he was judging him for taking risks. Now he says he would have liked W. much better if it had had old Stone ingredient. Not consistent of Travers.
wes | October 18, 2008 1:22 PM
i had a real problem with Ol' Pete here saying his favorite part of his video was the scum bucket,or whatever it's called. so he likes ripping on bad movies better than he does saying good things about good movies? i misjudged you Pete.
El | October 18, 2008 10:19 AM
I haven't seen Max Payne yet, but from what I've heard, they've changed the story and missed out on great action scenes.
Max Payne is the perfect game to make an action movie transition, how could they screw it up?
From what I've heard there isn't even the famous sniper with the camera following the bullet -effect that was rather famous in the game.
The story changed, the characters changed (Ludacris has taken the place of an old white man) and none of the tongue-in-cheek self-referencing that was present in the games. So it takes itself too seriously.
Goddamit, Hollywood. You cease to amaze me with your fuckedness.
The Enemy Below | October 18, 2008 10:19 AM
Yep!!I Hear You On That un'Charlie!!
Granted,I Lost Faith in Bush About Three Years Ago,But On The same Hand,Ollie Stone Isn't One Of My favorite Directors Either!!*
(*Personally,I've always Been More of a John Ford/Howard Hawks Man Myself!!).
Basically,Stone Is a Critic's Favorite,Not a Fave Of The General Public Who Really Go see Movies!!
Now When He Wants To,He Can Make Some fairly Good Movies Like Platoon;Wall Street and Any given Sunday!!
But Ever Since His Great Big Ol'Chunk O'Frozen Poopie of a Conspiracy Theory Pitcure"JFK"*
(*Which Shoulda Been subtitled'Just Full of Krap'!!),
He's Lost what Credibility He Has!!
Oh sure,Michael Medved and The Rest Of The Talk Radio Crowd will Gnash Their teeth and Whine and Rant about'W'and How'Hollywood's Trying To destroy Family Values'!!*
(*Point to Ponder:If Hollywood's Part of This Sinister Scheme To Destroy the American family,Why Is It Then That the#1 Movie In The US is'Beverly Hills Chihuahua' not to mention that the Former 80's teen Hunk/Former'Groaning Pains'Star/Born Again Christian Kirk Cameron Vehicle'Fireproof'is in the #4 Movie in America While Bill Maher's Mockumentary'Religilous'isn't even in the top ten?).
Truth Be Known,They Have a Symbiotic Co Dependent Relationship That They Won't Admit To!!
The Critic's Faves-Stone,Lee,Allen-Make Some Art House Flick That Not too Many People Go See and Mouth Off some Asinine Comment That Gets Medved and Company's Panties In a Bunch and Instead Of Just Blowing It off,They Have To Scream and Shout To Their Folowers How The Movies are Out To Warp Our Minds,When In all Honesty,They Need Each Other!!
Now Excuse Me While I Go Watch"Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of The crystal Skull"!!
Have a Good weekend!!
Bo | October 18, 2008 9:07 AM
I remember many laid their high hopes for Max Payne in their previews a while ago ...
So: nothing really decent from USA in a while now :) ... I wonder how Benjamin, Doubt, Milk etc. will turn out.
Miasta | October 17, 2008 6:07 PM
"Josh Brolin is electrifying as the worst president in U.S. history"
What?!?! I'm all for expressing an opinion, but have you ever heard of Andrew Johnson?? The decisions that asshole made did FAR worse damage to this country then anything Bush has or hasn't done these last 8 years. Hate Bush all you want, but have a little perspective, and get out of your little self-centered the-world-didn't-exist-before-I-was-born bubble. History will judge the Bush presidency far better then any Rolling Stone contributor prone to hyperbole! If you want to say "modern US history," then you could have an argument. Pick up a history book, or watch a history channel documentary.
Dryer | October 17, 2008 3:37 PM
Traver' is definately correct W isnt really much of anything. Its not a lampoon as the trailer suggest, nor is it a hard attack on the man. It' a muddled attampt at making a Capra-esque film on an unlikable president. Unlike previous presidential efforts, for better or worse with their various flaws; it at least enticed the viewer to research the subject and discuss their impact on society and the world as a whole. But with W, w'ere given less a portrayl and more of a rorshache(?) test; various well known accounts spliced together to create an uneven whole. Perhaps a better title could've been called BUSHISM'S. Its a Stone film in name alone. Much of the awe inspiring visceral affects; the fast cutting, overlapping images/colors seem to be products of the 90's. With W & WTC, Stone. like GRAVES mentioned isnt quite himself, he seems too humbled or restrained. All but expected when a major director falls hard to the ground and now cant even get major funding from a a big name studio. WTC, the exception. We'll more than likely see a director's cut of this film come January. Hopefully, Oliver can work out the kinks and establish a better film.
Gruci | October 17, 2008 3:34 PM
What is going on in the background?
Doug Graves | October 17, 2008 9:46 AM
Ive not yet seen the film. but from what I read, its sound like another restrained attempt by Stone. I wish Stone would release himself from whatever mental trappings he's fallen into after ALEXANDER. Ground control, to Oliver...Come Back !!!