Our mobile company, Orange, has a great deal: Orange Wednesdays. You send them a text, and they text you back a coupon that is good for 2-for-1 movie tickets, for any movie, on Wednesdays. Kellie and I took advantage of this and saw Oliver Stone's movie "W." last night.
Needless to say, the film has provoked in me a few thoughts and reflections. I have been a staunch critic of the Bush administration since I have payed attention to politics. In response to the war in Iraq and his conservative social policies, I have often maligned him in writing and in conversation, and I do not apologize for doing so. What occurred to me in watching the movie last night, which was obviously intended to be satirical rather than biographical, was the despite his bad decisions and bad policies, despite his war-mongering, Bush is not a diabolical figure. To be sure, I don't think his presidency has made the world a better place and has actually caused us to take backward steps in many key areas, but he is not the type of politician who is self-consciously doing something wrong. Rather, he is a man guided more by ideology and religiosity than by facts and figures, more by faith than by reason. He rarely admits that he is wrong because he feels he is doing the right thing, that he is guided by a purpose higher than himself. What scares me is that I'm not sure whether this is better or worse than having a scheming, diabolical figure in the White House. Is it better to have a self-serving agenda, or to blindly follow a flawed ideology? I wonder about this. To be honest, in the waning days of his time in office, I feel a bit sorry for the man; not because I do not hold him and his administration responsible for the wars and for Guantanamo and everything else, but because here is a man who really thought he was carrying out God's will, and there has been a massive referendum on that will.
The other thing that was odd about this movie, the villainy of Cheney and Rove aside (which seemed quite over-the-top, but perhaps more accurate than any of us would like to admit) was watching the film in a foreign land, surrounded by English and Scottish people. To be sure, the movie sets W. up to appear an embarrassing, almost buffoonish figure, but I have to admit that during some of his more awkward scenes, I felt myself sink into my chair, as if trying to hide from the rest of the audience. I didn't want to be identified with this politician (who is from my hometown), and in a funny way, I almost felt responsible for him, as if it was my job to apologize for him to the rest of the audience. "Sorry, we know, we know." How strange it is to feel, viscerally, the animosity of an audience toward the man, the man who is still the president of my country, and to feel awkwardly and unfortunately, and perhaps irrevocably, connected to this fellow. Indeed, it was the quintessential anti-Obama experience; instead of feeling this rush of pride, feeling okay with being identified as American, during the movie I just didn't want to be outed. Interesting.
Incidentally, perhaps the biggest effect the movie had on both me and Kellie was in its advertising. After Bush gives up alcohol, in the movie he takes up Dr. Pepper is seen with a bottle in almost every scene. Now, they don't do Dr. Pepper in the UK, or in much of the US, for that matter. And, as a matter of fact, neither Kellie nor I actually drink Dr. Pepper, or any soft drinks, as a rule. But, seeing the leader of the free world drink Dr. Pepper made us want some, much to our chagrin, since we have been told by many that it is impossible to find over here. Thus, imagine our surprise when, on the way home from the cinema, we popped into a convenience store and - divine providence! - they had both cans and bottles of the stuff, of Dr. Pepper! We felt obligated to each purchase a bottle. But how odd indeed. Now, if only someone can drink Shiner in a movie, so perhaps it will show up here, too... (Oddly, they DO have Lone Star in some places.)
