Welcome to Reel People. It’s a place where, you guessed it, real people like yourselves spout off on new movie releases. It works best if you—yes, we mean you—jump into the comments below and tell us what you think of the movie, too.

This week, we’re watching “W.”

What I liked: Good cast and character acting, some of the key players of the Bush Administration were spot on, and some were just vague references, but the interaction was believable and surprisingly not as slapstick and caricatured as I had assumed it might be. What was especially intriguing was how the director portrayed the psyche of “W” in some vignettes of inner turmoil and reflection, which was more about what some authors had hinted at in analysis of what may have influenced the President on public policy.

What I disliked: At times I felt like the director was trying to portray “W” as an innocent bystander of his own parties ideology, as well as his own drive and ambition. The storyline seemed to meander around at times and didn’t really pull of the irony of some of the events that have been part of the “W” administration.

Would I recommend it?: Only for true political wonks, and history buffs.

Score: 5 out of 10

- Michael Ritenour

What I liked: There was great acting by Toby Jones who played Karl Rove. Toby commanded his lines but that is no surprise considering all his other fine performances in other films.  Ellen Burstyn did an excellent job as Barbara Bush.

What I disliked: The film “W.” offered up nothing new, we’ve already heard it all from the media or standup comedians making fun of Bush. I don’t think this movie was entertaining enough for liberals to get a good laugh, and it’s not innovative enough to offend conservatives. The film dragged throughout and contained little humor; it provoked no emotions. The acting was so dry that the actors seemed as though they were on sleep meds. Josh Brolin’s portrayal of Bush was weak and boring. His Bush accent and gestures were present and then would fade a moment later - it reminded me of Keanu Reeves’ disastrous performance in “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” speaking with an accent and then sounding like a surfer dude in the second half of the same sentence. The Bush character should have been played by a younger actor for the early years because Brolin as a young Bush was not believable. Bush’s attitude and personality were totally inconsistent throughout the film. In some scenes, particularly th e ones in his early (party/drinking) years, he is speaking confidently and seems totally coherent, then in later scenes (sober) he is tripping over his words and using terrible grammar as we are accustomed to in his presidential speeches. I thought all the scenes of Bush having private meetings with his cabinet were absurd. Bush was portrayed as a puppet with little to no ideas of his own. All of these conversations were pure fiction because there are no witnesses to these meetings of national security and therefore no way to validate the content. Aside from the obvious presidential matters that are public knowledge, there is no way to truly validate most of the material in this movie. The movie trailers and tagline imply there will be all this insight into the life of Bush and his rise to the presidency, but it never happens. The majority of the content is about the war and is so redundant and boring it’s like watching CNN.

Would I recommend it?: Absolutely not, unless you ran out of Ambien and need to get to bed.

Score: 2 out of 10

- Nick Conrad

What I liked: Josh Brolin was amazing as George W. Bush. Brolin went beyond merely copying Bush’s speech pattern and mannerisms; instead, he perfectly portrayed the president’s seemingly self-confident, swaggering cockiness. There were several strong performances in this movie, including Richard Dreyfuss as Dick Cheney and Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell.

What I disliked: Because Brolin’s performance was so convincing and well done, Thandie Newton’s accurate but over-the-top portrayal of Condoleezza Rice seemed out of place. Also, James Cromwell’s perfomance as George H. W. Bush, while solid, was slightly jarring because Cromwell didn’t look or sound like him at all.

Would I recommend it?: Oliver Stone’s “W.” is a brief, interesting and relatively even-handed look at the life of George W. Bush. Bush supporters will probably think that Stone went too far, while Bush critics will most likely think that Stone didn’t go far enough.  The film, like Bush himself, will be loved by some and hated by others.

Score: 8 out of 10

- Lisa Ciurro