Richard Dreyfuss Slams "W" Movie, Calls Oliver Stone A Fascist (VIDEO)

Richard Dreyfuss appeared on "The View" to publicize "W.," in which he plays Dick Cheney, but ended up criticizing the film and director Oliver Stone instead.

When asked why he made the film, he said he did it for "money." Dreyfuss also said, "I think it's 6/8ths of a great film."

Asked how it was to work with Oliver Stone, he said "imagine working for Sean Hannity... you can be a fascist, even when you're on the left."

He also said he isn't sure the film "will have any historical legs."

That and more pointed criticism in the clip below, with a bonus awkward moment at the end.

WATCH:

Comments

[colddoseofsumthin]

stone completely lets bush off the hook. why aren't more reviews of W dissecting this. the only review i've read that gets this was this one: http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/2008/10/oliver-stones-w.html

[BottomLine2008]

I guess Ollie wasn't anti-Bush enough.

[crutnacker]

Actually, I think Dreyfuss meant to say he's a lousy director. Every Stone movie I've seen is technically interesting, but the screenplays are hamfisted and obvious, and he's stolen shots and ideas from tons of better movies.

[MarcInCA]

Mr. Dreyfuss is so right about this. I saw W. and left feeling like that movie lacked something huge. I hate Bush, but I didn't want to see a movie that was a just a Bush-bashing movie. And I wanted to be entertained, but I didn't want a movie just full of Bushisms to make me laugh.

There was no lesson to the movie and it gave me no new insight into Bush, the man. I knew there was something missing and I couldn't figure out what it was, but Mr. Dreyfuss put his finger right on it. The whole movie leaves you in the bubble of Bush's life. There is nothing about the outside world and how it was tremendously effected by this man. And I suppose that would be excusable if the movie had really given great new insight into what makes W. tick, but it didn't.

[peggyleg]

Richard Dryfuss is an ACTOR...th­is is what he does for a LIVING...o­f course he did it for the money,and anyone who says they don't work for the money is a LIAR..

[Dannydel]

What was that sharks name in 'Jaws'? Oh yeah, Bruce. "Hey Bruce! You have a lot to answer for dude!"

[AZterritory]

Hey Richard, you know what they call people who do this type of stuff for money . . . .and it's not actor.

[smags72]

Hey now, is that really necessary?? As an actor myself, I am very offended by your remark. If you have no respect for actors, I assume you don't watch any TV or movies, or even listen to commercials on the radio?? Hmm??

[aMOMinous]

Which type of stuff would that be? Act, entertain others or do a project one doesn't believe in 100 percent? If it is act, there are many incredible artists out there who can transport one with the transformation of themselves. If it is entertain.­..well, where would we be without those who lighten our souls or uplift us when we are down? If you mean do something that one doesn't believe in, well you are criticizing a huge portion of humanity on that one. We all have bills to pay. At least making a film with a message one doesn't agree with doesn't really hurt anyone directly like polluting, or poisoning food, or starting wars.

[derekw007]

Ohhh, and you know what they call people that do it for free?

[Doug77]

Even Sean Penn has admitted doing movies, specifically Carlito's Way, for the money. People need money, what's the big deal?

[SmootyBooty]

The look at the end says it all...

[strandwolf]

Dreyfuss is good & naughty.

[txgal44]

Dreyfuss is a good a actor as they come. He gave his opinion. Now respect it. The look at the end had Sheri squirming in her seat, and not in a good way.

[jbunyon]

Richard Duffus said a few good things, like we are quick to make up our minds. Very true. Admiting you are in it foe cash makes you seem greedy yourself. The fact that bimbo Hasselbeck wants to work for Hannity is proof she hs drunk on GOP kool aid. She should go to Fox so she can be watched by old and stupid americans who afraid of everything and believe everything.

[txgal44]

That knuckle head taking up for Hannity did it for me. Elizabeth who the he// do you think you are? Somebody must of told her she was important then why else would she behave that way. If you ask me, girlfriend hasn't paid her dues. You know deep down Whoopi want's to go all the way left on her.

[Tulka2]

Dreyfuss is a teacher by nature, Oliver Stone is an artist. No doubt such big egos would clash, but that's because of testosterone poisoning, not because of their politics. Can't you see through this....? Dreyfuss had some ideas for the film or for his character (Cheney) and they were probably really good ideas because, no doubt, Dreyfuss has a more cogent dialictic than does Stone who is all self-indulgent artist. Anyway feeling were hurt. It's unfortunate we live in a time when political labels like this are thrown around. I know Dreyfuss really meant facist (little "f"). He should have said tyrant which is more accurate.

[MadxAsxHell]

I disagree. I think Dreyfus is a talented, brilliant actor. I think Oliver Stone is a heavy-handed mediocre director who preaches his POV at you rather then leading you to it. That's why his films are flat and lifeless. He's also an obnoxious liar: "JFK" is bullshit lying propaganda like "Triumph of The Will" was Nazi propaganda with a difference: Leni Riefenstahl actually had talent.

I cannot STAND Oliver Stone's films, even though my politics are similar to his.

[Tulka2]

I think "Nixon" is actually kind and insightful towards its subject. It will stand up for exactly the quality Dreyfuss says is missing in "W" the movie, that is, a feeling for how Nixon's actions made the people of this country suffer.

JFK will probably go down in history as the most confusing, paranoid piece of history ever commited to film. I have seen it perhaps three times and always forget who he thinks "did it". I think it was anti-communist gay guys in La., right? LOL. But...? to give Stone credit. I think "Nixon" is a cry of pain. If you want to know how messed up the Kennedy assasination made the United States of America...­? Watch "JFK". It is just a cry of pain from the opening to the end.

My own personal gauge? Who would i want to be stuck in lifeboat with? Dreyfuss.

[pjburns11]

Well, this year for Halloween, I was going to dress up as either Sarah Palin, Michele Bachman, Joe the Plumber or The Wolfman. But now I have to add Richard Dreyfuss to the list bc of that creepy look at the end.

OOoh, it's getting scary! Like some political Poe!

Happy Halloween!

Quoth the Maverick..­.

http://thetruthburns.wordpress.com/2008/10/28/quoth-the-maverick/

[Raster]

Oliver Stone is NOT a "leftist"! He is totally UNPREDICTABLE, if anything. He's a loose cannon rolling around on the deck, periodically shooting at everyone.

[lentinelia]

Not a leftist.
Not a rightist.
An opportunist.

[who38]

Hear, hear.

[KISSman]

Dreyfuss is right about "W.". The film won't hold up at all. It didn't say much of anything. It doesn't move the audience and doesn't make you feel any emotion towards it. On top of that, it's WAY to nice to Bush.

Dreyfuss is one of the only bright spots of the movie. He and Josh Brolin are quite good, however everyone else seems like they are doing an exaggerated impersonation of the people they are portraying. Because of that, they don't come across as authentic in the least.

Stone's biggest blunder is that this film has no true audience. No one from the political right would want to see this film and most people from the left will walk away feeling disappointed with it. I think a lot of people would like to walk away feeling thankful that Bush's reign of terror is finally coming to an end, but unfortunately it leaves you feeling empty.

[who38]

Stone hasn't had a hit in years.

[GayIthacan]

Neither has Dreyfuss.

[HST]

Just lost all repect for Dreyfuss admitting to prostituting himself for money. He didn't like the movie turned out? Too bad.

[strandwolf]

He admitted no such thing. He works for the paycheck and more. Name a highly paid actor that hasn't participated in the making of a turkey. The money is a major factor, sure. They can always give it to charity. Perhaps he wanted to stay busy, the movie part was offered, and then the troubles began, courtesy of nutjob Stone.

[who38]

But Dreyfuss does have an obligation to the backers who paid his wages. Many actors have been involved in bad movies, but they don't badmouth it on national TV. I think that Dreyfuss can expect a long hiatus in his career. Too bad, he just narrated a documentary that everyone should see about following government money.

[OxamsRazor]

Being a filmmaker myself, I have a major problem with Dreyfuss going on TV and slamming a movie and calling his director names. I don't care if it's even true what he claims about Stone. You don't toss one of your own under a bus, especially so soon in the publicity cycle.

This is a STONE movie. It's his call how things go down. It's not up to the actor to decide the direction of the movie.

[guajiro]

Agreed. It makes Dreyfuss look self-centered and morose. It's not like he's ever made any epic movies that leaves an impact on a society.

[SurfCat]

The issues Dreyfuss went over are far important than loyalty to this latest wet-dream of a project by loose canon Ollie Stone.

I'm a filmmaker and most filmmakers in or out of Hollywood have far less than no clue to genuine history or to the circus theatre that passes for politics in the west.

And no one said director "STONE" (however bankrupt he might be) is the not the one that completely decided the direction of this piece of dreck. That's hardly something to crow over.