The reviews spin this movie as a Bushies keeping the little man down documentary. It isn't. The movie never editorializes the way Michael Moore movies do. Heck, it didn't even have to be about politics at all as much as it attempts to explain why we are constantly reading how miserable the rich and famous are...The movie is about a little guy that wanted to play with the big kids. Unfortunately, he got what he wanted. After writing several small time bios of people like Star Trek's Captain Picard, James Hatfield decides to hit the big time by writing a bio of then Governor George W. Bush. It worked -- for four days. The movie is about how an average, everyday guy reacts when the microscope of fame is turned back on him. Will he rise to the occasion and become a hero or be beaten down like a dog? Better yet, how would you react if all of your secrets were bared for all to see and judge? That's the question this movie explored for me.

I thought that this was a well-done documentary, but didn't have the same response as I think was intended, or at least that the other people who left comments had. I found the two characters, Hatfield and Hicks, totally manipulative - hamming it up for the camera. Of course, Hatfield put his money where his mouth is at the end, but that last scene - where Hicks just starts getting teary and then weeps openly - my husband and I went into hysterics. It was like watching a bad acting class. The story is interesting, and I've read the book in the past - but (and I'm NOT a Bush supporter, for sure) the most compelling part of it is the initial tell-all biography of Hatfield. I ended up buying that 2.99 on-sale edition that included it.

Watching this documentary isn't simply watching a film about someone writing something negative about George W. Bush. Bush takes a backseat to the story of the two individuals who believed in freedom of the press and freedom of attempting to find the truth. The question of how the PERCEIVED credibility of writers and publishers affects a written product is surfaced and the connection is (justifiably so) questioned. I thought the movie really showed how the written word is not judged by its content but rather by its environment, something that most people working in the literary profession would like to deny. And I wish Sanders Hicks all the best - he comes across as a very mature calm man despite his youthful antifa looks and behaviour.At some point in the movie, I could not help but shake the feeling that writing truthfully about Bush was like a mummy's curse - which is rather eery considering that these are based on ancient myths and legends.

Excellent documentary of what goes into publishing a banned book. The book being suppressed by the rich and powerful, in this case, being "Fortunate Son", an unauthorized biography of George W. Bush, Jr. (the still unimpeached president at the time of this writing).You also get a tragedy for your money along with a well-done soundtrack. And if that's not enough, significant parts of the book are revealed so that you don't even have to buy the book after seeing the movie. But you'll want to.