The 70s in Glorious Brown and Orange

This week saw the release of two films each dealing with the American political landscape of the 70s. “Frost/Nixon” and “Milk” are the big contenders in this years Oscar nominations with both films up for Best Picture & Director, with the lead actors and supports also have been given a nod.

The eagerly anticipated film version of Peter Morgan’s successful stage play, “Frost/Nixon”, concerns the former disgraced president’s 4 part television interview with British chat show host David Frost.
Each man has his own agendas for the show. Frost sees the interviews as his path to greatness and respect as a broadcaster. He is also in pursuit of the elusive apology the American public is so desperate to hear. Nixon needs to exonerate himself after resigning the presidency over the Watergate conspiracy scandal.
The film charts Frost’s cheque-book courtship of Nixon, the investigative preparations for the records through to the recordings and the aftermath.
I thought this was a strong, well made film. Essentially it was a boxing film which didn’t feature any physical violence. The interviews are structured like bouts; the politically savvy Nixon runs rings around Frost, before being dealt a knockout in the final round.
Ron Howard’s direction restructures the play for cinema and was subtle and un-showy. But the film doesn’t entirely shake off its ‘stagy’ origins. This is primarily an actors’ film. Both leads were captivating, Michael Sheen hints at the intelligence behind the sometimes self-important Frost; a man whose pride is damaged through his lightweight reputation. Frank Langella was a revelation as Richard Milhous Nixon. His Nixon is a tragic man, a formidable political operator yet unable to connect with ordinary people. Nixon could so easily have become the stereotypical bumbling, sweaty idiot he is often painted as. But here he is shown to be a man of great intelligence, self-hating and deluded.
A good film, but not great * * *

Also out this week is Gus Van Sant’s new film “Milk”, the story of Harvey Milk, the first openly gay man to be elected to major public office and his ultimate assassination.
Once again the performances were strong. Sean Penn was almost unrecognisable as Harvey Milk. It’s unusual to see him as charismatic as he is here. Milk is far removed from Penn’s usual macho self-hating roles. But perhaps the film is too plain. It’s a rather classical piece of storytelling, charting in flashback Penn’s raise to city supervisor, a vocal exponent of gay rights and increasingly powerful politician. This is fine and the reconstruction of the 70s was good but I got the nagging feeling that perhaps I’d seen this sort of biopic too many times before. Josh Brolin was great as the wounded and embittered rival to Milk, Dan White. But he wasn’t given enough screen time and was introduced too late into proceedings. The film maybe should have focused more on the relationship between these two. I think that the film makers missed an opportunity to tell a rather more unusual and conflicting story.
* * *

--------------------------------------------------
P.S. In relation to Julie’s blog, I’m not sure what would be on my top list of massacres.