alonovo.com (beta 2.0)

Well done, but Frost was no dummy 2010-07-02

Reviewer: Bradley F. Smith

Both David Frost and Richard Nixon actually come off petty well in this screen adaptation of a play. You never feel as if you are watching a play, though. It's fully fleshed out. Frank Langella has Nixon pretty well down. However, David Frost was not the TV airhead as portrayed here, presumably for dramatic purposes. He was somewhat the Charlie Rose of his day, kind of brainy, at least in his US appearances. The extra containing snippets of the real interviews is excellent, but I wish it was longer with more comparisons to the stage version.

Very good, BUT... 2010-06-13

Reviewer: Pen Twain

Superb performance by Langella. But the decision to paint Frost as a dummy was dumb. I remember him from as far back as TW3 and he was a pretty sharp character-actually a much more interesting character than the one you see in this movie. They didn't need to dumb him down to make the story work - they needed to smarten up the screenplay. Also, I saw the interviews way back when and it seems they tried to create some drama by falsely showing Frost falter in the initial stages, then "nail him" at the end. There are ways to create drama without dumbing down history (usually you just need to dig a little deeper).
But overall, the performance by Langella still shines through!

Frank Langella at his Best, and Also a Great Story 2010-06-12

Reviewer: Steven Fujita

The very first impression I got when the film started was that Frank Langella did not look nor sound like Richard Nixon. But by the end of the film, I was totally convinced in his portrayal, and thus, a great character study of how a President's decisions affect that individual. Also, this is a great study of how public figures use each other.

The beginning has David Frost, still popular, but not being taken seriously, trying to get back to the world stage of televion, and Richard Nixon, trying to rehabilitate himself in the public eye. Frost and his team want to "get" Nixon, and Nixon's team want to portray Nixon as being worthy of sainthood, well, at least the Nobel Peace Prize.

The movie focuses on two things: the preperations the teams were doing for their man, and the condensed and sometimes modified from original questions and answers from the two. Nixon keeps getting the better of Frost, but Frost delivers a knock-out blow in the last round. Frost wins, but when the two men say their good-byes, each has earned the respect of the other.

It's not a 100% truthful. But, how many true-life movies are 100% true? The special features of the dvd are great because a couple of the extras point out that this is "fictionalised" truth. In addition to the real Frost/Nixon comparison, there is a "making of" featurette, which is interesting, and a nice piece on the Nixon library.

As far as the acting, Frank Langella does an extremely convincing job of presenting a man, whether true or not, haunted by his legacy, yet angered by the fact that his accomplishments on China and the Soviet Union are ignored. One that starts out belittling his adversary, but in the end, respecting him as a worthy opponent.

Frank Langella's performance is so compelling, I think it rejected a viewpoint the film wanted to present. In the special features, it's noted that Howard wanted to examine the issue of the abuse of power and I think he wanted to show that President's abuse power on purpose. However, for me, what came out is how troubled Nixon was with all the grey areas a President's decision falls under. And if he does abuse his power, he either convinces himself that it isn't so, or does it thinking that in the end,it is for the greater good.

Regardless of the filmmaker's intent, Langella's character study, showing the motivations behind public figures to use each other to rise in the public's eye, and the calculations behind a "face to face" makes this into a must see movie for me.

A dual to the death... 2010-05-26

Reviewer: Andrew Ellington

I don't think a single movie this decade as surprised me (in a good way) as much as `Frost/Nixon' did. I mean, I walked into this having almost zero expectations. Well, to be honest, I had expectations, they just weren't very high. Truth be told, I love a good biopic. On the other hand, I kind of hate the news and so the idea of a biopic centered around an interview put me off almost immediately. Next, I'm not really into politics, like at all. I wasn't around in the 70's and so I really don't know much about Watergate at all. From the previews I got a very hammy and stagy vibe from Oscar nominee Frank Langella, and the very thought to Ron Howard directing this just rubbed me the wrong way. This film seemed to need a more cynical touch, and Howard's schmaltzy sentiment, while effective in biopics about washed up boxers and schizophrenic geniuses, would have been distracting and inappropriate here.

So, with all that said, I really expected this to be fairly bad.

Instead, what I received here was a brilliantly constructed exercise in organic tension that kept me completely engrossed from start to finish. I mean, this movie really never lets up. Taking a different approach than one I was expecting, `Frost/Nixon' adds layers of creativity to keep the audience intrigued. I loved the idea of splicing in faux documentary interviews with the cast. I also loved how this film had elements of almost sporadic construction that was not something I was used to seeing from Howard. With a subject as straightforward as the Frost/Nixon interviews, Howard handled things in a way that made things appear bigger than maybe they were. He added so much external tension that we were on edge throughout; not something I was anticipating.

And how about that cast!

When one thinks of an ensemble they usually think of a big cast with lots of screen time. Look at `Gosford Park' or `Nine' for recent examples. What I love so much about `Frost/Nixon' is that, while it has two clear lead performances, the supporting cast truly uses the most of their small parts. Everyone comes together to create a unified and cohesive representation of the time and the circumstances. Some don't fair as well as others (I found Rockwell to be a tad overdone and that stagy feeling I had when watching the trailers did rear its head with Langella at times) but some of the cast really nailed things. Kevin Bacon, Matthew Macfadyen, Rebecca Hall and especially Michael Sheen just completely understood their roles and delivered magnificently.

Ron Howard was the biggest surprise for me. I was really afraid that he was going to do exactly what Rockwell's character James Reston was afraid Frost was going to do; overly sympathize a very unsympathetic subject. Instead, Howard totally understood how important it was to convey the facts as they were, not watering down anything or manipulating anything. Sure, he laid out the human emotions needed to make both Frost and Nixon become real to us (we see the loneliness in Nixon's eyes, which was needed to make him human to us) but he never went overboard, which he could have easily done. In fact, in the final frames when Frost says goodbye to Nixon, a part where Howard would have had full opportunity to lather on the sentiment, Howard steadied his hand and crafted a respectful and poignant conclusion to his already near-impeccable film.

I don't think there are enough words to convey how pleasantly surprised I am with this extremely well crafted biopic.

Some dramatic highlights 2010-04-28

Reviewer: David Long

While there are some very good dramatic moments in the movie, to me it ultimately feels a little too drawn out. The original interviews might be important pieces of history, but do not make for a particularly good movie topic. The acting is very good, the important parts of the interviews are here, but there's too much material which feels repetitive and, at times, uninteresting.

Frank Langella is very convincing as Nixon and Michael Sheen is great as David Frost. It's interesting to get some insight into why Frost decided to basically put everything on the line to do the interview. Nixon is portrayed the way one would expect, trying to maintain his legacy but ultimately still haunted by his mistakes. The supporting cast is good too, especially Oliver Platt and Sam Rockwell as Frost's main researchers.

The actual interviews make up a small portion of the movie. There is the drama surrounding them, including how the rest of the media sees Frost as just a talk show host and Frost's attempts at securing funding. Unfortunately, this is where the movie drags a little. With more than a few scenes depicting him on the phone or meeting with people to sell the idea, it felt repetitive. The reaction of the Frost's team and his subsequent behavior after the first two interviews felt the same.

It all builds, somewhat slowly, to the last interview where we finally see the most dramatic moments. Watergate, the topic on everyone's mind, is covered in grand fashion. As seen in the extras, many of the lines from the final interview were taken straight from the original. While this ending was satisfying, I was still left feeling a little underwhelmed by the movie in general. I'm not sure it could've been done much better; perhaps the topic itself is insufficient for a two hour drama.