Nixon

Rating:
Summary: "Nixon" shows greatness of art, tragedy of politics
Review: Oliver Stone's portrait of the defining character of American political history in the second half of the twentieth century is disturbing, illuminating, overwhelming, impressive, artful: a poetic statement on a grand scale. A worthy sequel to the revolutionary incisiveness of "JFK," this epic gives a human face to the beastly nature of modern geopolitics. Nixon, to Stone's credit, wears this face in all its sympathetic, tragic, fatally flawed glory. Here is the man, beset with his own psychic struggles and simple ambitions, who dared to ride the beast and was thrown off bucking to the ground.

Here's the political statement established beyond question in "JFK" and elaborated in "Nixon": world politics, driven ostensibly by the most powerful nation in the world, is at the mercy of gangsters. Gangsters and Big Money-the privately powerful-strike deals with government through covert liaisons such as the CIA. The deal is this: Protect us from prosecution and we will kill your enemies for you, our way. We will even fund your next campaign. Just let us continue doing business the way we like to do it. If you don't like this deal, we can end it for you at any time: "in a heartbeat": our way.

Rating:
Summary: Shakespeare has found a rival in Oliver Stone
Review: One of the greatest films of all time. A fascinating, engrossing, and stirring story, an intriguing but always realistically portrayed cast of characters, and a tragedy that will become as legendary as Macbeth or Hamlet. Oliver Stone, the most successfully bold filmmaker since Stanley Kubrick, finally matures and realizes his potential with this one. It is over 200 minutes long, but it is watchable again and again. Even though "Nixon" would have worked even if Richard Nixon had never existed, it is gratifying to see Oliver Stone sticking to the actual history, give or take (quite unlike "JFK"). Anthony Hopkins becomes the character, rather than immitating Nixon. James Woods does the same thing with John Erlichman. Paul Sorvino takes exactly the opposite approach with Henry Kissinger, but it works both because his performance is entertaining and because Kissinger is so ingenuine. The scenes that Oliver Stone CUT from film (which you'll get to see if you buy the video) are better than 99% of the crap that's playing in theaters. Do yourself a favor and purchase "Nixon" right now.

Rating:
Summary: An odd-ball epic
Review: Oliver Stone's oddly paced and oddly shot epic dramatization of the rise and fall of "Tricky Dick" is one of the most engrossing films I have ever seen. It's like a throwback to the old-school Greek tragedies: a ruler rises to power against all odds, then has his throne taken from him because of his own screw-ups. Furthermore, Sir Anthony Hopkins gives a performance as Nixon that deserved the Oscar much more than Nic Cage.

Rating:
Summary: Virtuoso mess
Review: This film is an extremely well-made mess, hilarious in its performances and outlook. I really enjoyed its bizarre nature. Oliver Stoned!

Rating:
Summary: A PLEASANT SURPRISE
Review: He infers that the beast is embodied in the Central Intelligence Agency, which in turn controls the U.S. A sequence showing Nixon visiting CIA Director Richard Helms (Sam Waterston) was mostly cut out of the original film, but the video shows it in its entirety at the end of the movie. Helms and his agency are virtually said to be the devil. Flowers in Helms' office are shown to bloom and wilt in supernatural ways, presumably depending on Helms' evil whim. Waterston's eyes are shown to be coal black. He is Satan!
Nixon asks himself the rhetorical question, "Whose helping us?" while staring into a fireplace flame under a portrait of Kennedy. The theme is first brought forth in Nixon's college years, when his older brother dies, and apparently this frees up money through an unexplained source (an insurance policy?) that allows Nixon to go to law school. In light of two Kennedy assassinations, the answer to Nixon's question seems to be the same one that Mick Jagger gives in "Sympathy for the Devil".
"After all, it was you and me," Jagger sings, and Stone would have you believe it was the devil in silent concert with Nixon and his brand of...something. Jingoism, patriotism, xenophobia, bloodthirstiness? Nixon is seen on a couple of occasions shadowed by a devil-like winged creature (the beast), and his conversation with a female college student at the Lincoln Memorial ends with her identification of the beast as the controlling force in American politics. Presumably the girl is able to see this clearly because her heart is pure.
Stone invents secret cabals that never happened between Nixon and John Birch Texas businessmen, racist to the core, who along with a smirking Cuban are there to tell us that because Nixon was in Texas on November 22, 1963 he was somehow plotting JFK's murder.
The conspiracy link between "JFK" and "Nixon" exists in this reference, and the CIA "tracks" like the one Agent X talks about in "JFK", apparently tie Guatemala, Iran and the Bay of Pigs to subsequent events. The Bay of Pigs tie-in, led by E. Howard Hunt and his Cubans, Bernard Barker, Eugenio Martinez, et al, is real enough, but the assassination is one Stone insists is part of the same "track." Something on the list of "horribles," which Nixon discusses with H.R. Haldeman (James Woods), who then talks about "bodies," references to something I still have never figured out after watching the film 15 times. The Kennedy's bodies? Vietnam dead bodies?
Stone gives Watergate its due, but lets the actual events speak for themselves without embellishing it with more hate towards Nixon than that era produced of its own accord. He actually does a solid job of demonstrating the semi-legitimate reasons for creating the Plumbers in the first place, which was to plug leaks in light of Daniel Ellsberg's treacherous "Pentagon Papers" revelation, in concert with the bunker mentality caused by anti-war protesters threatening, in their mind at the time, a civil war like the one that forced Lincoln to declare martial law.
Stone also makes it clear that Nixon and his people were convinced that Kennedy stole the 1960 election, and he does not try to deny it (without advocating it, either). Murray Chotiner represents the realpolitik Republicans who, Stone wants us to know, pulled the same fraudulent tricks, when he says, "They stole it fair and square."
Nixon is depicted as foul-mouthed and quite the drinker. His salty language apparently was learned well into adulthood, and he did occasionally imbibe after years as a teetotaler, but his associates insist it was by no means a regular thing. Woods' Haldeman is no friend of the Hebrews, and Paul Sorvino, doing a big league Henry Kissinger, finds himself constantly at war with the inside Nixon team, put down for his Jewishness. Powers Boothe is a cold-blooded Alexander Haig, representing the reality of Watergate's final conclusion.
It never would have happened under J. Edgar Hoover, Nixon says, and Haig agrees that Hoover, who died just before Watergate, was a "realist" who would have kept it locked up. Nixon discusses suicide with Haig, who eases him out of that but never really tells him not to. When Nixon asks for any final suggestion, Haig says something the real man probably never said:
"You have the Army. Lincoln used it."
Sure.
Nixon breaks down, incredulous that for all his accomplishments, he can be brought down by such a nothing event. Stone allows Hopkins to infuse this scene with Shakespearean irony. Stone gives Nixon his due in many ways. He demonstrates that he was utterly faithful to his wife, Pat, turning down a right wing lovely served up by the Birchers, while telling the girl that he entered politics to help people. His hardscrabble youth is nicely portrayed, with Mary Steenburgen playing his long-suffering Quaker mother. Young Nixon is utterly faithful to her and the honest, religious ethic of the family. But in a later scene, Steenburgen looks questioningly at his Presidential aspirations, saying he is destined to lead, but only if God is on his side. It is a telling statement playing to his theme that dark forces are the wind at Nixon's sails. He enters politics as an idealist, and becomes something else because he discovers he has the talent for it. He is industrious, in contrast to the Kennedys, and will earn everything he has simply by out-working everybody.
An entirely loving portrait of Dick Nixon would have no credibility. Stone does a great job with the movie, which is as balanced as it could be with a side of liberal righteousness.(...)

Rating:
Summary: Underrated, Excellent, Unexpectedly Compassionate Portrayal
Review: Oliver Stone's "Nixon" is quite simply a great American film, one that has been shamefully overlooked in comparison with the seriously flawed "JFK." Stone obviously took notice of the criticisms of that earlier film, and while some of his conspiracy-mania appears in "Nixon", overall the later film is a much more balanced and human effort. Stone can direct like a lunatic (has anybody but the seriously disturbed sat through "Natural Born Killers" more than once?) but he is an undeniably intelligent and talented filmmaker who can rise to the occasion when challenged. And he was obviously challenged by the task of coming to terms with Richard Nixon, the dominant political figure of his youth. Stone dedicated the movie to his late father, and it is obviously an attempt by a son to understand patriarchal authority--and its abuses.

Stone's aggressive style is much on display here, but it helps draw you into the drama, rather than distracting as it has in other films. Ther's some truly inspired casting, from David Hyde Pierce as John Dean to James Woods and J.T. Walsh as Haldeman and Ehrlichman, to the splendid Joan Allen as Pat Nixon. But the centerpiece is Anthony Hopkins as Nixon who gives another remarkable performance in his patented manner of "clenched flamboyance" (as one critic described his acting.) He makes you feel every hurt, every slight that the man ever felt, as well as letting us see the undeniable brilliance as well as the pathetic flaws. By the time the Mormon Tabernacle Choir sings "Shanendoah" over footage of Nixon's funeral and the closing credits (a masterful, unironic touch) you may find yourself genuinely grieving over the wasted genius. One of the best political films ever made, one whose reputation should grow over the coming years.

Rating:
Summary: An Excellent Film.
Review: Oliver Stone's "Nixon" is probably the greatest political film of recent years alongside his masterpiece, "JFK." Some people have attacked Stone for supposedly "re-writing" history, these are people who either don't care about knowing the dark truths history has to offer or don't understand how dramatic composition works. This is a brilliant, powerful and important work. Stone does not justify what Richard Nixon did, he instead, presents a portrait of a flawed man haunted by memories and events. There is a Shakespearean feel to the screenplay. The film is a look at how politics really works, how it's a jungle in that field where issues are forgotten and the object is to win. "Nixon" is a study of power, and how power really works in our system of government. Stone is one of the most brilliant filmmakers of our time, his film here is filled with powerful moments, intense, rich cinematography by Robert Richardson and an editing style that adds texture, realism and energy to the movie. As for re-writing history, the pundits who attack this movie are living in Disneyland and even John Dean claimed that there wasn't anything "unfair" in the dramatic license found in the script. Besides, who the hell goes to the movies to get the facts? For that watch a documentary (and those use a large degree of dramatic license too) or read a book! "Nixon," in it's depiction of how politics and the world works is completely accurate. If you don't believe it, do your own research and especially read Anthony Summers' "Official And Confidential: The Secret Life Of J.Edgar Hoover." Oliver Stone is one of the true film directors who dares to show the truth, who takes a mirror and forces us to look at ourselves. He understands how society and how we who live in society really do operate. Those who attack his work are the ones afraid to realize the realities of this world, they got no balls. He's a dramatic historian, a genius who's work is vital to the history of American cinema.

Rating:
Summary: Great acting in a very flawed film
Review: "Nixon" is perfect example of how to take outstanding performances by actors and totally negate them through what can only be described as gross artistic, technical, and historical license. Anthony Hopkins (as Richard Nixon), Joan Allen (as Pat Nixon), and Paul Sorvino (as Henry Kissinger) give powerful performances, but director/screenwriter Oliver Stone completely spoils their efforts with his positively weird use of camera angles, oddly placed scenes, color, and his blatant attempt to re-write history.

What remains is a completely disjointed, disorganized mess; a highly sensational and fictionalized study of a dark and brooding soul, told in such a way as to do a terrible injustice to performers, moviegoers, and history alike. On top of everything else, "Nixon" is far too long, moves too slowly, and is a complete bore.

Even Dick Nixon, for all his flaws, deserves better than this!!

Rating:
Summary: Powerful. A Great Work.
Review: Oliver Stone's "Nixon" is an extremely powerful study of not just Richard Nixon, but of politics and power. Of how our system works, about the dark corners we rarely hear about, only when things like Iran Contra come to light. This is an epic biographical study of one man and how he shaped history. Anthony Hopkins gives a performance that immediatly ignites the screen with a fury. Stone's directing is that of a master. He truly is a genius in not only the craft of screenwriting, but directing as well. The screenplay by Stone, Stephen J. Rivele and Christopher Wilkinson is wonderfully complex. Like "JFK," this is a masterpiece in film assembly. There is so much information in here, so many characters, all skillfully written into a grand, intense and powerful work. Everything from the Kennedy assassination to the assassination of Patrice Lumumba are explored here to some degree. I also loved the way in which Stone with cinematographer Robert Richardson, combine so many film formats. Some scene are in color, others in black and white, and some scenes are shot in both formats. The score by John Williams is rich and powerful, even inspiring. This is a huge, brilliant movie. "Nixon" is a great, great film that everyone intersted in how the system works should see.

Rating:
Summary: Rushed and Unfinished
Review: I don't know if it's because of my age or not, but man, this movie was confusing. I'm in my late 20's so all of the Watergate/Nixon stuff happened before I was born. The only thing I knew about Watergate was that it's a hotel and Monica Lewinsky stayed there.
Oliver Stone's least developed and most incoherent film, Nixon was a potentially great film gone wrong. Coming after the masterful JFK and other excellent Stone movies like Talk Radio and Platoon, Nixon by comparison looks rushed, sometimes self-indulgent, and not entirely coherent. The biggest flaws are probably the chronological skipping around the film does, and the repeated intrusive injection of disturbing images at various times. As a result, there is too much of a stream of consciousness feel to this movie. Anthony Hopkins as Nixon sometimes does a great job, while other times he overacts, and seems not so much like Nixon but like a comedian making fun of Nixon. Events and names are run past the viewer without explaining them or providing much backstory; this might make this movie difficult viewing for somebody not already familiar with Watergate.