Rating: 
Summary: Suspenseful, even though the ending is well known
Review: Screenwriter William Goldman, in his book "Adventures in the Screen Trade", talks about the problems he had in bringing this story to life. Mainly they stemmed from having so many cooks stirring the pot (producer Redford, director Alan J. Pakula, the studio, etc.), but also in the fact that there really was no more drama to the story anymore. Everyone was already burned out from hearing about Watergate, and the ending was surely no surprise. He also makes repeated references in his book about the importance of structure in screenplays. Well, I think he did a fantastic job structuring this story, so that the inherent lack of suspense becomes unimportant, and we get to focus in on the reporter's process. Once Woodward and Bernstein get the stench of an apparent cover-up in their noses, the movie does a magnificent job of slowly spiraling towards the inevitable conclusion. They get closer and closer until... they make a fatal mistake and it all falls apart! And that's the brilliance of the screenplay. Goldman jettisoned the reporter's heroic ending (except for one moment of necessary exposition), for it's not a heroic story. Sure, Woodward and Bernstein did some good and had heaps of ambition, but that's not heroism. The ending is tragic, which is why the story can transcend its time and its politics, to become something larger and more important.Director Pakula and cinematographer Gordon Willis (who Goldman calls "the hero of the film") do a fine job of relaying a suspenseful atmosphere to the audience. The offices of the Washington Post are made to have an air of bustling energy at some points, and intense isolation at others. Plus, they have those great Citizen Kane ceilings that seem to go on for miles and miles in masterful deep focus. The scenes with Redford and Hal Holbrook (as the infamous inside source "Deep Throat") have this same quality, but add in mysterious pockets of shadow which create a genuinely spooky ambience. The supporting cast is wonderful. The aforementioned Holbrook gets to be shifty and paranoid, but powerful as well. The great Martin Balsam seems to have been injected with a shot of glee in his role as a Post bigwig. Jane Alexander and Stephen Collins, both playing small roles as reluctant but important informants, manage to convey the weariness and pressure on their characters very effectively. And Jason Robards is loaded with authority as Post chief Ben Bradlee, whose word is God and damn anyone who stands in his way. Robards is perfect here in a role that is actually smaller in size than the impression he leaves would have you think. Redford and Hoffman are paired together nicely here. They are never depicted as buddies, supporting each other for the partnership's greater good. Rather, they are two young and "hungry" journalists, each trying desperately to make a name for themselves, and whoa, look what just landed in their lap. There's a scene where Hoffman's Bernstein offers unsolicited editing to one of Redford's stories. It beautifully shows how the two men realized that the sum of their parts wasn't good enough and that they had to use their combined 'whole' to bring in the story. We never get any notion of the character of these two men outside of their journalistic lives, but Hoffman and Redford are real enough -- they never, ever try to be flashy -- that we don't really care in the end. Some of my favourite moments show Woodward and Bernstein's (or "Woodstein" as they are often referred to, in a recognition of their interchangableness) making youthful or nervous mistakes. "Turn left next chance you get," Bernstein says to Woodward in the car after revealing a particularly juicy break in their story. Woodward is so focused on the break that a couple of moments later he has to ask, "Did you say right or left?" And then there is a moment when Woodward, obviously nearing the burnout point, refers to a conversation he's had with "Slans" (an amalgamation of Sloan and Stans). You're never allowed to forget that this is the first big-time break for these two, which underscores the monumental achievement of it all, but still leaves room for the fact that maybe the whole thing won't work out in the end. The building of suspense where there is no suspense to build is an inspiring achievement.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Movie, Decent DVD
Review: Audio: Average to Poor, 2.0 mono Video: Okay Extras: Nothing special. Recommendations(always funny), scene index, cast bios and short essays on casting, location, "who was deep throat?" awards, and a Watergate chronology, subtitles for English, French, and Spanish. Wide and Full screen versions. Two reporters track down governmental cover-up, a government where a man can have "a wife and kids and a dog and a cat." Close examination of the video reveals ghosting and artifacts, but they are not really noticeable during casual viewing. Sound, again, no masterpiece, is mostly dialogue and not annoying. Forget the extras, if your interested in them, this DVD is not worth it. Wait for a special edition. If you just like the movie, though, this is a decent DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Hardly entertaining, but very informative
Review: If you're a history buff and want to know all about the Watergate break in and what it led to, then you can't miss seeing this film. Director Alan Pakula does an excellent job in showing us just what Washington Post reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward had to go through to uncover the truth about one of the most infamous moments in the history of the United States. There's no musical score and although Redford and Hoffman render fine acting performances, they aren't ranked among their respective best. Qualitywise, this film is about the same as the run-of-the-mill made-for-television films that pop out of the networks every once in a while. Still, it's worth a look-see if you're looking for information and not so interested in being entertained.
Rating:
Summary: Confusing, but it's supposed to be
Review: All the President's Men (Alan Pakula, 1976) We has met the enemy, and they is more ours than we realized they was. Pakula's fact-based look at the way Woodward (Robert Redford) and Bernstein (Dustin Hoffman) uncovered the story behind the Watergate break-in is a classic piece of filmmaking that's influenced almost every, if not every, piece of film and television dealing with journalism that's come since in America. Most, thankfully, are a little more coherent than this, but the confusion factor doesn't make All the President's Men any less a film. Much of what allows All the President's Men to straddle the line between confusing mush and classic filmmaking is in that everpresent devil, the details. Want an example? The main theme of the film is that words are weapons; the unforgettable opening sequence, in which the typewriterkeys strike the paper with seemingly epic force, is the result of mixing whip and shotgun sounds with the actual sounds of typewriter keys. Now that's attention to detail, folks. As well, Pakula never allows the story to stray from the straight and narrow. Woodward and Bernstein remain the focus throughout, and while some minor characters get enough screen time to be memorable (Jason Robards' performance as Ben Bradlee garnered him a very well-deserved Best Supporting Actor oscar), we don't need to know who they all are; their function in the film is solely to either funnel information to, or keep information from getting to, Woodward and Bernstein. We don't need to know anything else about them. It adds a little kick to know trivial details, such as the guy playing Frank Wills (the security guard who discovers the break-in initially) actually was the late Frank Wills, but it's not necessary to comprehend the story of what started as a routine newspaper article about a hotel burglary and ended up being a series of articles that won the Pulitzer Prize, changed the face of political reporting in America, and incidentally saved Bob Woodward's job at the Washington Post. *** 1/2
Rating:
Summary: Inside Watergate
Review: All The President's Men stars Robert Redford as Bob Woodward and Dustin Hoffman as Carl Bernstein, the two Washington Post reporters who broke the Watergate scandal. The movie is a tense thriller that finds the two journalists navigating their way through a series of mazes and roadblocks that find them eventually uncovering the biggest coverup in American political history. Mr. Redford is the movie's idealistic center and calming influence to Mr. Hoffman's hyperkinetic character. Jack Warden & Martin Balsam are solid as Post editors, Jane Alexander gives a fine performance as a paranoid White House employee and Hal Holbrook is dark and mysterious as the still unknown "Deep Throat". Jason Robards took home the 1976 Best Supporting Oscar for his forceful and commanding turn as Post editor Ben Bradlee. He provides an anchor for the two reporters and the film itself. All The President's Men is intelligent, intriguing and will keep you on the edge of your seat.
Rating:
Summary: A Classic Movie!
Review: This was a movie that you will watch and always remember. The two reporters,Woodward and Bernstein are well played by Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford. The investigation by these two reporters into a burglary at the Watergate Hotel of the Democratic headquarters eventually led to one of the biggest scandals in American history. This movie shows the role of "Deepthroat" as the unknown source used by the two reporters. The role of President Nixon's aids,Haldeman and Erlichman are also shown. This is the best movie you will ever see about the Watergate scandal.The plot is outstanding,the backup actors are great and a good display of the actions of the Nixon administration is shown as well. Buy this movie,you will enjoy it immensely.
Rating:
Summary: A 5 star film given a 1 star treatment for DVD transfer
Review: All the Presidents's Men is a truly wonderful film. Unfortunately, it was also one of the first films to be released on the DVD format. Because the format was experimental, the studios were not willing to spend lavish amounts of money to create a DVD when the format might not even sell to the public (see Sony's Mini-Disc). So in what was a sound business decision, but a horrible decision for fans of the film, All the President's Men was given the bare bones treatment. Why spend the money is nobody is going to buy the machine to play the disc? That means both no special features (which still plagues some new releases) as well as making the quality of the film transfer just plain bad. Is it better than VHS? Yes, but not by much. A couple of the other reviews have mentioned that the picture and sound quality is fine. I'm guessing that these folks either lack the technology to exploit the marvels of DVD, or simply have not viewed enough DVDs to know what is good from bad. Unfortunately, this is simply bad. The report from Widescreen Review speaks for itself, but I think it important to restate that fact that the positive reviews about the DVD transfer are wrong. All the President's Men doesn't have the action-packed scenes that take full advantage of Dolby Digital sound. But the 2.0 Dolby that is used isn't good. There is too much background noise and there isn't much difference between using your home theatre system vs. the speakers from your television. And compared to the picture quality, the sound is great. As I watched the DVD, I couldn't believe how bad the picture quality is. I know that a 25 year old film isn't going to be as crisp and clear as a film made last summer. But film restoration projects have made films that were shot in the 30's look way better than this DVD does. The film is grainy, the colors are not sharp, and the images aren't always too clear. Warner Brothers has started to re-release some of its early releases and has given them better handling. Nothing has been anounced about All the President's Men, but one would hope that it too will receive a make-over in the near future. I'd save my money until that happens -- this disc is such a small upgrade from VHS that it isn't worth it.
Rating:
Summary: "President's Men" is superb but special features dissapoint
Review: "All the Presisident's Men" remains an example of superb moviemaking... Lacking sex, violence or action, it depends entirely on storyline and the canvas of investigastive reporting to cast it's web, and cast it it does (though the entire world knew the ending). The performances, direction, and cinematography are superb and the picture and sound quality are amazing. The "special features" on the DVD, however leave much to be desired....There are no deleted scenes, interviews, running commentary or pictorial behind the scenes material. Curiously, the VHS contains a documentary,interviews with Redford, Hoffman and Pakula and 3 theatrical trailers. Why this material was eliminated from the DVD is anybody's guess.. ...
Rating: 
Summary: DVD Widescreen not full picture
Review: I have had this DVD for awhile and only noticed something disturbing about the widescreen side of the DVD. While watching the movie at the same time on TV, I decided to compare the quality (I always get a kick at seeing how DVDs fare so much better). The first thing I noticed was that the color for the TV broadcast was better, but then I kept noticing something was different about the TV broadcast from the DVD. Back and forth I went over the same simultaneous scenes and that's when I realized...the DVD widescreen does not show the full image top to bottom. While I could see the tops of heads and things on the TV version, those tops and bottoms were cut off of the DVD widescreen version. THE DVD comes with the standard version on one side and the widescreen on the other. I flipped over to the standard side, and indeed it was like the TV version with full heads and everything top to bottom, but there on the other side, the widescreen side, things were cropped. WHY??? It has made me leary of other letterboxes (my favorite format).
Rating:
Summary: Think
Review: ALL THE PRESDIENT'S MEN is a handsomely crafted adaptation of Woodward and Bernstein's book about the Watergate break in. Perhaps because of its slightly cool, unforced approach, it holds up remarkably well, especially given that the events dramatized are now out of the headlines and safely in the history books. The absence of hype and charge give a false sense of objectivity, even calm, to the uncovering of the conspiracy. It's a tense movie, but you don't feel manipulated or bludgeoned; the style makes us think we're in the hands of reasonable, intelligent men who can be trusted. We might be, but the "objectivity" is false because MEN is still a political thriller, with every prejudice neatly in place. Under the measured surfaces, the director, Alan Pakula, is not above using tried and true melodramatic techniques. Woodward and Bernstein, for example, are not just reporters, but young bucks who, in standard cinematic form, are trying to prove themselves to their superiors. (Or, in the words of one of the characters, "They're hungry. Don't you remember what it's like to be hungry?" There's been a variation on that line in every movie about journalists since any filmmaker thought the profession was interesting.) This technique cleverly makes us identify with their goal of "getting the story," without questioning their politics or motives. Their opponents, on the other hand, are either literally faceless or repellently smug manipulators whom we can feel comfortable in despising. Of course, it is difficult to feel too much sympathy for the villains, because no one, either in the film or indeed anywhere in the country since, seems interested in re-examining Watergate with any critical intelligence. A first rate work of art would confront those prejudices instead of exploiting them. There's no doubt that this is a good evening's entertainment, and to the extent it wakes us up to the fragility of democracy, commendable. In its own way, though, it ends up contributing to our complacency, precisely because it so easily classifies this character as right and good, that one as wrong and bad. It's the kind of moral superiority that makes us politically lazy, comfortable in believing that we'll always recognize a scoundrel when he appears. Alas, politics are never that simple, but melodrama always has to be if it is to be effective.
|
