comment #1

Devin Faraci says ...

I only saw one of those films, but the one I saw had an almost terrible first half saved by a good second half.

comment #2

mtgilchrist says ...

I was at the same screening of Frost/Nixon tonight and while I was slightly less enthusiastic about the film than you were, I admit that i was distracted by a woman sitting in the row in front of me who was inexplicably taking pictures of the film. Not "filming" it per se but taking pictures with her iPhone. I was just out of range of saying something during the movie, but thankfully my colleague next to me did and she stopped. After the screening it took a considerable amount of restraint for me not to approach her and ask what reason she possibly could have imagined in order to think it's appropriate to do that. Worse yet, she wasn't some teenager dicking around but a 55+ woman who at least by all outward evidence was not possessed of mental illness or incapacity. Seriously, WTF?

comment #3

Devin Faraci says ...

Did you tell a publicist? That shit's piracy.

comment #4

Scott Feinberg says ...

Jeff, I was getting the same BS tips about "Milk" being a disappointment, and then I saw it today and happen to think it's terrific, especially--but far from exclusively--Penn. The bad buzz actually only lowered expectations and made the movie all the more rewarding... but, still, you've gotta wonder where this stuff starts, and why it sometimes builds to the point that usually-credible people start circulating it to us.

comment #5

huntermdaniels says ...

Ron Howard is no great director in my estimation so it's no surprise that it's not Kubrick.

comment #6

mtgilchrist says ...

Thankfully my colleague was equally outraged and he bopped her chair with the fancy program they gave us, so she stopped. But the situation was one of those classic "how badly do I want to interrupt my own enjoyment of this movie" instances, and I was smack in the middle of a full theater.

comment #7

A.H. says ...

The trailer for Milk shows Emile Hirsch's character saying "I don't 'do' losing." I'm pretty sure people didn't talk that way in 1974. Is the rest of the movie filled with anachronisms like that?

comment #8

A.H. says ...

Oops, I mean 1978. Same question still applies. :)

comment #9

Kristopher Tapley says ...

Come off the conspiracy theory shit, Scott. There are some people who genuinely have issues with "Milk" and their concerns aren't totally unfounded. Just because they disagree doesn't mean they're somehow "wrong." Don't puff yourself and your "tips" into something their not.

comment #10

BurmaShave says ...

Sorry to D.Z., but where the hell is the buzz on this film?:

http://www.worstpreviews.com/trailer.php?id=1326&item=0

Or is that not a US release date?

comment #11

guylodge says ...

"London haters" is a bit strong, I think. For one, I certainly didn't HATE the film -- it's too intelligent and well-crafted for that. I just felt no emotional connection while watching it.

comment #12

Gordie Lachance says ...

Oh, how I would love to see the words "I felt a genuine gayness from Sean Penn" on a poster for this.

On another note, re. Hirsch's "I don't do losing". Who's to say what was or wasn't said back in the 70's? (especially in a hip ahead-of-the-curve neighborhood like Castro).

I mean they used to call guns gats back in the 1920's, but I'm sure most people think thats a 1990's hip hop thing.

comment #13

HarveyCo says ...

re: "Thankfully my colleague was equally outraged and he bopped her chair with the fancy program they gave us, so she stopped."

That was no woman, man. That was Roger Ebert!

re: "On another note, re. Hirsch's "I don't do losing". Who's to say what was or wasn't said back in the 70's?"

Maybe, like, people who were around during the 70's? Can we find any? Are they all dead? Are they in special homes? Oh, wait, I'm one of them. But I was very little.

comment #14

Zimmergirl says ...

There is too much pressure, early pressure on these movies to "pass" or "fail."

comment #15

LDKA0186 says ...

Wells, I know you said this wasn’t a proper write-up, but, man…this is some sloppy writing all around. Even for a “first impressions” thing, this is weak. Now, a couple of days ago you got on someone for saying they hated Manohla Dargis without clearly explaining why. After much thought, here’s why this blog fails:

1) You have got to stop with the faux-straight talk. “And that ain't hay” and “Honest Injun” are the worst examples here. It’s cutesy and phony sounding, as opposed to honest and direct, and the Western feel it creates (which, to be honest, is more “Wild Wild West” than “Deadwood”) is particularly incongruous with your subject matter—two politically charged movies set in 1970s California. Cut this stuff. If you pride yourself on straight talk, then just say something. Don’t then give a folksy expression to demonstrate directness. It’s unnecessary.

2) “I felt a genuine gayness from Sean Penn…that I didn't think he had in him.” Wow. Here’s the thing: the sentiment here works. Sean Penn specializes in macho types, so your surprise that he could so fully sublimate himself into the soul of a gay man is understandable. But, my God, your phrasing sucks! “I felt a genuine gayness?” Really? Again, not “direct and true,” but borderline insensitive and childish; it makes you seem distant from and uncertain about gay people. Maybe you are, I don’t know, but even so, you don’t need to draw attention to that fact. If you ever write a real review, rephrase this.

3) “It's not Kubrick, Bresson, Kazan, Eisenstein, Welles, the Coen brothers or Lubitsch.” Again, more sloppy writing. What do these guys have to do with “Frost/Nixon?” If I missed something, please fill me in, but it seems like you’re name-dropping just to name-drop. What do you achieve comparing this movie to ones it’s nothing like? It doesn’t add meaningful texture to your piece; all it does is bog your writing down with unnecessary details. And subtly, it is a critique of the movie—why list these other guys unless you want us to be thinking about them when we see Howard’s film?

4) Even in your longer reviews, you have a tendency to list rather than to critique. For example, look at “It's compassionate, exacting, precisely ordered and emotional.” Okay, that’s a decent beginning to some criticism (if more-than-a-little unwieldy—pick the strongest two of those and ditch the rest to make a clearer, more forceful point). Now explain what they mean. How the cinematography or the script creates a “precisely ordered” feel. How a certain scene is “compassionate” or “emotional.” You get my drift. The biggest problem with your listing is that you do it all the time; after this example, we get, “It's very well done, very full and expert,” “It's more satisfying, more underlined…and more clearly wrought,” and “Milk cares, holds back, pushes through and gets it done.” In those first two cases, again, explain further. That last one, though, “Milk cares, holds back, pushes through and gets it done…” that one doesn’t even make any sense. I guess you mean the movie proceeds with admirable restraint until the emotionally devastating climax, but your way evokes either a) pro-wrestling or b) porn. If you wanted that effect, my apologies. If not, I’d consider a rewrite. And one last thing about listing: when you list more than three things, you add commas between each example. No exceptions. It’s not, “Milk cares, holds back, pushes through and gets it done,” but rather, “Milk cares, holds back, pushes through, and gets it done.” Leaving out that last one is confusing—it makes the last two examples seem like one compound example.

You blogged about us leaving thoughtful comments to respect you and this site. Well, we readers deserve a little of your respect. Put a little more care into your writing.

comment #16

Leonardcoenbrothers says ...

Wow LDKA0186, you clearly have a lot of free time. You forgot to assign a letter grade, and to tell Jeff if he can do some extra credit work to help raise his grade point average.

comment #17

corey3rd says ...

I remember a Happy Day's episode with the Fonz saying he "don't do"....

comment #18

The Playlist says ...

I very much agree. Milk is terrific. I think it had some really creative stuff in it that made it land somewhere between My Private Idaho and Goodwill Hunting on the aesthetics scale. However, i suppose i can see that it's not a masterpiece, but certainly the strongest Oscar-bait so far.

comment #19

gruver1 says ...

Wells to LDKAO186: I'm aware that just listing adjectives and failing to provide examples of this and that in the proper context doesn't make for a complete and fully considered review. I said at the beginning of the post that I didn't feel like writing anything so I tapped out a general thumbnail impression of both films. Since I was mainly relying on short declarations and many adjectives, I used adjectives that felt right to me. I can tap out a real review of Frost/Nixon later today, and one of Milk when the mood suits and the blood is up. I've been writing fairly well and in some instances very well on this site for years. Sometimes I surprise even myself; sometimes I'm just digging ditches. I know how good I am, what my strengths and ineffective tendencies are. But I don't agree and will NEVER agree with using a comma prior to the word "and."

comment #20

dcc77 says ...

2) Separate three or more items in a series with a comma. Example: "We want to protect cats, dogs, and horses."

www.drgrammar.org/faqs/#37

Jeff, LDKA overstated his case and lost sight of the reality: this is a blog, not The New Yorker. Anthony Lane et al spend hours researching and crafting their pieces; they're not running a one-man news organization like you are. Of course you're an excellent writer.

That said, I always add the final comma in a list like Dr. Grammar recommends. It feels like overkill but for the sake of clarity -- LDKA's one unquestionably salient point -- you need to include it.

comment #21

Gordie Lachance says ...

Harvey Co-

My point was not that the 70's were so long ago, but rather that prior to cable television and the internet, regional slang and colloquialisms were passed from person to person and might never have gotten a broader usage. You wouldn't know unless you were there. But it's perfectly believable that Hirsch's character could have said that.

Anyway, the trailer sold me on Milk. Looks fantastic.

comment #22

HarveyCo says ...

re: "You wouldn't know unless you were there. But it's perfectly believable that Hirsch's character could have said that."

Why? Were you there?

comment #23

great scott says ...

So is Frost/Nixon back in the Oscar Balloon again?

comment #24

Gordie Lachance says ...

Sorry Harvey, didn't realize you were just a troll. You win. Have a nice day.

comment #25

HarveyCo says ...

Sorry Gordie, forgot you don't have a sense of humor. Which is a poor reflection on me because most of your posts shout that out loud.

comment #26

Hal says ...

The negatives pointed out by those UK reviewers are no less valid, but it should be kept in mind that there is often a kind of anti-Ron-Howard/Americana parochialism, thanks to a British scripted stage play being made on the other side of the pond.