Da 5 Bloods
On the Record
I May Destroy You
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
Already have an account? Log in here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We encourage our community to report abusive content and/ or spam. Our team will review flagged items and determine whether or not they meet our community guidelines.
Please choose best explanation for why you are flagging this review.
Thank you for your submission. This post has been submitted for our review.
Sincerely, The Rotten Tomatoes Team
Well acted, powerful, and really intense.
An intriguing story carried well by the lead actors, enriched even more by its real-life mirror. Slow, overly mechanical at times and, yet, the excitement of Hoffman keeps you involved.
Though many can't deal with writer's or how they operate, this movie was phenomenal in it's day and age and still works as it is. Part suspense, part intriguing, and being fact based it leads credence to it. Both actors play off each other and submit well to it. A well solid piece of entertainment.
Has certainly losts its pang for over 4 decades ago but nonetheless a well acted and interesting political thriller, if not bogged down. And, I hate to say it, but quite slow/hard to get into. Certainly works better in novel format. Suprisingly striking visuals.
I decided to watch this after seeing all the funny moments in ''la classe américaine''. Interesting topic, boring movie. All they do is make phone calls and note things down the whole time. I didn't feel the thrilling, scandal moments at all.
With charismatic leads and a very fresh, timeless feel, All the President's Men crackles with a modern feel and a palpable relevance.
Little details, such as the difference in the way Redford and Hoffman type is a great indicator of their differences, and the film is moody and yet also brisk.
The split diopter shots are always excellently conceived and used, doubling down on the notion that intimate and powerful moments occur in an open plan and busy arena, all night filled with the kind of intensifying the glare of these artificial environments and their depth and parallel lines.
The photography is stunning, the colours in what must have been a 4K remaster, popped and felt realistic and perfectly tuned. The film is very very funny and the score stays out of the way to make the story the focus and the emotions muted even if the effect of their work was loud.
Brilliant movie, and the discussion before and after was also wonderful.
How funny that two films tackling the direction of journalism in the late 1970s were released in the same year and took completely different stances on the nature of journalists and the reaction of the public to them. This film is earnest and treats journalists as idealistic social justice crusaders who want the public to know the truth while Network (1976) is far more cynical and presents us with ratings-obsessed businessmen who want a good story at any cost. Of the two I must say that I found a lot more to enjoy in Network which despite being a satire felt more realistic and had more to say about journalism. This film presents us with two romanticized figures who are so by the book in their pursuit of the truth that it is hard to believe them as real people in addition to not being drawn in by their false perfection. Adding to this lack of interest was the film's extraordinary length as a story that could have been told in a tidy 100 minutes, thriller elements and all, is stretched out over 138 minutes. All in all a film that will satisfy aspiring journalists hoping to ‘save the world' but for a slightly more cynical viewer they may take agin the phony ideals the film offers.
Washington Post journalists Bob Woodward, Robert Redford, and Carl Bernstein, Dustin Hoffman, investigate government corruption in 1972 after the Watergate Hotel is broken into. Woodward uncovers a trail of corruption leading to the White House after discovering that the burglars are connected to former government employee E. Howard Hunt. Using "Deep Throat", a shifty government employee, Woodward is able to verify information and is encouraged to "follow the money" in order to connect the break in to President Nixon. With the help of bookkeeper Judy Hoback Miller, Jane Alexander, they put together a story they can put to print and expose the corruption of the President.
The free press clearly have something to offer society as they supposedly provide us with un-biased information on political and social issues that educates us and holds the government accountable. However I do not believe that journalists are actually altruistic in their pursuit of a good lead. They have egos like everybody else and considering the amount of self promotion that Woodward and Bernstein dished out I believe that they knew they were onto something and felt a certain amount of satisfaction at having found a story that would make them famous. None of this is present in the film as our two crusaders are angelic in their commitment and devotion to their work and other than references to Bernstein being a womanizer and Woodward being to uptight they lack humanity. The great journalists in cinema have been flawed, tragic individuals such as J.J. Hunsecker in Sweet Smell of Success (1957) who are riveting even as they abuse the ethics of their profession. Seeing two ‘nice' men go about their job while facing very few barriers or challenges was hardly compelling and one would like to see more out of a film featuring Hoffman and Redford.
Remarkably the conspiracy they uncover seems less interesting than it should be as although it was a shocking bombshell at the time you never feel the abject horror that the public must have felt in the film. I wanted to be shocked and horrified as I was at the end of The Conversation (1974) but Pakula lacks the ability of Francis Ford Coppola to convey mental turmoil in the minds of characters. When Woodward runs down a darkened street in fear of being attacked by one of Nixon's associates I felt certain that nothing would happen to him and even if he had been beaten I doubt I would care. His ambitions were direct and straightforward, his reactions limited and this meant that even the moments of supposed excitement in the film are not as joyous as they should have been. Were Pakula to explore the idea that journalists are so jaded that they aren't exhilarated by a conspiracy of this scale I could have appreciated the dour, glum tone but instead he plays everything straight faced and that just wasn't enough.
If you want a fascinating Pakula directed thriller that manages to explore the emotional struggle of the main character effectively please seek out Klute (1971).
An exciting film about journalism, based on the true Watergate story.
William Goldman's direction in "All the President's Men" stays focused on the Watergate investigation by the Washington Post with impressive technical skill as well as benefits from the power of its two leads (Redford and Hoffman), but we already know the ending so the payoff isn't as satisfying as you'd like from such a significant moment in American politics.