We always thought excitement and Oscar predictions for “Frost/Nixon,” were misplaced. It is Ron Howard after all and yes, the Academy does like him (“A Beautiful Mind”), but his films are generally cliched, stock dramas that we can’t stand (“Parenthood,” and “Gung-Ho” being the only exceptions; recent fare is dreadfully dull and the reason why the Oscars sometimes can be terribly boring). We do love Frank Langella, he’s an amazing actor, but we dunno, we were never with the chorus on this one.
So as one of the first reviews of the film trickles in from InContention (the film has its world premiere at the London Film Festival), we’re almost happy to report that word is not so good.
“To be honest, we could have seen this coming. It’s difficult to think of a director less-suited to take on the intricate, minutiae-obsessed writing of Peter Morgan than Howard — a director who, even in his finest films, has always been interested in the big picture first, with characters serving history rather than the other way round.”
“Howard’s hands-off direction makes for an oddly bloodless viewing experience, with a lot of talk standing in for any fresh perspective (or frankly, much of a perspective at all) on the events.”
In contention continues, the film is apparently “coldly unilluminating,” protagonists who “rarely emerge as living, breathing people,” and a “doggedly linear approach to storytelling [that] only gets Howard so far.”
To be honest, we’re not sure how much we think of Michael Sheen as an actor either. The Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw left the movie feeling cold as well. He give it 2 stars and says, “A lot of hot air – but not much real heat.”
But Variety’s Todd McCarthy is much less severe. He says, “Frost/Nixon” is an effective, straightforward bigscreen version of Peter Morgan’s shrewd stage drama about the historic 1977 TV interview in which Richard Nixon brought himself down once again.” Peter Bart isn’t convinced by the film either, but says, “Frank Langella’s portrayal of Richard Nixon is unforgettable.”
