Review: Frost/Nixon
by John NolteFrost/Nixon is a full on respectable, accomplished and intelligent retelling of the now famous series of interviews English television personality David Frost conducted with disgraced former President Nixon in 1977, just a few years after Nixon’s resignation. No one can argue a successful stageplay hasn’t been transformed into a beautifully shot narrative with two memorable performances by Frank Langella as Nixon and Michael Sheen as Frost. The film holds your attention and reeks of competence from beginning to end.
All that’s missing is a point.
Since 1976’s All The President’s Men Nixon’s become a genre all his own. Take a look. So what exactly is the point of yet another Nixon Was An Evil Weird Cheap Racist picture? What our thirty-seventh president really needs is an artist with the artistry to Downfall the man. After all, you don’t win two presidential elections and force John F. Kennedy to steal his if all you are is a stooped-over gargoyle crippled with paranoia. Unfortunately, there’s nothing over Frost/Nixon’s 122 minute runtime that adds a thing to the bloated Nixon Genre.
Not that the story isn’t an interesting and sometimes fascinating one. Director Ron Howard, working from Peter Morgan’s, script based on his own play, sets the confrontation up as a boxing match between a wily champ whose experience has taught him all the tricks and a brash young contender who has no idea what a punch from the real deal feels like.
Still shy of forty, Frost lives an Austin Powerish life jetting off to do his various and silly television shows, partying with celebrities, and shagging stewardesses in the good old days before they became flight attendants. But his career is also on the wane and in the elusive and darkly fascinating Nixon, Frost sees not only a shot at big ratings but a return to where success in the entertainment business really means something: Hollywood.
For his part, Nixon wants his reputation back, wants to make his case and remind the American people that he was more than just the “victim” of a two-bit burglary. In David Frost, Nixon, for good reasons, sees easy pickings; an unserious goofball with no idea what he’s up against offering a ton of money and hours of television.
The interviews are filmed in two hour segments over a series of days. In keeping with the boxing metaphor, Howard presents them as rounds with Frost getting his clock cleaned in most of the early ones. In his corner are two very unhappy men, Bob Zelnick (Oliver Platt), a former network guy, and James Reston Jr. (Sam Rockwell), a Nixon-loathing researcher. Both are badly in need of a “win” if they’re to avoid professional humiliation.
A “win” is defined as “getting” Nixon. In their opinion, Ford’s pardon was not the end of a long national nightmare, but instead getnix-interruptus. They don’t want to understand their subject and they don’t want others to understand him, either. They want his head on a pole and all the career benefits that will come with that victory.
Besides being a pointless exercise in baby boomer narcissism, the narrative has its share of problems. Throughout the film a number of the characters pop up in interview segments to move and explain the plot. Maybe the idea is in keeping with the boxing metaphor with between-round analysis, but characters looking into a camera in order to explain what we just watched and their own motivations in anything other than a documentary is as artificial as you can get.
Early in the film Frost picks up and enters into a relationship with a young woman (Caroline Cushing) he meets on a flight to Los Angeles where he’s to meet Nixon for the first time. Other than her being an exposition excuse for Frost to pour out his anxieties, the relationship adds nothing, either to the plot or in examining the Frost character. The producers might have saved Cushing’s salary by simply having Frost speak into the camera like everyone else.
The politics of the film are decidedly left wing and the whole exercise reeks of liberal wish fulfillment. For much of the film Frost is unable to “get” Nixon and this is only presented as a lack of seriousness and preparation on his part, as opposed to a lack of argument. This is most apparent during the “round” involving Vietnam.
Nixon inherited a messy war started by JFK and bungled by Lyndon Johnson. You may not want to go as far as calling it a victory, but Nixon did manage to do in Vietnam better than we did in Korea. His relentless bombing campaign, including Cambodia, brought peace between the North and South, and more importantly, a removal of most of our military personnel.
Hollywood (and the liberal media) take great pains to avoid this chapter of our history and Frost/Nixon is no different. The fall of Saigon and the Holocaust in Cambodia wouldn’t have happened had the Democrats not won control of Congress in 1974 pledging to pull financial support from our allies in South Vietnam. Emboldened by the American Left, the North invaded and 3 million innocent people were murdered and/or “re-educated.”
These are facts, but the film will have none of it and the Nixon character’s protestations to the contrary, those who aren’t aware of them will be left with the impression that there never was a peace agreement, our troops never were removed, and the Holocaust in Cambodia was not a direct result of the Left abandoning our allies — but rather the bombing of Cambodia, the very act which brought about peace in the first place.
The film’s biggest flaw, however, is a deus ex machina involving Sam Rockwell’s character telegraphed so obviously and early it takes all the juice out of the story before it really begins. As Howard proved with the marvelous Apollo 13 he’s more than able to tell a suspenseful story even though how it ends is already well known. The fun is watching how success is achieved and Nixon/Frost practically puts this up in neon deflating its own purpose.
Frost/Nixon rates as an impressive television movie, but as a feature it lacks a point, any kind of real intellectual curiosity, and, most of all, an ambition to do more than win awards. There’s a great Nixon film to be made about this corrupt but fascinating man, but a couple of terrific lead performances won’t help anyone remember this one for very long.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
25 Comments
I like my version of the film better
http://dknowsall.blogspot.com/2009/01/for-your-co...
I won’t watch this, based on the humdrum narration from the commercial.
“President Nixon lied to the American people.”
Of course, lying was reasoned, nuanced, complicated and no serious matter when Clinton was in office and whenever he “nuanced” his way through various testimony. What does “is” mean by the way? Speaking of lying to the American people, lets talk about William Jeffersonm, ACORN, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd …
I’m not excusing anything Nixon did. It’s just hard to take a film seriously when you know the makers of it would never hold someone they find like-minded to the same account. It shows a lack of integrity and honesty on their part.
John, you sorta buried the lede. The real problem here is that the movie is a distortion of history, and among the distortions is the big ‘get’ that Frost achieves. Elizabeth Drew, normally of the New Yorker, wrote a pretty scathing piece on this, calling it a dishonorable distortion of history. The piece is here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elizabeth-drew/ifrostnixoni-a-dishonorab_b_150948.html?page=10
And yes, sorry, but you’ll have to visit Huffington Post to read it.
I grew up thinking Nixon was COMPLETELY responsible for Vietnam, from start to finish. And for the Killing Fields, etc.
“Nixon did manage to do in Vietnam better than we did in Korea.”
What?
My stepmother once told me that Richard Nixon had the smoothest walk she’d ever seen, and ever since then I’ve watched for it when looking at film of him. What do you know, she was right. It’s a minor detail, of course, but in this case the differences between the real Nixon and fictional depictions of him to date are stark.
On a somewhat related note, following the news and cultural coverage of the war in Iraq has completely changed this Gen-Xer’s view of the Vietnam War. To say that I’m more skeptical now about the “received wisdom” about Vietnam is an understatement.
The real tragedy is that Hollywood misses the opportunity to TRULY explore the fascinating character of Richard Nixon. How does the child of Quakers get to believe the ends justify the means? How is a guy about to win the American Presidency in a landslide still so lacking in self confidence that he needs to sanction the Watergate break-in? How is so liberal a Republican (EPA, Chinese engagement, etc.) so HATED by the left, even after the hippies so reviled his predecessor?
It’s an Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader story just waiting to be told. And the exploration of the pathos of the left is another untold part of it.
I have little interest in a Sunday School version of the affair (e.g. Deep Throat stopped the bad guy). In view of what we know about Felt and his motivations of revenge for being passed over in favour of Gray, I would much sooner see a film that explores those sorts of dynamics – especially given the fact that Felt well knew the Watergate breakins were petty matters compared to what the preceding presidents were getting away with.
It’s time for some Carter and Clinton movies. The Carter films can be comedies: the Clinton films — horror.
NCC: When you look at the individual treaties, the one negotiated in Vietnam was better than the one in Korea. Had the Dems not dipped a few million people in the grease the treaty in Vietnam did not require our troops to remain. Unlike Korea, we were able to come home.
Maybe in 100 years we’ll get that scathing HBO special on the stolen election of 1960 and why Nixon was so paranoid in the first place.
Until then, the truth be damned, Opie has to feel justified in his world view.
Let’s not forget this whole Nixon thing is wishful thinking: They tried very hard to do to George W. Bush what they got away with , with Richard Nixon. I think it was easier than even they thought: He always looked sweaty under pressure and his eyes shifted. That is not to say that he was ‘guilty’ in the sense that Clinton the president and Clinton the first lady , senator and now soon to be Sec of State. They all look cool under pressure. It doesn’t make them better just better looking.
The best crooks always do. Congress is full of them , especially this session and old hands remain to work their underhanded spells.
The left love to beat up on this disgraced former President. ONLY because he was a Republican. IF he had been a Democrat they would have moved heaven and earth to make excuses for him as they did Bill Clinton.
Bill was far worse in what he did and continues to do and so is Hillary, yet they survive and thrive socially, politically and financially.
And as Carolyn says above so well: They hated Nixon because he outsmarted them. That is why they hate and why they are determined to destroy and tear down. Nixon was smarter and better than they but he could not beat the press. They have tried this with President Bush and have never let up. They use every devious means at their disposal and intend to tear down anything they do not have control of our power over.
Carolyn’s assessment of the press and the OJ trail is spot on. I saw and heard the same. The trial was very much different than the press reported. In some cases, reported things that hadn’t even happened yet, as in the black socks. …. but I digress.
I have seen the trailers for and write-ups about Frost/Nixon and have long been a fan of Ron Howard as a director. Not this time.
I watched carefully the whole Watergate thing unfold and could not for the life of me figure out what all the fuss was about. Certainly not what the press was going on about. And then John Dean showed up.
Et Tu Brute. And Caesar was brought down.
This vermin that passes for liberal democrat these days who take their marching orders from the Daily Kos and other places funded by George Soros will ensure that our current young who simply do not understand and future generations, who will not understand the efforts to undermine and destroy all that is good in this country.
As for a film about the media: I am looking forward very much to John Zieglers: Media Malpractice: How Obama Got Elected.
I will gladly pay for it when it is ready. I also decided to go to Amazon and order the ACTUAL interviews between Richard Nixon and David Frost. The REAL thing.
Something has to break one of these days against the Soros funded nonsense on the Net and on the Networks.
I wonder just when they will get it? As long as Soros billions hold out I guess they can continue to broadcast or have their websites up and hire morons to run around and post vicious lies and attacks on their betters, but somewhere along the line they have to know that their ratings are a clarion call to their death knell.
I like to think that Big Hollywood ( thank you from the bottom of my heart, Andrew Brietbart) Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity ( he seems to be a bit nervous lately) Ann Coulter- loved it that Rush had her on on Friday-what a great duo that is!-John’s documentary and the real knowledge by our Republican reps in Washington that they had better find the steel in their spine or get out of the way, and other moves forward that must happen for conservatives will go a long way toward handing the media their heads in a way to slam home the idea they can no longer lie , cheat and viciously slander for their own ends.
Nixon wiretapped the Dems. It was stupid and illegal. It warranted impeachment. And, he was right to resign.
Obama spent $600 million to buy the office of the presidency. okay fine. but, $200 million of that was from untraceable donations. this is a direct violation of the FEC. It makes Nixon’s crimes look like stealing a pack of gum. The Obama campaign financing scandal is worse than Watergate by a long shot.
Of course, the media won’t cover it, and no one has the balls at the FEC to investigate it…for fear of being called a racist. Welcome to Venezuela.
$200 million! But, I heard the Republicans spent $150,000 on clothes for Gov. Palin.
“When you look at the individual treaties, the one negotiated in Vietnam was better than the one in Korea. Had the Dems not dipped a few million people in the grease the treaty in Vietnam did not require our troops to remain. Unlike Korea, we were able to come home.”
The Communists had a considerable military presence in South Vietnam at the time of the accords, which of course later grew significantly. They had none in South Korea at the time of the accords. And have had none since.
Nor were we entirely able to come home after the Vietnam accourds under Nixon’s approach. Nixon counted on the Communists believing he would send the B-52s back in if need be. Nixon had no particular reason to believe this logic could work past January 1977. As it played out Nixon was gone by mid-1974.
None of this is to excuse the Bella Abzugs of the world. But a politician as shrewed as Nixon had to know how difficult it would be to maintain support for the South Vietnamese given the likely Communist aggression.
Good God, can we retire the mom’s basement analogy?! It’s a sloppy cliche and we’re all much smarter than that here.
I was very young when he resigned so I don’t have a strong memory of Nixon as I do Carter or Reagan, so perhaps I was more focused on Langella’s performance as a character, and didn’t see it as an impression. I came out of the film with a lot of sympathy for Nixon, which I didn’t have before. I agree, the interspersed interviews were pointless, but I came away with the feeling that a dilletante got very lucky getting the interview, and his helpers went way over the line in trying to make Nixon look bad. It was also an interesting look at media years ago that in many ways seems much more naive than now. I know enough about the history to look at the movie with a clear eye. It’s not going to change anyone’s opinion of Watergate, but it’s a good movie. I went for the acting, not a history lesson, and it was worth my time.
“Torture does not lead to viable information in a criminal investigation. It never has.”
False. Waterboarding Khalid Sheik Mohammed saved untold lives. The ONLY question remaining is whether those deaths are worth less than making one terrorist more comfortable than we make regular fighter pilots during their SEAR training.
What’s wrong with “planting listening devices” within the DNC, which was suspected of collaborating with communists?…while we were at war with communist North Vietnam, no less? If the RNC was collaborating with Al Qaeda, would it be “illegal” to bug its headquarters?
President Nixon was an evil Republican. It was time to do another movie about how evil Republicans are. That was the entire point.
The left has been unable to PROVE that President Bush broke any laws, so they are forced to return to the only President they can point to who did — perhaps.
“reeks of competence” is a great description. It’s a decent film, but how it’s in Best Picture contention is amazing to me. This film will be mostly forgotten in ten years.
the actress is Rebecca Hall, btw. Caroline Cushing is the character.
Two points:
1.)Another great book that contains a balanced portrait of Pres. Nixon is “Kennedy/Nixon” by Chris Matthews (yes, Mr. “Thrill Down My Leg”, but this was before he embraced the left. This was written when Rush would invite him to guest host his show.) It is a fascinating look at the relationship these two had. Most people don’t realize how friendly they were up until the 1960 debates. This book would make for an incredible movie. Both men entered the House at the same time. Their offices were across the hall from each other. Joe Kennedy contributed to Nixon’s Senatorial campaign. They were each selected by their party to talk at town hall meetings and they traveled together to these meetings. Nixon’s paranoia didn’t manifest until the 1960 election when during the first debate, Nixon believed that people in Ike’s team leaked information about the Soviets and Cuba to Kennedy. It was also during the 1960 election that the relationship turned because Kennedy now saw Nixon as an opponent to be defeated. Their is a great movie here.
2.) Another great political movie is the original “The Manchurian Candidate”. Great performances, suspensful throughout, and little ideology besides we are under threat from a governments, not a corporation.
It is interesting that the argument about methods of thwarting Terrorism are hotly debated. There would be no debate whatsoever if one was not free to make them on boards like this or their family were in imminent danger of beheading because we were living under Islamic law. As the neck hackers raised their weapons, one would be pleading for ANYTHING to intervene and waterboarding would not be left off the table. NOTHING would be left off the table.
It is easy to chat. It is not easy to face these realities. Our President faced those daily and he prevailed on our behalf.
Whether Obama will or will not face those realities and be left wanting or will rise to the challenge will remain to be seen. I don’t have a lot of faith in his abilities based on his two year campaign and what he has said so far. We will see. For those who like to argue these points, by all means continue to argue. We are free, for now, to continue the dialog and as none of us are, thank God , in imminent danger of a head hacking, we can hypothesize endlessly. A luxury afforded by the much maligned President Bush. We will miss him and the wonderful Dick Cheney.
Obama and Biden? Their holding office is a strong signal to our enemies so we should enjoy freedom while we may.
It always irritated me to no end that Nixon was hounded from office for doing what every president known has done: monitor his enemies and the left conduct illegalities all day long and barefaced cover for them as being ‘no big deal’. When the press chooses to front for this there are no crimes. When they choose to hound and harrangue, THEN it is a crime.
I hold as examples Barney Frank. Chris Dodd. Chuck Schumer . Just as the most glaring examples of that. Of course, we could add Blago, Richardson. Emmanuel and now Geitner.. No big deal. THEY are democrats.
I believe Blago is under fire because he knows something they don’t want him to tell. Otherwise, they’d be making excuses for him, too. Tony Rezko must be singing like a bird.
Nixon’s enemies more than anything or any entity was The Press.
As we all know, it still is the enemy of anything that has anything to do with real American Values. As opposed to those practiced by the left charading as Real American Values.
The most amusing irony? Since his Nixon interview, Frost’s most successful long running British TV show is: THROUGH THE KEYHOLE. A group of Z-list guests try to guess the “celebrity” owner of a house from its contents.
Please…Frost was always a bit of a hack. Ever watch “The Frost Report” on Rediffusion? Well, probably not, because I’m old and formerly of Britain. Monty Python (of whom most of the writers were once writing for TFR) satirised him well in a sketch of the Timmy Williams Coffee Time…
“Written by Timmy Williams (read: David Frost)”
“Contributing writers:”
ANd then a string of about 100 names, the REAL jokesmen.
And then there’s his stealing Peter Cook’s act on Beyond The Fringe…
The audience were mature, a demographic for a movie with seemingly limited appeal. The trailer suggests a feature-length debate akin to court room drama. However, this fails to illustrate the background to the debate which is just as illuminating as the debate itself. Sir David Frost is now a renound political journalist but this film fails to identify why, instead concentrating on his knowledge of the media and its public as well as his entrepreneurial side and playboy lifestyle. Frost, played by Michael Sheen (who also played former Prime Minister Tony Blair to aplomb) drops his playboy lifestyle and media savvy approach after Nixon, played by Frank Langella, toys with him with all the tactical strategy of a consummate politician and possibly the keenest intellect of his generation of American Presidents. It is only by the final debate, when probed over Watergate (the abiding memory of Nixon’s reign and resignation) that Nixon admits openly that he realizes that only he believes it is not illegal act if it is the President’s action. This is the key point of the movie and the haunted expression on Nixon’s face immediately after making his admission is worth the theatre admission cost. This is also the converging of two men’s paths whereby Frost becomes a more pragmatic and faithful man as Nixon adopts a more relieved persona and falls into the trappings of retirement. One man’s career ends as another man’s career blossoms but that was always going to be the outcome of Frost versus Nixon.
To see the real Richard Nixon your have to see the documentary Apocalypse Africa Made in America. It contains the recordings of Richard Nixon that were once sealed in which he refers to blacks as ‘just out of the trees with spears’ and aborted black fetuses as ‘the little black bastards.’ What Nixon and his cronies did to Africa makes the Iraq war look like child’s play. This documentary is a must see. Richard Nixon’s sins have been overlooked for far too long, and must be re-investigated for history to be complete. Google NSSM 200 and you’ll see.
You must be logged in to post a comment.