I found this to be very compelling. I think Nixon is one of the most interesting political figures of all time, and for a guy who hugely wanted approval from others and wanted to be judged as a man who made great contributions to society, for him to open up to Frost was quite incredible. Nixon seemed to warm up to him, couple with what must have been a strong desire to get these secrets and guilt that he held onto out in the open. That seems to be what the American public wanted as well, some degree of honesty to come out of Richard Nixon. The actor who played Frost looked quite a bit like him and seemed to capture his mannerisms, and while the actor who played Nixon did a good job, he didn't much resemble Nixon. That being said, I was quite interested in this film the whole time and it illumited some things regarding that peice of history.

It's a good film from a "dispassionate" view. I expected more " fireworks" than were shown, but the fourth and final interview kind of made up for the previous three.
Casual viewers won't particularly write rave reviews, but those of us who were very familiar with Nixon and his Watergate will feel some satisfaction.
One comment on Nixon's Presidency. He accomplished more than just being tagged for Watergate. He opened previous closed doors on trade with China, and his Secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, fulfilled his position competently.

The descriptions of other contributors offer ample information concerning the contents and direction that this film takes. The pace and economy of the film are accurate enough to be convincing, relative to the actual interviews, and the film does offer something of the drama contained in the actual interviews themselves. The most nagging thing about this film is the feeling I got from it concerning the sincerity of Nixon's admission of wrong-doing. The film made me start to think that Nixon's view of domestic affairs played second fiddle to his foreign policy. I got the sense that maybe the Vietnam war and Cambodia were necessary in order to provide the US, and Nixon, with the credibility to act as arbiter in the political conflict between the Soviet Union and China. Nixon always said that it was to be a 'contained' war, and he was very appeasing to criticisms of it long after the fact. This doesn't square with his escalation of the conflict at the time. His presidential pardon seemed too convenient to answer the Watergate scandal. I wonder if it was unspoken US policy not to win the war but instead to agitate the political concept of communism to show US self-interest as anti-communist. The killing of masses of civilians was a demonstration of commitment to this agitation, one that would resonate globally. This may have convinced both the Chinese and the Russians that the US and Nixon, uninterested in a positive program of communism, could provide the most appropriate mitigation of their own ever increasing and aggressive differences, and possibly help prevent them from going to war with each other. This film put doubts into my mind about the sincerity of Nixon's declaration of wrong-doing but a willingness to admit to wrong doing perhaps to deflect attention to other, more urgent aspects of his policy. He was pardoned, he got wealthy, and he broke the law, there must have been something significant enough for him to take the fall, while also needing to remain secret. It can only have had to do with using the war in Vietnam as credibility to prevent a superpower war between China and Russia that may have been more costly.

The film:

Ron Howard has directed a great film. The surprise this strikes me with, thinking about the director of such pap as "Da Vinci Code" and swill like "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" is palpable.

"Frost/Nixon" works on several levels. Acting: Michael Sheen is very good as the unctuous David Frost, at first out of his depth but then finding his footing. Frank Langella is very good as Nixon. His portrayal, compared to Anthony Hopkins', is a bit more of an imitation, but still captures internal feelings and nuances in an affecting way. The period feeling is tremendous. The mid 1970's aesthetic pervades the film, and the lighting and quality of the HD presentation shows us every gold and avocado highlight. The pacing of the script is very crisp and never dull. So, all told, it is a very well done film. It may not deliver the sort of zeitgeist-defining aura of Oliver Stone's film, but is more focused on the personal elements than the over-arching ones.

The Blu-Ray:

WOW. Now THIS is a High Definition presentation of a movie. Detail is astonishing. Facial pores, dust motes, cloth textures, general color saturation, and black levels are all astonishingly good. When TV shots are used or simulated, individual pixels can be made out. Film grain is present and beautiful, not having been scrubbed away by any DNR. No edge enhancement or jagged edges are visible.

It is, frankly, as perfect-looking a presentation as I can imagine. It might be the single best Blu-Ray I have personally seen. Now, this won't be a film that some will want to demo a Blu-Ray player, containing no explosions, spaceships or car chases. But have no doubts. This is utterly spectacular material.

The audio is a DTS mix that does a good job mixing dialogue, music, and sound effects. I never had a problem with the mix and did not have to adjust the volume once for clarity.


In terms of extras, there about 48 minutes of documentary material, split into 4 programs, that could have been combined into one master program. Two programs are making of material, 6 minutes talk about Nixon's library and and 7.5 minutes tackle the actual interviews. All of this material is in 1080i. 30 minutes of deleted and extended scenes are presented in 480p - most are superfluous and it's good that they were cut. Ron Howard supplies a commentary to the film. It's a decent but not overwhelming slate of extras.

*********

If you're a fan of political drama, this is a no-brainer. If you love the Stone film, this is a great companion piece. It's a tremendous HD representation of a very good movie, with a fair number of extras.

This movie paints David Frost's interview of Richard Nixon as a verbal boxing match. In part, the interview no doubt did get framed that way - as a result of Nixon's own adversarial spirit, and as a result of the hopes many members of Frost's staff entertained of getting a breakthrough admission of guilt from Nixon in regard to Watergate. However Ron Howard, the Director of this film, said this combative aspect of the interview was enhanced in order to make the film more visually dynamic.

Some further poetic license is taken with Frost's reputation. The people ringing this debate are shown repeatedly dismissing Frost as a playboy Hollywood interviewer, as a lightweight unequal to the task of asking any hard-edged political questions, and particularly unequal to the task of getting Nixon to confess to wrong-doing. Again, Ron Howard says that Frost's reputation was skewed this way for the purposes of projecting his encounter with Nixon as a more arresting, more suspenseful "David" and Goliath contest.

In actuality, Frost has always had the reputation of being much more of an insightful interviewer. When he had his American interview show, people would chuckle a bit at his trademark question, "How would you define love?" However overall, it was usually recognized that his offbeat personal questions did end by producing a remarkably intimate, revealing portrait of his subjects. He has always been known as a good listener, as someone able to catch at any loose thread that a person might present. He would then put himself in a position to gently, sympathetically pull on that thread until he unraveled many of the mysteries of his subject's personality.

So in watching this movie, I found myself wishing that the interview had, both in reality and for the purposes of this dramatization, gotten framed less as war and more as exploration. I wondered what might have been elicited if Frost had not been pressured to abandon his usual avuncular style in favor of a hard-hitting, "nail him" approach. I would at some level have preferred that the movie could have been entitled - not Frost-slash-Nixon (Frost/Nixon) - but in a greater spirit of cooperation, Frost-hyphen-Nixon (Frost-Nixon).

For a moment, I thought perhaps such a wish was wrong-headed when I saw Frost elicit what became the advertising trailer for the film - Nixon declaring that when a President decrees something - "then it's NOT illegal." However in his commentary, Ron Howard revealed that this was perhaps the one place where the film strayed from the verbatim text of the interview. In actuality, Nixon made that telling remark in another interview, outside this adversarial series.

Whether you enjoy the blood sport slant given to these proceedings though, or whether you watch this film wondering what might have been revealed under less pressured circumstances - you're bound to be engaged and educated by this reenactment. Furthermore, Ron Howard's Director's commentary is serious, intelligent, and worthwhile.

The one disappointment connected with this DVD is the listing of the "real" interview among its bonus features. Actually, this feature includes only a few seconds of footage from the real interview. The rest of the feature is just another "The Making of Frost/Nixon." However, this film will probably pique your curiosity about the actual interviews and propel you to seek out that footage - so that you can judge for yourself how different inflections, editing, and context - might have recast this historic encounter.

The characters really come alive for the viewer, it is intense and informative. I highly recommend this one.