This movie had all the elements that I like in a movie. It had great actors, suspense, a solid story and it was based on true events
Theme: The theme of this movie was based on the age-old fight between good and evil. Two journalists stumble upon a story about a break-in at the offices of the National Democratic Party that turns into an investigation into White House corruption that goes all the way up to the President of the United States of America.
Relationship of the Parts to the Whole:
In many parts of the film, we see the struggle between doing what is right and going along with corruption, in order to protect careers and lifestyle. It is evident when Woodward and Bernstein try to interview employees of Creep (Committee to Re-elect the President). They received no cooperation at all during the first attempted interviews, due to employees trying to protect their jobs and lifestyle. In another part of the film, Debbie Sloan convinces her husband to resign when they discover the depths of corruption. She proclaims that, “This is an honest house” when the reporters come to interview her husband. She wanted them to know that neither she nor her husband wanted any part of the dishonesty and corruption that they found happening around them. The struggle was also evident in the conversations with Donald Segretti, although he was a bit more arrogant about his role in the corruption. He knew what he was doing was wrong, but dismissed it as trivial. He maintained that it was not as bad as what he did in college, excusing himself as a college prankster rather than part of the corruption. At the same time, you could see and feel his emotional struggle as he realized the enormity of what he was facing. I saw this same emotional struggle between good and evil in many more situations, including the exchange between the reporters and the co-worker who was dating the Creep employee, the bookkeeper at Creep who knew about the illegal activities, and even Deep Throat, who would provide confirmations, but not information, even though he knew the level of corruption and the names of those involved.
Subjective Evaluation:
I found it fascinating the Robert Redford both directed and acted in this film, and that he could stay so focused on each of these roles. The integrity and endless amount of research that went into this film to keep its credibility is mind-boggling. I have so much respect for the final product, knowing how important it is to remember our history so we don’t repeat it. It is a film that I will encourage both of my children to see. It was such a huge part of my formative years, and saddens me that neither one of them really understands the enormity of what happened in the early 70’s.
The Film as Moral, Philosophical or Social Statement:
This film has an abundance of moral, philosophical and social statements that are as relevant today as they were when this story first broke in 1972. Robert Redford did an outstanding job of telling a true story, but giving it the weight and seriousness it deserved. If you didn’t know that it really happened, you would have to marvel at the complexity of the story line. Knowing that it was true, I was impressed with the way the director told the story, made it seamless and taught some very deep lessons without preaching. I believe this is a very important film and one that will watched for years to come by many generations. It has, and will have a serious impact on those watching it and interested in the history it has to offer. In one scene, a women says to Bernstein that he shouldn’t believe the myths of the White House. Society needs to hear and remember this.
Works Cited
Boggs, J. M., & Petrie, D. W. (2008). The Art of Watching Films (7th Edition ed.). Ashford University: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment