IMDb > Frost/Nixon (2008) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Frost/Nixon More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 16 of 25: [Prev][11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [Next]
Index 241 reviews in total 

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

very good,not spectacular

Author: disdressed12 from Canada
11 May 2009

while i thought this was very good film about the infamous Frost/Nixon interviews,i don't think it was spectacular.i thought Frank Langella was very good as Nixon,although i have read comments on this site that his accent was horrible.having not yet seen the actual interviews,i can't comment on that.i also thought Micheal Sheen was excellent as Frost.he made me completely forget his character in Underworld I and II.the supporting cast was also very good,with Oliver Platt,Sam Rockwell,Matthew Macfadyen,and Kevin Bacon.however,i was most impressed by Rebecca for the movie itself,i found it just this side of was interesting,but it didn't have me on the edge of my seat or glued to the screen.still,it is a very good film.for me,Frost/Nixon is an 8/10

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Re-lives the 1970s Frost/Nixon interviews.

Author: TxMike from Houston, Tx, USA, Earth
27 April 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The subject of this movie is one that is already very well-known, and one which every viewer should know the outcome, before they see it. So, it has be be done in a fresh manner, telling us what we didn't already know. Otherwise, why not just view the tapes of the original presentation?

Before I watched this movie, on DVD, I commented to my wife "How did they make this into a two hour movie?" The way they did it was to tell the back-story, of how the idea of the Frost/Nixon interviews came up in the first place, the negotiations, showing Nixon as always somewhat greedy to get a bit more pay, the efforts of Frost's team to get financial backing, the research they did, the preparation Nixon's team did to help him be general and avoid getting into a negative light.

Frank Langella is just plain masterful as Richard Nixon. He was nominated for Best Actor in this role and could have won it, but as luck would have it there were several award-caliber performances that year. Still, even though Langella doesn't look that much like Nixon we soon forgot that we were watching an actor. His performance really embodied the Nixon that I knew back in the 1960s and 1970s.

Michael Sheen, who was so good as PM Tony Blair in "The Queen" has the role her of David Frost. I was not so familiar with Frost, but Sheen does a fine job also.

Much of what we see is a fictionalized account of what lead up to the interviews, and what went on behind the scenes during the interviews, but with proper research I feel that what we see is plausible, and certainly worth a viewing.

Good movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Well crafted movie

Author: Andrew Marshall from United Kingdom
12 February 2009

This film is based on the period after Nixon resigned the US presidency. It follows the run up to his interview by David Frost who was a fairly average talk show host anywhere in the world that he could hold down a job. All the major US TV networks wanted the interview for themselves and did not take kindly to Frost landing the job mainly through his own enterprise.

The film is a classic battle of David and Golliath. Personally I love the verbal battle between characters more than physical battles and anyone of the same opinion should love the film. If you need a fix of action from your movies you are probably well advised to skip this.

Frank Langella is brilliant as Nixon and Sheen isn't overshadowed either as Frost. There are a number of elements to the film that are open to interpretation and I'm not as convinced about the main conclusion of the 'victor' of the interview as I was before seeing it. Ron Howard also does a reasonable job and it's always interesting to spot which role his brother will land.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Great performance of Frank Langella

Author: QTarantino-Fan from Germany
3 January 2010

First I have to say that i'm a German and way too young to have seen the interviews, which means that I didn't had a good knowing of the historical circumstances. Nevertheless I really enjoyed the movie, which describes the interviews between British talk show-master David Frost and former US-President Richard Nixon in 1977 and the events which eventually led to these interviews.

The best part of the movie is without question Frank Langella's performance as Richard Nixon. As Nixon he is unbelievable convincing and even resembles him physically in a striking way. He really gives you a good idea how Nixon was, even if you don't know much about him. Another plus-factor is that Langella doesn't act too over the top as Nixon. He really embodies Nixon and isn't some flat caricature of him. On the other side there's Martin Sheen's Frost. Don't get me wrong Sheen delivers an excellent performance - perhaps the best of his career - but in contrast to Langella he just seems a little pale. Though considering that Nixon is a lot more powerful character to play it's quite understandable that Langella appears more convincing.

The rest of the movie is well done with a good direction by Ron Howard for whom I'm glad that he doesn't only direct stuff like The Da Vinci Code etc. The pace of the movie is well executed but a little bit too conservative in terms that Howard doesn't differ from the usual story line telling formula.

Overall it can be said that the great performance by Langella adds real excellence to an good movie.

9/10 stars

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Frost/ Nixon got me stunned...

Author: buggyinthevolvo from Australia
27 November 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Frost/Nixon. Amazing visually, by performance, acting and directing. Frank Langella plays the role of President Nixon [ and which he did very well],and the man who plays David frost [ forgot his name..] This movie uses the unique skill of building up for the whole 105 minutes and then releases all the excitement during the climax scene between Frost and Nixon, it never bored me, and it was a great effort of story, drama and some stunning scenes. It may be hard to understand for some people as lots of events occur during the final interview, and people may get confused on what is going on so far. But for me it was a summer winner. After watching this film, i felt more than satisfied and I'm pretty sure you will feel that way too. Just be warned it is a political film.

overall, it s a big winner for me. Highly recommended.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Hello Mr.President, Good Evening & Welcome!

Author: ShadeGrenade from Ambrosia
17 November 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In 1977, David Frost's interviews with disgraced ex-President Richard Nixon attracted the highest ratings ever for an American news programme. They are regarded now as a highpoint in current affairs broadcasting.

It is easy to forget how ubiquitous old Frosty was then; forever jetting back and forth across the Atlantic on Concorde, hosting chat-shows here and in America. As the '70's arrived, he focused less on satirical comedy of the sort he'd made his name with ( such as 'T.W.3 ) and concentrated on 'big star' interviews. But by '77, the perception was that his career had nosedived. He then got the idea of interviewing 'Tricky Dicky', and getting him to apologise for Watergate. Frost was no stranger to slippery customers, having famously torn insurance swindler Dr.Emil Savundra to pieces back in 1967. Nixon represented the ultimate challenge. When no network agreed to pay the ex-President, Frost was forced to approach big business interests, cap in hand. The programmes went ahead.

From the onset, it looked as though Frost had his work cut out for him. His very first question - "Why didn't you burn the tapes?" - was met by a long, rambling answer that told no-one nothing. Other questions were met with similar unhelpful responses. It must have looked as though Frost was wasting his time ( and other people's money ). But then a remarkable thing happened. Frost's research uncovered new facts about Watergate; these enabled him to ask searing, probing questions which wore Nixon down and got him to speak from the heart, something no-one had previously managed to do. It was a personal triumph for Frost.

You would think that a film about a television interview might turn out boring, but 'Frost/Nixon' is far from that. Peter Morgan's script ( based on his play ) is literate and absorbing. Frost's verbal battles with Nixon are riveting, a meeting of powerful minds. Tremendous performances from Michael Sheen and Frank Langella. Sheen gets 'Frost' to a tee, while Langella's 'Nixon' comes over as remarkably sympathetic, outshining even Anthony Hopkins' performance in Oliver Stone's 'Nixon'. I am not a big fan of the films of Ron Howard, but was impressed greatly by this. Another amazing thing is that it makes John Birt ( the man who sacked Stanley Baxter from London Weekend Television and then crucified the B.B.C. ) seem likable!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Engaging and worth watching

Author: BrianMemphis from United States
9 November 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The film is framed by shots of TV cameras from Nixon's point of view - at the beginning the camera Nixon is resigning into and at the end the camera into which he apologizes. As one of the characters states, the movie is about the "reductive power of television." Nixon understands this, tries very hard to manipulate TV to his advantage, and fails. He's haunted by TV from his earliest debates to the very end. (Is the scene with the dog intended to further drive home this point by reminding the audience of the 'Checkers' speech?) A complete opposite approach from Nixon, Frost builds a career by embracing the shallowness of TV and is ultimately rewarded for it. Excellent performances all around, nice interplay between the two main characters over a pair of shoes.

The movie is probably about as exciting as it possibly can be, despite the fact that it is about a TV interview. In the end, like an old western the main characters face each other alone, with even their support teams watching from separate rooms through the filter of television.

Sure to attract and entertain US history buffs, the movie will inevitably be compared to 'All the President's Men' but should not be. Neither this movie nor the interviews have the same level of historical significance as the reporters uncovering the actual events. In other words, don't expect 'Frost/Nixon' to replace 'All the President's Men' in your high school history classroom anytime soon. A more apt comparison would be to the movie 'Quiz Show' - this movie feels like the 1970s in the same way 'Quiz Show' felt like the 1950s, and it attempts to add some depth to the dimensions of the characters we watch on TV. Another comparison that comes to mind is to the recent Richard Gere movie 'The Hoax' - Gere's character approaches and pushes his project with the same intensity as Frost in this film.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Heavyweight, and exhilaratingly entertaining

Author: Harry T. Yung ( from Hong Kong
5 March 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Watching the opening news clips is re-living the history of Watergate. Just as one of the commentaries intimated, I was glued to the TV every evening watching the judiciary investigations by the Senate Committee under Sam Ervin and Howard Baker. Subpoenas brought before the Committee the infamous four: Ehrlichman, Haldeman, Mitchell and Dean (there was even a spoof song written with the four names as title). But I stopped following the events after Nixon's resignation, and missed out on the dramatic Frost interviews. Thanks to the movie, it's better late than ever.

The preliminary, which occupies about a third of the 2-hour movie, is already addictively captivating. The two camps are briskly established. On Nixon's side is doggedly hard-as-steel aid Jack Brennan played by equally hard-as-steel Kevin Bacon, as well as world-wise contact man Swifty Lazar played masterfully by Toby Jones (who would have given Philip Seymour Hoffman a run for his money with his own portrayal of Capote in "Infamous" (2006)). In Frost's camp we first see partner-in-crime (a manner of speaking) John Birt, played effectively by Matthew Macfadyen (who played Mr Darcy in the 2005 version of "Pride and prejudice"). Then, recruited into the team are two top-notch people: researcher James Reston Jr played by Sam Rockwell (who played Jesse James' brother Charley, in that 2007 movie with a title too long for me to repeat) and TV camera expert Bob Zelnick (played by veteran actor Oliver Platt). To add a romantic touch, playing Frost's newly-acquainted girlfriend Caroline Cushing, is beguiling Rebecca Hall (remember her award-deserving performance as Vicky in "Vicky Christina Barcelona).

The heavyweights are of course Frank Langella and Michael Sheen, and this movie has indeed been likened to a heavyweight boxing championship match, by just about every critic. Frost, hitherto a successful yet never seriously recognized entertainment show host has a heavy (and reckless, claims many) financial stake in this series of interview shows as his door to fame and fortune. Nixon looks towards this as a heaven-sent opportunity to win back the support of the people, his door back into the limelight of politics which he has sorely missed. In the beginning, looking at the track record of Nixon's cunning manipulating skills, it would seem that Frost is a lightweight stepping into the ring to challenge a heavyweight. But as the bouts unfold, the story of David and Goliath gradually emerges. Nothing more needs to be said other than this is stage drama at its best (this is originally a stage play performed by the same two gentlemen).

Michael Sheen is excellent as David Frost, but it's Frank Langella's portrayal of Richard Nixon that deserves an Oscar, with due respect to Sean Penn.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Better than I expected

Author: richard-1787 ( from United States
1 March 2009

I haven't (yet) seen the play on which this movie is based, so I can't say whether it's faithful to it, better, worse, different, etc. All I know is the movie, which I just saw in the theater.

It was a little disconcerting for me at first, as I kept seeing David Frost in terms of former Prime Minister Tony Blair (because the actor who plays Frost played Blair in The Queen). That's not the movie's fault, but it definitely skewed how I first saw Frost, i.e., I didn't see him as the largely frivolous man that contemporary viewers were used to seeing - even though the movie did a good job of presenting that aspect of Frost's career at that point.

It also took me a little time to get used to Langella as Nixon. Because he doesn't look like Nixon, I at first saw a bad impressionist doing Nixon. Again, that wasn't the movie's fault. Langella doesn't try to do an impression of Nixon. But it took me awhile to see him as Nixon. Once my mind made that shift, my involvement very much changed.

For the better. This movie gets better and better as it goes on. Once it gets to the preparations for the final interview, it really becomes a first-rate movie. By the end, I was very moved. Which surprised me. I didn't feel at all sorry for Nixon, nor did I feel any great joy at Frost's eventual success. The movie doesn't try to make you cheer for the latter or weep for the former. Rather, I had a feeling of sadness at seeing what a deeply flawed person Nixon turns out to be, and the thought that such a man led our nation, and mislead it, with that flaw.

It's definitely a movie worth seeing. It might be better watching it at home, as the first part may not hold you and being at home would give you a chance to get up to go to the kitchen for something, etc. But once the preparation for the final interview begins, you will be happy you rented it, and won't have any desire to take a break.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Excellent...Well made.. Well Acted.. nearly a perfect movie.

Author: haider ejaz (hyder_sagg2003) from Pakistan
22 February 2009

Direction is fine.... I think Ron Howard has given his hardest work to this movie. A beautiful mind (Which i think is better than this one) was also his excellent work but this movie is better directed.

The Issue i have with this movie is, It doesn't appeal The whole World... I am from Asia I wasn't aware of President Nixon before (and i didn't want to because there is a lot to know). But this movie didn't bore me infect I was curious in some scenes.

The Best part of the movie is Frank Langella. He did his part so well and is a real contender with Sean Penn and Mickey Rourke. Michael Sheen was also good. And the Environment created in movie was pretty authentic some times I felt THAT I wasn't watching a movie.The ending was STRONG.

At the end I would repeat that Frost/Nixon is a very Well made, Well Acted film but it isn't much appealing 8/10.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 16 of 25: [Prev][11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history