Thankfully Gus Van Sant returns to his "I want to tell a good story" director form, as he's shown in films like "Good Will Hunting", at least for the moment ditched his film school "I want to be as obscure and artsy as possible" as he's shown in films like "Elephant". Welcome back, Gus.
This movie is an absolute triumph in what I think will be a huge Oscar contender, especially for our buddy Sean Penn, who's been craving another Oscar since "Mystic River" (undeserved win). I cannot see anyone beating him out from this masterful performance. He is dead on with Harvey Milk, and not a trace of the blowhard asswipe exists, at least for a two hour period.
The film begins in 1978 with Milk making a recording of his thoughts, as if he is going to be "assassinated" sometime, and wants to be clear on what his agenda has always been, and that's to be open about yourself, and not hide anything. Of course the film sinks its teeth into the gay scene in San Francisco pretty deeply, and those homophobes out there who cannot stomach seeing two men kiss...probably either need to close their eyes (like children at an "R" rated movie) or avoid the film altogether. But you'd be missing out on a pretty powerful film. One of the most admirable things about Milk was that he was (or, became) unafraid of who he was, and especially in politics, that is very hard to pull off. He does nail it perfectly when he tells his then lover Scott, played by James Franco, "Politics is theatre."
On the other side of him, however, is the very meek and self-loathing Dan White, who is played by Josh Brolin, another Oscar contender for this year. He plays White as a guy who is so seething with jealousy and envy that he doesn't see the picture that Milk wants in this country, and that he actually wants White to be a part of it because, as Milk put it to his colleagues, Dan is like him. Only, Dan is like the old Harvey Milk, who hid in the subways of New York City growing up, lying to his parents about his sexual orientation, covering everything up.
For a film, though, that could have been just one big homoerotic circle jerk--it actually doesn't grand stand about gays. It shows gays as who they are--people. It doesn't stereotype, or at least--it doesn't INTEND to. I mean, San Francisco in the 70's pretty much speaks for itself. Lot of colorful people, to say the least. But it shows an honesty about a group of people who, like anyone, wants civil rights. And that's why this movie works so well. It doesn't have a lot of scenes of police beating up gays--although that's hinted at at times. It doesn't have the typical "gays being beat up by stereotypical homophobes to get the point across". It's an honest portrayal, and I think because of the fact that Van Sant shows restraint, it comes off as more powerful.
It does, however, spare no opportunity to show the intolerance of Milk's detractors, such as the people behind Proposition 6 (to take away gay rights, and to cause them to lose their jobs) like John Briggs. And that's partly what this movie is about as well, about intolerance, and about fear, and about ignorance.
This is by no means a family film or a film that you just go to chew some popcorn over. It's a biopic about an important leader that really doesn't get mentioned much in our media, and it's as strong and moving as other recent biopics like "Ray" and "Walk the Line", and it deserves to be noticed.
out of
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
