How we face history is an unfailing topic. After watching "The Queen" last year, I was shocked. There is such a group of filmmakers who can take major historical events in the past ten years as a blueprint, take a large number of political figures who are still in political high positions as the protagonists, and shoot a biographical theme but the climax of the plot is not lost in any movie. Film. History is the history that is told, and it is the words of many people. Only by calmly commenting with a cold-eyed objective perception can it not cause controversy, and it is very difficult to achieve this. Judging from the writing point of the script of the play itself, it seems that the director is trying to pry into the true heart of the parties through the coat of scandal, so as to write a more humane Nixon. History is history. It is made up of many chances and coincidences, so why is the truth not the only pursuit? The screenwriter did not try to spend his main energy on how to truly restore history. Morgan also stated in the interview, "I found an excellent entry point, that is, everyone is a member of society, and this person’s Natural attributes will restrict his social attributes. Nixon is a politician, but his negative, introverted, and suspicious character restrains himself, so there will be Watergate. But Foster is a natural communicator with others. Experts, many people will love him involuntarily. Therefore, in my opinion, he is the most suitable host." This is also true. The focus of the big-screen version of "Foster Dialogue with Nixon" is neither the pursuit of historical truth nor the true restoration of the situation at the time, but a deep understanding of the dialogue under this historical event from the perspective of human nature. both sides.
Secondly, from the point of view of the film itself, it still retains the past style of Morgan's screenwriter and director Howard's directing skills. Although the screenwriter tried to avoid it, the film was inevitably included in the ranks of political films. It is precisely because of this that the film is only released in the United States. Shooting political films requires the producer to have an extremely deep understanding of the background of the time, only in this way can the director be able to perform better. Director Howard did a good job on this point. The film closely revolves around the four-day interview with Nixon conducted by David Foster from beginning to end, with almost no redundancy.
Third, because of the film’s own interview format and the existence of objective history, all the lines in the film have to copy the original dialogues of the year, which greatly limits the play of the screenwriter. However, we can still see the skill of the screenwriter. The focus of the story was inadvertently shifted out of the interview. The changes in the hearts of both parties before and after the interview complemented the interview itself, which fully played the role of the story in "Queen".
Finally, as mentioned above, due to the limitation of the film's genre and content, this film is filled with lines, talks, monologues and inner explanations of the characters from beginning to end, but just like the story of "Queen", there is nothing in the process of watching it. The dull or boring feeling. In fact, as long as this is achieved, the film has been successful.
Whether it is out of obsession with history or interest in the film itself, it deserves our attention.
View more about
Frost/Nixon reviews
