Nixon

Buena Vista Pictures | Release Date: December 20, 1995

7.1	USER SCORE Generally favorable reviews based on 43 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Buy on

Stream On

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

Compi24Dec 14, 2012

Oliver Stone's refreshingly sympathetic portrayal of the 37th U.S. President succeeds as a fabulously written Shakespearean tragedy and a true testament to Anthony Hopkins vast acting prowess.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

amheretojudgeJan 14, 2019

Guilty Or Not Guilty.

Nixon Stone's now-a-complete anthology on American politics from '60s to '70s, is a set that may dwell well in contrast to his rest of the installment, but as an individual, in its single entity, it is a "blah" forwardGuilty Or Not Guilty.

Nixon

Stone's now-a-complete anthology on American politics from '60s to '70s, is a set that may dwell well in contrast to his rest of the installment, but as an individual, in its single entity, it is a "blah" forward pass. This meticulous venture of Stone was clearly not easy to bind it all in one act. Such political films that barely has any concrete material to follow, takes a lot of work to narrate it linearly with a definite structure. And covering all the controversies and debates, Stone has put up a behemoth stature for us to climb, it is a long way up but it is worth all the effort.

Unlike, his other similar features, this one lacks enthralling encounters that leads on electrifying debates, in fact if anything, it is too diplomatic to lose its control and let things flow, Stone is too calculative to make it cinematic. And if there are these many restraints on script, the making of the film, is boost off supremely by its stunning cast. And the titled character is played by Hopkins whose research on Nixon is a testament to his sheer brilliant performance. His best bits are when he shares the screen by his supporting actress Allen, who is equally challenging to him on screen.

The eerie editing and camera work does help Stone to make his point clear, but Hopkins's act has a rhythm of its own, the first time he convinces Allen to not leave him is the apt example for it. These are also tiny packets of firecrackers that we get in this overstretched version of Stone's dive on shady political drama, since the rest of the part is too mellow to demand our attention. Nixon managed to lose even in comparison to Stone's JFK, it is a biography that no one asked for.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

MovieGuysAug 14, 2014

Nixon, while succeeding as a rather sympathetic character study of the man, drags on and on for over 3 hours without a moment of happiness or joy. It is a very depressing and sullen look at Nixon's life, even if the movie works on this angle.Nixon, while succeeding as a rather sympathetic character study of the man, drags on and on for over 3 hours without a moment of happiness or joy. It is a very depressing and sullen look at Nixon's life, even if the movie works on this angle. However, Hopkins' performance as well as the subtle nuances in the cinematography and the subliminal messages make it an important film to see, flaws and all.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

TrailesqueApr 9, 2018

I wasn't a fan of this on first viewing, mostly because I didn't buy Hopkins as Nixon, and found segments of it dull. But recently I have come to appreciate it more - it is a very ambitious film, and overall it does a fine job of telling theI wasn't a fan of this on first viewing, mostly because I didn't buy Hopkins as Nixon, and found segments of it dull. But recently I have come to appreciate it more - it is a very ambitious film, and overall it does a fine job of telling the Nixon story, of course with a fair amount of Stonian poetic license. For example, Stone concludes that the notorious missing 18 minutes of recorded conversations must have been about the JFK assassination, a speculation I don't recall seeing anyplace else. Most of the performances are first rate, Joan Allen's in particular. Hopkins gets the voice right, but his attractive features fail to convey Nixon's famous ugliness, and he doesn't bring to life the man's nastiness and vindictiveness. There are a lot of interesting visual techniques put into play here, as usual for a Stone film, and the script is impressive too.

Tricky Dick Nixon was a hated figure, mostly because of the Vietnam War, and this was something that clearly weighed on him. The film is surprisingly sympathetic and portrays him as a basically decent man who went astray in a couple of areas. It is difficult to understand today why he had so many supporters. Perhaps he conveyed an image of steady, serious leadership? All in all, a good political biopic that held my attention for 3.5 hours - that is something noteworthy right there.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

FilipeNetoJul 21, 2018

Richard Nixon is one of the most controversial heads of state of the twentieth century. During his tenure as president of the United States, he earned a general hatred almost as high as the power and influence of his office. He wasRichard Nixon is one of the most controversial heads of state of the twentieth century. During his tenure as president of the United States, he earned a general hatred almost as high as the power and influence of his office. He was investigated, vilified, attacked but never condemned. Even though I'm not an American nor an expert of these period, I feel it is necessary to make an unbiased and objective historical analysis of this president, I just don't know if that has already happened. Even so, the film we have here didn't seem partial, trying to remain neutral to some extent.

Directed by Oliver Stone, it's not appropriate for people who don't know anything about Nixon, or Watergate, or this period of American history, since the film wasn't wasting time explaining anything. So if you didn't understand why Nixon opened the US to China or what was the Watergate or the Bay of Pigs, I suggest you ignore the movie for now and first go read some books or see some documentaries about it. Another problem I want to highlight is the huge web of conspiracies and obscure theories that the film weaves around the president. It never lets us understand what "crimes of responsibility" Nixon has committed. The film also suggests, without subtleties, that Nixon was a simple man who rose in life but wasn't accepted by the "American aristocracy" because of this humble origin, which left him deeply hurt. I don't know if it's true, but the film indicates that as origin of President's lack of scruples.

Anthony Hopkins assures the main role in an interesting performance, but that's far from being his best. He made a good preparation and tried his best to be Nixon, but has few physical similarities with him, not to mention his extreme difficulty in imitating president's characteristic voice. Anyway, Hopkins was brilliant at his character's psychological work, with most dramatic scenes going on as he, semi-drunk, reviews his decisions while listening to his famous audio tapes. The remaining cast does a reasonable supporting work. I will not close my review without left a word of appreciation to the sets and costumes, which rebuilt the atmosphere and culture of the Seventies quite well, much like the rooms and offices within White House. Not being exceptional, it's an elegant, quality film, that helps us think about an important period in American history.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews