Reds

Starring: Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, Jack Nicholson, Maureen Stapleton, Gene Hackman, Edward Hermann, Jerzy Kosinski, Paul Sorvino, M. Emmet Walsh
Directed by: Warren Beatty
Rating: R
Genre: Drama
1981

Times Seen:
Tim: 1

Summary: An American journalist (Warren Beatty) gets involved with the Communist revolution in Russia and tries to encourage revolution at home.

Review:

Tim: Some movies are easy to write about, some are difficult to write about, and some are impossibly difficult to write about. Reds is the latter. I really don't even know where to begin with this film. There's a lot I love about this movie, some things I hate, and a lot that bewildered me. I've thought a great deal about this film and what I think about it. I definitely did not love this film, but I have to admit Warren Beatty crafted an impressive, bold movie here. This is a film that's worth seeing, even if it's a film I never want to see again.

I do give some credit to Beatty for making a movie about an American Communist sympathizer. That's certainly not a story very many actors would be willing to tell, let alone write, star in, and direct. I know Beatty is an ultra-Liberal, and I have to admit he's strong views in politics slightly turn me off about him- and this film. I wonder if Beatty was trying to tell a story about a complex, controversial American, or if he was telling the story of a man he identified with and shared his philosophy. I hope it's the former. I admire John Reed's passion, but I don't share many of his beliefs. Still, Beatty knew this had to be a controversial movie, and I applaud him for moving forward regardless.

I also want to comment on the length of the film, because again, it's polarizing. The movie clocks in at 195 minutes. That's stunningly long. There's movies about Jesus Christ that aren't that long, and Beatty is asking us to spend over 3 hours on a Communist sympathizer? It just felt like the movie became too bloated. It certainly could have used a few more edits. I will say that the length of the film allows Beatty to craft a truly epic movie. The scope of the film is certainly impressive. Unfortunately, it also makes this a real beast of a movie to sit through. Add in the fact that Beatty's film moves at a very slow pace, and you have some issues. Reds is a movie I'm glad I watched, but I honestly can't see myself ever watching it again. The film was good on first viewing, but I didn't take enough from this film to invest 3 hours and 15 minutes of my life ever again. I see both sides of this issue- as I said, it's polarizing.

The cast, fortunately, is not something you can really argue about- it's fantastic. Beatty does a very good job in the lead role. The guy is a really talented actor, and films like this make me wish he was more prolific. He is just fun to watch on screen. He really embodies this character. Diane Keaton was a fine choice to play Louise Bryant. She gives a strong, intelligent performance, and she interacts well with Beatty. I admit that eventually their constant fighting and bickering got to me, but it's something to behold seeing these two actors sharing the screen.

The supporting cast is great, too. Jack Nicholson is fantastic as writer Eugene O'Neill. This might be surprising because Beatty and Keaton get significantly more screen time, but I think Nicholson gave the best performance of the film. His character was fascinating, and the scenes involving him were significantly better than those without. I really, really loved his performance here. The film also features a strong performance by Maureen Stapleton. I have to say I didn't love her performance as much as many people did, but I admit she was good. She has one terrific scene near the end, but the rest of her performance was slightly forgettable. Here's something interesting about the cast- this film was (stunningly) nominated for 4 Academy Award acting awards- Warren Beatty for Best Actor, Diane Keaton for Best Actress, Jack Nicholson for Best Supporting Actor, and Maureen Stapleton for Best Supporting Actress. This is extremely rare, and speaks volumes about Beatty's direction and assembling the right cast. What's also interesting is that only Stapleton won, and I thought her peformance was by far the weakest of the four. The rest of the supporting cast is good, too, especially an all-too-short role for Gene Hackman.

In addition to the 4 acting nominations, this film received 7 other Academy Award nominations (11 total isn't too shabby). The film did manage to win three- in addition to Stapleton, it won for Best Cinematography (which was certainly impressive), and Warren Beatty won for Best Director (which I can see, and it's impressive he marshalled this film together.

When I think of Reds, I marvel at the film Beatty created. He deserves a lot of the credit for this polarizing, epic look at a very interesting American at a fascinating time in history. However, the film is overly long, much too slow, and the payoff just isn't there (especially when you've invested 3+ hours in the film). I begrudgedly admit that Beatty created something special here, but this is not a film I loved, or I would likely ever watch again.

Rating 1-10
Tim's Rating: 7.5



If You Enjoyed This Movie, We Recommend: The Parallax View, Bonnie and Clyde, Ishtar