This film has been praised far beyond its actual value. It is nowhere near as wonderful as one may be led to believe due to all of the awards and critical praise. Having seen the film, it is clear to me all of the hoopla is little more than politically correct cheerleading. The problem criticizing a film like this is that given its overt agenda, combined with today’s neo-fascist attitudes, going against the grain and pointing out how emotionally distant and manipulative the film is will be confused with hatred towards gays. The fact is that this film is much like every other Gus Van Sant film, it is completely lacking in any meaningful emotional connection and overloaded with self important dialog, along with heavy-handed visuals. The story of Harvey Milk should be told. I honestly believe this. He was an important figure and the rebellion of Castro Street is ripe for cinematic explanation. The man’s life lends itself to being a fascinating biography, despite one’s feelings about homosexuality; he was a notable figure and a fascinating one as well. This film doesn’t tell his story in the best possible way.

I will be upfront and admit that I don’t jive Van Sant’s directing style. I think he gets in front of his camera too often. We see this in overt shots like one in this film where Milk and his lover are sitting on the stoop of his camera shop. The two men, having just been insulted by a Christian liquor store owner, are shown making out in front of Milk's store. This is presented as an act of love and defiance. Behind them a large store sign that reads “Yes, we’re OPEN” may as well be a billboard. Where a more delicate director would combine these images Van Sant practically puts the sign in neon pink and has animated arrows pointing out his clever use of environmental symbolism. Blunt overtures like this litter his works.

Sean Penn’s performance as Milk is solid, but certainly doesn’t rise to the level of a Best Actor Oscar. Then again, I believe the award shouldn’t be an annual distribution but only passed out when someone honestly excels at the art of acting. Penn's work doesn't rise to the level of a signature performance. He plays the man with vigor and brings him to life, but he doesn’t stand out. He doesn't get lost in his portrayal, which he is certainly capable of doing. In this performance, he's always just Sean Penn with an affectation.

This is not a biography as much as it is a piece of political theater. Yes, Milk was an activist who became a politician and telling his life’s story demands his politics be explored. I don’t have a problem with his activism and political attitudes being on display. I concur with some of his assertions. Gays should be allowed to live their lives in peace. Yes, they are God’s children and they deserve respect and love. With the exceptions of being able to marry and adopt children, I agree with many of the political aspirations of the homosexual community. But this film overplays its hand. Van Sant is too overt, too involved to deliver this material without getting in its way.

If you’re comfortable seeing homosexual activity and are looking for a biography that is good, not great, then this will work for you. Just don’t be fooled by the hype machines. It’s not a great film and Penn doesn’t give a stunning performance. It is a good film, and has some merit. Perhaps someday the subject matter will be revisited and a stronger film will result.




Related Reviews:
Sean Penn movies
21 Grams (2003)
The Assassination of Richard Nixon (2004)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
The Flickering Wall
Behind the Hype

Labels: Emile Hirsch, film, Gus van Sant, James Franco, movie review, politics, Sean Penn