Reviews
Milk review
January 23 2009
Gus Van Sant
Starring Sean Penn, James Franco, Emile Hirsch
Sean Penn can occasionally end up doing Sean Penn, doing Sean Penn, doing Sean Penn performing
He may be the ‘Greatest American Actor of his Generation’, but given the wrong material Sean Penn can occasionally end up doing Sean Penn, doing Sean Penn, doing Sean Penn performing.
On paper, Milk looks like the right material. Gus Van Sant’s ambitious biopic has all the hallmarks of ingenious melodramatic paydirt. Here is a man (Penn) who turns 40 in New York in 1970, is unsatisfied with life, meets a younger lover called Scott (James Franco), moves to San Francisco, becomes a gay rights activist and a city supervisor (the first openly gay elected official in the state) and is then brutally slain by a disgruntled colleague, Dan White (a soft, mesmerising turn from Josh Brolin). Note: this is not a spoiler for non-Milk obsessives, as the film flags up the assassination, via newsreel, in the first five minutes.
Thus the Harvey Milk story should have you, alternately, weeping in the aisles and punching the air in triumph. And yet, maybe it’s because Van Sant and his novice writer Dustin Lance Black were so keen to truthfully navigate the life that they forgot to dramatically define the man. Hence we get all five of Milk’s consecutive and increasingly similar election bids (four failures, one success). We get two marches (similar again), one rally, several parties and one campaign to remove dog shit from public parks. All true, yes, but eventually wearying in their relentless honesty. The movie, of course, had been in Oliver Stone’s hands before he leapt on his Bush biopic W, and it’s strangely coincidental to note that it also suffers from that movie’s chromosomal flaw – its central character was a hollow man.
Penn’s Milk, naturally, isn’t just hollow – he’s saintly and hollow. His default expression (which he uses a lot, in lieu of complex emotions or interesting dialogue) is a beatific smile. He is surrounded by hot young firebrand actors, such as Franco, Emile Hirsch and Diego Luna, who each regard him with equal awe (though it’s hard to tell whether they’re fawning over Penn the Guru or Milk the character). Van Sant and Black clearly missed a trick here. For the real Milk – a former avid Republican, an egotist and to some a difficult man – seemed worthy of a dense, conflicted biopic. In the end, we have to be satisfied with Penn, doing Penn, doing Penn.
Anticipation:
Enjoyment:
In Retrospect:
Milk (text) by Kevin Maher is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
This review should be tattooed across Sean Penn's forehead as an example of Truth and Rightness. Milk is… okay. It's as middle brow and middle of the road as it gets. As for that triple Oscar nomination… Just fuck right off Oscars you bunch of cunts.
Written by Edwardo on January 23rd, 2009 at 18:12
Edwardo… slightly harsh, no?! Granted, it doesn't deserve to nominated for Best Picture, but Penn was very good and James Brolin was pretty good too – although I think James Franco was a lot more impressive. Ultimately, the film is good but nothing more. The performances are good, the direction is good (if a little more conventional than Van Sant's previous work), it looks good, it sounds good… but the story is pretty important one and I'd be happy if it didn't win any awards but benefitted from the publicity nominations bring so more people go to see it. It deserves that much.
Written by JW Smith on January 24th, 2009 at 16:22
Penn isn't very good. He's a shyster, a conman, a narcissist, a put-up agent, a smoke and mirrors merchant. He's a huckster, a salesman, and the product is Sean Penn. Sean Penn could no more disappear into character than I could give myself a blow job. It's always about him, him, him. I think he has some sort of Messiah complex. He thinks he's been sent to change the world. I bet you a million pounds he refers to himself in the third person.
As you say, ultimately the film is good but nothing more. But here's Sean Penn with his stupid beatific smile acting like Jesus, like he's been sent to single handedly rescue the gays and bring them into the fold. And what do people do? What does the Academy do? Fucking pats him on the back and legitimises this painfully PC nonsense by showering him with praise. What a joke.
But that's the fucking Academy for you. A bunch of ill informed, under educated no taste fuckwits operating under the mistaken impression that shit like Milk represents the cream (geddit?) of American filmmaking. These idiots probably haven't seen one tenth of the American films released in 2008. Fuck: they probably don't even want to. They don't want to expand their horizons, they want to have their pathetic middle-class faux-liberal world view reflected back at them in larger than life glory. Do that, and you're always in with a chance of winning. It's a vicious circle jerk.
Or something.
Written by Edwardo on January 26th, 2009 at 11:20
"Penn isn't very good. He's a shyster, a conman, a narcissist, a put-up agent, a smoke and mirrors merchant. He's a huckster, a salesman, and the product is Sean Penn."
The last two sentences here could be summarised as 'Sean Penn is an actor.' As for the first sentence, well I haven't seen Milk yet, but I recall he was pretty good at least in 21 Grams, Mystic River, U-Turn, The Assassination of Richard Nixon, and Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Maybe he should just stick to playing arseholes and dopeheads…
Written by Anton Bitel on January 26th, 2009 at 16:40
Woah, Edwardo, you need to chill out son! Penn can act – end of story. Agree with you though about the academy who, btw, if you dislike so much you should NOT go around referring to with a capital A. Does anyone care about the oscars anymore? I saw the list the other day and I just felt so completely numb to it. Why doesn't LWL head out to LA and do their own alternative awards in a tent or summat?
I might see go see Milk tonight actually.
Written by Donnie_Smith on January 26th, 2009 at 17:26
hmmm perhaps i'm in the minority here, but i really enjoyed this, i think the acting credits would be better bestwoed on Brolin, but i could hardly criticise Penn, or indeed Van Sant too much (although the big march wasnt as exctiing as it should have been) it ain't perfect and from what i've see so far that would qualify for the oscars, The Wrestler or Hunger should win best pic. that they werent nominated…well that is sumin to complain about.
Written by richCie on January 26th, 2009 at 18:02
'Penn isn't very good. He's a shyster, a conman, a narcissist, a put-up agent, a smoke and mirrors merchant. He's a huckster, a salesman, and the product is Sean Penn…'
I could not have said it better. Thank you summing Penn up so well.
Written by Deirdre on January 26th, 2009 at 22:46
Edwardo,
With a regulatr stretching regimen, I bet you could give yourself a blow job within, say, six months. Keep me posted. Maybe this whole forum could become the "how close is Edwardo to giving himself a blow job?" forum. Very exciting. Then we'd see some milk.
Y'all get too worked up about nuthin'.
Written by Mikey on January 26th, 2009 at 23:16
He's a shyster, a conman, a narcissist, a put-up agent, a smoke and mirrors merchant. He's a huckster, a salesman, and the product is Sean Penn."
The last two sentences here could be summarised as 'Sean Penn is an actor.'
Well put. I've not seen Milk, but Edwardo, your comments seem to come more from a dislike of Sean Penn than the film. I have a similar hatred for Josh Hartnett, but I avoid getting myself worked up by simply avoiding films he stars in. It's a good strategy that works for me.
Agreed about the academy awards though, though in truth, twas ever thus. The oscars haven't been in anyway relevant, credible or worthwhile for many, many years. I've noticed that I've not once read anything about the awards in LWlies. Long may this continue.
Written by Bobby_Floyd on January 27th, 2009 at 16:27
WRONG!!!
If you applied a version of those sentences to a good actor, it would have to read thus: "X is a huckster, a salesman, and the product is their character".
The best actors aren't selling themselves because they don't need to. Their selling a character. Yes, it's smoke and mirrors because this is, of course, a kind of artifice – a false reality – but the whole point of acting is to lose yourself in that reality, not stand above it puffing your chest out and making sure that you – the artist – is still visible.
Written by Edwardo on January 27th, 2009 at 18:19
There's no 'wrong' here – just two different views on Penn's acting abilities. In the titles mentioned above (and others too, like The Falcon and the Snowman, Sweet and Lowdown, State of Grace – and I haven't seen every film with Penn in it), Penn acquitted himself very well indeed (in my opinion, natch) – and was not in any obvious way (again, to me at least) grandstanding. I still haven't seen Milk, so have no opinion on his performance there – but it is not difficult to imagine how grandstanding and chest-puffing might form an essential part of such a role. Perhaps your suggestion that one should not confuse character and actor cuts both ways.
What's more, there is a certain circularity in your formulation on what constitutes good acting. When actors disappear into (and sell) their character, they are in fact always selling themselves…
Written by Anton Bitel on January 28th, 2009 at 09:43
Another oscar for the ‘Greatest American Actor of his Generation' then? The debate goes on…
Written by Donnie_Smith on February 23rd, 2009 at 10:42
‘Greatest American Actor of his Generation'
Isn't that Josh Hartnett?
Written by Bobby_Floyd on February 23rd, 2009 at 12:08
Thanks..I finally found a review of the movie I can agree with. Penn showed he could play a character different from himself…but did he play Harvey Milk? After watching the documentary on Harvey Milk, I don't think so.
So, maybe also a man kissing a man gets you the oscar…with each successive actor kissing deeper and longer…Penn did no peck on the cheek… so for that it's called "Daring", Altthough gay actors have been kissing heterosexual counterparts for ages, without the same fanfare.
James Brolin did a much better job playing Dan White.
Written by PM in NY on May 28th, 2009 at 22:48