Reagan

Review by Mark Woodring

I hope you’re prepared for a very unusual look at a movie, because frankly, I’m not sure how linear I can make this thing.

Be ready for unexpected detours and switchbacks, as I’m likely to be all over the place on this one.

**NOTE: this post may be updated with audio once we actually have the chance to talk about it. Until then, you can read Mark’s review below. Remember, though, you can listen to all our discussions of this and every other movie directly over on ACAST. Stay tuned.**

Reagan - Review
Reagan (Showbiz Direct) small

135 Minutes, Rated PG-13
Written by Howard Klausner
Directed by Sean McNamara

Synopsis:

From dusty small-town roots, to the glitter of Hollywood, and then on to commanding
the world stage, Reagan is a cinematic journey of overcoming the odds. Told through the voice of Viktor Petrovich, a former KGB agent whose life becomes inextricably linked with Ronald Reagan’s when Reagan first catches the Soviets’ attention as an actor in Hollywood, this film offers a perspective as unique as it is captivating.

In this day and age in America, it’s going to be very difficult to find an objective review of a film like Reagan. Despite his near total destruction of Walter Mondale in the 1984 election (in which he won a staggering 49 of 50 states) he remains to this day a divisive subject of political discussion.

Not the MOST divisive of our Presidents, but still…

I mean, it does choose to open with a reenactment of the 1981 assassination attempt.

I won’t sugarcoat this one for you: Reagan is more than a bit of a love letter to the late President. While sometimes that’s a good thing in terms of a biopic, sometimes it can let the filmmakers conceal (not hide, mind you: conceal) flaws the subject.

Reagan is no exception.

Told in a series of flashbacks by Viktor Petrovich, the KGB agent tasked with tracking possible enemies to the Soviet Union years before they emerge (a spy clairvoyant, you might say), who became convinced that Ronald Reagan would be such a threat, after initially identifying his potential during the union madness in 1940’s Hollywood (in which Communists attempted to unify all the unions under one banner they controlled, thus controlling the output and the message (umm…) of the studios), the story of Reagan is presented as a lesson to a promising young Russian politician as a lesson on why the Soviet Union fell.

Truth or fiction, I have no doubt all governments have such a program (think Project Insight from Captain America: Civil War, but far more primitive) if they’re concerned about those who might threaten their power.

Every government has lists, right?

Told through what might have been this serviceable framework of flashbacks, Reagan is nonetheless stifled by not only the time shifts from “present” to Reagan’s two terms, but the mixing in of his childhood and Hollywood career, first marriage (to Jane Wyman) and subsequent marriage to Nancy, who was the true love of his life. This over-convoluted assembly of sequences is distracting, and detracts from the pivotal events of his presidency.

That’s also a problem, as the film never really settles on what it is. Despite its title, Reagan isn’t a very effective biopic, with the aforementioned structural problems, and it’s not a simple look at his time as President, either. It’s maddening how disjointed it is, especially if you already have a grasp of US history and the Reagan years.

Note: my formative teenage years were lived during the Reagan presidency. My first vote was cast for his Vice-President and successor, George H. W. Bush, for God’s sake. I remember most of the scenes from the 1980s as they happened.

What Reagan ultimately becomes, then, is less a look at the man and president and more an examination of his effect on one thing: The Soviet Union specifically, and Communism in general.

If you’re a Star Trek fan, you might liken this to the fact the series finale of Star Trek: Enterprise is really an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation.

It does a disservice to all involved.

Dennis Quaid does the heavy lifting here, trying this best to channel the essence of The Gipper without slipping into parody. The problem with that is that any interpretation of Ronald Reagan automatically feels like parody, as so much of his persona was either a relic of his film career or so grounded in his reality that it feels like parody to today’s jaded eyes.

Penelope Ann Miller as Nancy Reagan was actually a good fit, as it turns out. She brings the same wide-eyed belief to this role as Nancy exuded when she was in the spotlight.

The rest of the supporting cast is… fine? Robert Davi disappears behind makeup as Leonid Brezhnev, but the rest of the group is swallowed up in suits and hair in various stages of loss. They’re window dressing for the story we’re being told, and little more.

The movie itself is based on the book “The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of the Soviet Union” by Paul Kengor, and reflects (and perhaps amplifies) Reagan’s religious fervor through Kengor’s own lens.

Regardless, I wouldn’t consider this a “faith-based” film any more than I might consider American Underdog (which I enjoy, BTW) one, despite the proclivities of the filmmakers and studios involved.

Despite the flaws in Reagan, the film does cover the historical highlights rather well, even if it glosses over the whole Oliver North/Iran-Contra affair with a bit too light a touch. It’s a reminder that Reagan’s “Peace through Strength” foreign policy was viable, even if the Strategic Defense Initiative wasn’t.

It’s a reminder that belief in America and its place in the world, its role in keeping at bay the forces of Evil is one that cannot be shirked, for if not us, who? Despite her imperfections, America is that “shining city on the hill” Reagan believed it could be again, if only it chooses to believe it.

I have seen a lot of chatter on social media about Reagan‘s low opening weekend totals, reveling in the fact that a movie about a man who no one seriously believes didn’t love America unabashedly, second only to his love for Nancy.

These people do so because it’s the cool thing to do at the moment: bash America.

If bashing Reagan helps them accomplish whatever transient political vitriol they feel like propagating, then they’ll do that, happily. They will have missed the essential exchange between Reagan and Tip O’Neill, demonstrating how opposing parties can choose to work together in good faith and good humor.

But Reagan, despite the problems I outlined above, along with it’s sometimes made-for-TV feel, has a lesson to teach us, perhaps now more so than any time in recent history.

America is — perhaps — the last, best hope for mankind. If so, then attempts to reduce it to less than it is, to remove its freedoms and aspirational nature, is… Evil. The Evil Ronald Reagan fought so hard to defeat for so long.

I enjoyed Reagan for what it was, but long for what it might have been.

Reagan is available in theaters now and stars Dennis Quaid, Jon Voight, Penelope Ann Miller, David Henrie, Mena Suvari, Kevin Dillon Xander Berkely, Lesley-Anne Down, Trevor Donovan, C. Thomas Howell.

And remember, if the BEST thing you can say about a movie is that it’s “visually stunning,” then they’ve done something wrong.

Please don’t forget to LIKE, SHARE, and FOLLOW us on:

And please, if you like what we do, consider helping us keep on entertaining you. You can use this handy link:




Or, you could check out the merch in Our Store:

VSMP Merch Store

Not only will you be helping us out if you pick up some merch, you get cool stuff to wear around (including the coveted WTFWT? logo!)


 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,