It has taken me far too long to get to
this one. Part of this was that I didn't want to be so immediately
obvious with my picks for this series, but another, bigger, part of
it, especially in recent months, was simply a dearth of time, forcing
me to constantly push back my writing schedule. Now, though, I make
no further excuses. After nearly two years of an unending stream of
revelations about the historical level of corruption in the Trump
Administration, aided and abetted by every figure of consequence
within the GOP, let's talk about everyone's favorite, go-to
historical comparison. Let's talk about Watergate.
Released in 1976, just a few short
years after Nixon resigned in disgrace rather than face an
impeachment vote, All The President's Men was the procedural
investigative journalism drama that started them all; there's no
Spotlight or The Post in
a world where All The President's Men
was never made.
Directed by Alan J. Pakula, with a
screenplay by William Goldman, the movie is directly lifted from the
non-fiction book of the same name that chronicled the investigative
work of Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward following the Watergate
break-in that, eventually uncovered a massive and long-running
network of wrongdoing that forced the first (and thus far, only)
resignation of a President in US history. Starring Robert Redford as
Woodward and Dustin Hoffman as Bernstein, the movie saw plenty of
immediate success upon release. It was nominated for 8 Academy
Awards, including Best Picture, and won 4 (Art Direction, Sound
Design, Screenplay, and Best Supporting Actor for Jason Robards).
Since then, its stature has only grown- it continutes to regularly
appear on various "Best of" film lists from the late 20th
century, and it is among the relatively few works selected for
preservation in the National Film Registry.
With all that pedigree attached to its
name, and with a subject matter so heady, it's easy to approach the
film today with a particularly high amount of skepticism, especially
since the film defies much of the dramatic bells and whistles that
later takes on this sort of journalistic film try to use to raise the
stakes. There are very few moments that are conventionally
"cinematic," with a rising score, quick editing, or a
fast-moving camera. The movie is steady in its approach towards and
depiction of real journalistic processes, and thus consists mostly of
people just talking, often about names and ideas and organizations
that seem incredibly obscure and vague for most viewers.
In the end, though, this all fits in
with the focus of the film, and with what makes it still stand out
from others within this genre; the lack of artificial drama allows
the movie to focus on the actual story all the more. Redford and
Hoffman, being as good as they are, are able to tell us bits and
pieces about who these reporters are as individuals, but there is
never any focus on that, because that's not what's important. What
matters more is examining the sort of corruption they found and
providing an example of the sort of work needed to bring the truth to
light.
And it's not just all dialogue; the
cinematography is expertly crafted, using a lot of distant, long
tracking shots to convey a sense of size and scale of the huge
apparatus that is the US government, the smallness of two reporters
compared to a massive and (at the time) very mysterious corruption
racket surrounded and threatening to silence them. It's easy to get
lost in such large, sprawling, winding buildings, if you aren't
careful.
This careful use of shot composition
reaches its zenith in the final moments of the film. It's easy to
forget that Watergate was a long process- the break-in and initial
investigations were in the summer of 1972, BEFORE Nixon was
reelected, and were still ongoing throughout the campaign and after
he won in a massive landslide. The ending of the film deliberately
focuses on this moment of seeming defeat instead of ending with
Nixon's ultimate downfall; in the last scene, a television airing
Nixon's exuberant reelection speech is in the foreground of the shot,
with Woodward and Bernstein behind and in the right side of the
frame, at first out of focus, but still diligently working away at
their typewriters throughout the speech, not once looking up.
I found this choice to be incredibly
powerful, the sort of silent testament most of this film's imitators
have never been able to equal. Yes, there have been setbacks and
losses, and in the wake of a triumphant reelection, it may have
seemed obvious to many that any further efforts to uncover the truth
would not change anything, or would just be waste of time. We know
now, of course, that the true reckoning was still to come, but it
only came about because enough people, Woodward and Bernstein
included, refused to give up and insisted on airing the truth in the
light of day.
Obviously, it's not possible to talk
abot this movie without adressing the famed scenes with Deep Throat
(whose identity, long a secret, was revealed a full three decades
after the film's release). This is easily the most well-known and
most thoroughly parodied part of the entire film, so iconic that it's
nearly impossible to try to experience the scenes on their own
merits. They are certainly a touch
on the hammy side, and the character is played up as being something
of a mysterious mentor-like figure rather than one individual in a
large chess game with his own goals and interests.
Nonetheless,
I still found the whole dynamic around his character an effective
refute to the hope of some that, in our current times, lifelong
employees of the "deep state" will be able to save us via a
supposed ironclad commitment to the Constitution. If anything, the
dynamic within the FBI and CIA that Deep Throat reveals is exactly
the opposite- that the "deep state," insofar as it exists,
tends far more towards not rocking the boat, even when that boat is
headed off a fucking waterfall. And that famous line, engraved in
American film canon, "Follow the money," has remained
powerfully prescient; it was, indeed, through following chains of
checks and bank accounts that much of Nixon's blackmailing apparatus
was revealed. And when we look at the news today, what are the
revelations that brings out the clearest signs of panic in Trump?
Anything touching his tax returns. Oh, and how history repeats
itself.
Though certainly not perfect, All
The President's Men still remains a powerful testament to how
hard work and ceaseless diligence can still bring out a few rays of
good into a world that seems to be drowning in darkness. It reminds
us that apathy and willed ignorance remain defining parts of human
society; so many people in the movie shrug their shoulders at the
reporters' questions and insist they were "just following
orders, and what's so wrong with a little loyalty?" In the
midst of the Watergate scandal as it was developing, it was easy to
feel that evil was getting the upper hand, that a particularly bad
election had killed any chance of the truth meaning anything at all.
Yet, because enough people refused to quite, the ultimate fall ended
up being all the greater and more shocking.
It is up to us to learn from the
example set by Woodward, Bernstein, and their colleagues at the
Washington Post to ensure that the current regime, one that would
make even Richard Nixon blush, meets a similar (or preferably, even
worse) fate.
-Noah Franc
Previously on Films for the Trump Years:
Part 1- Selma
Part 2- Good Night, and Good Luck
Part 3- 13th
Part 4- Get Out
Part 5- Chasing Ice/Chasing Coral
Part 6- The Big Short
Part 7- Human Flow
Part 8- Winter's Bone/Moonlight
Part 9- Black Panther
Part 10- Arrested Development
Part 11- Bowling for Columbine
Part 12- [T]error
Part 13- Angels in America
Part 14- Do The Right Thing