SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home The Mini-review: 'milk'

THE PLANK NOVEMBER 25, 2008

The Mini-review: 'milk'

BY CHRISTOPHER ORR

Gus Van Sant's Milk is not a bad movie. Star Sean Penn eschews his characteristic bluster, offering a powerful yet modest performance as Harvey Milk, the openly gay San Francisco supervisor who was assassinated in 1978. The supporting roles are also sharp, in particular Josh Brolin as Dan White, the disturbed former supervisor who killed Milk and Mayor George Moscone. And Van Sant's direction is generally smooth, if extremely conventional. (Apart from the men kissing, there's not much here likely to scandalize.)

Moreover, Milk is, at least to those like myself who share its political goals, a worthwhile movie: an introduction to a crucial figure in the gay rights movement for millions of Americans who've never heard of him; a testament to how far gay rights have come in just 30 years; and a reminder of the focus and fortitude that further progress will require. The fact that one of its central events, the push to enact controversial Prop 6--which would have banned openly gay men and lesbians from teaching jobs in California--was echoed so closely by the recent Prop 8 vote (though with a happier outcome the first time around) only serves to underscore its ongoing relevance.

So why did the movie leave me so cold? Largely, I suppose, it is a question of belatedness. Milk was murdered 30 years ago. The exceptional The Times of Harvey Milk won the Oscar for Best Documentary 24 years ago. The Dead Kennedys recorded their Dan White-themed "I Fought the Law (and I Won)" 21 years ago. Yet, all this time later, after the world has shifted under our feet, Hollywood wants us to applaud its courage for finally--finally--telling this story? Really? I can't help but think there will be something cheap about the inevitable Oscar nominations (and probable victories) with which the movie industry will advertise its moral elevation come February.

There are other quibbles: Van Sant and screenwriter Dustin Lance Black shamelessly rip off the earlier documentary, framing the film early with footage of then-supervisor Dianne Feinstein announcing the murders and audio of the tape-recorded "will" that Milk wanted played in the event of his "death by assassination." And what I would give to see a movie in which the death of a martyr is not filmed in excruciating, can-you-believe-how-tragic-this-is slow motion. But these are idiosyncratic complaints.

If you are of a mind to see Milk, then by all means do so. It is a well-made film and, in its way, perhaps even an important one. But if you can find a copy, take a look at The Times of Harvey Milk, too. I first saw the film more than twenty years ago, and it frankly overwhelmed me. As its title advertises, it is less the story of a man, and more the story of a movement and a moment, told not by Milk himself but by a few of those who were close to him. One in particular, an auto machinist named Jim Elliot who began as a skeptic and homophobe but became one of Milk's resolute supporters, has stuck with me ever since. (If you've seen the film, you'll know who I mean.) In his voice, perhaps as much as in Milk's own, you hear the march of progress.

Update: I'm semi-out-of-pocket for the holiday, and the version initially posted was missing a few copy edits, since corrected. 

--Christopher Orr

Also be sure to check Chris' thoughts on Australia here and Twilight here.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 20 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

20 comments

Tangent on the slow-mo martyr's death: one of the things I liked about Saving Private Ryan was that our hero Tom Hanks was shot in the background and it took a bit of time for anyone to notice, because the battle kept going on for awhile after it happened.

- ejbenjamin

November 25, 2008 at 3:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My recollection is that the Briggs amendment was aimed at all gay people, women as well as men, to prevent them from teaching in the public schools in California (I was in school at Santa Cruz at the time and remember the organizing).

- rlesses

November 25, 2008 at 3:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In addition it would have banned anyone who "advocated homosexuality" from teaching jobs.

If I recall correctly it drew slightly more than 40% of the vote.

(Which might have gone up a point or two if Ronald Reagan hadn't opposed the initiative.)

- mikeda

November 25, 2008 at 4:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Question: Why doesn't TNR have the guts to report and comment upon the very real and pressing civil rights issues in America today? Why are the TNR editorial staff and writers ignoring these issues?  

Apologies for the off-topic post but I will not apologize for calling you out on such a shameful display of what seems to be obvious prejudice on the part of this publication.  This is how it works ladies and gentlemen, you either stand up and be counted, or you're part of the problem.  It's your choice, I await your response.

Florida ban on gay adoptions ruled unconstitutional

www.miamiherald.com/.../786605.html

[A Miami-Dade circuit judge Tuesday declared Florida's 30-year-old ban on gay adoption unconstitutional, allowing a North Miami man to adopt two foster kids he has raised since 2004.

In a 53-page order that sets the stage for what could become a constitutional showdown, Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman permitted 47-year-old Frank Gill to adopt the 4- and 8-year-old boys he and his partner have raised since just before Christmas four years ago. A child abuse investigator had asked Gill to care for the boys temporarily; they were never able to return to their birth parents.

''This is the forum where we try to heal children, find permanent families for them so they can get another chance at what every child should know and feel from birth, and go on to lead productive lives,'' Lederman said in court before releasing the order. ``We pray for them to thrive, but that is a word we rarely hear in dependency court.''

''These children are thriving; it is uncontroverted,'' the judge added.

Moments after Lederman released the ruling, attorneys for Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum announced they would appeal the decision to the Third District Court of Appeal in Miami.

''We respect the court's decision,'' said attorney Valerie Martin, who had argued in support of the ban during a weeklong trial Oct. 1-6. But, she added: ``Based upon the wishes of our client, the Department of Children & Families, we have filed a notice of appeal this morning.'']

[The judge added: ``There is no question the blanket exclusion of gay applicants defeats Florida's goal of providing [foster] children a permanent family through adoption.''

In a ruling that, at times, reads more like a social science research paper, Lederman dissected 30 years worth of psychological and sociological research, concluding that studies overwhelmingly have shown that gay people can parent every bit as effectively as straight people and do no harm to their children.

''Based on the evidence presented from experts from all over this country and abroad,'' Lederman wrote, ``it is clear that sexual orientation is not a predictor of a person's ability to parent. Sexual orientation no more leads to psychiatric disorders, alcohol and substance abuse, relationship instability, a lower life expectancy or sexual disorders than race, gender, socioeconomic class or any other demographic characteristic.

''The most important factor in ensuring a well-adjusted child is the quality of parenting,'' Lederman wrote.]

- AaronBBrown

November 25, 2008 at 5:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey Mr. Orr / TNR, why can't I access your old reviews? I just tried to pull up your Bourne Ultimatum review and I can't read it because it's gone into some blog archiving hole.

- ClumsyMohel

November 25, 2008 at 9:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can think of nothing more dreary than an evening spent with a "worthwhile" movie...

- emigdio

November 26, 2008 at 4:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Like Aaron Brown I feel I must comment on my perception that TNR has lately had much less punch as an alternative publication where one could find these "controversial" topics covered.  I can only assume that this is the result of an attempt to broaden your readership. If that's the case, it's a shame because you may be losing the very base that has supported you for your long and distinguished history.

Unlike emigdio, I can think of nothing more satisfying than an evening spent with a worthwhile movie.

This is a good, honest movie review.

- moran@sbc.edu

November 26, 2008 at 9:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

clumsymohel,

Our Web hosting experience since CanWest took over a little more than a year ago has been relentlessly frustrating, and we still don't have our earlier archives easily accessible. You can find my take on the Bourne Ultimatum here, however, even if it annoyingly lacks paragraph breaks:

communities.canada.com/.../8607.aspx

- Chris Orr

November 26, 2008 at 10:11am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why A Recession May Be The Perfect Time To Pass Climate Legislation , By Bradford Plumer Washington Diarist

- Anonymous

November 26, 2008 at 10:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

For those who missed them (or would like to have them gathered in one place), here are my takes on several

- Anonymous

November 26, 2008 at 11:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Aaron,

Thank you for your post--I've been trying to cope with that.  When the TNR writers felt like devoting more time to discussing which school the Obama girls go to than to the failure of Californians to defeat ugly Prop 8, I felt like my investment in the periodical had been mashed up and turned into TMZ-type gloss.  

Sometimes it's you (we) commenters who have more cogent posts.

- dylanposer

November 26, 2008 at 7:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I believe that Milk was murdered along with Mayor Moscone because their fellow supervisor, the none too bright, Dan White, felt he had been outsmarted and double-crossed out of his supervisor's seat by Milk and Moscone.

White, likely was not a leading proponent of gay rights.  But, I don't think Milk was killed because he was gay, any more than Moscone was killed because he was Italian.

but, then, everybody's a martyr these days.  

This was

- ChanRobt

November 26, 2008 at 8:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

dylanposer writes with umbrage, "...When the TNR writers felt like devoting more time to discussing which school the Obama girls go to than to the failure of Californians to defeat ugly Prop 8, I..."

Uh, Dylan, white voters in California voted against Prop 8 by a majority.

It lost because the black and Hispanic citizens who came out in great numbers to vote for Obama look with revulsion on the idea of gay marriage.

Your beef is not with tnr, or the majority white population of California.  It is with the downtrodden minorities.  they're not educated enough to rationalize gay marriage.

- ChanRobt

November 26, 2008 at 8:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your point would carry more weight if Harvey and the mayor were working to deny Mr. White’s return to the Board of Supervisors so they could create a Board that was more sympathetic to Italian Americans. But that’s not what they were trying to do, was it, ChanRobt?

- Vyson

November 28, 2008 at 2:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Vyson, Dan White was a stupid, addled man.  He somehow let himself to be hornswoggled by Milk and Moscone to give up his supervisor seat.  He had immediate remorse for the dumb thing he did, and asked for his seat back.

Naturally, the two politicians who had tricked this babe in the woods out of his seat didn't give it back.

So, the guy went batshit and killed his two tormentors.

I'm not sure that makes Harvey Milk the Martin Luther King of gay lib.  It makes him a prominently gay politician who was murdered by a dumbass he pulled a fast one on.

- ChanRobt

November 28, 2008 at 8:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I wrote a couple of weeks ago about Rob Epstein's moving 1984 documentary The Times of Harvey Milk

- Anonymous

December 9, 2008 at 10:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr. Orr, I am at a loss to understand how a movie critic can punish a movie because of Hollywood's "belatedness."   If you cannot put aside your personal feelings about something external to the movie long enough to give an honest assessment about the movie itself, perhaps it is time you stop reviewing movies.  It seems to me that you went into this movie with a chip on your shoulder and began drawing comparisons with the documentary film you tout from scene one.  To be fair, you have inspired me to seek out the documentary.  But you could have accomplished that "worthwhile" objective without disparaging "Milk" based on personal feelings that are relevant to no one but yourself.  In the big picture, this movie ranks among the best of 2008 and will most likely pass the test of time and be watched for years to come.  By association, your review will be posted and read for years to come on such outlets as rottentomatoes.com.  Your legacy as a critic will be measured by reviews such as this one.  And that is a shame, for in basing a review on Hollywood's "belatedness," you do a disservice to both your audience (present and future) and your credibility as a movie reviewer (present and future).

- Tom Orlando

January 18, 2009 at 12:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sometimes--last year, for instance--the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences does a pretty good

- Anonymous

January 22, 2009 at 3:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

David Denby's dour take on the upcoming Oscars is too kind to Milk , in my view , and far too hard

- Anonymous

February 3, 2009 at 3:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There's a widespread sense that the Academy's strange, unanticipated decision to expand the number

- Anonymous

June 29, 2009 at 5:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close