This is one of those works that is emblematic of what can be done with a director who knows his craft and chooses a style that is both controlled and not controlling, a writer who can let out some wild scenes and incredible exposition and make it practically believable (maybe more so today), and a cast that understand their creative forces at work. After seeing the film I was actually struck just as much, for example, by William Holden's performance as I was by Peter Finch, though the latter usually gets most of the credit (and rightfully so, in an Oscar-winning turn beating out De Niro in Taxi Driver if one can believe that). But then one has to take into account their different levels of skill in their performances, and how they both deliver even more than what is required. Holden, for me, is just as good here as he is in his best work (Sunset Blvd, The Wild Bunch), but in the role of the worn-out, dedicated professional who in his own way has had about as enough bs that can be taken as the main character. Yet Holden also knows his performance needs to be more reserved, and as his story gets more complicated he has to make some subtle choices as perhaps the only really sane person in the film. His work here is accomplished in the style of one sense, while Finch, who plays a character going back and forth between being totally nuts and knowing more than anyone else out there in TV land, takes his role with a heedless abandon.
In short, this is one of the more fearless looks at the media ever presented on film, and it's even more relevant today perhaps than when it was first released. It's sad that not only did Lumet and Paddy Chayevsky think that what they were doing (aside from the ending) was all true, but that as the decades have passed since Regan's to-do with changing the rules of journalism, it's gotten worse. It was actually kind of shocking to see one or two of the revelations from Finch in some scenes, and the connection made in the 3rd act with Saudi Arabia is one of my favorite parts of the film (particularly the speech by Ned Beatty in one of the all-time great one-scene roles). News, basically, now is like everything else on TV, where you get what you pay for via the advertising, but not as it should really be with the news as it is. Howard Beale, basically, is like one of those ultra-symbollic (but relatable) characters in movies, in a demented way like Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, where the truth has to be spoken by someone, but who in America will listen (or, ironically, who won't if it's shelled out right in front of the cameras).
In other words, this is one of those films that does ask a viewer to think about what is being shown- an 'informed' public (which is growing less and less as the media becomes smaller and more controlled via government and regulations)- while still providing acting that sticks and lines of dialog that are among the best in 70's films. Faye Dunaway is the female counterpart to her older male stars and is just as good, being like a very cold, typical businesswoman who only makes things feel like she does, as if something was lost in youth. Duvall is also good here, if maybe not at his very best, in a role as a TV exec. But there are bit parts that are really good too, like the black female militant member who complains at a meeting about the grosses of showing footage on TV. And in a small way, like the films of Brooks and Monty Python, Lumet understands how to film things very realistically (though the style appropriately changed from start to finish) so that the satire within can spring out. Even an over-the-top scene like Beale's first Mad-as-Hell speech works on this level.
Overall, this is a really amazing film, with enoughs scathing, dark material mixed with the truth that should and isn't presented to those who rely solely on programming. "Because you're on television, dummy" are the last words Beatty says to Beale in their scene after Beale asks "why me?" By the end, as the film reaches its ultimate climax, one might wonder if his question is relatable to all TV, not just the news. Why is it what you say to people through this abstract medium important, or not? The answers, looking at how the news is run now, should be obvious. Maybe Lumet's best outside of his more 'urban' films (i.e. Serpico, The Pawnbroker, Dog Day Afternoon).
In short, this is one of the more fearless looks at the media ever presented on film, and it's even more relevant today perhaps than when it was first released. It's sad that not only did Lumet and Paddy Chayevsky think that what they were doing (aside from the ending) was all true, but that as the decades have passed since Regan's to-do with changing the rules of journalism, it's gotten worse. It was actually kind of shocking to see one or two of the revelations from Finch in some scenes, and the connection made in the 3rd act with Saudi Arabia is one of my favorite parts of the film (particularly the speech by Ned Beatty in one of the all-time great one-scene roles). News, basically, now is like everything else on TV, where you get what you pay for via the advertising, but not as it should really be with the news as it is. Howard Beale, basically, is like one of those ultra-symbollic (but relatable) characters in movies, in a demented way like Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, where the truth has to be spoken by someone, but who in America will listen (or, ironically, who won't if it's shelled out right in front of the cameras).
In other words, this is one of those films that does ask a viewer to think about what is being shown- an 'informed' public (which is growing less and less as the media becomes smaller and more controlled via government and regulations)- while still providing acting that sticks and lines of dialog that are among the best in 70's films. Faye Dunaway is the female counterpart to her older male stars and is just as good, being like a very cold, typical businesswoman who only makes things feel like she does, as if something was lost in youth. Duvall is also good here, if maybe not at his very best, in a role as a TV exec. But there are bit parts that are really good too, like the black female militant member who complains at a meeting about the grosses of showing footage on TV. And in a small way, like the films of Brooks and Monty Python, Lumet understands how to film things very realistically (though the style appropriately changed from start to finish) so that the satire within can spring out. Even an over-the-top scene like Beale's first Mad-as-Hell speech works on this level.
Overall, this is a really amazing film, with enoughs scathing, dark material mixed with the truth that should and isn't presented to those who rely solely on programming. "Because you're on television, dummy" are the last words Beatty says to Beale in their scene after Beale asks "why me?" By the end, as the film reaches its ultimate climax, one might wonder if his question is relatable to all TV, not just the news. Why is it what you say to people through this abstract medium important, or not? The answers, looking at how the news is run now, should be obvious. Maybe Lumet's best outside of his more 'urban' films (i.e. Serpico, The Pawnbroker, Dog Day Afternoon).