Network (1976) User Reviews

"The World Is A Business, Mr. Beale"

[Lechuguilla · 9/10 · 28 July 2009]

In 1976 when this film came out, there was no cable television, no internet, no cell phones. All that existed, apart from newspapers and radio, were three or four "broadcast" television channels. Since then, technology has exploded with a cornucopia of communication devices. Which renders the story in "Network" painfully dated. And yet ...

The story's theme is as valid now as it was thirty-three years ago. The theme is that the ratings business has corrupted television, because ad revenue, and therefore profit, is tied to the ratings. Programs and events then, and now, get aired if, and only if, they are likely to result in high ratings. It's all very seamy, very dishonorable, very shabby, and very relevant to today's world of ten thousand channels.

Though most of the characters in "Network" end up being corrupted by television, Howard Beale (Peter Finch) is one who does not. His vision is pure. And he speaks the truth: "... television is an ... amusement park ... a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of ... story tellers ... jugglers, sideshow freaks ... and football players ... You're never going to get any truth from us (television) ... We lie like hell ... We deal in illusions, none of it is true. But you people ... believe the illusions ... You do whatever the tube tells you ... you even think like the tube". Worse yet, people elect their leaders based on how they look and sound, and how their words are interpreted by boob tube "pundits".

"Network" is a film wherein thematic import is conveyed almost entirely through dialogue. Some of the dialogue devolves into speechifying, which may come across to viewers as preachy. Still, the film's message was highly prophetic. Except for the film's climax, everything predicted in this film has already happened. And credit should go to script writer Paddy Chayefsky for his futuristic vision.

Some parts of the film seem superfluous in retrospect, like the romance between two main characters. But the film has a sense of realism, helped along by the use of technical jargon and a general absence of background music. The film's technical elements, including direction, casting, acting, editing, and cinematography, are fine.

As social commentary, "Network" is one of the best films ever made, despite a dated, time-bound, story. That "there are no nations, only currency" is becoming increasingly obvious, and as Ned Beatty's arrogant character explains in a frighteningly ominous tone: "The world is a business, Mr. Beale".

Only surprise is, it wasn't cynical enough

[corazontvc · 9/10 · 23 November 2017]

I recently rewatched this movie I've seen at least a dozen times and capture something new every time. It's a complete no holds barred hollowing out of the television industry, and, while television isn't the all looming force it once was (500 channels as opposed to around 7 including PBS and VHF and UHF at the time of this movie, depending on location), it still has much to say about the dissociation from reality that viewing things on a screen can create, especially when what you're witnessing is designed for the most craven response.

Plot is quite simple: long time news anchor (Howard Beale) has breakdown after being fired and loses it on air, bigwigs (Diana Christensen) notice said breakdown brought in more ratings than ever before and nurture this tendency until a monster is created that is against their best interests ($$) and now must destroy this monster. All in the way this is portrayed is what makes it so much more.

This is a deeply cynical movie, and quite prescient. A few years after this movie, the TV world was going to experience crudity on levels it had never imagined before. Morton Downey Jr. to Geraldo would usher in an age of the normalization of TV as spectacle, prurience and depravity we are very much still engaged in today. The kernel of the idea of capturing eyeballs with such content has simply been even more economically fine-tuned by other mediums, especially the Internet. Want to see beheadings, torture porn or video of people being shot to death? Sure you do. Diana predicted it. The natural progression of major character Diana's ideas are present for all to see. Only, it may not have been cynical enough in some ways. Could they have predicted reality TV? Or the endless line of meaninglessly competitive shows like Cupcake Wars? Jackass? At the beginning, it even toys with the idea of 'The Death Hour', filled with suicides and assassinations and car wrecks. We haven't seen anyone purposely killed on live TV to get ratings by a network, to my knowledge, but I doubt that is far away based on current trajectory.

Not to mention the brilliant critique of business by Arthur Jensen's (Ned Beatty) epic speech to Howard Beale. We are all just a subsidiary to business interests, AS IT SHOULD BE. The richest 1% own half the world's wealth. This was not an accident or survival of the fittest in a meritocracy, this was planned from the inception.

While the dialogue is brilliant, this dialogue is meant to convey ideas, not especially to capture how people really talk in various situations. It is more theatric than realistic. That brings us to probably the weakest part of the movie, the romantic aspect. It plays a parallel plot to the main one, and while it does serve to show that Diana is a 'Humanoid' in Beale's terms-seemingly human, but not really-it's also the weakest element. Hence, the lack of one star.

A point must be made about Faye Dunaway. This is her greatest movie. Bonnie and Clyde may have opened the door, but this broke it down. She encapsulates the inherent cynicism and calculating nature of Diana Chirstensen (play on offspring of Christ?) with near perfection. Her sheer physical presence is something to behold as well. From her impossibly high cheekbones to her lithe figure wrapped in chic 70's elegance, she steals every scene she's in. Just do yourself a favor and don't look up her more recent pics, plastic surgery is not her friend.

Will young people like this movie? Not if they want a fist bumping silly night, but if they sense they are being manipulated and want to know why, this is one place that was at ground zero.

Prescient...

[cchase · 9/10 · 28 August 2005]

It is the only word I can come up with to describe this masterfully savage satire, and IMHO, it's the only word that need be used.

Once I had seen ALTERED STATES and read the novel, I was hungry to find out more about the late novelist/playwright/screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky, and sought out this movie. It blew me away years ago, but I find it even more stunning now. Not just because of the writing, Sidney Lumet's taut direction or the Oscar-caliber performances by everyone involved, all of which are almost beyond being lauded with superlatives.

But what knocks me out is how Chayefsky seemed less to be writing from the power of his imagination, than channeling Our Times Now. As if he was capable of some form of mental time travel; able to look into the Nineties and beyond to see the coming of SURVIVOR, or Maury Povich, Jerry Springer, Bill O'Reilly and Paris Hilton. Even HE probably didn't know how he knew, but he sure as hell felt it and wrote it down for us to marvel over today.

Sure, there are political and cultural analogies throughout the picture that are dated. But the core of his vision remains startlingly clear and eerily prophetic. As for Howard Beale, there is not one single "celebrity" who mirrors that character today, but maybe he is a composite of several different personalities with whom we have become all too familiar in the world of "news-fo-tainment." Or maybe he simply hasn't materialized yet. Maybe that is just how far ahead of its time NETWORK really was.

After all, being "mad as hell" nowadays has so many more layers of meaning than it did nearly thirty years ago...

A Prophet known as Paddy Chayefsky

[Andrea-Orsini-1 · 10/10 · 20 January 2008]

To think that this blackest of black comedies was made in 1976 could only means two things: 1) Nothing has changed or 2) Paddy Chayefsky was seeing the future with the most disturbing clarity. I endorse the later of the two because I believe things have changed since 1974 - I wasn't born yet, but I know because of my parents, the movies, literature, etc, etc, etc. Peter Finch as the mad prophet of the airwaves gives Chayefsky a riveting and powerful voice. The scenes between old chums Finch and William Holden are some of the best written scenes in any American movie until the Coen brothers emerged. Finch is superb, superb! and Holden, at the end of a legendary career, gives a performance of such ferocious sincerity that I rediscovered the man, the actor and felt the need to revisit some of his opus. From Golden Boy to Sunset Boulevard, Holden was a man who carried his own discomfort as a weapon. Extraordinary! However, the most alarming character in the whole thing is Faye Dunaway's. She is magnificent in her thin, nervous, bra-less attitude. She is a monster of commercial amorality. Everything in this incredible movie moves with the precision of an inspired clairvoyant's vision. Duvall's executive, Beatrice Straight's betrayed wife and Ned Beatty's god like big shot makes this one of the most frightening, entertaining, funniest, remarkable film from the 70's. Sidney Lumet proves once more that he's as good as his material. Here he is at his zenith.

A rare honest movie

[kirkintha26 · 10/10 · 4 September 2007]

"Network" is a fantastic movie that illustrates just how the "mob" and the media can exploit even the best intentions for mutual profit.

Howard Beale (Peter Finch) is an on-air personality that, after finding he is not bankable anymore, snaps and starts to speak his own uncensored, and highly inflammable commentary about the hypocrisy of modern life.

In his mad-hatter routine, somehow he sparks his audience's interest, and in a twist of fame finds himself, the not bankable as prime market share for prime time television. And naturally, his bosses and those who stand to profit from his actions, use his fame to better their own cause.

Beale's rise to stardom is only one facet of this intricate story about how the mob influences media. Throughout "Network" we as the audience are constantly shown, to nausea, how ruthless popularity and trend mold what we see as consumers of entertainment. Most of the main characters are in fact trapped in their roles - and powerless to the bottom line, which is that media relies on advertisement and ratings to generate revenue.

In fact, I believe that is what the point of "Network" is - this movie shows us, that "news" is entertainment, and how we as viewers (whichever demographic you are) are willing to suspend all common sense, class, independence, honor, integrity for a few moments of triumph or more pragmatically, how we relish tragedy.

"Network" is too heavy for most people - it is meant for people who do not like TV, who think that product placement is ridiculous, and in general do not like to think of themselves as a "market". If you need your reality spoon fed to you, this movie is not for you.

However, if you have had enough, and wish to feel for a moment like you are an empowered free thinker, i would humbly suggest that this movie is for you.

One of the best of all time.

[dead47548 · 10/10 · 8 January 2008]

I can't put it more perfectly than Turner Classic Movies' Robert Osborne who said "What was originally a satire is a stinging mirror of television news today." I strain to think of a film that is a more brilliant take on society, and all of the flaws it has. It's obedience and entertainment by those who rebel, no matter how insane they are. The exploitation of those in peril for any kind of economic profit. And the fact that everything Beale preaches is completely true and completely bashes the people who are producing him. I was amazed by how much he sells out while continuing to rant about how terrible the people he works for are, and the fact that they just keep him on the air because they want ratings.

It couldn't be more related to today. Turn on the news and you see videos of how horrific the war on terror is and how horrific American society has become, but it stays on the air because people don't want to see the good things in life. They care about the bad and the corrupt. People must have laughed it off back then, but it was such a foreshadow to the near future. The performances are just as brilliant as the social commentary. Each actor becomes so absorbed into their characters that you can't even tell they're acting. It feels like you're watching these people in their daily lives, interacting and becoming more and more corrupt. Finch and Dunaway easily give two of the greatest performances of all time. I could write 20 more pages about it's brilliance, but I'll stop now to keep me from rating. I just have to say that it's so rare to find a film as incredibly flawless as this.

They don't get much better than this.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 10/10 · 9 October 2023]

Experienced, but disillusioned news Anchor Howard Beale blurts out one night that he wants to commit suicide live on air, he is fired, but the executives notice that his outburst had a positive affect on ratings, they decide to stick with the unstable news reader.

Close to fifty years old, and still brilliant. Network is an impressive film, that holds up incredibly well, and still has a powerful message. It dares to discuss the way that people are ruled by a box in the corner of a room, and that people have a morbid curiosity in disaster and tragedy, we can't help but watch it.

Two hours fly by, it's fascinating from start to finish, it really does explore the darker side of humanity, the sheer exploitation that occurs for wealth.

When you think of all that's been seen on the small screen since then, this film was almost prophetic.

This boasts an awesome cast, including William Holden, Faye Dunaway and many more, but for me it's Peter Finch that steals the show,

One minor detail that's always struck me, the American decor of the 1970's, some of it is so tasteful.

Even now it's still a phenomenal film.

10/10.

It Is More Than a Film, It Is Like a Crystal Ball

[tfrizzell · 24 August 2001]

"Network". If there was ever a film that foreshadowed to events of the future it would be "Network". Much like "Midnight Cowboy" seven years earlier, "Network" was hailed because it took risks and it was like nothing that the cinema had ever experienced before. Both films were great when they were initially released, but few great films become so much better with time like "Midnight Cowboy" and "Network". The fictional fourth network of 1976 is UBS. Ratings are bad and the network desperately needs some new show to give them a boost to challenge NBC, CBS, and ABC. Enter the network's national news anchorman (Peter Finch in his posthumous Oscar-winning role). He, like the network, is going through a crossroads. His wife has just passed away, he is about to be fired, and he is slowly losing his mind. The firing is imminent and he decides that he will announce to the world that he will commit suicide on his last evening news broadcast. Of course a national frenzy starts, but Finch surprises all by showing just how crazy he is. Instead of committing suicide, he goes on the air and becomes a modern-day Moses to some with crazed ravings and outlandish statements that really are just the ramblings of a man slowly spinning out-of-control. Faye Dunaway (Oscar-winning) and Robert Duvall are the key people at the network who find a way to market Finch and boost anemic ratings. Finch is given a variety show which could be best described as "The Tonight Show" gone stark-raving mad. He gets on stage and basically says whatever is on his mind and the crowds love it. Co-worker and close personal friend William Holden (Oscar-nominated) knows that Finch is out of control, but cannot do anything and eventually is let go due to his disapproval and interference. Holden though has fallen in love, or lust, with the unfeeling Dunaway. Wife Beatrice Straight (in an Oscar-winning performance in which she has less than 10 minutes of screen-time) learns of what is going on and more trouble ensues for Holden on the home-front. Finch meanwhile continues his ravings as he hears voices in his head telling him what he must do each time he is asked to perform. Soon his act grows stale as the public tires of his antics and the network must always defend speeches that they themselves do not really understand. Finch's "15 minutes" of fame eventually come to an end, but not in the conventional way that one may think. "Network" is a cinematic masterpiece because it is so strong in the major elements of the industry. The acting is exceptional. There were five performing nominations from this film (Ned Beatty was the fifth) and three wins. The only other film to accomplish that was "A Streetcar Named Desire" from 1951. Sidney Lumet was great before this film, but he became even greater afterwards. This is arguably his greatest directing job. The screenplay by Paddy Chayefsky is one of the smartest ever written. It is insightful and has a real depth to it. "Network" was looked upon as a sort of "far-fetched black comedy" in 1976. However, "Network" is a film that is all too realistic 25 years later. In many ways the fictional UBS station is much like the FOX station which came on the air in the late-1980s and stole audiences with wild shows that were quite different from the other three networks. Reality television, perverted talk shows, and other types of variety programming run wild today. "Network" did not have much to do with all this occurring, but it is like those who worked on the film had a crystal ball into the future. A great movie that becomes greater as time passes. 5 stars out of 5.

Doesn't fully fulfill its promising premise

[zetes · 7/10 · 25 July 2003]

An interesting, ambitious, and somewhat entertaining satire of television, but one that pretty much fails for a number of reasons. It's difficult to believe almost everything that happens in it. Not one of the characters rings true. William Holden is as boring in 1976 as he was in 1955, and his cliché relationship with Faye Dunnaway is not at all believable, and not even that interesting. Their scenes together go on forever, and Holden's character carries the trite and obvious metaphor of Dunnaway as television personified, and their relationship as soap opera far further than necessary. Dunnaway herself puts an amazing amount of energy into her performance, and she didn't not deserve the Oscar she won, if you'll excuse my double negative. But her character really is only the metaphor that Holden attributes her, so what ground can she win with that? Beatrice Straight gives a performance that's most famous for being the shortest that ever won an Oscar, only three minutes. I didn't know who Beatrice Straight was, but it's obvious when she starts giving her big speech, so showy that she induced me to roll my eyes as many times as inches tall her Oscar is; that must be a record, too. Robert Duvall fares the best among the major cast members, although he hasn't much of a character either.

Peter Finch's performance is interesting, but his ranting gets old quick. While Howard Beale's first couple of ravings would undoubtedly raise people's interest (the `I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore' scene is as great as it is famous), but I doubt the television show that is developed for him, which apparently airs five days a week and runs for many months before the film ends, would ever attract an audience of any kind, except maybe a small bit who have a taste for public access television, which is what it seems like. I think people, especially the kind of disenfranchised, cynical people to whom Beale's show is supposed to appeal, would be much more critical and suspicious of a man who does his show opposite a psychic and in front of stained glass window.

People always refer to Network as `prophetic,' and then claim their proof is stuff like Jerry Springer, Hard Copy and reality television. As much as some of us may hate those kinds of television shows, only the deranged or stupid would ever believe that When Animals Attack is harmful to anybody other than those who are being attacked by animals. Does anybody really believe that anyone would ever air programs like The Ecumenical Liberation League or whatever that was? Some of the scenes focusing on this new show which the network is developing seem to want to be comedy, although the film is too heavy-seeming to ever succeed in being comic. Anyhow, in the world of reality, in which Holden's character keeps trying to convince Dunnaway and the film's audience that the story is really happening, the network's lawyers would have stopped them immediately. I will say that the film is prescient in only one way: Ned Beatty, who appears for one scene, has the most intriguing part, where he says, among other things:

"It is the international system of currency which determines the vitality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today! And you have meddled with the primal forces of nature! And you will atone! Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale? You get up on your little 21 inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT, and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today."

It comes out of right field in the film - well, kind of. The almighty dollar is the driving force of the film, and, the film realizes correctly, the world. But what Network does not understand is how television works to propagate this system, or perhaps how it would. It's too busy finding its subject, television, overtly evil when it misses the ways it can be more subtly evil. Not that I think all TV is evil or anything. Personally, I watch a lot of television and enjoy it immensely. I don't think it is particularly wicked, and I actually think that there's a lot of great art to be found on television (yes I do!). However, most of the evil I do see comes from the news. I wasn't around in 1976, so I can't say whether or not the news was as suspicious and creepy back then, but, if Network really had been prophetic, it would have at least got some of the satire right. 7/10.

We Have Seen the Future, And It Sucks

[Putzberger · 10/10 · 28 December 2005]

This movie came out when I was nine years old, and I saw it on network TV the following year, lured by the brouhaha that surrounded the use of the "barnyard epithet" during prime time. I loved this movie before I understood it, and I worship it now. Like "Elmer Gantry" or "1984," it's a work of didactic art that only fails on an imaginative level -- Sinclair Lewis couldn't grasp how debased evangelism would become, Orwell couldn't foresee the excesses of Mao or Pol Pot, and Chayevsky couldn't envision the absolute decline of television from a vast wasteland to a malevolent sewer. Fox News, reality TV, even the OJ chase, "Network" anticipates every vile bit of it.

Now, it's ridiculously overwritten -- NO ONE is as articulate as the characters in this film, and most certainly, no one who works in television is as literate as Diana Christensen (the Faye Dunaway character). I doubt that poet laureates or even Eminem could spew as witty an aside as "muttering mutilated Marxism." But damn if that isn't part of its charm. Plus, outside of Max Schumacher (William Holden), the characters are pretty much archetypes instead of real people (the Robert Duvall character might as well wear a black cape and top hat), but their two-dimensionality works as a good metaphor for Max's seduction into the "shrieking nothingness" or television. Plus the actors are so superb they make screeching caricatures into almost-sympathetic characters: Duvall is a credible and charismatic villain, Finch is a fine mad prophet and Faye Dunaway manages to make a shrill, manipulative, soulless neurotic so damn cute and sexy you'll want to leave your wife for her, too, just as long as she promises to keep sitting cross-legged on your desk and hitching up her skirt. (Therein lies the real eroticism, forget the intentionally mechanical, unerotic coupling later in the flick). Anyway, this is complex, high art masquerading as popular entertainment, go rent it now.

Quite a telling film

[Kingslaay · 7/10 · 1 January 2020]

Network shows how there is close to no difference between art and reality. Its always about ratings no matter the cost. Today we are shown so much garbage because of ratings. Sadly bad news or incidents sell which is why I've seen networks repeatedly show things over and over again. Network is ahead of its time in showing all of this. Funny enough the ravings of Howard Beale who many consider crazy turn out to be truths, he's the most honest character in the film. The end of this film shows that nothing is above prime ratings, even murder. It was almost normalised. Great performances from a strong cast. The content and messaging is top notch. The only thing is the artistic flair with which the film is made. Despite Sidney Lumet being a great director if you had Marty Scorsese at the helm he would have taken it to even greater heights.

It's so prophetic it's scary

[malikroberts16 · 10/10 · 25 June 2006]

Now, here is a film that everyone needs to see, especially today.

Children should be raised on the truth instead of fiction.

Television seduces, entertains, divides, desensitizes, and corrupts not just kids but adults as well. It's gotten so bad over the years it's like some kind of a disease now. Most people believe everything they see, read, and hear. Fortunately for me, I'm not most people. There are things that I question and there are things that I know are very wrong. Lying to the American people in every possible way is very, very wrong.

I've never seen anyone open up their window and stick out their head and yell that they're as mad as hell and they're not gonna take this anymore. I've never seen anyone say that they were a human being and that their life had value. We're so screwed up in the head we don't even deserve to be called human beings. We're like pre-programmed, numbered, clones enslaved from the cradle to the grave; clones that are programmed and structured to obey authority of all kinds.

"Network" deserved the Best Picture Oscar for '76, but it lost to "Rocky". How the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences allowed that to happen is beyond me.

That's all I have to say about that.

An extreme critique to TV networks with great cast giving tour-de-force interpretations

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 5 November 2019]

A scathing indictment of the TV industry and its propensily towards ambition, corruption and self-prostitution. A washed-up TV presenter, Peter Finch, is gleefully exploited by his management staff , as he suffers paranoia and at the edge of a mental breakdown turns into a celebrity when he acts with his epileptic evangelic revivalism . As the network chiefs attempt to profit from his illness, as his announce to commit suicide himself boosts the ratings to such an extent that he finds his salary doubled.

Black satire taking a savage, cruel bite at the American television , its anchormen, and the shares that rule the executives who work in it. Thought-provoking and ironical script from the prestigious Paddy Chayefsky. The individual roles are startling well drawn and the interpretation is magnificent. Peter Finch won an Academy award in his last film, he is excellent as a neurotic and ranting Television newcaster who flips his lid and he is prophesying gloom and doom and then he announces he is going to commit suicide on the air. While William Holden displays a sober acting as the faded executive in distress who falls for the younger Dunaway . As Faye Dunaway plays an ambitious executive who will stop at nothing to triumph, she gives overacting, an strident interpretation that threatens to overbalance the movie. And Holden's neglected wife is magnificently played by Beatrice Stright in a brief acting, considered to be the shortest performance to win an Oscar as support cast .Remaining secondary cast is very good such as Ned Beatty, Lance Henriksen, Wesley Addy, and special mention for Robert Duvall, and as narrator : Lee Richardson.

It contains an adequate cinematography by Owen Roizman and atmospheric musical score by Elliot Lawrence. The motion picture was magnetically directed by Sidney Lumet, providing a lavishly mounted vehicle for three great actors, Peter Finch, Faye Dunaway and William Holden. Giving powerful scenes especially at the John Finch's appearances and when people come to the windows of their block of flats in a thunderstorm, and while displaying shouts .Lumet was one of the best American filmmakers, including important films such as 12 angry men, Fail safe, The pawnbroker, The hill, The deadly affair, The group, The offence, Serpico , Equus, The wiz, Prince of the city , Deathtrap , Daniel, Power, The morning after, Family business, Night falls on Manhattan, Gloria, Before the devil knows you are dead, among others. Rating 7/10. Above average.

"Let him do his angry man thing"

[Steffi_P · 4/10 · 12 August 2010]

One thing you got in 70s cinema, as the 60s generation began to grow up and relaxations on content stopped being threatening and started being normal, was that the message movie went mainstream. Understandably, the eloquence of the message was always going to be more important than its real importance.

Network was scripted by Paddy Chayefsky, who was less the angry young man of the anti-Vietnam generation, and more the grumpy middle-aged man of any and every generation. Appropriately enough the picture is a cynical and grouchy rant. It is preachy, hysterically so in places, and yet it is so pessimistic, offering no solutions to the problems it builds up to ridiculous proportions, that watching it is a rather draining experience. Its message is not as clever as it thinks it is, conflating a new technology with ongoing social problems, as short-sighted cynics have done for centuries. There is even a none-too-subtle dig at women who take on masculine roles, which just goes to show how bitter and reactionary Network is. And the idea of someone so obsessed with an idea it causes them orgasm prematurely is simple a sad mix of bad psychology and playground puerility.

And yet, the 70s were also a time in which Hollywood was starting to regain some semblance of professionalism, after the unevenness of the previous decade. Network seems to have been made by a highly consistent production team. Sets and costumes are designed to perpetuate a pattern of regular black and white shapes arranged in rows. Not just ceiling lights or skyscraper windows, but filing cabinets, radiators all conform to this same style. Director Sidney Lumet, with his usual mode of subtle stylisation, even keeps it up in the few outdoor daytime, with the even framing of the tree-lined boulevard in the scene after Ruddy's funeral. Lumet also often has opposing shots of two actors with one in bright white and the other in black, so the switching back-and-forth between them is like a light flicking on and off.

The 70s was also a time in which acting really started to successfully reconcile dramatic realism with theatrical exuberance, and here we have some great examples of both. William Holden, looking decidedly weary and craggy, seems to have entered the age which suits his style best, and he brings a layer of genuine humanity which Network sorely needs. Beatrice Straight gives a small yet impassioned performance as his wife, and though barely five minutes long her performance is among the more memorable. Another excellent bit performance is that of Ned Beatty, whose glorious hamming is the complete opposite of Straight's straightness, but nevertheless provides one of the most entertaining scenes of the whole picture. Of course any more than a few minutes of screen time and these two performances would unbalance the entire thing. Which brings us onto Peter Finch, who again is pure ham, but of the classic Charles Laughton variety, putting every ounce of strength he has into a compelling act. Had it not been Lumet's policy to ensure the real-world cinema screen never becomes the same as the film-world TV screen, we in the audience would be truly mesmerised by those mad prophet speeches.

And thus Network delivers its message with great force and power. And of course the film has now gained a new raft of fans because this banal grumble about TV was supposedly "ahead of its time", except that TV never has been and never will be quite that way, because audiences – human beings – are not as stupid as Chayefsky thinks they are. In fact, the thing that Network probably best predicts is the wave of movies like Fight Club that didn't really say much but said it with an original twist and thus became cult hits. Which is a pity. And now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to watch the new series of X-Factor, which though lowbrow at least makes good entertainment.

The Age of Network

[nycritic · 10/10 · 22 February 2005]

Thirty years after its release to public praise and multiple Oscar wins, Network is one of those films that instead of dating badly or becoming a product of its time has actually grown and become even more relevant today, and if it were re-released in 2006 for its actual thirtieth anniversary not on film but on national television right at the beginning of the fall season (complete with the most lurid reality TV shows and inane TV pleasers), it would only become more justified in its story.

The story of the failing network that didn't have a show on the Nielsen Top 20 and resorted to extreme measures to ensure that this changed seems so today: we see how channels that once had failing ratings churned out shock television right smack in the daytime while still applying Standard and Practices to other "prime-time" shows that could be taken the "wrong" way. Jerry Springer, Maury Povich, Rikki Lake, Oprah, Mark Burnett, MTV -- they're all here under different guises, all competing to have their voices heard on television, all eventually becoming as ratings-hungry and establishment-friendly as the CEOs running the show.

Today we don't quite have Howard Beales ranting and raving about the ills of society on national TV (although they do "tell" us how we should feel, when we should laugh if we're too stupid to get the joke, who to vote for, the "truth" about the tobacco industry). Today media is all the rage and televises even a fart if it deems it interesting and guarantees more viewers. Today shows like "20/20" or "60 Minutes" bring us 'exclusives' even if it's at the cost of journalistic integrity. And now, with 'reality TV' still the dominating novel trend even in little-seen cable channels, creating stereotypes in leaps and bounds while claiming authenticity of the events depicted, there hasn't yet been a need to create a lunatic who could sermonize everything and make us Mad as Hell. On this aspect alone NETWORK has dated: the 70s were all about counterculture, anti-establishment, revolution, leftists, Patty Hearsts, Lennon and Yoko, "Nova", the Mansons, the hippies, the Earth-lovers, the militants. Nowadays, buff bodies parade themselves in shows containing outlandish competitions where eating the most grotesque concoctions are the norm, or enduring a barrage of extreme insults has become entertainment (i. e. "American Idol") and the very concept of dignity flies out the window. Of course, after signing an extensive release form in which they free the network of all responsibilities if something goes wrong because we all know networks can't be held liable for any faux pas. In short, nowadays people from all over try to become the next It person and outlast their 15 minutes of fame. Nowadays, everyone has their own reality TV show depicting their 24 hour day activities. I wonder if Diana Christensen isn't alive and well and exerting absolute control over the networks in general, bringing anything and everything that can garner a little bit of shock value (Boy Meets Boy, or any reality TV self-made "villain/villainess") and eventual ratings, taking over actual scripted shows with real actors.

NETWORK is a powerful movie of which I can't praise enough about even if its screenplay, by Paddy Chayefsky is a little too verbose. No one talks the way he makes his characters talk, using impassioned speeches with big, even archaic, words, and more than once the script makes the characters go completely over the top but even then it makes its point. Of the actors, William Holden's quiet portrayal of a former television exec, Max Schumacher, who has a conscience, but still feels some attraction to danger and risks his own family to experience is who is at the heart of this crazy story who was ahead of its time. Peter Finch's Howard Beale never comes through enough as a real human being: just someone who was pushed too hard and decided to shut down for the remainder of his life. But Holden holds the moral glue of the story, and interestingly enough, is wise to know that his affair, perfectly scripted as he even states, will end on a high note -- he'll return to his sanity and his wife, and Diana Christensen will bask in her own executive madness, since this is all she knows and holds dear. In her last words -- "Let's kill the son of a bitch." -- she informs us this is all she is about without so much as batting an eye. Who comes, who goes, is irrelevant to her, as long as the network can be number one. And that is the inhuman reality of television -- a media directed to entertain humans.

Top-notch satire of television

[M-DAWG · 10/10 · 29 December 2005]

I just finished watching this movie and was blown away. Sidney Lumet's satire shows the hollowness of television and the mindless generation that is produced from an excess of it. This film is shocking and eye-opening also showing executives' mad quest for ratings.

The acting in this film is superb. Peter finch stars as the TV anchor who becomes an "angry prophet who denounces the hypocrisies of our time." We gradually see how he first preaches to the common everyman, but is then exploited by the slick executives to achieve their one goal: Ratings. Faye Dunaway also shines as the Vice President in charge of programming who finds herself becoming less aware of the difference between television and reality. William Holden also lends fine support.

As the acting and directing in this film are exquisite, the message it portrays is a very strong one. This scathing indictment of TV is necessary for everyone to see.

"I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!" - Howard Beale

[MichaelMargetis · 9/10 · 25 August 2005]

#1 Best Film of 1976

'Network' is Paddy Chafesky's riveting and grim tale of the sleaze surrounding the American television industry. Winner of the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay, 'Network' is without a doubt one of the most powerful, influential and meaningful films ever made. One of the reasons 'Network' was so well received by both film critics and movie-going audiences was because it possessed a certain quality that most films unfortunately lack -- intricate and involving characters in realistic situations. 'Network' definitely makes my list of the top 10 films of the 70s, and it's an absolute shame it didn't pick up the well-deserved 'Best Picture' Oscar at the Academy Awards ceremony in 1976.

The film follows a low-rated television network trying to keep it's head above water. The network, UBS, has decided to fire an aging veteran news anchor, Howard Beale (Peter Finch), in an act of desperation to boost ratings. Beale is given a two-week notice, and instead of going out with his tale between his legs, Beale announces on live television he was fired and is going to kill himself. This raises panic and chaos at UBS, until they get the memo that Beale's crazed rant just bumped the ratings significantly. The UBS execs, Diana Christensen (Faye Dunaway) and Frank Hackett (Robert Duvall) decide to give Beale his own show where he complains and screams bout the problems with the world, while Beale's best friend (William Holden) feels it's inappropriate for the network to take advantage of a mentally-ill man. Besides exploiting a mentally unstable man, the company execs also work out a weekly program with a anti-establishment African-American communist, Laureen Hobbs (Marlene Warfield) following political terrorists and their violent outbursts.The film also stars Beatrice Straight as Schumacher's boring wife, Conchetta Ferrell was an assistant working for the network and Ned Beatty who plays the sinister boss of the UBS television network who always gets what he wants.

'Network' boasts one of the finest and most intricate screenplays ever written that rightfully earned Paddy Chafesky the Oscar for Best Screenplay. Sidney Lumet's directing is absolutely incendiary and the movie has an incredibly strong cast. Faye Dunaway gives what is perhaps her very best screen performance as the cutthroat Network executive, while Robert Duvall is just as brilliant as the ruthless Frank Hackett (which should have earned him an Oscar nomination, period!) Beatrice Straight is solid in her role (not quite Oscar-worthy if you ask me, though) and Marlene Warfield is just as great as the sassy pinko sistah (excuse me for that phrasing). The two performers who really steal the show however are William Holden and Peter Finch. Both nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role at the Academy Awards in 1977, Peter Finch gives a startling and powerful performance as the 'mad-as-hell' (not to mention crazy-as-hell) Howard Beale, while William Holden gives a subtle but none-the-less outstanding performance as the conflicted Max Schumacher. It's hard to say who was better, but if I absolutely had to decide I'd choose Holden's non-Oscar-winning performance slightly over Finch's sympathy Oscar-winning performance (he still was extraordinary,m though). I honestly believe if Finch hadn't died just after the film, Holden would have taken home the Oscar gold for Best Leading Actor, both were still magnificent though. The only player in the cast that I felt wasn't that great was Ned Beatty. In a role far-deserving from an Oscar nomination (which he for some odd reason received), Beatty plays the angry little man role he always does. Besides Beatty's performance and marginal pacing problems towards the middle (you are gonna get that in any 70s film that isn't a Kubrick film), the movie is utterly perfect.

I can't recommend you seeing 'Network' highly enough. If you want a carefully made motion picture that makes you think and reflect on how cutthroat our society has become (especially TV broadcasting), 'Network' is a absolute must. What are you waiting for, go out and rent 'Network'! It might just alter your perspective on things. Grade: A-

MADE MY TOP 300 LIST AT #46

Eerily prescient classic

[bankofmarquis · 10/10 · 9 February 2018]

"I'M MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!"

One of the most famous lines in film history is as impactful today as it was when it was first uttered by fictitious news anchor Howard Beale in Paddy Chayefsky's (seemingly) parody of where TV and TV news is heading, 1976's NETWORK.

The astonishing thing about this terrific motion picture is how prescient it is. News is now entertainment. Appeal to the disaffected masses. Drive our message to the viewers. Be provocative. The 6:00 news had "less than 1 minute of hard news, the rest was sex, scandal, brutal crime sports, children with incurable diseases and lost puppies."

Sound familiar? This isn't from today, it came from this movie that was made 42 years ago as a cautionary tale of what might happen.

Besides the social ramifications, how does this film hold up? Quite well, indeed. A rare 10 star BankofMarquis film. Starting with the great Paddy Chayefsky's Oscar winning Screenplay. This was the capper on a brilliant career from Chayefsky - who also won Oscar's for his screenplay for 1972's THE HOSPITAL (I'll have to check that one out) and 1956's MARTY.

What does a terrific screenplay do? It attracts top-level talent clamoring to be in this - and they all deliver. Start with Faye Dunaway who won the Lead Actress Oscar for her role as Entertainment Head Diane Christensen - a driven, work hard, play hard individual who has the idea to make news "entertainment". Lost in the fog of time (and MOMMIE DEAREST) is the fact that in the mid-1970's, Dunaway was, perhaps, the greatest leading actress of the day and her skills are in sharp display in this film.

Joining Dunaway in terrific supporting turns are Robert Duvall, following his turns as Tom Hagen in GODFATHER I and II, as network head, Frank Hackett, Ned Beatty as Ned Jennings, President of the company that owns the network - he has a speech towards the tail end of this film that is as good - both in performance and in the way that it is shot - as anything put upon the screen - it was masterful. Speaking of masterful, Beatrice Straight won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in one of the shortest performances to ever win. She is in this film for about 6 minutes in total - but she won her Oscar for a 5 minute scene that is, most definately Oscar-worthy.

And then there are the leading men. William Holden gives one of the last great performances of his extraordinary career as the "voice of reason in this film". He is our everyman caught up in the bizarre, absurd circumstances that evolve around him. It is his effort to try to make sense of this insanity that jumps off the screen. Holden was, deservedly, nominated for a Best Actor in a Leading Role Oscar, but lost (rightfully so) to Peter Finch's turn as crazed newsman turned prophet, Howard Beale. His maniacal (but not over the top) turn is one for the ages. If you do nothing else, see this film for his performance (but there is so, so much more to love here). Unfortunately, Finch passed away from a heart attack in between his Oscar nomination and win, and was the first posthumous winner in an acting role (sadly, Heath Ledger would join this "club" years later).

Finally, enough cannot be said about Sidney Lumet's direction. A movie like this would not succeed without a sure, steady and seasoned hand at the helm - and this is how I would describe Lumet's direction. He lets the camera roll and lets the actors and the screenplay take center stage, not drawing attention away, but adding to the themes of the film throughout - especially in Beatty's speech at the end.

NETWORK was nominated for (but did not win) the Oscar for Best Film of 1976. Did it lose out to other nominees ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN or TAXI DRIVER? Nope, it lost to ROCKY.

Let that sink in.

If you get a chance to watch (or rewatch) this film, I highly recommend you do so. For me, it was GREAT to watch this on the big screen with an audience, one of the reasons I love - and will continue to attend - the SECRET CINEMA series of films.

Letter Grade: A+

10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(OfMarquis)

Corporate cosmology

[tieman64 · 31 March 2008]

Sandwiched between "Jaws" and "Star Wars", Sidney Lumet's "Network" was one of the last gasps of the American New Wave. With the unprecedented box-office successes of blockbuster movies, studios quickly seized upon high-concept premises, putting greater emphasis on tie-in merchandise, spin-offs and the use of sequels.

Realising how much money could potentially be made in films, major corporations started buying up the Hollywood studios. The corporate mentality these companies brought to the film-making business would slowly squeeze out the more idiosyncratic of the young New Wave filmmakers, while ensconcing the more malleable and commercially successful of them. Modern Hollywood was born. A smooth conveyor belt that bowed to art only when trends got stale. Test screenings, market analysis, committee screenplays and multi demographic franchises were here to stay.

"Network" is a Sidney Lumet satire devoid of pyrotechnics, fancy editing, noticeable camera work or even music. It concerns a news anchor by the name of Howard Beale, who vows to commit suicide on air. He's fed up of his life, his marriage and the meaningless crap he's forced to report. Why not end it all?

Beale's angry rants and morbid honesty begin to appeal to audiences, and soon he's the star of his own show. Beale's network (UBS) hates his instability but loves the fact that he's bringing in huge ratings. Soon his anti-establishment stance is being prostituted as a means to make easy money. As the film unfolds, we watch as dissent is commodified and the counterculture becomes part of capitalism's politico-military-media complex. Like "The Parallax View", all shocks to the system are enveloped.

To the powers that rule the news, Beale is a powerless fish in a pond far bigger than himself. They let him speak his mind because they know that he's ultimately impotent. But as UBS grows in stature and clout, unseen corporations begin to buy it up. Shares are sold, managers are changed, until eventually a mysterious Saudi Arabian company, backed by oil money, orchestrates a silent take over. Suddenly Beale is no longer a news reporter; he is seen as a prophet of truth, a tool whom new, unseen shareholders decide to use for their own ends.

Beale will not stand for this. He rallies the population and gets them to send angry letters to the White House. Due to public pressure and cold hard democracy, the Saudi Arabian company is forced to back down. Behind closed doors, shares and stock change hands.

Angry that Beale has thwarted a lucrative business deal, the mysterious head of UPS - played by Ned Beatty as a fuming corporate psychopath - summons Beale to his office. His scene steals the movie. Apocalyptic and furious, Ned tears apart Beale's philosophy with his own "corporate cosmology".

Patriotism, race, nationality, democracy, religion, these are all dead modes of organisation. The world is ruled by business. Profit has replaced prophet and the only effective praying is done by greedy conglomerates who prey on the wants and needs of the many. Man is standardised and institutionalised, he says. Individuality is important only insofar as it is marketable to the drones. All the troubles in the world are caused, not by the horizontal distinctions between race, religion and colour, but between the vertical distinctions between class, money and power.

As such, Ned demands that Beale preach a new message. That the world is one vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit. A company in which all men will hold a share of stock, all necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilised, all boredom amused. Beale is chosen to preach this evangel, and so he leaves Ned's office as a battered and disillusioned man.

Needless to say, America does not like the new Howard Beale. His defeatist truth is too bleak, too harsh and too gloomy. They want a revolutionary and a prophet, someone to offer them hope. Beale sees no more hope.

Beale is assassinated days later, because of his increasingly low ratings. Over the course of the film, we've watched Beale transition from suicidal news reporter, to empowered revolutionary, to disillusioned wise man, to a dead and discarded piece of meat. The film is defeatist, though Beale's combative spirit continues to live on in certain circles, very much like Paul Newman's dead character in "Cool Hand Luke".

9/10 - "Network" still packs a prophetic punch, thanks largely to Paddy Chayefsky's screenplay. A control freak and auteur, Chayefsky (and producer Howard Gottfried) submitted the "Network" script to United Artists in 1975. UA drew up a short list of directors suitable for the production. This list included Roman Polanski, Stanley Kubrick and Sidney Lumet. Kubrick was given a script and sent back a favourable reply, but Chayefsky, who was as much a stickler for control as Kubrick, didn't want to hand his vision over to an auteur. Sidnet Lumet was finally chosen because it was felt that his working methods were suitably restrained. Years later, Chayefsky would remove his name from the "Altered States" screenplay because of Ken Loach's wild style. Chayefsky views his screenplay as the final word. The story set in stone. And in "Network" Lumet obliges by filming his words as simply and religiously as possible.

I can see what they are doing with the film and I can actually appreciate it

[stamper · 7/10 · 8 October 2004]

Network is much more than just a film, about the madness of the TV industry. It is a film about the madness of the human being, the corruption of politics and the rape of the truth. Now I must admit that the film probably is not for everybody, because it isn't very thrilling and it might appear a tad slow to some. Personally I thought it was a very interesting film and I found myself comparing the depicted situations with the reality of today. It made me wonder how much of the films contents were regarded crazy in 1976, which I now (in 2004) found to be plausible or even true. If you like the plot summary on IMDb give this one a try. You might just get as interested as I did.

6,75 out of 10 (with a 7 given upon voting)

A Great Film About 20 Years After & Before It Was Needed

[DKosty123 · 9/10 · 19 February 2017]

This film though not noticed enough now, is one of the great films. Peter Finch put just about everything he has into Howard Biel. In fact he died of a heart attack after the film was released and he was out promoting it. Certain films have impact, and this one still does.

In a way, this is a higher budget, bigger star update of the 1950's film "A Face In The Crowd" starring Andy Griffith and Patricia Neal. Howard Biel is very much the character Lonsome Rhodes was in that film. The difference is that while the earlier film went totally off the deep end, this one stops at just the right spot. The issue Howard Biel highlights here of Foreign Money and Big Corporations and Big Government taking over the world and screwing the little person- well let's fast forward to when it happened after the movie was made.

When Government decided it had to tax Senior Citizens Social Security benefits for starters as this requires some Senior Citizens as high as in their 90's to have to file income taxes. Then they are paying taxes on top of benefits they earned that were already taxed.

Then in the 1990's, Howard Biel would have come in handy when NAFTA passed by a corrupt Federal Government, which had started in 1986 to offshore jobs by changing the Federal Tax Code, the working man needed someone to stand up and say "We're Mad As Hell and we're not going to take this anymore!" Black people needed it when a huge Federal Program threw thousands of blacks in jail during the 1990's too. Then when the Big Banks talked a willingly corrupt government in the 1990's into deregulating them, removing restrictions FDR put in place to prevent the system from another 1929 meltdown, we needed Biel again.

Then in the 2000's, when big drug companies bribed a government into passing a drug law that made them wealthy and then allowed them to put out dangerous new drugs like "opoids" without regard with what they do to the public? Of course then 2 political parties who have disregarded any chance of term limits and have made themselves rich by sucking the taxpayers dry like kittens do their mom-ma cat?

Could a real Howard Biel have really done anything about that? Unfortunately the answer is no, because the big corporations, big money, mass media and corrupt governments appear to have won since this movie was made. Even though there are 2 great films warning us this could happen, we are at a point today where a whole lot of little people are no longer counted in a system that is rigged.

Yes, we should be "Mad as Hell" about it, but the out of touch media and those kittens living in a glass bubble still have not woken up as reality is being more hidden today than it was in 1976.

With William Holden, Faye Dunaway, and a huge cast, Sidney Lumet brings off a classic here that even has cameos from John Chancellor and Walter Cronkite. This movie portrays things as they are. Heed the warning, and educate yourselves as to what has happened since 1976. Even today's protesters need to watch this to really understand what they are doing, and why.

Too Much Pontificating

[kenjha · 7/10 · 2 June 2008]

This biting satire of media gone mad features a terrific cast: Holden as an old-time news guy, Finch in his Oscar-winning role of the mad prophet of the airwaves, and especially Dunaway as a woman whose life ambition is "a 30 share and a 20 rating." Lumet is usually a reliable director but this is Chayefsky's film and he wants to make sure he is the center of attention. Although he offers some keen observations, Chayefsky spends too much time having his characters pontificating pretentiously. It just becomes tiresome after a while, and the plot just becomes too silly, even for a satire. What's more, the relationship between Holden and Dunaway is never believable.

Network

[Coxer99 · 10/10 · 2 May 1999]

Engrossing satire from Paddy Chayefsky and Sidney Lumet about sensationalism and the almighty dollar in television. All the performances astound, especially Beatty as the tycoon who tells Peter Finch his ideal America and his ideal philosophy on where America is heading. The film is a fine mix of black comedy and drama, brought to life by Chayefsky's incredible script and Lumet's superb direction. Dunaway won a much deserved Oscar for her performance. It's a performance that makes your jaw drop to the floor from start to finish. She makes being a bitch look so darn good.

Insightful but second half weirdly uncomfortable

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 20 September 2014]

Howard Beale (Peter Finch) is an aging declining UBS news anchor. Longtime friend/boss Max Schumacher (William Holden) tells him that he's going to be replaced. Beale goes on the air to announce that he will commit suicide on the next Tuesday broadcast. Meanwhile programmer Diana Christensen (Faye Dunaway) develops a reality show with Ecumenical Liberation Army terrorists who film their own bank robbery. Executive Frank Hackett (Robert Duvall) has the news division on the chopping block. Schumacher allows Beale to go on one more time to say goodbye, but he goes on a tirade which cause the ratings to spike. Beale catches the eye of Diana Christensen and she convinces Hackett to keep him on the air. Diana starts to have an affair with Schumacher.

It's a funny satire at the time. It's more of a funny but sad reality of TV nowadays. What is over the top satire from the mind of writer Paddy Chayefsky is now too close to the truth. The fact that it's so real diminishes the comedy. It's a little sad that the stupidity has become common place. Director Sidney Lumet does this comedy straight and allows the material to shine on its own. I also find the second half too convoluted and too unreal. All the Howard Beale Show stuff is too weird with a very uncomfortable ending. I just can't see why people would watch his show. And ending the movie that way is really unfunny.

Worst overacting of all time?

[JamesD2 · 2/10 · 22 August 2012]

I absolutely hated this movie.

Mild spoiler below

I have never seen so much shouting and screaming in my life. Every character is very, very serious and has to yell and scream and throw a mini-tantrum every scene. Watch the employee GET FIRED. Oh wait, let's hire him back. Oh let's FIRE the employee. Oh wait, let's hire him back. Oh let's FIRE the yaaawwwn.

All the actors are very, very serious because you know how serious it is to produce a network TV show. Such mellodrama. They are acting like it is the ER and the president is getting shot.

They every character has a rambling speech that goes on and on and on and on. Very serious stuff. You can tell because they have those lines in their foreheads when they speak.

More yelling. More screaming. Life or death. About a news program for God's sake.

There is has never been a film made with less subtlety. No subtlety at all. Just screaming, yetlling and overacting.

Just horrendous, horrendous acting. How did it get all those Oscars? Because Hollywood loves movies about themselves. See Shakespeare in Love for example.

It was pure agony to finish this movie. I had to break it up into four parts. I give it 2 stars because I wanted to see how they were going to end it. The whole seemed pointless.

I have never disagreed with so many reviewers in my life. I suspect it is because a lot of people saw it back in the day. Old movies have a positive bias I noticed. Most don't hold up that well. I just saw Patton yesterday and I give that a 10. This one does not stand the test of time. By the way, I was 9 when this was released so I am old too.

My overwhelming emotion in watching this movie is I wanted to tell all these actors and actresses to sit down and shut the hell up.