Hey
I'v seen both Nixon and Frost/Nixon which both have extraordinary talent behind it. But who doe you think is better Anthony Hopkins in his 1995 oscar nominated role or Langella who is a shoe in for the nomination.
Personally I can't decide. What do you think?
P.S. I'm sorry if I'm repeating another msg.
[deleted]
You seem to be judging Langella on his ability to deliver an impersonation of Nixon.
"Shoot straight, you bastards! Don't make a mess of it!
[deleted]
I'm surprised no one's mention Philip Baker Hall's portrayal of Nixon in "Secret Honor" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088074/ .
I found Hall's work somehow more echt-Nixon than either of the other, demonstrably 'acting' actors acting demonstrably.
Phillip Baker Hall was brilliant as Nixon in Secret Honor.
Another great Nixon was Bob Gunton in Elvis Meets Nixon, but it was a small role.
As far as Anthony Hopkins, he didn't really get the voice down, but I thought he had Nixon's mannerisms down cold. I thought Langella terrific as Nixon also, I think he had the voice down better than Hopkins. I would call it a draw between them; they were both outstanding.
What was the name of the film in which two young women correspond with Nixon in his closing months in office, and become a source of emotional support to him as his resignation nears? Not a weighty movie, but fun, in a valley-girl kind of way; I'm just reminded of it now.
Dick?
"PLEASE DON'T DATE ME! I PROMISE I'LL WORK HARDER!"
Yes! Thanks HtS.
It's here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144168/
A fun film, and one I'm especially partial to because Dan Hedaya is a neighbour here in my NYC enclave. Hedaya as Nixon: another good acting job.
(or, if you're of another frame of mind: the worst effing film ever!)
... and I've posted a year to the day of the OP, without intending to.
Is that wacky, or just kismet?
Langella without a doubt. Hopkins couldn't achieve an American accent, which disqualifies him right off the bat, IMHO.
share... which disqualifies him right off the bat,
unless the purpose of the art is to show the essence of the man, and not trip up on the externalities.
I'm truly indifferent to a debate over who does Nixon better, but the actor's accent has to be the least of it
-this is film, after all, not a TV special-of-the-week.
[deleted]
I think Stone's Nixon is a very underrated and inexplicably forgotten film. Great performance by Hopkins, and an historically important supposition by Oliver Stone on the 17 minute gap. The tie-in of the Watergate burglars to the JFK assassination is one of the great black holes in American history.
share
ah, it was an 18.5 minute gap, newtown; everybody over the age of 18.5 knows that.
[deleted]
Neither- to see the true essence of RMN, watch Dan Hedaya in the 1999 gem "Dick".
"In a time of universal deceit,
telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
Having seen both, and watched 'Frost/Nixon' last night, I will say unequivocally, Langella, hands down. Hopkins can't assay an American accent to save his life, and he comes across as neurotic and hyper. Whereas Langella's Nixon is insecure, verbose, arrogant, disarming, and above all - American, and right on the mark with the famous voice and gestures.
shareHopkins, Langella.... it still takes a Capricorn to play a Capricorn. (Or, in the case of Jim Carrey playing Andy Kaufman playing Elvis, a Capricorn playing a Capricorn playing a Capricorn.)
That said, as much as I love Langella, he seemed a bit overwrought as Nixon.
On the other hand, while Hopkins and Joan Allen were potentially perfect casting as Dick and Pat Nixon, they give the wrong performances! Hopkins plays Nixon like a cuddly teddy bear (instead of like Hannibal Lecter) and, thanks to the damn screenwriter, Allen plays Pat like a brittle kick-ass '90s woman (something Pat pointedly was not). And it nearly ruined Oliver Stone's movie.
--
LBJ's mistress tells all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPdviZbk-XI&;
Unfortunately I haven't seen Hopkins' performance, but the problem with Frost/Nixon is that immersion suffers greatly because Langella's Nixon looks more like Brezhnev than anything else. That's why I don't think Hopkins could possibly be worse.
shareWhy dont they ever give Oprah Winfrey a shot?
What a wonderful Nixon she could be.
I've seen both films and I think it is unfair to compare them because they both show different aspects of Nixon's life. The version with Hopkins really dig into Nixon's past and reveals how his childhood, etc. influenced his adulthood in various ways. He definitely had difficulties in coping with his past, and one's past is a great part of what makes a total person. Nixon was a very complex man, and Hopkins did a wonderful job of revealing that. However, Langella took on another aspect and showed the audience how Nixon was able to protect himself but powerless to defend himself when times got rough.
shareDon't forget Oliver Platt!
share