Die Washington-Post-Reporter Bob Woodward und Carl Bernstein decken die Hintergründe des Watergate-Skandals auf, der zum Rücktritt von Präsident Richard Nixon führt.Die Washington-Post-Reporter Bob Woodward und Carl Bernstein decken die Hintergründe des Watergate-Skandals auf, der zum Rücktritt von Präsident Richard Nixon führt.Die Washington-Post-Reporter Bob Woodward und Carl Bernstein decken die Hintergründe des Watergate-Skandals auf, der zum Rücktritt von Präsident Richard Nixon führt.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- 4 Oscars gewonnen
- 17 Gewinne & 23 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
The story has been the prototype for every conspiracy thriller since, establishing all the motifs that would eventually be exhausted by 'The X-Files' and become cliché. The narrative flows smoothly, and Goldman does an excellent job of reigning in a potentially incomprehensible plot line, a feat that won him a much-deserved Oscar. The story does, however, slow down in spots, becoming repetitious, and could have benefited from a little judicious pruning.
An excellent movie, that not only sheds light on a historic episode without the usual glossy spin, but highlights the pitiful condition of modern journalism, a fall from grace that in time will prove to far more terrifying and long reaching than anything perpetrated by Nixon and his cronies.
This dramatization of how it was discovered that the burglary of the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D. C. was funded and directed by the Nixon White House is a lot better than it has any right to be. Given the tedious, non-glamorous and frankly boring leg- and phone-work that is often the lot of the investigative reporter, it is surprising that this is a very interesting movie even if you don't care two beans about the Watergate scandal. In fact, this is really more about how the story was put together than it is about the scandal itself. It is also a lot less political than might be expected.
It stars Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman as Washington Post reporters, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, and they are good, with excellent support from Jason Robards (Oscar as Best Supporting Actor) playing Post Executive Editor Ben Bradlee, and Jane Alexander as an innocent caught up in the machinations. But what makes the movie work is the Oscar-winning script adapted from the Woodward and Bernstein best seller by that old Hollywood pro, William Goldman (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid 1969, Misery 1990, etc.). What he does so very well, even though we know the outcome, is to establish and maintain the tension as Woodward and Bernstein run all over town chasing leads and misdirections. He accomplishes this by putting just enough varied obstacles in the path of our intrepid reporters, notably the Washington bureaucracy and the understandably cautious senior editors at the Post.
The direction by Alan J. Pakula (Comes a Horseman 1978, Sophie's Choice 1982, etc.) focuses the scenes nicely, keeps the camera where it belongs, and highlights the story with a shadowy Deep Throat (Hal Holbrook), skitterish sources, and a vivid recreation of a top American newspaper at work. I was especially enthralled to see the interactions among the reporters, the editors and the sources. I thought they all looked and sounded authentic, Redford's good looks having nothing to do with the story, which was right, and Hoffman's flair for the intense reigned in, which was necessary. The diffidence of Alexander's character and the soft pushiness of Woodward and Bernstein were tempered just right. Bradlee's stewardship of the story and his ability to take a calculated risk seemed true to life.
Some details that stood out: Redford's hunt and peck typing contrasted with Hoffman's all fingers flying; the talking heads on the strategically placed TVs, reacting (via actual video footage) to the developing story--deny, deny, deny! of course. The thin reporter's spiral notebooks being pulled out and then later flipped through to find a quote. The bright lights of the newsroom looking expansive with all those desks as though there were mirrors on the walls extending an illusion. The seemingly silly tricks to get a source to confirm: just nod your head; I'll count to ten and if you're still on the line... And you know what I liked best? No annoying subplot!
The rather abrupt resolution with the teletype banging out the leads to a sequence of stories that led to President Nixon's resignation had just the right feel to it, especially for those of us who have actually experienced the goosepimply sensation that comes with watching a breaking story come in over the teletype. The quick wrap-up surprised me, but delighted me at the same time.
Bottom line: an excellent movie that wears well, a fine example of some of Hollywood's top professionals at work some thirty years ago. #30
On June 17th, 1972, Watergate hotel security guard Frank Wills spotted a possible break-in at the Democratic Party's National Committee. Some apparent CIA agents were arrested for breaking and entering, and later held at a trial, where Bob Woodward first found out that they were more than mere intruders. They worked for the government.
After researching into the matter, Woodward soon realized that one of the intruders had the name of a political figure scrawled in a notebook located within his shirt pocket.
And with the help of Carl Bernstein, a fellow Washington Post reporter (and a veteran of the field), Woodward followed the slight tracks, and the two men soon found themselves unearthing a shattering conspiracy that did indeed lead all the way up to President Richard Nixon, the 37th President of the United States of America, himself.
Based on Woodward and Bernstein's own memoirs, William Goldman's Oscar-winning script makes for a brilliant subtle mystery; a true-life story as amazingly honest and forthright as it is entertaining and engaging. It would always remain the late Alan J. Pakula's greatest film, and its standing as one of the top films of all time on many various "great movies lists" is certainly merited.
It's a shame that both Hoffman and Redford were snubbed by the Academy Awards for their performances here. As Woodward and Bernstein, the two are amazingly convincing and bounce dialogue off of each other with striking clarity and realistic quality. Hoffman, who is top billed, appears in the film less than Redford, but gives just a performance just as amazing. He would gain an Oscar twelve years later for his portrayal of Raymond Babbitt in "Rain Man," his finest performance to date, but his role in "All the President's Men" is of a different caliber. Woodward and Bernstein are two complete opposites, and at first they rub each other the wrong way -- Bernstein, a veteran reporter, takes one of Woodward's articles and starts making revisions. "I don't mind what you did," Woodward says, "I just mind how you did it." Even though it's not anything special, this if my favorite scene in the movie, and perhaps the best example of just how well these two actors are able to bring their characters to life.
The movie is a mystery but not in the traditional sense. Almost all of us watching the film already know how the story is going to turn out, but the way it makes its dynamic revelations seem surprising and its story tense and exciting is one of the greatest examples of compelling filmmaking.
For the film's opening sequence, in which Woodward and Bernstein's condemning news is written on a typewriter, Pakula used sounds of gunshots to clarify each separate key of the device striking downwards. The 37th President of the United States of America was sentenced to a sort of death with the publishing of that article, and the bold gunshots add an extra depth and meaning to this fact.
"All the President's Men" has no hidden morals, messages, meanings. It's just a true story about something that happened, brought to life on the big screen by a great director, an influential screenwriter and two of the best actors of all time. No, it's not going to have you thinking after it's over, but if anything, it's the type of movie that will generate a lot of talk instead. And more often than not, that's a good thing.
5/5 stars.
- John Ulmer
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesOne scene involving Robert Redford on the phone is a continuous six-minute single take with the camera tracking in slowly. Towards the end, Redford accidentally calls the phone caller by the wrong name. But as he stays in character, it appears genuine, so the take was used in the final cut.
- PatzerWhen Bernstein is questioning Judy Hoback in her home, she tells him that "In one two-day period, $6 million came in." In the following scene, in which Bernstein is explaining his notes to Woodward, he repeats the information as "In one six-day period."
- Zitate
[last lines]
[last lines excluding archive footage]
Ben Bradlee: You know the results of the latest Gallup Poll? Half the country never even heard of the word Watergate. Nobody gives a shit. You guys are probably pretty tired, right? Well, you should be. Go on home, get a nice hot bath. Rest up... 15 minutes. Then get your asses back in gear. We're under a lot of pressure, you know, and you put us there. Nothing's riding on this except the, uh, first amendment to the Constitution, freedom of the press, and maybe the future of the country. Not that any of that matters, but if you guys fuck up again, I'm going to get mad. Goodnight.
- Crazy CreditsThe opening Warner Bros. Zooming \\' logo is in black and white.
- Alternative VersionenGerman theatrical version was cut by. ca 7,5 minutes (ie. a conversation between Rosenfeld and Simons, Woodward asking a woman about Hunt, Woodward and Bernstein being dismissed by Mrs. Hambling, Woodward on the way to a meeting with Deep Throat). DVD release is uncut.
- VerbindungenEdited into La classe américaine (1993)
Top-Auswahl
- How long is All the President's Men?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- Todos los hombres del presidente
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 8.500.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 70.600.000 $
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 70.601.199 $