The always great Forrest Whitaker plays Cecil Gaines, the fictional version of the actual butler. In a surprising return to acting (she's actually a talented actress, guys!) Oprah Winfrey plays Cecil's wife. The main draw of this one was the bevy of A-listers brought in to portray the various Presidents, though: with a nearly unrecognizable Robin Williams as Dwight Eisenhower, James Mardsen as JFK, John Cusack as a surprisingly convincing Nixon, Liev Schrieber as LBJ and Alan Rickman as Ronald Reagan. For some reason the film skips completely over the Ford and Carter administrations. Gaines sits as a literal witness to history, rising from sharecroppers son to the White House and dutifully filling his responsibilities at the White House as his family and the world convulse with the social upheaval of the times.
The Good: The leads are, in a word, great. Whitaker is a shoo-in for a best actor nomination and Winfrey turns in an inspired performance. Terrance Howard is always likable, and Lenny Kravitz and Cuba Gooding, Jr. are strong as other White House butlers. The other supporting players are more or less effective, but Schrieber, Mardsen and Richman stood out for me. Additionally, the story is moving (if occasionally emotionally manipulative) and the main characters at least are well-drawn and complete.
The Bad: Let me start by saying that I don't have an issue with fictionalizing history in and of itself. What I do have an issue with is presenting something as a true story and focusing on authentic-feeling depictions of real historical figures while inventing a story wholesale. I don't understand the motivation there. There was a REAL butler who served American Presidents for decades, surely his life was interesting enough to make a movie of, right? If you want to make a Forrest Gump-type movie about the Civil Rights movement, by all means, do so, but I don't understand the motivation of fictionalizing things that took place in living memory when a real story is available. Maybe that's a hang-up that I shouldn't hold against the movie, but I really felt cheated when I found out that most of the narrative is completely made up. It feels false, lazy, emotionally manipulative, cheap and forced. History is interesting enough, we don't need to make it up, do we? Why make up a son who was personally close with MLK, Jr. and have him elected to congress when one didn't exist? That's about as subtle as shouting CIVIL RIGHTS HERE, and really cheapens the real people, Presidents included, who were part of that time.
In all, despite a manipulative narrative and some questionable decisions, this flick is worthwhile because of the performances at its center. Whitaker and Winfrey really create a believable, loving couple through two fleshed out and powerfully played characters. This flick is worth watching for their performances, but ultimately falls short of what it intended to do, by virtue of being misleading and overly broad. Sorry guys, I just couldn't overlook it.
6/10.
