This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Just so...so bad

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

This film, which tries to be a view of history from the perspective of one man, fails because it is very much historically inaccurate. By negating the film's primary purpose, it detracts from all other aspects of the film. It's difficult to evaluate the quality of the acting and the casting because the premise of the film is insultingly fictional.

This movie is full of bologna. Anyone raving about this is a puppet of propaganda and enjoys the re-write and false representations of actual and historical events.

I am frankly shocked that this movie did so well in ratings and awards. It's utter dreck. Apparently it isn't even historically accurate. For shame. What a huge disservice to the message and subject matter, which is so important for people to see.This is one of those terrible, schlocky, emotionally manipulative films that tries to cram in as many cameos of beloved actors as possible, often to hilarious effect. James Marsden as JFK. What more can I say? Oh, and Alan Rickman as Reagan and Robin Williams as Eisenhower. I have never in my life seen such laughable casting. The absolute pinnacle was John Cusack as Nixon. It sounds like a great idea for an SNL sketch, not such a great idea for a movie that intends to present itself as a drama.The editing was incoherent and abrupt, as though it was done with a chainsaw.Most unforgivable of all is the way in which this film made an unintentional farce of such important subject matter as racism and civil rights. I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would take this film seriously, let alone rave about it and shower it with awards. Are people this starved for good African-American/Civil Rights material? If so, that in itself is a huge injustice.

From humble beginning as the son of a cotton-picker, an African American rises to a post as butler at the White House, overseeing the tenures of eight American Presidents and several civil rights movements in this semibiographical film. The main reason to see the movie is Forest Whitaker's lead performance as a man who rises high by learning to keep his mouth shut, and Whitaker does well incorporating repressed emotions into his performance until it reaches the point where he feels it is finally right to make a stance. Covering years upon years of White House history, the film sometimes feels episodic and certain presidential reigns feel overlooked, with the majority of time spent on Eisenhower and Reagan's years in office and precious little on Nixon (though John Cusack as Nixon does have an excellent scene early on during his vice presidency days). Intriguing as the insight into the running of the White House is, it is also hard to deny that the events on the outside are far more interesting - in particular, a group of African American activists undergoing training in which they are pushed around and spoken violently to in preparation for a stance at a diner. On that note, David Oyelowo is well cast as one of Whitaker's sons who becomes very embroiled in the politics of the day. Some have complained about the film being lengthy, sentimental and melodramatic, all of which may be true, but with Whitaker so well cast in the lead role as his character ages over several decades (great makeup effects), this is nevertheless a surprisingly engaging experience while it lasts.