From scene one, this film delivers a long slow burn as the tale of power and corruption unfolds. There is little action, but the film is steeped in an atmosphere of tension and high drama. The direction by Michael Mann is masterful, an object lesson in how to frame shots and let silence, as well as words - and music - work for the story. Al Pacino is once more the great actor of early films such as 'Scarecrow', instead of the theatrical performer of recent films. Russell Crowe shows his solid 'ordinary guy'character as more tortured through losing his family than any of the macho scenes he portrayed in 'Gladiator.' A superb film.
540 Reviews
Smart film making.
moonlightreflections30 May 2000
"The Insider" in many ways reflects the golden days of American cinematography, where every scene serves a purpose, dialogue is sharp and poignant, and characters and events remain true to their emotions and nature.
The film presents certain questions throughout its duration that are intended to invoke thought in the viewer, and at the same time explores them to unprecedented depths which are by no means native to the film industry. The story is of a quick-paced nature, and demands that the viewer pay the utmost attention to every single line and image presented; it flabbergasts in its unparallelled structure of continuity and coherence to those sentient enough.
After watching this film, it became apparent why Crowe was so reluctant to play the role of Maximus in "Gladiator" after acting the part of Jeffrey Wigand. It appears more or less as if Crowe had been this character in reality, and it really inspires to see that such a talented actor is finally beginning to enjoy the prominence that he deserves.
In the past decades, there has been a progressive decline in the number of intelligent films making it onto the market, but the success of "The Insider" will hopefully serve as a shout-out to all the film companies and directors reluctant to tread on such sensitive ground. This movie could not receive a higher recommendation!
The film presents certain questions throughout its duration that are intended to invoke thought in the viewer, and at the same time explores them to unprecedented depths which are by no means native to the film industry. The story is of a quick-paced nature, and demands that the viewer pay the utmost attention to every single line and image presented; it flabbergasts in its unparallelled structure of continuity and coherence to those sentient enough.
After watching this film, it became apparent why Crowe was so reluctant to play the role of Maximus in "Gladiator" after acting the part of Jeffrey Wigand. It appears more or less as if Crowe had been this character in reality, and it really inspires to see that such a talented actor is finally beginning to enjoy the prominence that he deserves.
In the past decades, there has been a progressive decline in the number of intelligent films making it onto the market, but the success of "The Insider" will hopefully serve as a shout-out to all the film companies and directors reluctant to tread on such sensitive ground. This movie could not receive a higher recommendation!
Intensity beyond intensity
Surecure29 March 2005
The Insider is the only film I remember having seen where I walked out of the theatre with a headache because of the intensity of the story. Michael Mann is one of few directors who has such an in-depth understanding of both the subject of his film and the nature of that subject, that he is able to portray a realism that is nearly impossible to match.
There is real skill displayed in the way in which the Insider weaves through the aspects of both Bergmann and Wigand's lives. Whereas a lesser director would have thrown the characters at each other in an artificial collision, Mann introduces each character as being average professionals each living in their own respective stable lives. It is only when their chance encounter creates a subtext that could consume them both does the real chemical reaction in the story take place.
Bringing life to these fantastically written characters are two of the most talented 'big-name' character actors of our time, Al Pacino and Russell Crowe. Surprisingly, it is Crowe that drives this film forward, and his portrayal of Wigand is spot-on perfect. His is an honest humanity, both a loving father and a flawed husband who never fully balances his life under the pressure of circumstance. Crowe nails the performance by not hamming-up the character, but rather by understating his personality. This works in that it is the character that is elevated while the actor disappears.
That is not to ignore the excellent work by the remainder of the cast. Pacino's performance is accented and accentuated beautifully by Christopher Plummer's portrayal of Mike Wallace. Most notably are several standout scenes mixing Pacino, Plummer, Philip Baker Hall and Stephen Tobolowsky that ground the underlying tensions of the film fantastically. And the juxtaposition between the cold, hard New York settings and the organic nature of Mississippi further press this film beyond standard non-fiction works.
Easily one of the best dramas of 1999, the Insider is a standout member of that elite club of great historical dramas such as All the President's Men that are few and far between. It is for that audience that appreciates skilled performances meeting skilled direction and restrained, mature writing.
There is real skill displayed in the way in which the Insider weaves through the aspects of both Bergmann and Wigand's lives. Whereas a lesser director would have thrown the characters at each other in an artificial collision, Mann introduces each character as being average professionals each living in their own respective stable lives. It is only when their chance encounter creates a subtext that could consume them both does the real chemical reaction in the story take place.
Bringing life to these fantastically written characters are two of the most talented 'big-name' character actors of our time, Al Pacino and Russell Crowe. Surprisingly, it is Crowe that drives this film forward, and his portrayal of Wigand is spot-on perfect. His is an honest humanity, both a loving father and a flawed husband who never fully balances his life under the pressure of circumstance. Crowe nails the performance by not hamming-up the character, but rather by understating his personality. This works in that it is the character that is elevated while the actor disappears.
That is not to ignore the excellent work by the remainder of the cast. Pacino's performance is accented and accentuated beautifully by Christopher Plummer's portrayal of Mike Wallace. Most notably are several standout scenes mixing Pacino, Plummer, Philip Baker Hall and Stephen Tobolowsky that ground the underlying tensions of the film fantastically. And the juxtaposition between the cold, hard New York settings and the organic nature of Mississippi further press this film beyond standard non-fiction works.
Easily one of the best dramas of 1999, the Insider is a standout member of that elite club of great historical dramas such as All the President's Men that are few and far between. It is for that audience that appreciates skilled performances meeting skilled direction and restrained, mature writing.
The film that keeps on giving
m&a_o4 May 2000
I first wanted to see 'The Insider' because it professed to show the truth behind the lies of the Tobacco Industry. My wife and I saw it and were thoroughly impressed. In fact we've now seen it 5 times (I think, though I may have lost count).
If you go to the movies to be entertained mindlessly, do NOT see this movie, you will bored. This movie is for people who like to think, and who like to receive superior presentation of thought provoking material. The Insider has all that.
The movie gets you thinking about mankind. The obvious problem with human nature is obvious in this movie. The Tobacco companies knowingly selling addictive product, whilst claiming it is not. And then almost, almost but not quite, getting away with ruining an individual's life, an individual who's conscience was pricked by what they had seen.
But then it moves into the CBS drama, where again the hopelessness of mankind in general shines through. The strength of two individuals though manages to win the day, which is what makes this true story so unusual.
I found that (contrary to those who complained of the movies length) every scene that Mann has given us has a reason. A good reason. From the opening scenes depicting an evil far from USA. To the hints as to why we didn't hear anything about the drama when it happened, because the OJ murder story and media frenzy drowned out what should be to us all a much more serious matter.
For me the crowning moment in the film was when Russell Crowe (as Wigand) was about to dig into a hamburger when behind him on TV a newscaster reported findings about him, bad (though unfounded) findings. Crowe put his knife and fork back down in a way that told us all that he had no more appetite, in fact all the will left in him had been violently thrust away, thrust away by the selfish interests of the Tobacco companies.
All in all this is a complete movie that deserved its 7 nominations and should have gotten some awards. The sound was great, as was the camera work. If you love an artistic movie, you will love this one. Crowe is thoroughly believable and has cemented himself as a first rate actor, capable of playing just about any part put his way. Pacino is very well cast, Plummer is a class act, and a host of supporting cast did themselves proud.
What we can't forget about this movie, for all its drama, and for the pointed view it gives us of the nature we bear, its a TRUE STORY. Thats what really makes it shocking. And only those driven to the ends of despair and loneliness such as Wigand and Bergmann were, can really truly realise another fact pointed out in the movie, in the end of it all, we are nothing anyway, so what does it all matter?
See it!
If you go to the movies to be entertained mindlessly, do NOT see this movie, you will bored. This movie is for people who like to think, and who like to receive superior presentation of thought provoking material. The Insider has all that.
The movie gets you thinking about mankind. The obvious problem with human nature is obvious in this movie. The Tobacco companies knowingly selling addictive product, whilst claiming it is not. And then almost, almost but not quite, getting away with ruining an individual's life, an individual who's conscience was pricked by what they had seen.
But then it moves into the CBS drama, where again the hopelessness of mankind in general shines through. The strength of two individuals though manages to win the day, which is what makes this true story so unusual.
I found that (contrary to those who complained of the movies length) every scene that Mann has given us has a reason. A good reason. From the opening scenes depicting an evil far from USA. To the hints as to why we didn't hear anything about the drama when it happened, because the OJ murder story and media frenzy drowned out what should be to us all a much more serious matter.
For me the crowning moment in the film was when Russell Crowe (as Wigand) was about to dig into a hamburger when behind him on TV a newscaster reported findings about him, bad (though unfounded) findings. Crowe put his knife and fork back down in a way that told us all that he had no more appetite, in fact all the will left in him had been violently thrust away, thrust away by the selfish interests of the Tobacco companies.
All in all this is a complete movie that deserved its 7 nominations and should have gotten some awards. The sound was great, as was the camera work. If you love an artistic movie, you will love this one. Crowe is thoroughly believable and has cemented himself as a first rate actor, capable of playing just about any part put his way. Pacino is very well cast, Plummer is a class act, and a host of supporting cast did themselves proud.
What we can't forget about this movie, for all its drama, and for the pointed view it gives us of the nature we bear, its a TRUE STORY. Thats what really makes it shocking. And only those driven to the ends of despair and loneliness such as Wigand and Bergmann were, can really truly realise another fact pointed out in the movie, in the end of it all, we are nothing anyway, so what does it all matter?
See it!
SMOKE 'EM IF YOU GOT 'EM!!!
bldsimple26 November 1999
I'll make this simple for you with short attention spans: Al Pacino's best performance of the 90s. Russell Crowe's best work on par with LA Confidential (if not better) and a gripping shot by Christopher Plummer as 60 Minutes anchor Mike Wallace.
For those who can handle it, read on:
Jeffrey Wigand (Russell Crowe) has been fired from his job. He has to break the news to his wife (Diane Venora, who I believe should go on to be one of the best actresses of all time) that their beautiful home, swank cars and health care plan (their oldest daughter is athsmatic) are about to go down the tubes. He's been given a severance package but that's about to fall apart as well.
Enter Lowell Bergman (Pacino), producer for CBS Television News' bastion of journalistic integrity, 60 Minutes. Bergman's doing a report on fires that were started by careless smokers and has been given a report so huge and full of technical jargon he can't make heads or tales of it. Through a friend he is put in touch with Wigand in the hopes of finding a translator. Wigand thinks Lowell is coming after him because of what he knows about his former employers, a major tobacco company.
It is at this moment that director Michael Mann institutes a trick, the likes of which hasn't been seen since All The President's Men. The two exchange a cat-and-mouse conversation via fax. Bergman finally calls Wigand's bluff by daring him to meet him the next day. He does.
What does Wigand know? Well, its all over the papers these days about how the tobacco industry lied about manipulating the leaves to make them more habit forming. We have Wigand to thank for that. But that isn't where the story ends. This is a two-fold tale; on one hand you have the self-destruction of a man who put everything on the line just so he could do the right thing. On the other, you have a television producer who so believes in the integrity of himself, the network, and his show that he is willing to risk everything he has to fight for the protection of his source. I haven't seen this much commitment outside of Woodward and Berstein's staunch protection of "Deep Throat."
The trump card of this film though comes in the form of Christopher Plummer playing one of the most visible news figures of the past 25 years, Mike Wallace. Wallace teeters on the edge of looking like a foul-mouthed, celebrity hungry, media hound who's only thought is about ratings. However, before its over, he evokes the "integrity of Edward R. Murrow," a line that gave me chills and made me pray for an Oscar Nomination.
Director Michael Mann is known chiefly for his Action/Thrillers. This 155 minute film is slow paced but gripping for ever second it is on the screen. A lot of people have complained over the past 7-8 years about Pacino's "staccato" performances, suddenly shouting at the slightest provocation. This film returns him to his prime form, a style he hasn't walked in since Dog Day Afternoon, ...And Justice For All and Serpico.
Anybody got a light?
For those who can handle it, read on:
Jeffrey Wigand (Russell Crowe) has been fired from his job. He has to break the news to his wife (Diane Venora, who I believe should go on to be one of the best actresses of all time) that their beautiful home, swank cars and health care plan (their oldest daughter is athsmatic) are about to go down the tubes. He's been given a severance package but that's about to fall apart as well.
Enter Lowell Bergman (Pacino), producer for CBS Television News' bastion of journalistic integrity, 60 Minutes. Bergman's doing a report on fires that were started by careless smokers and has been given a report so huge and full of technical jargon he can't make heads or tales of it. Through a friend he is put in touch with Wigand in the hopes of finding a translator. Wigand thinks Lowell is coming after him because of what he knows about his former employers, a major tobacco company.
It is at this moment that director Michael Mann institutes a trick, the likes of which hasn't been seen since All The President's Men. The two exchange a cat-and-mouse conversation via fax. Bergman finally calls Wigand's bluff by daring him to meet him the next day. He does.
What does Wigand know? Well, its all over the papers these days about how the tobacco industry lied about manipulating the leaves to make them more habit forming. We have Wigand to thank for that. But that isn't where the story ends. This is a two-fold tale; on one hand you have the self-destruction of a man who put everything on the line just so he could do the right thing. On the other, you have a television producer who so believes in the integrity of himself, the network, and his show that he is willing to risk everything he has to fight for the protection of his source. I haven't seen this much commitment outside of Woodward and Berstein's staunch protection of "Deep Throat."
The trump card of this film though comes in the form of Christopher Plummer playing one of the most visible news figures of the past 25 years, Mike Wallace. Wallace teeters on the edge of looking like a foul-mouthed, celebrity hungry, media hound who's only thought is about ratings. However, before its over, he evokes the "integrity of Edward R. Murrow," a line that gave me chills and made me pray for an Oscar Nomination.
Director Michael Mann is known chiefly for his Action/Thrillers. This 155 minute film is slow paced but gripping for ever second it is on the screen. A lot of people have complained over the past 7-8 years about Pacino's "staccato" performances, suddenly shouting at the slightest provocation. This film returns him to his prime form, a style he hasn't walked in since Dog Day Afternoon, ...And Justice For All and Serpico.
Anybody got a light?
A Great Movie, Very Underrated, Due To Poor Marketing
shapiromshap22 March 2007
Russell Crowe at his best as a Kentucky tobacco executive in Eric Roth and Michael Mann's masterpiece, "The Insider," is one of the most underrated American films ever. Not only is it important historically for its political implications - not about tobacco, but about conflicts of commercial interest that control freedom of speech along the airwaves in the U.S.- it is a great story and it is true. Disney had no idea how to market "The Insider" and essentially sold it as tobacco movie and it is so much more. Pacino gives a grand A plus performance as a Long Island Jewish producer and halfway through the movie I forgot he was Al Pacino. Even better Christopher Plummer masterfully captures the full essence of Mike Wallace. Gina Gershon could turn lust from a stone as always. Michael Mann seems to always pull strong performances from his actors, and Eric Roth who brilliantly adapted "Forrest Gump" did the same here with Mann. Though long, "The Insider" is never boring and a movie all Americans should see twice to make sure they fully comprehend regardless of how you feel about the tobacco debate.
Great Movie and Why it Failed Commercially
caroltj14 September 2021
This is an excellent, riveting movie based on true events and yet failed at the box office, failed commercially. It failed because it's about Honor and Prostitution and the American population no longer knows the difference between those values or cares, which is worse. Prostitution, hypocrisy, deception, betrayal, these are the current reigning mores of American society along with profits at the expense of human life. In the America of the 1930's or 1940's, this movie would've been a smash hit success. Those days are gone from the United States. How sad for great creations like this...and for us. Prostitution can be defined as selling ones honor cheaply and the US, it's government and population, do it every day.
A Classic Vegetable Movie
daveisit9 January 2001
Once again I have found a movie that is like eating your vegies. You don't like them, but you know they're good.
The truth is this movie was a little boring. The story is worth telling, the acting is worth rewarding, and the direction and script are both worth appreciating. So what is the problem?
It's too long. Oh Yes, It's just too long.
The truth is this movie was a little boring. The story is worth telling, the acting is worth rewarding, and the direction and script are both worth appreciating. So what is the problem?
It's too long. Oh Yes, It's just too long.
Michael Manns Best Film With Career Best Performances
cdjh-8112520 October 2016
For me personally I've always been a bit off and on with Michael Mann what few films I've seen from him I'm not a big fan (even Heat) but I was still desperate to see The Insider and now haven seen this masterpiece I will always give him credit as The Insider is now one of my all time favourite movies with amazing performances. The characters in this movie are incredibly investing because Mann doesn't paint them as perfect they're all making mistakes and screwing up which makes them seem more human. Russell Crowe is absolutely amazing in this movie with Gladiator also being one of my favourite movies I wasn't sure if I'd ever see a better performance from him but here he is just as good not only is his accent convincing but the toll taken on him is perfectly conveyed through his masterful performance. Al Pacino is every bit his equal he perfectly conveys his no nonsense, experienced character making you believe that no one else could have played this part. The tension in this movie is done just right every time Crowe puts his (or his families) safety on the line you feel it you are worried as to what the company is going to do to him next. Is also a very interesting film, to see all the ways in which Crowe and Pacino are trying to combat Big Tobacco using the law in very specific way and it further enthuses Pacino's experience and Crowes vulnerability. When things do go Crowes way you feel it the writing in this movie is so good that you are desperate for Crowe to succeed because overall you see that he just wants to do the right thing.
I absolutely adore The Insider it's suspenseful and heartbreaking and in many ways also uplifting it's got some Career best performances and makes me desperate to see more films from Michael Mann.
100%-A+
I absolutely adore The Insider it's suspenseful and heartbreaking and in many ways also uplifting it's got some Career best performances and makes me desperate to see more films from Michael Mann.
100%-A+
i must agree - good not great
smdono3729 June 2000
The insider, although wonderful at some parts, in my opinion, is not all it's cracked up to be. Russell Crowe and Al Pacino do give stellar performances, but I found this movie to be extremely slow! To give an example, the scene at the driving range is one of the longest and most unneeded scenes in film history. The entire scene could have been cut in half, at least. As a movie fan, I am all into long shots, but this was ridiculous!!! The story was indeed intriguing, but the way it was presented was nothing that needed to take 2 and a half hours of my time. I believe the actors did well with what they were presented, however, and I cannot state this enough, it was just way too slow and long!!!!
Riveting from start to finish
Snoopymichele18 July 2006
This is a movie that I was on the fence about seeing, simply because it seemed like just another movie about a whistle blower. It is so much more than that, and it is a movie worth watching time and again because of its complexity. It is about journalistic integrity, corporate greed, good vs. evil, and standing up for what you believe in, no matter what the cost. It pulls no punches about how far the tobacco industry would go to hide the truth from the American public about cigarettes, but it never seems propagandized.
Russell Crowe gives a top-notch performance of Everyman scientist Jeffrey Wigand that meets Al Pacino and Christopher Plummer's portrayals of 60 Minutes Hotshots Lowell Bergman and Mike Wallace frame by frame. These three actors have the perfect blend of chemistry and timing, and fit their characters like a glove. They completely inhabit their roles and at times it seems more like a documentary than a fictional story.
From beginning to end, it has the kind of edge of your seat tension that keeps one glued to the screen. Despite being a fairly lengthy film, it moves at a quick pace, and is absolutely riveting. The direction is superb, the camera angles are fast and furious, and it is a delight to watch.
Russell Crowe gives a top-notch performance of Everyman scientist Jeffrey Wigand that meets Al Pacino and Christopher Plummer's portrayals of 60 Minutes Hotshots Lowell Bergman and Mike Wallace frame by frame. These three actors have the perfect blend of chemistry and timing, and fit their characters like a glove. They completely inhabit their roles and at times it seems more like a documentary than a fictional story.
From beginning to end, it has the kind of edge of your seat tension that keeps one glued to the screen. Despite being a fairly lengthy film, it moves at a quick pace, and is absolutely riveting. The direction is superb, the camera angles are fast and furious, and it is a delight to watch.
Ambitious, brilliantly-cast recreation of true events...
moonspinner5517 December 2010
Russell Crowe disappears inside the role of Jeffrey Wigand, real-life ex-corporate head for the tobacco giant Brown & Williamson who was fired after opposing the company's "impact boosting" of cigarette tobacco (enhancing the nicotine to be more rapidly absorbed into the smoker's system) with flagrant disregard for the public's health considerations. Wingard is contacted by "60 Minutes" producer Lowell Bergman (Al Pacino) who convinces Wingard to tell his story to 30 million viewers, this despite legal action and ugly threats from his former employer. Director Michael Mann takes his time setting up this character-driven piece; he's careful to include lots of high drama, though one must wade through many story incidentals to get to the meat of the piece (the television news show caving under pressure from the network's legal advisers, and then admitting their cowardice and doing the right thing). The performances (which really drive the picture) are outstanding. Pacino is able to root out the helplessness of the producer's situation, feeling great empathy for his client but also with the knowledge his own career is on the line. Ethics and morality come in second in this man's circle, and standing up for one's principles is to be labeled a martyr. Christopher Plummer gives an Oscar-worthy performance as "60 Minutes" anchor Mike Wallace, and Philip Baker Hall is equally strong as show-creator Don Hewitt. Wallace and Hewitt's loyalty to each other--and how that affects their working relationship with Pacino's Bergman--provides riveting drama, while Crowe's floundering Smoking Gun (one with a hair-trigger temper) is completely realized by the actor. Though assembled in a smoothly astute manner, "The Insider" is quite long. It takes at least an hour to get cooking, yet the final events are truly gripping and moving. *** from ****
Much of this is excellent, and yet...
alice liddell15 March 2000
I hope I can say this under IMDb guidelines, but THE INSIDER is a little disappointing after the mighty HEAT. It's not that it's a bad film - on the contrary, it's a rare Hollywood film that treats its subject with seriousness, irony and complexity. Unfortunately, it shares the classical epic's delusion that somehow length confers greater worthiness, and so we get a lot of dragged out scenes of people just staring, which perhaps gives a truer sense of what it must be like for ordinary people in such circumstacnes - the sheer tedious dread - but dissipates, in contradiction of the closing credits, the film's 'dramatic effect'.
In many ways similar to ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN (as has been pointed out) - an investigation into 'respectable' corruption (in this case the Columbia-like addiction-mongering of tobacco companies) - it is also that film's complete opposite. Whatever its flaws, Pakula's film was shaped as a thriller, had the exciting momentum of a thriller, the driving sense of two detective figures bringing enlightenment to a depressingly murky situation.
There was always a large element of wish-fulfilment about this. For a start, the case had already been won, the film felt like retreading old victories. But most seriously, the shadowy Establishment network that allowed Watergate to happen was never punctured - Nixon was a scapegoat, things were allowed to get back to normal. This is half-suggested in Pakula's tireless determination to make a conspiracy thriller out of everything, but the essential American faith in right and truth outing was generally asserted.
Michael Mann is too good a director to settle for this. His film does follow a feel-good arc - revelation of corruption, suppression of revelation, eventual revelation of revelation - which suggests that men of truth and honour can defeat proto-fascist corporate power. And there is, like THREE KINGS, a sense that audiences wouldn't be able to handle a more realistic ending.
But Mann ironises this arc at every turn. His hero is Lowell Bergman, a CBS news producer with a reputation for securing great stories in some of the world's most dangerous hot-spots. He is played by Al Pacino, an actor in the grandstanding manner, who, despite many villainous roles, carries with him a dogged, Spencer Tracy-like integrity. In following his point-of-view, we get to see the development of the plot and the workings of corporate power.
In the opening sequecne, as Bergman is being driven through Iran, we see what he sees - when he looks in a particular direction, the camera follows. The thing is, he doesn't see anything, he is blindfolded - the traditional treatment to the Hollywood hero has been brilliantly subverted, and undermines Bergman as a hero thorughout the film.
For instance, when Bergman, trying to persuade Wigand to talk, suggest, idealistically, information is power at a Japanese restaurant. Mann frames the two men sitting in the traditional Japanese manner, almost legless, not looking very powerful at all.
So in a film where there is an awful lot of talk adn exposition, it is crucial that Mann's irony gives us, the audience, the real view, as in that first sequence. A recurrent motif is Bergman standing godlike from a balcony looking out over a huge city - he does not survey all he sees; it's an impenetrable blank to him. Just as the plot slips away from him, he talks to Wigand on the phone on a beach- Mann cuts to him wading in the water like King Canute. This subtle ironising makes it all the more credible when this blustering hero, totally in control, driving the plot with ariculate confidence, is suddenly shown to have very little real power at all.
Wigand isn't ironised in quite the same way - he is in a more passive position, defending his family, repository of information. BUt his introduction also shows how removed he is from the real world. WE see him first in his office which looks onto a staff canteen - the realms are only separated by a glass wall, but they could be two different worlds - his dark, lonely,furtive, suffocating, sinister (we don't know what he's doing, but it looks very secretive), dislocatingly cut with the friendly, communal, human babble of the canteen. WHen he goes to leave the building, the camera slows down, the sound is blocked out, the light brightens, adn Wigand looks like he's entering a dream or fairytale world.
THis ironising is crucial, because the film takes on a feel-good turn. At first it suggest taht truth can be recorded, delivered to the public, despite the flexing of corporate muscle. When this threatens , there are alternative means of diffusion. BUt look at thow Wigand's testimony is recorded. We see the testimony split into different screens, teh 'real' Wigand and his screen image. Lter we see Bergman editing the piece, rearranging the truth to achieve it more powerfully. There is no such thing as an unmediated 'pure' truth, and although this might seem rather obvious, it sours the heric sense of the truth finally getting out to the public. Also disturbing is the possiblity, that never actually occured to me until the smear attacks, that Wigand might be lying. WE are given no evidence adn are expected to take this man's word. THE idea of anyone's 'word' being simply enough is so rejected by the film that itt further undermines the optimistic intentions, and this is never resolved withing the film. Is there somehow an abstract 'truth' thast can be extracted from the deeply compromised eople that utter it?
All this is great - and there are some interesting insights about families (although not, as ever with MANN, women) adn imiplications about the wider sphere of political and media corruptoin - but the film is too subversive for its own good. It undermines its heroes, its themes, its genre, its mode of representation, its setting. THis is all necessary adn brilliant, but it doesn't leave much for a film, certainly at this lentgh. Unlike ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN - a film about actively seeking a well-defined truth - THE INSIDER is about defending a compromised truth - and this passivity means that it can never work as a thriller - you keep waiting for something to happen adn it doesn't. It can't.
In many ways similar to ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN (as has been pointed out) - an investigation into 'respectable' corruption (in this case the Columbia-like addiction-mongering of tobacco companies) - it is also that film's complete opposite. Whatever its flaws, Pakula's film was shaped as a thriller, had the exciting momentum of a thriller, the driving sense of two detective figures bringing enlightenment to a depressingly murky situation.
There was always a large element of wish-fulfilment about this. For a start, the case had already been won, the film felt like retreading old victories. But most seriously, the shadowy Establishment network that allowed Watergate to happen was never punctured - Nixon was a scapegoat, things were allowed to get back to normal. This is half-suggested in Pakula's tireless determination to make a conspiracy thriller out of everything, but the essential American faith in right and truth outing was generally asserted.
Michael Mann is too good a director to settle for this. His film does follow a feel-good arc - revelation of corruption, suppression of revelation, eventual revelation of revelation - which suggests that men of truth and honour can defeat proto-fascist corporate power. And there is, like THREE KINGS, a sense that audiences wouldn't be able to handle a more realistic ending.
But Mann ironises this arc at every turn. His hero is Lowell Bergman, a CBS news producer with a reputation for securing great stories in some of the world's most dangerous hot-spots. He is played by Al Pacino, an actor in the grandstanding manner, who, despite many villainous roles, carries with him a dogged, Spencer Tracy-like integrity. In following his point-of-view, we get to see the development of the plot and the workings of corporate power.
In the opening sequecne, as Bergman is being driven through Iran, we see what he sees - when he looks in a particular direction, the camera follows. The thing is, he doesn't see anything, he is blindfolded - the traditional treatment to the Hollywood hero has been brilliantly subverted, and undermines Bergman as a hero thorughout the film.
For instance, when Bergman, trying to persuade Wigand to talk, suggest, idealistically, information is power at a Japanese restaurant. Mann frames the two men sitting in the traditional Japanese manner, almost legless, not looking very powerful at all.
So in a film where there is an awful lot of talk adn exposition, it is crucial that Mann's irony gives us, the audience, the real view, as in that first sequence. A recurrent motif is Bergman standing godlike from a balcony looking out over a huge city - he does not survey all he sees; it's an impenetrable blank to him. Just as the plot slips away from him, he talks to Wigand on the phone on a beach- Mann cuts to him wading in the water like King Canute. This subtle ironising makes it all the more credible when this blustering hero, totally in control, driving the plot with ariculate confidence, is suddenly shown to have very little real power at all.
Wigand isn't ironised in quite the same way - he is in a more passive position, defending his family, repository of information. BUt his introduction also shows how removed he is from the real world. WE see him first in his office which looks onto a staff canteen - the realms are only separated by a glass wall, but they could be two different worlds - his dark, lonely,furtive, suffocating, sinister (we don't know what he's doing, but it looks very secretive), dislocatingly cut with the friendly, communal, human babble of the canteen. WHen he goes to leave the building, the camera slows down, the sound is blocked out, the light brightens, adn Wigand looks like he's entering a dream or fairytale world.
THis ironising is crucial, because the film takes on a feel-good turn. At first it suggest taht truth can be recorded, delivered to the public, despite the flexing of corporate muscle. When this threatens , there are alternative means of diffusion. BUt look at thow Wigand's testimony is recorded. We see the testimony split into different screens, teh 'real' Wigand and his screen image. Lter we see Bergman editing the piece, rearranging the truth to achieve it more powerfully. There is no such thing as an unmediated 'pure' truth, and although this might seem rather obvious, it sours the heric sense of the truth finally getting out to the public. Also disturbing is the possiblity, that never actually occured to me until the smear attacks, that Wigand might be lying. WE are given no evidence adn are expected to take this man's word. THE idea of anyone's 'word' being simply enough is so rejected by the film that itt further undermines the optimistic intentions, and this is never resolved withing the film. Is there somehow an abstract 'truth' thast can be extracted from the deeply compromised eople that utter it?
All this is great - and there are some interesting insights about families (although not, as ever with MANN, women) adn imiplications about the wider sphere of political and media corruptoin - but the film is too subversive for its own good. It undermines its heroes, its themes, its genre, its mode of representation, its setting. THis is all necessary adn brilliant, but it doesn't leave much for a film, certainly at this lentgh. Unlike ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN - a film about actively seeking a well-defined truth - THE INSIDER is about defending a compromised truth - and this passivity means that it can never work as a thriller - you keep waiting for something to happen adn it doesn't. It can't.
Michael Mann does it again!
srobbins8 November 1999
I have been a huge Michael Mann fan for years, but I do have to admit that I approached his latest film "The Insider" with just the teensiest bit of trepidation...after all, Mann is the godfather of the thinking man's action flick, and I've even heard it said that his action sequences are so integral to his movie that they are practically another character in the film...with which I completely agree. So I was wondering how a movie with no chase sequence, no gunfights, basically no action whatsoever--well, how could that possibly qualify as an authentic Michael Mann signature film?
Yes, the action, per se, is missing, but Mann still brings his signature directorial style to life with lots of wide shots, intense close ups, and indirect focus, all bathed in cool blue light and threaded together with an inventive soundtrack (including a reprise of a former track that was used so effectively in "HEAT"; sorry, I can't recall the title offhand).
And what the movie lacks in "action", Mann more than makes up for in high-wire tension. He pulls us into the drama of an ordinary man's life by portraying the myriad humiliations, both large and small, that assault Wigand from the moment he is fired from his job as an R&D VP for a major tobacco company. The detoriation of his life, from his finances to his marriage to his belief in himself, is explored with the sort of atmospheric detail that is Mann's trademark: the play of light or lack of it; the familiar sights and sounds of everyday life, from the patterns of rain on a windshield to the rush of wind through the trees; and camera work that ranges from tight, out-of-focus shots to sweeping panoramas of razor-sharp clarity...all of this creates an environment of realism that puts you into the film. You can't just observe Wigand's struggle; you experience it with him. My movie-watching partner observed as we left the theatre that he felt exhausted from the tension, as if he'd just been through the corporate wringer himself. I knew what he meant!
But atmosphere isn't all Mann delivers. Once again, this genius director has placed an unexpected actor in the lead role of his film, with amazing results. Before Daniel Day Lewis was "Nathaniel Poe" in "The Last of The Mohicans", no one would have believed he could pull off a major hunk-o-rama role...well, guess what? He ended up defining the hero of the adventure/romance genre! In "The Insider", Mann has opted for the opposite effect, casting young, potential hunk material Russell Crowe as an older, slightly-pot-bellied father of two. Wigand doesn't look like anyone's hero, and perhaps that's actually the message of the movie: an ordinary man--a nobody, really--caught up in extraordinary circumstances. And Crowe delivers...in a major way! Personally, I can't remember an acting performance that mesmerized me to this extent...unless it was the last time I watched Crowe, in "L.A. Confidential". He evokes his character in this movie with the apparent ease of a magician doing card tricks: the illusion is complete and appears to be effortless. Even with silver, receding hair and twenty extra pounds which, we are shown, is not the result of costume padding, but Crowe's own amplified flesh, he is imminently watchable... almost hypnotically so.
There are, even as I post this, whispers and rumors about this movie being an Oscar contender. Best director, best actor, best supporting actor. Again, I can only nod my head in complete and total agreement. Russell Crowe will blow you away, and Al Pacino gives his best performance in years.
This film is quiet, intense, and ultimately, extremely moving. I literally burst into tears twice, the way you do when you've recieved bad news or seen something dreadful, so complete was my empathy for the character of Jeffrey Wigand . The anger, helplessness, and puzzled confusion at being punished for telling the truth felt all too familiar to me.
In summary, I was not at all disappointed in Mann's direction of this film. Even without the phenomenal action sequences he's known for, this film had the same visceral effect on me that I experienced when I saw Manhunter, Last of the Mohicans, and HEAT. I'm a born-again fan!
Yes, the action, per se, is missing, but Mann still brings his signature directorial style to life with lots of wide shots, intense close ups, and indirect focus, all bathed in cool blue light and threaded together with an inventive soundtrack (including a reprise of a former track that was used so effectively in "HEAT"; sorry, I can't recall the title offhand).
And what the movie lacks in "action", Mann more than makes up for in high-wire tension. He pulls us into the drama of an ordinary man's life by portraying the myriad humiliations, both large and small, that assault Wigand from the moment he is fired from his job as an R&D VP for a major tobacco company. The detoriation of his life, from his finances to his marriage to his belief in himself, is explored with the sort of atmospheric detail that is Mann's trademark: the play of light or lack of it; the familiar sights and sounds of everyday life, from the patterns of rain on a windshield to the rush of wind through the trees; and camera work that ranges from tight, out-of-focus shots to sweeping panoramas of razor-sharp clarity...all of this creates an environment of realism that puts you into the film. You can't just observe Wigand's struggle; you experience it with him. My movie-watching partner observed as we left the theatre that he felt exhausted from the tension, as if he'd just been through the corporate wringer himself. I knew what he meant!
But atmosphere isn't all Mann delivers. Once again, this genius director has placed an unexpected actor in the lead role of his film, with amazing results. Before Daniel Day Lewis was "Nathaniel Poe" in "The Last of The Mohicans", no one would have believed he could pull off a major hunk-o-rama role...well, guess what? He ended up defining the hero of the adventure/romance genre! In "The Insider", Mann has opted for the opposite effect, casting young, potential hunk material Russell Crowe as an older, slightly-pot-bellied father of two. Wigand doesn't look like anyone's hero, and perhaps that's actually the message of the movie: an ordinary man--a nobody, really--caught up in extraordinary circumstances. And Crowe delivers...in a major way! Personally, I can't remember an acting performance that mesmerized me to this extent...unless it was the last time I watched Crowe, in "L.A. Confidential". He evokes his character in this movie with the apparent ease of a magician doing card tricks: the illusion is complete and appears to be effortless. Even with silver, receding hair and twenty extra pounds which, we are shown, is not the result of costume padding, but Crowe's own amplified flesh, he is imminently watchable... almost hypnotically so.
There are, even as I post this, whispers and rumors about this movie being an Oscar contender. Best director, best actor, best supporting actor. Again, I can only nod my head in complete and total agreement. Russell Crowe will blow you away, and Al Pacino gives his best performance in years.
This film is quiet, intense, and ultimately, extremely moving. I literally burst into tears twice, the way you do when you've recieved bad news or seen something dreadful, so complete was my empathy for the character of Jeffrey Wigand . The anger, helplessness, and puzzled confusion at being punished for telling the truth felt all too familiar to me.
In summary, I was not at all disappointed in Mann's direction of this film. Even without the phenomenal action sequences he's known for, this film had the same visceral effect on me that I experienced when I saw Manhunter, Last of the Mohicans, and HEAT. I'm a born-again fan!
Exceptional
asdsasde23 December 2011
This movie is genuine art - unlike 99% of what is out there. This is the best movie I have seen. Casting excellent. Script excellent. Cinematography excellent. Soundtrack excellent. Every one of the characters is robust and phenomenal. The main characters in most movies are not as developed as background characters are in this film. It took me a while to even believe that Russell Crowe was the same person as the lead in Gladiator. While I feel that Pacino plays more or less the same way no matter his character, he really suits this movie. Even supporting characters have memorable scenes and dialogue in this movie, my favorite being the courtroom deposition of Wiegand (Crowe). This movie provides intensity on so many levels. There is action (not shootouts or car chases...), suspense, heroism, depression, hope - you name it. There is abundant complexity in the plot, especially in regard to Wiegand being pushed to the edge of sanity. Lisa Gerrard (vocals) is perfect as usual for adding drama and feeling. The camera work in my opinion - while a different beast - is on par with Saving Private Ryan, Gladiator, and other famed movies. If you prefer movies that don't follow the conventional, cliché plot, this is one you must see.
Just Great Film-making......Period
ccthemovieman-124 February 2006
Not always, but usually a Michael Mann-directed film means good things for movie buffs, and this is no exception.
Tremendous acting highlights this movie about a behind-the-scenes look at a "60 Minutes" story of a man who blows the whistle on a tobacco company. Al Pacino, as the TV show producer "Lowell Bergman," Russell Crowe as the whistle-blower and tobacco scientist "Dr. Jeffrey Wiegand," and Christopher Plummer as "Mike Wallace" all are riveting in their performances. They are intense characters, as are many of the supporting characters in this involving film.
There is little action in here but a ton of tension in the first hour of this long (158 min.) film. The story held my interest even when the tension left, thanks to the acting, the great cinematography, involving music score....well, just about everything. It's simply a well-done movie, similar to Mann's "Heat," except without the violence.
The only negative was the obvious Liberal bias, but that's not surprising being it's about "60 Minutes." I wasn't surprised when Ken Starr got a cheap shot, for example. This film bias could have been a lot more blatant so I'm not complaining. Obviously, they went a overboard in their stand against the tobacco industry, repeating the same damaging scenes over and over. However, I appreciated they didn't shrink from pointing out how the network was covering its own behind even though it was hurting its most successful program.
Photographer Dante Spinelli did an incredible job making this look fantastic despite the fact that there was no great scenery or exotic sets. As mentioned, this is just great film-making. What else can you say?
Tremendous acting highlights this movie about a behind-the-scenes look at a "60 Minutes" story of a man who blows the whistle on a tobacco company. Al Pacino, as the TV show producer "Lowell Bergman," Russell Crowe as the whistle-blower and tobacco scientist "Dr. Jeffrey Wiegand," and Christopher Plummer as "Mike Wallace" all are riveting in their performances. They are intense characters, as are many of the supporting characters in this involving film.
There is little action in here but a ton of tension in the first hour of this long (158 min.) film. The story held my interest even when the tension left, thanks to the acting, the great cinematography, involving music score....well, just about everything. It's simply a well-done movie, similar to Mann's "Heat," except without the violence.
The only negative was the obvious Liberal bias, but that's not surprising being it's about "60 Minutes." I wasn't surprised when Ken Starr got a cheap shot, for example. This film bias could have been a lot more blatant so I'm not complaining. Obviously, they went a overboard in their stand against the tobacco industry, repeating the same damaging scenes over and over. However, I appreciated they didn't shrink from pointing out how the network was covering its own behind even though it was hurting its most successful program.
Photographer Dante Spinelli did an incredible job making this look fantastic despite the fact that there was no great scenery or exotic sets. As mentioned, this is just great film-making. What else can you say?
A very good thriller
maheshmanutd5 February 2012
The Insider is a 1999 movie directed by Micheal Mann based on a segment of CBS TV Show "60 Minutes". The movie depicts the true events that happened in the background. It is a about an interview of a tobacco company whistleblower Jeffrey Wigand portrayed by Russell Crowe. Al Pacino stars as Lowell Bergman, the producer of the show. There is nothing flambuoyant, nothing extravagant, just true events although dramatized for the sake of a movie.
The movie is a fantastic, pure thriller. It will grip you to the seats till the end. The screenplay is really brilliant but the standout factor is the acting of the two titans, Russell Crowe and Al Pacino. I was amazed by their performances.
I am not going to elaborate on the storyline here. You just watch and enjoy.
The movie is a fantastic, pure thriller. It will grip you to the seats till the end. The screenplay is really brilliant but the standout factor is the acting of the two titans, Russell Crowe and Al Pacino. I was amazed by their performances.
I am not going to elaborate on the storyline here. You just watch and enjoy.
A good story but far too long
eliotapt15 March 2018
An in depth and provocative and compelling legal emotional drama that fights for answers while wanting a search for justice.
blanbrn17 May 2016
Finally after many years watched Michael Mann's legal drama 1999's "The Insider" and it was clearly a well done legal drama that searches for answers and blows the whistle on those in power who try to hide corruption that blends greed and power. The film recounts a chain of events that pitted a guy against the giant tobacco industry. And this film would really be in depth and drag the characters thru a fight of their lives.
Al Pacino(still one of the best actors in the business)is in top form with a strong performance as veteran "60 Minutes" producer Lowell Bergman and Russell Crowe(is the man affected by it all the insider himself former tobacco executive Dr. Jeffrey Wigand). The story is pretty cut and dry when Wigand is fired by the tobacco company, he agrees to become a paid consultant for a story that Bergman and "60 Minutes" is working on about the unethical ways within the tobacco industry. This all leads to a long battle between all with a lot of legal cat and mouse games which puts everyone's reputations on the line.
As expected the tobacco industry will use any legal and corporate means they can to help save a billion dollar a year habit. Still both Bergman and Wigand are fighters that are searching for answers and they want justice in the form of truth as with every little bit more evidence is uncovered.
Cleraly this is a harrowing drama with legal and emotional twist and turns it has an in depth cold hard edge that keeps you glued while searching for answers and fighting for the truth with twist. "The Insider" was for sure one of Michael Mann's better made films.
Al Pacino(still one of the best actors in the business)is in top form with a strong performance as veteran "60 Minutes" producer Lowell Bergman and Russell Crowe(is the man affected by it all the insider himself former tobacco executive Dr. Jeffrey Wigand). The story is pretty cut and dry when Wigand is fired by the tobacco company, he agrees to become a paid consultant for a story that Bergman and "60 Minutes" is working on about the unethical ways within the tobacco industry. This all leads to a long battle between all with a lot of legal cat and mouse games which puts everyone's reputations on the line.
As expected the tobacco industry will use any legal and corporate means they can to help save a billion dollar a year habit. Still both Bergman and Wigand are fighters that are searching for answers and they want justice in the form of truth as with every little bit more evidence is uncovered.
Cleraly this is a harrowing drama with legal and emotional twist and turns it has an in depth cold hard edge that keeps you glued while searching for answers and fighting for the truth with twist. "The Insider" was for sure one of Michael Mann's better made films.
Good film but...
fridoterbeek10 January 2021
Very Good!
buiger18 March 2009
Finally, now here is a movie where everybody seems to agree on the same verdict. It is a very rare occasion that most of the major critics, the Academy and myself all agree on the judgment of the quality of a motion picture. This only goes to say that this film really has to be good. It also goes to show that the best movies are almost always based on true stories. Truth always trumps fiction.
This movie was very well directed and well filmed, but above all it was well acted. Both Crowe and Pacino deliver memorable, believable performances, creating characters for which we can feel for, with whom we can identify. I agree on most of the Oscar Nominations, but I also feel that maybe an Oscar was warranted for best screenplay which is probably the best part of this motion picture.
Thumbs up!
This movie was very well directed and well filmed, but above all it was well acted. Both Crowe and Pacino deliver memorable, believable performances, creating characters for which we can feel for, with whom we can identify. I agree on most of the Oscar Nominations, but I also feel that maybe an Oscar was warranted for best screenplay which is probably the best part of this motion picture.
Thumbs up!
Michael Mann understands human psychology better than anyone.
lovemichaeljordan9 March 2023
An excellent drama with a film score that sounds like the music from Gladiator. The plot is easy to follow but hard to predict. The first act was far too intense and exciting for my own good. I think my feelings were intensified as the film is based on a real event and I had no idea how it would end as the plot of the film teetered between disaster and success.
In one corner are Russell Crowe and Al Pacino, and in the other corner are all the greedy businessmen. Crowe has been fired from his job as a chemist at a tobacco company and he is sitting on a lot of secrets that he should tell. The company does everything it can to get him to shut up, while slick journalist Pacino tries to get Crowe to appear on his news show. Crowe finally decides to tell the truth and the consequences are devastating.
No one portrays rounded and interesting characters like Michael Mann. The characters are so ruggedly well written with motives, unique personalities, and stories that are smoothly shown during the course of the film. Mann understands human psychology better than anyone. The characters in the film are indeed real people, but it is masterfully directed by Mann.
It's very interesting how the different men think and reason, as well as how they develop through the film. Crowe is unsure if he made the right choice. Perhaps he made the right decision, but at what cost? His wife just wants to keep the family together and keep the nice benefits that his old job still provides the family with. Crowe gets into real trouble because he did the right thing. Not all stories like this always end well. Is it worth the risk to say something, or should you continue to live the lie?
Crowe does the right thing and is promised that things will happen, but when it comes down to it, it doesn't turn out quite as he predicted. All the characters have their interests, but Pacino is the one who acts the least selfishly. Or does he? It's a question that Pacino wrestles with a bit in the film. Is he doing this to help Crowe? Or does he do it because he likes the kick it gives him? Or is he doing it to get a good show and make money?
The film is about what the consequences can be for a man when other men forget their moral compass and do everything they can to climb higher in the workplace hierarchy. Pacino has a clear code of honor that he maintains. We have a good man there. The Insider is a riveting drama with superb characters and fine photography. 7.6/10.
In one corner are Russell Crowe and Al Pacino, and in the other corner are all the greedy businessmen. Crowe has been fired from his job as a chemist at a tobacco company and he is sitting on a lot of secrets that he should tell. The company does everything it can to get him to shut up, while slick journalist Pacino tries to get Crowe to appear on his news show. Crowe finally decides to tell the truth and the consequences are devastating.
No one portrays rounded and interesting characters like Michael Mann. The characters are so ruggedly well written with motives, unique personalities, and stories that are smoothly shown during the course of the film. Mann understands human psychology better than anyone. The characters in the film are indeed real people, but it is masterfully directed by Mann.
It's very interesting how the different men think and reason, as well as how they develop through the film. Crowe is unsure if he made the right choice. Perhaps he made the right decision, but at what cost? His wife just wants to keep the family together and keep the nice benefits that his old job still provides the family with. Crowe gets into real trouble because he did the right thing. Not all stories like this always end well. Is it worth the risk to say something, or should you continue to live the lie?
Crowe does the right thing and is promised that things will happen, but when it comes down to it, it doesn't turn out quite as he predicted. All the characters have their interests, but Pacino is the one who acts the least selfishly. Or does he? It's a question that Pacino wrestles with a bit in the film. Is he doing this to help Crowe? Or does he do it because he likes the kick it gives him? Or is he doing it to get a good show and make money?
The film is about what the consequences can be for a man when other men forget their moral compass and do everything they can to climb higher in the workplace hierarchy. Pacino has a clear code of honor that he maintains. We have a good man there. The Insider is a riveting drama with superb characters and fine photography. 7.6/10.
Poor movie, too long, weak acting
Buffygrrl2 August 2000
The Insider captured my interest from the very first ad I saw for it and my friends and I (the 9 of us that went to see it) were dying to go. We went a week after opening and watched it, and the entire time sat there thinking "why on earth is this getting all the praise of critics and audiences?" Russell Crowe began the movie in a downtrodden and depressed state so as the movie progresses and his life takes a turn for the worse, the empathy which is supposed to be invoked in viewers is merely a putrid mixture of boredom and pity. The three-hour tale left eight of us asking why we paid hard-earned money for it. My recommendation? Wait until it comes on t.v. and there's absolutely nothing better to do, and even then.. go for a walk instead.
Crowe and Pacino together
didi-59 July 2003
Forget Russell Crowe's performance by numbers in 'Gladiator' (good though that film was), and enjoy his acting talent here alongside Al Pacino. Both men give inspired and classy masterclasses in how to put a character across. 'The Insider' is unusual, it is long and wordy (not often the case in modern movies), it has a superb soundtrack - 'Sacrifice', in particular - and it makes you involved, makes you care.
Curious, then, that a Roman epic outshone it. A good epic, but not in the same class.
Curious, then, that a Roman epic outshone it. A good epic, but not in the same class.
You will be able to get some Courage from this movie!!
noriko_yo_usa29 January 2012
This movie has an air of tension from beginning to end. I was excited about the battle of two men up against the tobacco industry. And I'm surprised that this movie is based on a TRUE STORY.
Russell Crowe played "Jeffrey Wigand." He's a good scientist who works for a tobacco company. He's an ordinary man who loves his family. One day he learns secrets inside of his company. Therefore he is discharged unfairly. The company uses the duty of confidentiality as a shield. They threaten him. He is caught in a moral dilemma between releasing the truth and protecting the secrets. His conflict is painful.
Jeffrey meets Lowell Bergman(Al Pacino)who is the producer of a news program for CBS. Jeffrey decides to release the truth,being encouraged by Lowell. Lowell and Jeffrey continue fighting with the tobacco industry. They use neither violence nor a gun,Lowell believes in the power of journalism.
The two men's courage and beliefs,and the image of them fighting against the wall of power are so strong that you will be greatly impressed. When you finish watching this movie,you will be able to get some courage from them.
Russell Crowe played "Jeffrey Wigand." He's a good scientist who works for a tobacco company. He's an ordinary man who loves his family. One day he learns secrets inside of his company. Therefore he is discharged unfairly. The company uses the duty of confidentiality as a shield. They threaten him. He is caught in a moral dilemma between releasing the truth and protecting the secrets. His conflict is painful.
Jeffrey meets Lowell Bergman(Al Pacino)who is the producer of a news program for CBS. Jeffrey decides to release the truth,being encouraged by Lowell. Lowell and Jeffrey continue fighting with the tobacco industry. They use neither violence nor a gun,Lowell believes in the power of journalism.
The two men's courage and beliefs,and the image of them fighting against the wall of power are so strong that you will be greatly impressed. When you finish watching this movie,you will be able to get some courage from them.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
