It's solid and has its heart in the right place, and has a few incredibly powerful and effective sequences. The acting from the leads is all fantastic. Forest Whitaker, who I'm normally not a fan of, is very well-suited to this role and brings it a quiet intensity and sadness. It's an undeniably strong performance. David Oyelowo is also incredibly effective and this role could be a breakout for him. I thought Oprah Winfrey was honestly brilliant in this movie and would like to see her get some awards consideration. She brings the most life to all her scenes and it's a very showy role that she tackles head on. She was my favorite part for sure. All three of these actors make the movie worth seeing...

But while it is well-intentioned this is also one of the most manipulative, Oscar-baity films I've seen in quite some time. It hits you over the head so much with its message that by the end I swear to God I thought Harvey Weinstein had somehow convinced Obama to make a cameo in the final scene. It's also very routinely directed and the grainy cinematography shows its lower budget, though the costume design and such is mostly impeccable. It also goes on for too long despite never really going more than skin deep with the time periods it covers.

It rushes through major historical events in the most basic of terms and the sprawling supporting cast is never fully utilized. Best are James Marsden (who had one of my favorite scenes in the film), Cuba Gooding Jr., Lenny Kravitz and Yaya DeCosta (who really impressed me here). Terrence Howard is appropriately sleazy but his character never really goes anywhere. Robin Williams is alright, Alan Rickman and John Cusack are completely miscast, and Liev Schrieber's makeup is so distracting that I couldn't even critique his performance. Alex Pettyfer has maybe two lines. Jane Fonda has a single nice scene, but for the most part the other female cast members have next-to-no lines (Mariah Carey and Minka Kelly literally don't have any dialogue, and Vanessa Redgrave has a brief scene in the very beginning).

That being said, I honestly did think it was decent. The three leads are really great, and I did think that while manipulative the handling of the civil rights movement in the '60s was very well-done and disturbing. And the ending is pretty rousing. This is 100% going to do well and have great word of mouth - it got a TON of applause at the screening I was at and a lot of people were crying at the end. I have no doubt Harvey will turn this into a major awards player because of this.

I was honestly a lot more moved by The Help, which obviously tackles similar issues. I know that one could be Oscar-baity at times too, but it seems SO subtle compared to this movie. B-/C+

Embarrassing. It's the perfect movie for anyone who thought Forrest Gump was too subtle.

The lone bright spots are Whittaker (though he is hamming it up), Cuba, the prepping for/the diner scene, and the last few minutes after Oprah dies.

My favorite part of the movie (and what's wrong with it in a nutshell) is the scene where Whittaker returns to the plantation he grew up on. He and Oprah are standing there and supposed to be in their sixties, placing the setting in the late eighties, and its supposed to be a powerful moment (though random). And what are they wearing? Old school Adidas/MC Hammer like track suits. FOR NO REASON. We get it Lee Daniels, it's the eighties. I just couldn't help but burst out laughing. It completely undermines the scene.

And the way they telegraph his younger son dying in Vietnam...this movie just sucks.

Worst movie of the year.

This soared past my reserved expectations. Directed with characteristic flair and uncharacteristic focus by Lee Daniels and acted for the most part with care and spirit by a larger-than-life cast, The Butler is an epic, yet intimate depiction of the American civil-rights movement as experienced by an African American father, Cecil, a gifted butler who serves seven presidents and becomes a beloved veteran at the White House, and his eldest son, a student activist who finds himself at the heart of many of the most iconic and turbulent moments of the sixties and seventies as a member of the Freedom Riders and later the Panthers. Without coming to a simple answer, the film raises a riveting question: who is the superior agent of social change, the man who quietly and slowly tries to change minds from within a flawed system or the man on the outside closing his hand into a fist and readying to fight and perhaps die for his vision of right and wrong? If the system is changed, it is the second set of people to whom monuments are constructed and upon whom most films and pieces of literature focus, but Daniels' film argues for serious consideration of the other method (a life of bowed-head servitude as a form of humane and subtle protest) and the level of self-control and sacrifice it entails. There are also several wonderful moments of drama and observation from within the White House as time marches ever onward and various icons (a few beloved, many notorious) move in and out, including a haunting late-night encounter with an inebriated, self-pitying, and nearly ruined Richard Nixon at the height of the Watergate scandal which ended his presidency. My main complaint: I wish there were more time devoted to the protagonists' interactions with people such as Nixon, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Ronald and Nancy Reagan. Most of the actors are spot-on, but several come and go too fast, resulting in a feeling of historical-figure bingo. The film nails its central intent (exploring the African American experience at the height of the fight for civil rights via a story of the cultural gap separating a traditional father from his left-wing, fist-in-the-air son), but, as strange as it sounds, I wish it found more time for playful side excursions considering the wealth of personality and story available.

B+

I'm kind of shocked by the solid to great reception it's been getting. Aside from the performances it really isn't a well-made film.

Any movie would improve after Oprah dies.

Oddly, considering its advertising campaign, this film is less about a presidential butler than it is about fathers and sons. It's a better movie for it, though. The journey from Eisenhower to Reagan in the White House has better scenes than others (James Marsden, for example, is an effective JFK while John Cusack is completely miscast as Nixon), but the movie is at its best showing the division between Cecil and his son Louis. Forest Whitaker is a softspoken actor who always seems dignified in his roles, and this one is no different. While Oprah devours her somewhat limited screen time with relish in another effective performance, the film's highlight might be David Oyelowo. Oyelowo is terrific, believably aging from 18 to 50. There are moments of great power here but subtlety is not Lee Daniels' forte, and the movie ends up being kind of a narrative mess. But it's an interesting mess, I guess. I was never bored. And the acting is top-notch, for the most part. B

I, on the other hand, believe Cusack's Nixon is the most interesting of the presidential portrayals. He does not try too hard to impersonate him on a physical level, but he captures a certain essence of Nixon: sinister and sweaty. And he has two great, eerie scenes: the tense "vote-for-me" conversation in the kitchen and the scene where he's boozing at night, slumped on the couch, and assures Cecil he will emerge from the Watergate scandal stronger than before.

It is a pity Daniels restrained himself from including even a reference JFK's numerous extramarital sexual liaisons. It could have resulted in a nice scene showing the depth of Cecil's devotion to the White House and the secrecy expected of those in service. We see Lyndon B. Johnson berating people on the toilet, Reagan planting himself firmly on the wrong side of history in regard to South Africa, etc., but the film toes the line and safely portrays Kennedy as a near saint (including his bouts of severe physical pain does not count).

THE BUTLER

I enjoyed the film overall. I liked the acting and the story progression. It's a nice little historical bio that was informative and interesting. He had quite the life story. I like historical dramas and I find this period of history to be very interesting. There was so much change going on during that time, it's almost hard to imagine how much the country changed from 1963 to 1980 by which time Cecil is working for Reagan. The film also reinforces the extremely difficult life that black people went through as reenacted with the freedom rider bus firebombing, the sit ins, desegregation. That said, the film seems more fitting for classroom viewing. There was a lack of emotional connection for me for certain scenes that should connect. That tv movie vibe is what that is imo. Forrest and Oprah were good and I liked Schreiber's take on Johnson. Rickman as Reagan was eh, but it was nice to see Fonda as Nancy.

Grade - B

better than forrest gump

Go back to retirement.