Popcorn & a Movie

Every so often a film comes around that is so un-inspirational in its quality, so middlingly good, that it is difficult to find an argument either for or against, and therefore troubling to review because we don’t really feel one way or another about them.  Generally a critic will send these films off with a shrug.  I myself have probably labeled them as films that are “just there.”  But when said film is a buzz-generating, award-gathering film like Milk, “just there” becomes the heart of the argument.
  Milk is the winner of at least eighteen 2008 film awards, and is the source of numerous Oscar nominations, including Best Picture, Director (Gus Van Sant), Actor (Sean Penn, as title character Harvey Milk), Supporting Actor (Josh Brolin, as Harvey’s closeted, struggling political opponent) and Original Screenplay (the true story was arranged for the screen by Dustin Lance Black).  Is it good?  Sure.  But is it great?  It’s obvious by now that I don’t think so.
  I thought it would be.  It’s the story of the first openly gay American politician, a man who stood for his beliefs, his people, his way of life, and then lost that life, in more ways than one, to that very cause.  It’s pretty naturally presented by Black and Van Sant, pretty seamlessly acted by Penn and co-stars Brolin, Emile Hirsch and James Franco.  But it never transcends that quality.  It never pushes past the barrier of “good” and rises to the next level.  It’s never, really, as inspirational as its story, a story that itself is bigger than the film.
  Like fellow Oscar runner Frost/Nixon, Milk is a historical piece that essentially “gets by” on its history.  It presents that history with confidence, and with great players playing great roles.  But that wasn’t enough in Frost/Nixon to keep the Movie Gal from labeling it “boring,” and it isn’t enough here for me to approach this film with anything more than a shrug.
  I won’t put it down, or chastise it.  It’s good.  In fact, I think to a lot of people it will live on as a shining beacon of historical inspiration.  You can’t account for taste in this critical world, and you can’t account for personal politics.  I will say that I like Frost/Nixon better because it excelled in the one area I believe Milk most failed – personal depth.  Frost/Nixon was able to carve into real people and find their soul, to the extent where we got to know them for more than their actions.  Milk is glossier, and despite a penchant for intimate moments and subtle ticks, I never really felt like I got to know these people on a personal level, or why they made the personal choices they made.
  And that’s what you hope for from a great film – a personal (ideally inspirational) experience or goosebump greatness.  Maybe this says something about me as a person, but I got that from the Oscar-snubbed Dark Knight.  I didn’t get that here.