Le 18½, Sacré Fromage

The movie has a fascinating premise: a lowly Washington stenographer in the early 1970s comes across a tape of Richard Nixon and his henchmen listening to the missing 18 and a half minutes from the "Nixon Tapes." Problem is, the filmmaker does all he can to avoid telling the story. The movie is a strange period piece, a vehicle for showing off retro fashions and furnishings. Great attention to detail in those departments, but the story was utterly neglected. The actor playing Richard Nixon doesn't even sound like him.

The premise sounded interesting, "what if...??" Started slow, had some really unnecessary characters, probably just to fill time. I was annoyed and grossed out by the whole bossa nova - dinner scene & had to fast-forward through most of it. Blechhh! Surely the writer could have come up with a better way to insert these characters into the storyline? Ugh. So I got to the end, and I was even madder. I had to rewind because another reviewer mentioned the play/record button. I was then able to listen to the "recording" and ignore the fight scene, then the ending made slightly more sense, but still.....soooo many plot holes. I'm pi$$ed off and feel cheated out an ending that would have worked. The wonderbread arc was totally ridiculous. I really wish I hadn't seen this. Can't recommend it. Skip it. I promise, you're going to wish you had if you watch it anyway. Don't say you weren't warned.

The film has a great premise but it is very poorly executed. The film should be a thriller but it dissappears into weird sub plots which add nothing to the story and rather then draw you in just make you think what the hell has this got to do with anything.

It spins off direction so much that you lose interest in what should have been an interesting subject.

The extra characters are ridiculous left wing stereotypes that are just annoying and wish weren't in the film. It hard to tell whether this was aimed at discrediting left wing politics or if the director actually believes this.

Such a waste of a good idea.

It's 1974. White House transcriptionist -- someone who takes recordings and converts them into written records -- Willa Fitzgerald has the missing tape recording of Nixon that everyone is hot for. She meets up with reporter John Magaro and they go to a motel in Maryland to listen to the tapes, but his reel-to-reel player is broken. However, Vondie Curtis-Hall and Catherine Curtain at the cabin next to theirs have been listening to a tape of bossa nova non-stop.

It plays more like an extended anecdote than a story, so it's good they have some talent in place that can play it for comedy, like Richard Kind as the one-eyed motel owner, and Alexander Woodbury as a fisherman.

It's certainly an entertaining satire, if not particularly deep. Still, who knew that Bruce Campbell could do such a good Nixon impersonation?

When a transcriber obtains the only copy of Nixon's infamous 18 and a half minute long tape. Enlisting the help of a reporter, Connie sets to work in trying to undercover the truth behind the Watergate scandal, but she soon finds several obstacles in her path....

Whilst 18 1/2 starts off quite serious and seems intent on following a narrative path that the audience expects it to follow, it quickly goes from being intriguing to being surreal and somewhat bizarre...

The main focus of the film lies with Connie and Paul and their desire to find a reel to reel tape player in order to be able to fully understand the corruption with Nixon and his government. Whilst this is running in the background, it seems to take a back seat to the weird array of characters that we are introduced to; they aren't there for any real purpose other than to confound and baffle...

The picture really becomes messy in its second half with its multiple reveals; which have to be seen to be believed; it's at this point that the picture goes from being real to being surreal. It becomes too goofy in its second half and ends up being impossible to take seriously. The two leads are OK, but don't seem to have much of a dynamic and they also have an awkward chemistry about them too.

I really tried getting my head round this film and tried to get into the mind-set of those that made it and despite my best efforts I simply couldn't. I presume it's supposed to be a light-hearted take on the events leading up to the Watergate scandal, but I'm not entirely convinced that this was the right material to be given goofball treatment too. It's a shame as it started so well and ended so badly.

The only other time I can remember a film beginning with such promise and ending so badly was From Dusk till Dawn, but at least that film had some decent acting talent.