Gaslit

Watching Julia Roberts not intentionally play Julia Roberts turns out to be quite refreshing now that she appears to be evolving into more of a character actress. She doesn't resemble the real Martha Mitchell except in conveying her outsized personality in this intriguing account of the Watergate break-in and the detrimental ramifications on the Nixon administration. Director Matt Ross appears to take cues from the Real Housewives in his dramatic treatment as cartoonish moments were mixed in effectively with the hidden events and conversations that really did occur. Under layers of latex, Sean Penn makes for an appropriately coiled John Mitchell, while Dan Steele looks to be on hyperdrive as John Dean. More entertaining than I expected, especially when the fallout gains momentum toward the end of episode 2.

What has grabed me by the collar, in this series, is that I find myself wanting, wishing, needing for the plot to be different for the outcome, the fate, of Martha Mitchell. She saw the truth but her husband was too corrupt, too much into the game, too controling to let her speak. And she was too firmly imbeded into his talons to see a way out.

If what I have seen is all true . . . How sad for our nation! Politics is not for honest people. And if the Nixon administration was this psychologically sick then the situation has only become worse.

Some scenes are very brutal - both psychologically and physically.

"Gaslit" has a high-quality cast and production values, capturing the look and mood of the early '70s. But the tone is off-putting. Many scenes are played as broad farce, as if most of the key figures in the Watergate scandal were buffoons. These were corrupt people who made terrible blunders, but they were not all a bunch of clowns.

I think Sean Penn is very good as John Mitchell, but Julia Roberts could have put more a little more energy into her portrayal of Martha Mitchell, who was very flamboyant, colorful and opinionated. Dan Stevens as John Dean is a weak spot. He makes Dean seem very silly and clueless, and looks too hipster. These were Republicans! "Gaslit" explores an interesting episode in American political history, and includes many key facts, but the tone makes it seem a bit too much like a caricature.

It's very well written, exceptional acting, makeup is incredible especially on Sean Penn and the cinematography is beautiful! Gaslit is intriguing even gets better and intense; barely boring at all. I love that Sam Esmail is a producer he's masterful at his craft so is director Matt Ross I've enjoyed his acting. Hopefully overtime the series gets appreciated more I think it deserves higher than 6.8! To me it's one of the most enjoyable political stories out there.

This was, overall, a nice watch. Well acted and well written and I'm always a sucker for well designed and appointed period pieces. Julia has enough of the elements to remind me of the actual historical figure she's playing and I bet, coming from Georgia, she's familiar with the type. It feels like it.

But they make a key mistake I have trouble brushing away and, honestly, I don't want to: they whitewash the unpleasant parts of the woman this is about, who had views ranging from unpleasant to outright bigoted that she was just as open and loud about. By rewriting, ignoring, and washing away those parts of her we're denied the honest, complicated, powerful portrait of a flawed woman of her time who did such an important and ultimately honorable thing.

There's no reason to make her a hero to the point when people go to research her they are surprised and put off. The kind of complicated character we're talking about is pure awards-bait for actors and writers. Think of Mare of Easttown, for example, Ray Donovan, even Archie Bunker. A character does not need to be all good or all bad or purely likeable to be compelling and even respectable for the good things they did do. They really missed the boat on that part.