A drama based on the life of Ronald Reagan, from his childhood to his time in the oval office.A drama based on the life of Ronald Reagan, from his childhood to his time in the oval office.A drama based on the life of Ronald Reagan, from his childhood to his time in the oval office.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 3 wins & 5 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
It was a fine movie, but honestly a little too feel-good sometime with very little stakes. It sorta felt like a more dramatic version of a hall mark special. There was nothing really inherently wrong with the movie, just that it was a tad boring at times.
Also, they tell the story from a narrators point of view, and I kinda felt like the choice to do that was a little needless. It didn't add anything to the story, and kinda just bogged the whole experience down.
I usually enjoy Dennis Quaid's performances. He's not the best actor, but I always find his performances endearing and entertaining. I'm not so sure he was the right pick for Reagan. He looks the part of course, but he doesn't really disappear into the role. He also does this thing with his voice that is meant to sound like Reagan, but it's a bit overacted and distracting.
I would recommend it as a one time watch if there's nothing else to watch and people want a casual filler movie. Just don't expect to be blown away or anything.
Also, they tell the story from a narrators point of view, and I kinda felt like the choice to do that was a little needless. It didn't add anything to the story, and kinda just bogged the whole experience down.
I usually enjoy Dennis Quaid's performances. He's not the best actor, but I always find his performances endearing and entertaining. I'm not so sure he was the right pick for Reagan. He looks the part of course, but he doesn't really disappear into the role. He also does this thing with his voice that is meant to sound like Reagan, but it's a bit overacted and distracting.
I would recommend it as a one time watch if there's nothing else to watch and people want a casual filler movie. Just don't expect to be blown away or anything.
The movie's biggest upside is that Dennis Quaid is awesome as Reagan. When I first saw images of him as Reagan, I was skeptical because I was concerned that he didn't look like Reagan. When I watched the movie, however, I found Quaid to be convincing in his voice and mannerisms; and I think the film's crew did a fine job with the makeup and prosthetics. In addition to Quaid's awesome performance, I think Penelope Ann Miller is convincing as Nancy Reagan: she looks and sounds like Nancy. I love the visuals of Reagan's California ranch and the Oval Office. The closing image of Quaid's smiling on horseback, with a cover of John Denver's "Take Me Home Country Roads" playing, kinda hit me emotionally. At times, the movie can provoke 1980s nostalgia with the images and soundtrack.
That said ... the critics of this movie have a few valid points. The biggest criticism is that the movie goes at a breakneck speed and feels like a bare-bones cliffnotes version of Reagan's life. The movie attempts to cover all of Reagan's life, so the movie gives time to his job as a lifeguard, his days as a choir boy, his first marriage, his acting career, his time as the SAG President, his governorship, his time as president, and the onset of Alzheimer's. The result is that a lot of topics are left out altogether (e.g. Just based on this movie, you might figure that Reagan had no children). Of the topics covered in the movie, many are just skimmed over. For example, I feel as if I blinked my eye and missed Reagan's first wife (played by Mena Sevari); the topic of Grenada is covered in one line that Reagan says to Margaret Thatcher; and George H. W. Bush appears for about 5 seconds in a meeting.
The movie often cuts to newspaper clippings and historical clips to try to condense loaded historical events, and there is a frame narrative involving Jon Voight's character, an aged KGB. I like the idea of having Voight narrate Reagan's story, as his narration often helps keep the movie organized and allows the movie to condense some events. Voight could've worked a little more on his Russian accent, but it's nothing too bad
The other flaw, which critics have stressed, is that the movie is extremely pro-Reagan. I admit that I am a fan of Reagan, and I'm a Republican. So I'm not as angry about the movie's pro-Reaganism as many critics are. But even I have to admit that the movie's extreme pro-Reagan POV hinders its potential to offer historical insight or historical knowledge. The movie straight-up glosses over all of Reagan's flaws or mistakes. Even during its discussion of the Iran-Contra affair, the movie makes Reagan look like an unsuspecting and innocent party. I also found some scenes felt like campaign advertisements. When Reagan is giving a speech during his run as governor, for example, the movie shows several people (e.g. A waitress, a barber, and a man getting a shave) all stop what they're doing and stare at Reagan on TV as if mesmerized. This same scene basically re-occurs when he does the "Tear Down that Wall!" speech. Ronald Reagan in this movie is basically a one-dimensional, anti-communist patriot who almost never commited sin or error knowingly
The movie offers no drama, and there is little educational or historical value. And obviously, you should stay away from his movie if you dislike Ronald Reagan. But if you're a fan of Reagan, you will leave the movie feeling uplifted; Quaid's performance will be enough for you to overlook many of its flaws.
That said ... the critics of this movie have a few valid points. The biggest criticism is that the movie goes at a breakneck speed and feels like a bare-bones cliffnotes version of Reagan's life. The movie attempts to cover all of Reagan's life, so the movie gives time to his job as a lifeguard, his days as a choir boy, his first marriage, his acting career, his time as the SAG President, his governorship, his time as president, and the onset of Alzheimer's. The result is that a lot of topics are left out altogether (e.g. Just based on this movie, you might figure that Reagan had no children). Of the topics covered in the movie, many are just skimmed over. For example, I feel as if I blinked my eye and missed Reagan's first wife (played by Mena Sevari); the topic of Grenada is covered in one line that Reagan says to Margaret Thatcher; and George H. W. Bush appears for about 5 seconds in a meeting.
The movie often cuts to newspaper clippings and historical clips to try to condense loaded historical events, and there is a frame narrative involving Jon Voight's character, an aged KGB. I like the idea of having Voight narrate Reagan's story, as his narration often helps keep the movie organized and allows the movie to condense some events. Voight could've worked a little more on his Russian accent, but it's nothing too bad
The other flaw, which critics have stressed, is that the movie is extremely pro-Reagan. I admit that I am a fan of Reagan, and I'm a Republican. So I'm not as angry about the movie's pro-Reaganism as many critics are. But even I have to admit that the movie's extreme pro-Reagan POV hinders its potential to offer historical insight or historical knowledge. The movie straight-up glosses over all of Reagan's flaws or mistakes. Even during its discussion of the Iran-Contra affair, the movie makes Reagan look like an unsuspecting and innocent party. I also found some scenes felt like campaign advertisements. When Reagan is giving a speech during his run as governor, for example, the movie shows several people (e.g. A waitress, a barber, and a man getting a shave) all stop what they're doing and stare at Reagan on TV as if mesmerized. This same scene basically re-occurs when he does the "Tear Down that Wall!" speech. Ronald Reagan in this movie is basically a one-dimensional, anti-communist patriot who almost never commited sin or error knowingly
The movie offers no drama, and there is little educational or historical value. And obviously, you should stay away from his movie if you dislike Ronald Reagan. But if you're a fan of Reagan, you will leave the movie feeling uplifted; Quaid's performance will be enough for you to overlook many of its flaws.
"Reagan", this biopic stars Dennis Quaid in the titular role. Penelope Ann Miller co-stars as Nancy Reagan. Dennis Quaid tries hard to be Reagan, but his performance is more mimicry rather than acting. Miller's performance appears much too much nice to be the steely Nancy. The rest of the cast including Jon Voight as a fictional Russian analyst are adequate but not revolutionary. And being a movie biopic, it necessarily gives short shrift to a long and varied life. And you know most of the story (although there are few portions that surprised me, so I won't spoil them here). Weakly recommended for those nostalgic for the Reagan era. 6/10.
As a history movie and biopic nerd, I've been following the development of it for most of the last decade. Given its long development, not to mention some of its supporting cast choices (including politically conservative actors Jon Voight, Robert Davi, and Kevin Sorbo) and the fact it's been sitting on a shelf since it was filmed in 2020-21, I wondered what the final product would be.
I'll be honest: I've got very mixed feelings about the thing I spent two and a bit hours watching.
Quaid was fantastic, as I expected. A little airbrushed/over made-up looking in some of the younger scenes but damn good all the same. His reading of Reagan's 1994 Farewell Letter was remarkable. And, as predicted when the trailer dropped earlier this summer, Quaid didn't share a single scene with any of the aforementioned outspoken actors. A part of me suspects they have been brought in to get a bit more money without causing too much fuss.
And it's a film that clearly needed money if the production values are anything to go by. They're a couple of steps up from a Lifetime or cable tv movie. They tried but the budget wasn't quite there and you can tell it in the production values and the odd CGI shot that looked cheap. One area where the film had value put was in its score which was good, though overbearing in places due to the sound mix, with a highlight being the main title Cold War crash course (though The Man from UNCLE film in 2015 did the concept better).
Then there's the script. It tried to cram his whole life into two hours and it's deeply unfocused as a result. There's some stuff in it that's misrepresentation (such as the 1983 war scare) or just made up (including a sequence that shows the "Tear Down this Wall" speech covered live worldwide, a speech that was boosted to its current status mythic status well after Reagan left office). Like the production values, it's a couple of steps up from Lifetime or a Christian DVD movie (which it becomes in a few places rather jarringly) but it's got its moments. There's almost no nuance or sense of Reagan beyond politics or Nancy (their children barely appear), with AIDS covered in a brief montage and Iran-Contra dealt with in about eight minutes with no real look at what Reagan did or did not do. Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer this was not, with neither screenwriter Howard Klausner or director Sean McNamara capable of doing anything but highlight the positives.
Reagan the movie is a mixed bag, to put it mildly. Worth the wait of a decade? Probably not. Is there still a better film to be made about Reagan?
No doubt.
I'll be honest: I've got very mixed feelings about the thing I spent two and a bit hours watching.
Quaid was fantastic, as I expected. A little airbrushed/over made-up looking in some of the younger scenes but damn good all the same. His reading of Reagan's 1994 Farewell Letter was remarkable. And, as predicted when the trailer dropped earlier this summer, Quaid didn't share a single scene with any of the aforementioned outspoken actors. A part of me suspects they have been brought in to get a bit more money without causing too much fuss.
And it's a film that clearly needed money if the production values are anything to go by. They're a couple of steps up from a Lifetime or cable tv movie. They tried but the budget wasn't quite there and you can tell it in the production values and the odd CGI shot that looked cheap. One area where the film had value put was in its score which was good, though overbearing in places due to the sound mix, with a highlight being the main title Cold War crash course (though The Man from UNCLE film in 2015 did the concept better).
Then there's the script. It tried to cram his whole life into two hours and it's deeply unfocused as a result. There's some stuff in it that's misrepresentation (such as the 1983 war scare) or just made up (including a sequence that shows the "Tear Down this Wall" speech covered live worldwide, a speech that was boosted to its current status mythic status well after Reagan left office). Like the production values, it's a couple of steps up from Lifetime or a Christian DVD movie (which it becomes in a few places rather jarringly) but it's got its moments. There's almost no nuance or sense of Reagan beyond politics or Nancy (their children barely appear), with AIDS covered in a brief montage and Iran-Contra dealt with in about eight minutes with no real look at what Reagan did or did not do. Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer this was not, with neither screenwriter Howard Klausner or director Sean McNamara capable of doing anything but highlight the positives.
Reagan the movie is a mixed bag, to put it mildly. Worth the wait of a decade? Probably not. Is there still a better film to be made about Reagan?
No doubt.
Reagan is not deserving of the low critic ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritc (as of this writing, it sits at 20% and 22% respectively), but it is not quite a 10 out of 10 motion picture, either. It is well acted, the story is serviceable, and so is the direction overall, but if you are coming in expecting a straightforward biography of Ronald Reagan from his youth to his final days you will only be slightly disappointed, as a lot of the events in his life are recounted by the narration of Viktor Petrovich (Jon Voight). It certainly has its place in a story about the 40th President of the United States, but sometimes presents a slight "tell instead of show" problem as the narrative progresses and sometimes interferes with some of the retellings of the more dramatic moments in Reagan's life.
This motion picture does portray Reagan favorably but does not glamorize and glorify every aspect of his life and every decision he made in the entertainment industry, his relationships, and time in office. Dennis Quaid gives an excellent performance worthy of award recognition, nailing everything about Reagan from his voice, mannerisms, and personality, his chemistry with Penelope Ann Miller is fantastic.
Definitely worth a watch.
This motion picture does portray Reagan favorably but does not glamorize and glorify every aspect of his life and every decision he made in the entertainment industry, his relationships, and time in office. Dennis Quaid gives an excellent performance worthy of award recognition, nailing everything about Reagan from his voice, mannerisms, and personality, his chemistry with Penelope Ann Miller is fantastic.
Definitely worth a watch.
Did you know
- TriviaMost of the film was shot in Oklahoma due to a state tax rebate launched in 2020, and COVID-19 restrictions that were much lighter compared to other states. Filming took place in Oklahoma City, Guthrie, Edmond, and Crescent. Using CGI and special effects, the Oklahoma City Capitol Building was dressed up to look like the United States Capitol Building, and the Temple of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry in Guthrie doubled for The White House.
- GoofsIn a scene identified as taking place in 1945 near the end of World War II with Ronald Reagan wearing his Army uniform, he is wearing the Cavalry branch insignia of crossed sabers on his lapels. Reagan started in the Army Reserve as a Cavalry officer in 1937, but after being called to active duty in 1942 shortly after the US entered World War II, he was transferred to the Army Air Forces, whose lapel branch insignia was a 2-bladed propeller superimposed over eagle wings, and remained in the Army Air Forces for the remainder of the war.
- Quotes
Ronald Reagan: As I see it, we don't mistrust each other because we're armed. We're armed because we mistrust each other. But I think that we both agree on the most important thing. That nuclear war can never be won, and must never be fought.
- Crazy creditsThe credits show archive footage of several moments from Reagan's life, as well as his funeral. Halfway through, there's an epilogue of what happened to these real-life individuals. The credits continue. Afterwards, there's an image of a letter sent to Reagan by Prince Hussain Aga Khan when he was a child (a voice actor reads it).
- ConnectionsFeatured in Greg Kelly Reports: Jon Voight (2021)
- SoundtracksDon't Fence Me In
Written by Cole Porter
Used by the permission of WC Music Corp. (ASCAP)
Performed by Bob Dylan
- How long is Reagan?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Рейган
- Filming locations
- Santa Monica, California, USA(Reagan Ranch)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $25,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $30,047,417
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $7,650,720
- Sep 1, 2024
- Gross worldwide
- $30,107,173
- Runtime
- 2h 21m(141 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39:1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content