Matcollis This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Melanie Bouvet The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Frances Chung Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Walter Sloane Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

rooprect Up front, let me say that this is a good movie with excellent acting, a powerful message, and overall it's a credit to the art of filmmaking. Other reviewers have covered that better than I can; I just want to mention something that no one else seems to have brought up.Director Gus Van Sant chose to focus on the personal life of the man Harvey Milk rather than the cause he championed. This wouldn't be a problem except that Van Sant gives us a highly airbrushed, family-friendly, almost Disney version of Harvey Milk, making me wonder: if this film isn't about the gay rights movement, and if it isn't about the real Harvey Milk, then what is it about?If you dare to hear me out for 2 paragraphs, you might want to don your iconoclast flak jacket because I may shatter the lily white image of Milk that the director would have you believe. But I'm doing this to make a point that a good film would celebrate the ideals of an individual rather than the individual (or a fabcation of a perfect saint for us to idolize). But such is Hollywood, I guess.The man real man Harvey Milk wasn't always the boyscout which director Gus Van Sant paints him to be. In reality, it may have been more accurate to say that Harvey was *interested in dating* boyscouts (boo hiss, I couldn't resist 1 tasteless joke, but the truth remains: at least one of Harvey's lovers, Jack McKinley, was 16 years old when Harvey, 33, ran away with him in 1963). Another sore spot, which the film exploits for a cheap emotional twist, is the suicide of a certain minor character. If you want to know the truth behind this subplot, google "Harvey Milk and the Boy from Minnesota" for an eye opening exposé which might make you wish they had omitted the whole episode from the film, rather than twist it into a tear jerker.I understand that Harvey Milk is synonymous with gay rights in the 1970s, and certainly he deserves much praise for his amazing accomplishments. I just resent the way Gus Van Sant fabricated a glossy, flawless hero. I would've much preferred a fallible hero who does the right thing, much like the excellent film "Amadeus" accurately portrays Mozart as a stumbling drunk but a musical genius nonetheless. Give the audience credit for differentiating the human from the achievement.Apologies if I ruined the illusion of Harvey Milk's perfect life, but isn't it better to honor the things he did? If anything, that's the legacy Harvey Milk wanted: for us to carry on the message rather than idolizing the messenger.

SnoopyStyle In 60's San Francisco, the police are cracking down on gay men. In 1970 NYC, Harvey Milk (Sean Penn) hooks up with Scott Smith (James Franco) but he's still on the down-lo. In 1972, they decide to go to San Francisco to start anew. They find an economically-depressed Haight. Harvey opens a camera shop and becomes an organizer on Castro Street. He gathers gay support and businesses supporting gays. He meets young Phoenix teen Cleve Jones (Emile Hirsch) who dismisses Harvey at first. He runs for office but fails. Anita Bryant is on a country-wide crusade against homosexuals. In 1977, there is redistricting and Harvey runs for one of the supervisors with Anne Kronenberg (Alison Pill) as his campaign manager. He starts going out with Jack Lira (Diego Luna). He finally wins as one of the first openly gay politician. In 1978, he is put in office along with opponent Dan White (Josh Brolin) from the conservative Irish Catholic district and supportive Mayor Moscone (Victor Garber). It's a tumultuous year that ends in tragedy.Director Gus Van Sant keeps this biopic along the straight and narrow following a standard biopic formula. Certainly, Harvey Milk's life has a lot of sign posts to observe. Through it all, Sean Penn gives the character a caring humanity. The large cast is populated by great actors. I would have liked more from some of these supporting characters but the story has to keep moving. Overall, this is a solid biopic.

Kirpianuscus the fight of a man. for principle. for his credo. for a better world. a revolution. and a victory who reminds so many similar other success. short, an useful testimony about the force of hope and determination and courage. the great fact - Milk has the splendid gift to be an universal story. not only about the struggle of a sexual community for its rights. not about a simple man who becomes symbol of the desire to change social perception and to say the truth against each obstacle. and, maybe, not one of the most remarkable roles of Sean Penn. but something real profound.a message. a remind. a testimony. essential more than important. for understand the details who define the life. Milk is the portrait of a hero. and good support for not ignore the other. a powerful pledge for tolerance. and a great film.

blakelogsdon1 As a man that comes from a long line of milkmen, I was very excited to hear there was going to be a movie named Milk. Finally, Hollywood had latched onto the compelling and exhilarating story that surrounds the rise and fall of the dairy industry! Corporate farms, mass-scale shipments, cheese production! What more could viewers hope for? The history of the milk companies in this country is thrilling to say the least, and it is filled with new truths at every turn. For example, who would have thought that California leads the country in milk output annually? Not me! And I don't believe the majority of audiences would have seen that twist coming either! This exciting, eventful tale would be a nice change from the unstimulating, dull superhero and alien invasion flicks that are currently being spewed out of the bowels of the Hollywood studios.But when I learned that this was not a film about the story of the milk companies in the US and instead about some gay dude trying to do a bunch of gay politics, I felt as if I was drowning. And not even drowning in milk, which is a death I would be happy to endure. I was drowning in the hot, steamy liquid of betrayal produced by Hollywood's homosexual community. The very same community that had tricked me with this tomfoolery of a movie. For some reason, the film companies decided that America needed to hear the story of some gay milkman imposter than a true, realistic story on the origin and evolution of America's dairy corporations. I would like to say that the makers of this film are corrupt, lying, evil swindlers, and if they don't think the dairy world will fight back against the distribution of this movie, then they thought wrong! Because the dairymen and dairywomen of the world are a family! And we are also an army! An army that can crush the movie industry as a whole with one swift flick of the utter! So, you better watch out writer Dustin Lance Black and director Gus Van Sant because we aren't coming at you with 2% of our force. We're coming at you with the WHOLE thing. And it ain't going to be pretty. You've been warned.Sincerely, Your fellow IMDb user blakelogsdon1