This film is a cinematic case of burying the lede. Reducing an epic about a journalist deeply embroiled in one of the most significant political revolutions of the 20th century to a love story seems absurd, but unfortunately that is just what happens here. The film is far more concerned about the love triangle between Jack Reed, Eugene O'Neil and Louise than it is in the political upheaval and it never quite works. Of course, burying the political within the personal is typical Hollywood strategy, it's just disappointing to see it in a film that is ostensibly centered on such a pivotal leftist event.. When the film does focus on the political in the last 40 minutes or so it does work really effectively to show a bumbling regime that was doomed to failure at its inception.

Too aware of its own importance. One little problem: it never made me interested in these two people.

Briefly overrated, then forever underrated. This sprawling romantic epic still manages to keep everything grounded despite it's length and ambition, thanks to excellent writing and directing. Performances are all top-notch.

Film felt a bit dated as an epic and was a struggle to get through. At a different period of time, this piece might have connected with me. It felt like a slight miss throughout most of the picture. There are a few standout sequences and set pieces, but overall too long too droll without much substance.

The problem with Reds is that its really just a basic love story. And that would be all well and good, but you get the sense that there is a better movie in there somewhere full of interesting ideology. However, the love story distracts from all that.
Also, the weird "witness" interviews feel out of place. The story doesn't feel important enough to warrant their perspectives.

Epic, ambitious, arse numbingly long but never dull Beatty's Reds is a quite brilliant. film. The script is dense and political in a way that would never be bankrolled today. Beautifully shot with in some exquisite locations Reds is quite wonderful.

An extraordinary film. Beatty's masterful handling of the difficult subject matter is to be applauded, and the performances from Beatty, Keaton, Nicholson, and Stapleton are all terrific. It's a massive undertaking but ultimately a very rewarding experience. Stephen Sondheim's musical contributions cannot be oversold.

A movie about a fascinating time in human history reduced to a poorly developed love story of two people we could never like nor be interested in. One of the worst movies ever to win an Academy Award. In fact practically everything except Raiders of the Lost Arc was a throw away picture at the 1982 Academy Awards.

Whats so sinful about this movie is the fact that in 3 hours it couldn't bother to develop a single character. Gluttony on celluloid.

Also Dianne Keaton cannot dress herself even in 1917.

It might just be me, but I found this movie really hard to follow. maybe because I’m not as informed on the subject matter as I would like, but I felt a little lost. I thought the performances were solid, and I wasn’t bored in the slightest. There were simply moments where I was like, “Wait, who’s that guy?” And, “Wait, what just happened?” And, “Ok. What the hell is going on here?”

I would promise to watch it again and pay better attention.. But it’s soo long and well.. no promises, there, sorry.

It’s about Communism, ok?

This film is a cinematic case of burying the lede. Reducing an epic about a journalist deeply embroiled in one of the most significant political revolutions of the 20th century to a love story seems absurd, but unfortunately that is just what happens here. The film is far more concerned about the love triangle between Jack Reed, Eugene O'Neil and Louise than it is in the political upheaval and it never quite works. Of course, burying the political within the personal is typical Hollywood strategy, it's just disappointing to see it in a film that is ostensibly centered on such a pivotal leftist event.. When the film does focus on the political in the last 40 minutes or so it does work really effectively to show a bumbling regime that was doomed to failure at its inception.

Reds is far too long. Somewhere along the way Mr. Beatty became convinced that he was dealing with characters that were much more interesting and compelling than they actually are. The film is comprised of scenes depicting Beatty's John Reed shouting and ranting at political rallies. Then we get scenes with Reed shouting at his girlfriend Louise Bryant and then making up... and then fighting again. Beatty also makes the poor decision to intercut clips of interviews he conducted with some of the real people who knew these characters. These tidbits do nothing to further our understanding of these people or the events depicted. The excellent cinematography and Jack Nicholson's performance are worth noting.