Reds (1981)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Jim H

  
  Reds is an epic political drama, and Beatty's passionate directing and acting are fun to watch. The fact that Beatty was able to make this film in the 80s is equally admirable. But I find the movie too unquestionably devoted to revering the man and his politics. Sure, the film… More
  Reds is an epic political drama, and Beatty's passionate directing and acting are fun to watch. The fact that Beatty was able to make this film in the 80s is equally admirable. But I find the movie too unquestionably devoted to revering the man and his politics. Sure, the film allows a few questions about his character in relationship to his treatment of Louise, but mostly I see Beatty jerking off to the life of Jack Reed, and such devotion always makes me suspicious. The film is so agenda-driven that it makes me understand why some dislike Oliver Stone.

• First L

  
  Warren Beatty wrote, directed and stars in this biopic of John Reed, a journalist who became entrenched in Russia's communist revolution and also helped inspire the founding of the communist party in America. Despite this being Beatty's movie and role, the film seems to… More
  Warren Beatty wrote, directed and stars in this biopic of John Reed, a journalist who became entrenched in Russia's communist revolution and also helped inspire the founding of the communist party in America. Despite this being Beatty's movie and role, the film seems to focus more on Reed's love interest, Louise Bryant (Diane Keaton). She's an aspiring writer/journalist herself, and she's almost immediately fascinated by Reed's radicalism. Soon, at his behest, she leaves her husband and moves to Greenwich Village. But in the Village, she finds herself isolated amongst the intellectual elite, who show no interest in her opinions. Only writer Eugene O'Neill seems intrigued by her, and his interest seems just as much romantic as anything else. It's a love triangle that falls to pieces under the weight of John Reed's charisma, though. Soon she marries Reed, he starts changing from journalist to activist, fueled by a passionate interest in socialism and revolt. The movie, as a sort of reverse Dr. Zhivago, occasionally shows glimpses of film epic, but more often it's more a ponderously flimsy melodrama. Diane Keaton shows no charm whatsoever, nor does her character display any great intellectual quality, and it's hard to understand just why everyone is supposed to be so attracted to her. Yes, there are a few scenes of human insight, and a few scenes of epic beauty, but I find the subject matter in general to be grating. Reds must've been quite impressive at the time of it's release, but it loses a little bit of stature with the passing of each year (sort of like "Titanic"), and I can't say that's unjustified.

• Reid V

  
  Very grand in scope. In fact, so grand in scope that I lose focus of what it is really trying to say. It is a romance film set against the backdrop of the Russian Revolution of 1917. While there are some great shots and Beatty is very convincing as a passionate radical, Keaton's… More
  Very grand in scope. In fact, so grand in scope that I lose focus of what it is really trying to say. It is a romance film set against the backdrop of the Russian Revolution of 1917. While there are some great shots and Beatty is very convincing as a passionate radical, Keaton's performance did not have the same finesee. It felt like Beatty set out to make an epic out of material that was more suitable for a standard film. It is worth a watch, but the 3 and 1/2 hours goes by at a snail's pace.

• Randy T

  
  Had it been produced today, in this new millennium, this would have been a remarkable film. The fact that it was made in the early '80s, when America and Russia were still very much at odds with each other, makes <i>Reds</i> almost otherworldly. Circa 1915, the… More
  Had it been produced today, in this new millennium, this would have been a remarkable film. The fact that it was made in the early '80s, when America and Russia were still very much at odds with each other, makes <i>Reds</i> almost otherworldly. Circa 1915, the true story of an American journalist who saw the oppression of workers in a capitalist society and dreamed of something better. He, along with his wife and his circle of 'intellectual' friends, at first try to effect change in the U.S. but are later enticed overseas by news of the Bolshevik revolution. This is not an anti-American film, neither is it pro-Russian. What at first seems like Utopian naiveté is later unraveled and exposed (credit Beatty for not succumbing to the Hollywood elite). What this is, in simple terms, is an intricate docu-drama with an amazing assemblage of creative talent. The cast list reads like an actors who's-who: Beatty, Diane Keaton, Jack Nicholson, Gene Hackman, Paul Sorvino and the incomparable Maureen Stapleton. Wow. The knock here is that this film is too long. One of the shortfalls of having the writer as the producer/director is the reluctance to make cuts where cuts need to be made. Still, a relatively minor gripe about an otherwise phenomenal film.

• Ken S

  
  Beautifully shot and acted.

• Aaron N

  
  John Reed: Look, what does a capitalist do? Let me ask you that, Mike. Huh? Tell me. I mean, what does he make, besides money? I don't know what he makes. The workers do all the work, don't they? Well, what if they got organized? Warren Beatty's epic political drama… More
  John Reed: Look, what does a capitalist do? Let me ask you that, Mike. Huh? Tell me. I mean, what does he make, besides money? I don't know what he makes. The workers do all the work, don't they? Well, what if they got organized? Warren Beatty's epic political drama about the stormy romantic partnership of journalist-revolutionary Jack Reed, played by Beatty, author of Ten Days That Shook the World, and writer-artist Louise Bryant, played by Diane Keaton, set against the backdrop of World War I and the Russian Revolution. At a little over three hours, Beatty has certainly made his passion project. He had evidently shot 140 hours of film and from that culled it down to a very well made film that features great performances from all involved, namely Beatty, Keaton, and Jack Nicholson. It is also a very beautiful film that certainly gets across its status as an epic. Its political subject matter certainly doesn't make it the kind of film that would play well with today's audiences in general, but it certainly captures its historical atmosphere as well as provides a very good love story. Eugene O'Neill: Jack dreams that he can hustle the American working man, who's one dream is that he could be rich enough not to work, into a revolution led by *his* party.

• Dean M

  
  Warren Beatty produced, directed, cowrote and starred in this $33 million American film masterpiece. This three-hour biography film was ambitious interesting about love partnership of two American journalists Beatty and Diane Keaton made amazing performances. Also features brilliant… More
  Warren Beatty produced, directed, cowrote and starred in this $33 million American film masterpiece. This three-hour biography film was ambitious interesting about love partnership of two American journalists Beatty and Diane Keaton made amazing performances. Also features brilliant bits from Jack Nicholson, Gene Hackman, and Maureen Stapleton.

• Tim S

  
  Powerful story from Beatty and Co.

• Tim S

  
  Before this I thought Warren Beatty was just an old cougar who got young poon.

• Walter M

  
  [font=Century Gothic]Directed by Warren Beatty, "Reds" is a handsomely produced and well-acted epic that starts in 1915 in Portland, Oregon where wannabe artist and journalist Louise Bryant(Diane Keaton) meets journalist John Reed(Warren Beatty) who has returned to his… More
  [font=Century Gothic]Directed by Warren Beatty, "Reds" is a handsomely produced and well-acted epic that starts in 1915 in Portland, Oregon where wannabe artist and journalist Louise Bryant(Diane Keaton) meets journalist John Reed(Warren Beatty) who has returned to his hometown to raise funds for the radical magazine, The Masses, that he writes for.(While he has a knack for being in the right place and time, he is also in danger of crossing the line between journalism and activism.) She is yearning for adventure and a way out of stuffy Portland, so returns to Greenwich Village with him, the center of bohemian and radical activity in New York City(Not so much anymore but Provincetown is still jumping...) at the time when anything seems possible, maybe even a workers' revolution. It is also where she meets anarchist Emma Goldman(Maureen Stapleton) and playwright Eugene O'Neill(Jack Nicholson).[/font] [font=Century Gothic]I had seen "Reds" once before and that was quite possibly 25 years ago when I was in high school. The reason I was curious to see it again(I remembered some of it, certainly more than is normally the case) was having learned so much about the time, places and people(which are captured so well), especially Emma Goldman, that I think I am much better equipped to relate to the movie now and its themes of personal development.[/font]

• Alec B

  
  Warren Beatty won an academy award for directing a film about the only American buried in the Kremlin. The best thing about this film is how intertwined with the film are interviews with the real people who were around at the same time the story takes place. Diane Keaton and Warren… More
  Warren Beatty won an academy award for directing a film about the only American buried in the Kremlin. The best thing about this film is how intertwined with the film are interviews with the real people who were around at the same time the story takes place. Diane Keaton and Warren Beatty are great as the leads, but its Jack Nicholson in one of his most subdued roles as troubled playwrite Eugene O'Neil who steals the show.

• Brian R

  
  Starts out great but then begins to wither down when the politics come into play. The politics doesn't even matter in this picture what matters is the romantic relationship between Warren Beatty and Diane Keaton. Jack Nicholson and Maureen Stapleton put in fine performances. Reds… More
  Starts out great but then begins to wither down when the politics come into play. The politics doesn't even matter in this picture what matters is the romantic relationship between Warren Beatty and Diane Keaton. Jack Nicholson and Maureen Stapleton put in fine performances. Reds is an updated version of Doctor Zhivago but a little better.

• Simeon D

  
  This lengthy biopic of Communist journalist/playboy Jack Reed is visually outstanding, with a flawless cast, and a directorial win for Warren Beatty. 100/100

• Dimitris S

  
  Political romance,the harsh criticism will attack with a low blow and yet this certain,passive ability of Beatty to glorify what has become a symbol of revolution is more than stupendous thinking at the same time an achievement like that hasn't occurred ever since Eisenstein and… More
  Political romance,the harsh criticism will attack with a low blow and yet this certain,passive ability of Beatty to glorify what has become a symbol of revolution is more than stupendous thinking at the same time an achievement like that hasn't occurred ever since Eisenstein and Gone with the Wind paused and the biased "wealthy" successors took responsibility.Communism in the hands of serious Hollywood equals superb awe... Loads of arguments?Sure,but heck,I bet P.T. Anderson was a bit influenced by this film to create his magnum opus,don't you think?

• alan j

  
  solid Beatty movie..deply moving history lesson...excellent performances by Keaton and Beatty

• Wu C

  
  Lenghty biopic of John Reed stays afloat thanks to the great performances by the cast.

Read all 16 featured audience ratings