--- title: "All the President's Men" year: 1976 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/all-the-presidents-men" fi1m_score: 90 critics_score: 86 critics_reviews: 14 published: "2026-09-16T10:08:51.572774+00:00" updated: "2026-09-16T10:08:52.206799+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # All the President's Men (1976) Directed by Alan J. Pakula · 2h 18m · MPA PG · Drama, Mystery, Thriller **Fi1m score: 90** · Critics 86 from 14 reviews *In a sentence:* A newspaper office should not be this bad for our nerves > Alan J. Pakula turns the slow work of reporting into a thriller we would recommend to almost anyone. Its crowded trail of names occasionally tests the patience, but the people doing the checking keep us absorbed. ## Synopsis In Washington, Bob Woodward (Robert Redford) and Carl Bernstein (Dustin Hoffman) investigate Watergate for the Washington Post. Their job is to establish which names and accounts stand up to checking, and what connections they can prove. Ben Bradlee (Jason Robards) oversees their work in a newsroom where suspicion alone is not enough to justify publication. Away from the busy offices, shadowed car parks provide a setting for guarded conversations. The reporters have to keep asking questions when answers are incomplete, following a story whose importance is still difficult to measure from behind a desk. ## Review *All the President’s Men* is an excellent thriller about the slow business of establishing what a newspaper can safely print. Alan J. Pakula makes us care about the checking, including the steps that a less patient film would hurry through on its way to an accusation. We would recommend it even to anyone who thinks a film about the Watergate investigation sounds like homework. The tension comes from having enough information to suspect something and still being some distance from being able to prove it. Robert Redford, as Bob Woodward, and Dustin Hoffman, as Carl Bernstein, make a convincing team without smoothing away the differences between them. Their shared scenes have enough impatience and friction to spare us a mutual admiration exercise. We believe in their concentration, and in the effort required to stay interested when an answer fails to settle anything. Neither performance asks us to applaud a journalist merely for being a journalist, which is a considerable relief. Gordon Willis gives the Washington Post newsroom a hard brightness that does not offer quite the comfort we expect from a well-lit room. George Jenkins’s production design fills it with the ordinary clutter of office work, making the surroundings convincing without encouraging us to stop and admire the furniture. Beyond it, the shadowed car parks allow darkness to occupy an uncomfortable amount of the screen. We were frightened by those spaces: it is difficult to listen calmly to a conversation when we keep trying to see what the shadows might conceal. Robert L. Wolfe’s editing gives the investigation a steady pressure without pretending that each new piece of information deserves a sudden burst of excitement. The repeated business of asking, listening and checking remains absorbing because we can follow how much work each answer leaves to do. David Shire’s music is effective in its restraint, allowing the film’s uncertainty to persist rather than telling us how frightened to be. There is room for hesitation, and for us to wonder whether the reporters have understood what they have heard. William Goldman has to make a succession of names interesting while keeping the connections between them comprehensible. His screenplay mostly manages this by keeping the question of proof in front of us, although there are stretches when we are keeping track rather than becoming more involved. Jason Robards, as Ben Bradlee, helps give those details weight; his authority makes us feel that somebody will have to answer for what reaches the page. The supporting characters do not all receive comparable attention, and some feel defined entirely by the information they can supply. Within the political thriller, the film is unusually willing to spend time on routine work. It trusts that we will find uncertainty troubling without needing an obvious threat at every stage, and its confidence is largely justified. There is something reassuring in its faith that persistence and careful reporting can matter, though we would hesitate to take that faith for a complete account of how power works. The film stays close to the reporters and the practical limits of their knowledge. Give it an evening when the names have a chance of sticking. At 138 minutes, it asks for sustained attention, and it does not treat confusion as a reason to abandon the details. We would keep the phones out of reach; there are enough distractions in the newsroom. *Fi1m score 90, published 16 September 2026.* ## What the critics say The consensus is firmly positive: all fourteen reviews admire the film’s patient treatment of investigative journalism and its ability to make procedural detail tense. Praise centres on Pakula’s restrained direction, William Goldman’s handling of a complicated investigation, and Gordon Willis’s cinematography, particularly the contrast between the bright newsroom and shadowed spaces beyond it. The convincing office detail and controlled ensemble performances also draw approval, with Jason Robards repeatedly singled out. The spread is chiefly between admiration and enthusiasm, rather than opposing verdicts, and reservations are scattered. The Hollywood Reporter finds that the plotting occasionally thins out and gives the protagonists too little jeopardy, a qualification to the wider praise for suspense built from methodical work. /Film admires the procedural filmmaking but finds its faith in journalistic accountability quaint in the present political climate; the disagreement concerns how that faith holds up, not the skill with which the investigation is dramatised. ### Reviews we read (14) - **Radio Times**, Adrian Turner (5/5): This Oscar-winning thriller is one of the best movies ever made about American politics, with William Goldman's script brilliantly clarifying multilayered corruption and Pakula's tense direction drawing parallels between the open newsroom and murky politics. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-p4f5uo/all-the-presidents-men/) - **Slant Magazine**, Wes Greene (4/4): The review praises Pakula's cool, restrained direction and Willis's atmospheric cinematography for turning the film into a subversive detective story that emphasizes the banality of investigation and creeping paranoia without sensationalism or mythologizing. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/all-the-presidents-men/) - **Empire**, Ian Nathan (90/100, inferred): The film is one of modern American cinema’s most intelligent and provocative accounts of political failings and a near-perfect depiction of journalism at its purest and most inspired; it is quite brilliant. Pakula’s verite texture captures the drudgery of investigation and the bustling newsroom, with standout performances including Jason Robards as Ben Bradlee. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/president-men-review/) - **Sight and Sound**, Richard Combs (90/100, inferred): The film masterfully paces its investigation with clipped allusiveness and atmospheric tension like classic mystery fiction, using tight camerawork and controlled performances to build compulsive step-by-step progress through the Watergate maze. [Read](https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/reviews/story-marshalled-with-dazzling-skill-precision-all-presidents-men-reviewed-1976) - **The Times**, Kevin Maher (90/100, inferred): This is the gold standard of journalism movies, consistently praised for its extreme quest for authenticity in recreating the Washington Post offices and details. The new 4K restoration highlights the meticulous production design and cinematography that capture the era's office life. [Read](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/film/article/all-the-presidents-men-review-zw25vnj0r) - **Time Out**, GA (90/100, inferred): Pakula's film is remarkably intelligent as both an effective thriller and an abstract charting of corruption and power, with extraordinary visual set-ups contrasting the bright newsroom against shadows and monumental buildings. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/all-the-presidents-men) - **Little White Lies**, Hannah Pettit (85/100, inferred): The film powerfully captures a liminal phase of American history through eerie transitional spaces like shadowy parking garages and the vast Library of Congress, with Gordon Willis's cinematography heightening the paranoia and uncertainty of the journalists' quest. [Read](https://lwlies.com/in-praise-of/liminality-all-the-presidents-men) - **RogerEbert.com**, Michael Phillips (85/100, inferred): The critic praises the film's enduring celebration of investigative journalism and its masterful, process-driven storytelling, highlighting Gordon Willis's expressive cinematography and the way it mythologizes the reporters' work while remaining relevant today. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/features/just-be-sure-youre-right-watching-all-the-presidents-men-in-2025) - **The Guardian** (B+/B+): The film succeeds in making the complex Watergate scandal both comprehensible and watchable. It praises the clever portrayal of the reporters' investigative work and the inclusion of some memorable invented dialogue. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/oct/10/all-the-presidents-men-watergate-conspiracy-richard-nixon-woodward-bernstein-redford-hoffman) - **The Hollywood Reporter**, Arthur Knight (70/100, inferred): The critic admires the film's gutsy and authentic recreation of the Watergate investigation under Pakula's direction, highlighting strong performances and production values while noting that the plotting occasionally wears thin without enough jeopardy for the protagonists. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/all-presidents-men-review-1976-movie-742796/) - **Collider**, Shawn Van Horn (90/100, inferred): The critic calls the film a near-perfect thriller and love letter to journalism that remains vital 50 years on, praising its realistic depiction of reporters' methodical work, strong ensemble performances, and Pakula's direction. [Read](https://collider.com/all-the-presidents-men-robert-redford-50-years-later-more-important/) - **Eye for Film**, Stephen Carty (90/100, inferred): The critic calls it a breathtaking, classic motion picture that is thought-provoking, deliberate, and powerful, praising its authentic depiction of journalism. They single out the tension generated despite the known ending and the performances, especially Jason Robards. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/all-the-presidents-men-film-review-by-stephen-carty) - **/Film**, Witney Seibold (80/100, inferred): The critic praises it as the best conspiracy thriller of the '70s, highlighting its taut filmmaking, amazing script, and great performances, but notes it feels quaint in the current political climate as a comforting vision of accountability. They single out the journalistic integrity and the procedural elements. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/2165400/robert-redford-thriller-all-the-presidents-men-streaming-hbo-max/) - **Polygon**, Brian VanHooker (70/100, inferred): The critic hails the film as a masterwork of directing, acting, and writing that captures the unglamorous grind of investigative journalism and features excellent performances, particularly from Redford, Hoffman, and supporting players like Robards and Holbrook. [Read](https://www.polygon.com/50-years-later-all-the-presidents-men/) ## Details - **Director:** Alan J. Pakula - **Director:** Alan J. Pakula - **Screenplay:** William Goldman - **Cinematography:** Gordon Willis - **Editor:** Robert L. Wolfe - **Music:** David Shire - **Production design:** George Jenkins - **Producer:** Walter Coblenz - **Cast:** Dustin Hoffman as Carl Bernstein; Robert Redford as Bob Woodward; Jack Warden as Harry Rosenfeld; Martin Balsam as Howard Simons; Hal Holbrook as Deep Throat; Jason Robards as Ben Bradlee; Jane Alexander as Bookkeeper; Meredith Baxter as Debbie Sloan - **Runtime:** 2h 18m - **Certificate (MPA):** PG - **Release (the US):** 9 April 1976 - **Genres:** Drama, Mystery, Thriller - **Budget:** $8 million - **Box office:** $71 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5y8SW2KyTY ## Where to watch in the US Not streaming, renting or buying in the US at the last check. Also available in: JP. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - Academy Awards 1977: Best Director (nominated); Best Film Editing (nominated); Best Picture (nominated); Best Supporting Actress (nominated); Best Production Design (won); Best Sound (won); Best Supporting Actor (won); Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay (won) ## If you liked this - *The Conversation* (1974), Fi1m 92: Another patient investigation in which listening closely makes the danger harder to judge. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-conversation.md) - *Z* (1969): A political investigation with greater heat, and equal anger at official obstruction. - *The Insider* (1999), Fi1m 89: For more newsroom pressure, with the personal cost of publication brought closer. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-insider.md) - *State of Play* (2003), Fi1m 88: A British newsroom thriller that gives reporting room to become difficult and messy. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/tv/state-of-play.md) - *The Lives of Others* (2006), Fi1m 84: Listening becomes morally dangerous work in another carefully controlled study of institutional power. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-lives-of-others.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/all-the-presidents-men