User Reviews

Epstein (and Friedman) make documentaries by assembling talking heads, news footage, and narration -- they make documentaries about events and phenomena, not about detailing lives as they happen. This is an event timepiece, and it hits a weak spot in me -- it's a good movie regardless, but it twists something that makes my heart ache. The movie itself might not warrant such a high rating, but what it depicts does evoke very strong emotions, specifically in the last half hour: you come out of the movie shattered and raging. It's a very lean hour and-a-half, and it manages to cram in as much of a sense of the time, at least in terms of the gay perspective, as possible. Epstein's movie is about the gay experience, but he's not a propagandist: he's more than willing to show that the Democratic Jimmy Carter didn't want to be photographed with Milk, that his sister offered to "cure" Milk of his homosexuality through religion; and he's open to showing that Ronald Reagan, much despised in the gay community, did not support California's Proposition 6, which would make it legal to fire existing teachers who were openly gay.

The film's aim is to make a martyr out of Milk -- but then, he is one, isn't he? He knew his own assassination was coming, or felt that it could; it's why he taped his own will assuming it might be heard if in fact he was assassinated (though he likely wouldn't have known it would be an angry former fellow city supervisor who would kill him). When the head of the city supervisors announces that the mayor and Milk have been killed, presumably by Dan White, distraught about not being re-selected as a city supervisor after resigning the position and then wanting it back, it's like an electric shock to the back of your neck, the crowd of news reporters shrieking in disbelief. The story is famous: White, who shoots Milk five times (once in the head), is found guilty only of voluntary manslaughter (and eventually released after just five and-a-half years), and his trial findings result in a street mob. That mob mentality grosses me out, but when citizens furious with the ruling start to firebomb police cars in the street, I couldn't help but feel for them and root them on; this kind of spit in the face to the gay community (and the memory of two dead, innocent men) deserves a gut reaction. There's a difference between mobs fueled by hate and mobs fueled by injustice. When someone says, "We are reacting with anger because we are ANGRY" you feel that anger. When we see thousands of people in the darkened street holdings candles over their heads, you might begin to weep. 9/10

The life and aftermath in death of wonderfully wry and droll Harvey Milk, San Francisco's first openly gay city official who, along with Mayor George Moscone, was killed on a November day in 1978 by disgruntled ex-colleague Dan White (who ultimately received an unusually light sentence after his trial). From Milk's sneaky campaigning tricks to the infamous 'Twinkie Defense', this documentary is solid and involving. It has a creepy ambiance that is difficult to shake after it's over, yet there's a darkly amusing undercurrent throughout (which Milk himself might've appreciated!). The film says to take these events seriously, but to take them AS events. See the humor in the chaos. This was a deserved Oscar winner for Best Documentary, and it is quite moving, funny, despairing--never clinical or cold. *** from ****

I caught this on IFC a few weeks back. I've had the original Mark Isham score for years, and love that, but I never put any effort into finding and watching the film. It's wonderful. Even listening to Harvey Fierstein's voiceover doesn't get irritating because the subject matter is at once riveting and heartfelt, exuberant and crushing. The thing that makes this movie so effective, I think, is that it was clearly pieced together for a mixed audience. This is not a gay film, or a political film, or something only San Franciscans will understand. It brings you in and allows you to really see and hear how this man affected lives around him, including the life of the man who shot him. Fascinating. Haunting. Wonderful. Go see this film.

Though I am a San Francisco Bay Area native, I have no memory of Harvey Milk's career, being as I was only 6 when he was assassinated. However, watching this film made me feel as if I was there, seeing everything as it happened. It truly is that powerful and involving.

Director Robert Epstein skillfully alternate between archival news footage and interviews with Milk's friends and associates, who recall him with warmth and affection. This isn't a hagiography (Milk was, as his former campaign manager notes, hot-tempered and sometimes very hard to work with), it's merely a straightforward portrait of a fascinating and inspirational man.

Harvey Milk was charming, intelligent, articulate, and above all, tenacious. It was largely due to his efforts and those of his supporters that the Briggs Initiative, which would've restricted the rights of gay teachers, was defeated in California. Though gay rights were understandably his biggest issue, he also fought for other disenfranchised groups, and shrewdly recognized that they should all come together as one to fight for human rights. He also presciently recognized the very real possibility that he could be murdered, and taped a statement which he requested be played only in the event of his death by assassination. It's eerie to listen to it, not least because he speaks in such a matter-of-fact way.

Epstein provides a surprising amount of balance with regards to Dan White, who shot both Milk and George Moscone. He certainly doesn't have sympathy with White's actions, but he makes sure to note that White had devoted his whole life to public service, that he gave up a secure job as a fireman to take a low-paying job as district supervisor, then quit in frustration. Nonetheless, his disgust for the ridiculously light sentence White received for murdering Milk and Moscone is palpable, and one interviewee posits that had White murdered only Moscone, he'd have been in San Quentin for the rest of his life.

White, by the way, committed suicide a year after being released from prison. Epstein thought about changing the ending of the film in order to mention this fact, but decided that to do so would be to shift the focus too much to White. The subject of this movie is Harvey Milk, and it's a beautiful tribute to him.

I do have one criticism: the filmmakers don't clear up the matter of the so-called "Twinkie defense," in which psychiatrists who testified for Dan White's defense allegedly claimed that his consumption of junk food was what caused his depression (which, his attorneys argued, was what led him to go on his killing rampage). What the psychiatrists actually claimed was that White consumption of junk food was a symptom, not the cause, of his depression.

"The Times of Harvey Milk" is one of my two favorite documentaries of all time, along with "Roger & Me." Through interviews with his friends, acquaintances, and political allies, Harvey Milk is really brought to life and a wonderful and inspirational human being. It's an especially moving story for me, since I grew up in Berkeley, just across the Bay from San Francisco - but you can enjoy this movie regardless of where you're from. I've seen "The Times of Harvey Milk" about five times now, and I've cried every time. Just thinking of the opening shot of Diane Feinstein saying, "Mayor Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk have been shot - and killed" to a shocked crowd of reporters chokes me up.

I felt it was a powerful film as I saw it as a new arrival in SF in 1984. I didn't understand its power, though, until the documentary ended and the theather kept the lights very low. As I got up and started walking to the exit, I realized that most of the audience kept their seats. Very odd, since the credits and EVERYTHING had ended. The folks were just sitting and crying.

Art has historically been used to let people rethink and understand the events of their times. (Think Shakespeare.) This film is that type of "art".

The title of this excellent documentary is well chosen, since it is as much about a time and a place as it is about Harvey Milk. The time is the late 1970s and the place is San Francisco. After quickly covering some biographic details the movie concentrates on Milk's campaign to get elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. After three unsuccessful attempts he wins, becoming the first openly gay man to be so elected. As much of a breakthrough as that was, it must be kept in mind that Milk was elected representing a heavily gay district.

Things have changed a lot in thirty years, since some U.S. congressmen are now openly gay. But the issue of acceptance of homosexuality is still contentious, as proved by the passage in 2008 of Proposition 8 that changed the California Constitution to ban gay marriage. This documentary is relevant since it shows where things started to change.

A good part of the film is devoted to consideration of California's Proposition 6 that was put before the public in 1978. Proposition 6 would have banned gays and lesbians from working in public schools. Of course Milk was heavily involved in opposition to the Proposition and it was a peak moment for him and the gay community when the proposition failed. The filming of the celebration of this in the gay community is a high point of the film.

It was only shortly after the defeat of Proposition 6 that Milk and San Francisco Mayor George Moscone were assassinated by Dan White, a fellow supervisor who had recently resigned, but was seeking reinstatement. The spontaneous candlelight vigil on the evening of the assassination that comprised some 40,000 people marching from the Castro neighborhood to City Hall was captured on film from the roof of a nearby building and is an exceedingly moving emotional highlight of the film.

This film is clearly tilted to present Milk in a favorable light and indeed that is not difficult, since Milk's charisma comes across strongly. However, it is mentioned that Milk was subject to fits of anger and could be difficult to work with. Also, Dan White's anguished testimony at his trial is played and he seemed genuine in his expression of regret, but hardly enough to exonerate him in the minds of most people. When White got what was considered a light seven year sentence, the ugly rioting and vandalism that resulted were not whitewashed. White was released from prison after serving five and a half years and committed suicide less than two years later. So, in the end he paid the price for his crimes.

The interviews with some of Milk's associates almost ten years after his assassination are very effective. They are all articulate and insightful about themselves and the history of the times of Harvey Milk.

The use of documentary footage from the time is effective and either a gay or a straight can appreciate this documentary as history.

This is a very important film, documenting the coming-of-age of LGBT involvement in the political process. Made just a few years after the Milk/ Moscone assassinations, it expertly captures the mood of a community, pre-AIDS, poised to assume political power.

The climax of the film is the peaceful, strangely silent, candle-lit march up Market Street from the Castro, the center of San Francisco's gay male community. The gay community's response to horrific violence is shock and love. When I show this film to young (mostly heterosexual) student audiences, there is always a collective gasp as they see the throngs of silent marchers.

STUNNING. That's the only word to describe this film. If you haven't seen it, prepare to be amazed. Clear the room and remove any distractions because you won't want to miss a second of this remarkable recounting of the Harvey Milk story. Prepare to cry and scream, because you will do both.

"The Times of Harvey Milk" covers a bit of American history that almost NO Americans seem to know about, and this is a tragedy. Everyone should know about these events, and the astonishing, beautiful people who participated in them. Perhaps the most stunning moment to me comes when a red-haired straight woman, who became a frequent customer in Harvey Milk's camera & film-processing shop, recalls the night after Milk and Mayor Mosconi were killed. Her description, her face, and her tears make me cry every time I see it. And when Dan White was given a slap on the wrist for murdering Milk and Mayor George Mosconi... because the jurors thought he was under the influence of too many TWINKIES... the city erupted. The film of these riots is stunning, and you may find yourself wishing that you could be there with the rioters who STOOD UP to this historic injustice and demonstrated their rage.

People of all ages and all political persuasions will find this film a remarkable document of an important bit of American history. I believe it is essential viewing for all.

This documentary richly deserved the Oscar awarded to it. One would have to be made of stone not to cry at least once. Poignant & powerful, it weaves through the story of this remarkable man with grace and dignity. Even if you are blase about the issue of gay rights, see this movie. I first saw it by renting the video, then purchased it. The events took place when I was a freshman in high school & can recall reading about the tragedy in civics class.

My teacher lets us see this film on class. It is a good issue to let us to think. I wasn't born when the event took place, but I could fell they had a lot of pressure to support the right. After I watch the video, I know Harvey Milk is really encouraged. Gays in that age were more unacceptable than now. They could insist rights not only for them but other people, they are great! Also they must accept any kind of criticism from everywhere. People can behave whatever right rights in right way at will. I got the news that the murderer was caught for less than 10 years. I think most people can't accept it even the supporter. Even he died, his achievement still exist.

The Academy Awards celebrate the film works of many and often, the category that brings about much bitterness is Best Documentary. This category has been so dominated by films concerning World War 2 and it's very long shadows, anything about recent events, such as "The Thin Blue Line" or "Crumb", don't always have a fair chance at being nominated, much less winning.

It's to the credit of all involved here that they help us learn more about Harvey Milk and the world before and after his assassination. Murdered minutes after Dan White fatally shot San Francisco Mayor George Moscone, Milk became the most visible example since the late Martin Luther King of a progressive figure almost certainly living each day as if it were his last. The climate of hate never truly ceases, it just moves at night and waits for the moment to destroy yet another person who bravely won't shut up and accept their oppression with a smile.

Rob Epstein gives us the authentic footage featuring deathly quiet moments of grief from a candlelight procession thousands took part in after Milk died and the counterpoint, rioting in the streets after the ridiculously light sentence White was given became public knowledge. They're both equally poignant and two sides of the same psychosocial coin. For a jury to call what White did "manslaughter" was really lighting a fuse that wouldn't be put out until the inevitable explosion occurred.

Human rights are not a top priority the world over and the abuses so many suffer with no recourse for justice are our 21st century mission to take on. Harvey Milk sacrificed for the next generation to have an easier life than him and his contemporaries. Now is the time to watch this great film and acknowledge his impact and legacy.

Before watch this film in the class, I didn't know whom was Harvey Milk………^^" Harvey Milk was the first openly gay man elected to any substantial political office in the history of the planet. I can't help but admire him to confess his was a gay, especially who was running for office and in such a time people believed the homosexuality a mental illness. And I think when he realized was a gay usually cause for terror, even mortification, but Milk felt doesn't care about what people criticize him and what people say; instead, he just wants to do the entitlement things. Unfortunate, he had murdered, but it's inspired many people and associate. We can say that Harvey Milk was a great city supervisor of SF and noteworthy person. However, no matter what sexual you are, "to respect them" is only way we could do for our world peace and hope.

After I saw the movie, I think we should to learn how to esteem the others who are not similar with ourselves. Even the person has the different sexual orientation. Harvey Milk is a successful political, but he was been killed because his sexual orientation. The same thing has no chance to happen in Taiwan. Because I think people should know the violence couldn't solve any problem. I felt so pity after saw the movie. But I felt so lucky in the same time because in this society, more and more people learn how to esteem the others that decrease the probability of violence. In the movie, we can learn many things. Also could to think what should we do when we meet the same thing. The documentary is that I strongly recommend.

Where was justice? That's all I could think of. After having killed two people, White was only sentenced to 8 years, but only served a little more than 5 years before he got released. Had it been any other men, the punishment most likely would have been much harsher. Nevertheless, it is evident that White was overwhelmed with remorse as he committed suicide a year and a half after his release from prison.

On the other hand, I found this quite ironic. Having to have fought so hard for the rights of the homosexual, the amending of the California Constitution due to Proposition 8, literally erased all the battles the gay community had fought in history. The proposition doesn't affect domestic partnership, but it does declare that homosexuals do not deserve the rights that heterosexuals have.

If you are a gay right activist, STRONGLY RECOMMENDED!

One could easily see this film as manipulative, but at its core, it is truly an honest telling of the life of a man who wanted to make a difference, and understood his role in history, perhaps all too well.

If it seems manipulative, that's because it is. While not a general rule for a Documentary, this is still a good one because it takes a stand on an issue, but still allows for both sides of the arguement to come across.

Whatever your personal beliefs, this film will open your mind to important issues, even if they were in the late 1970's. They still resonate today.

I felt it was a powerful film as I saw it as a new arrival in SF in 1984. I didn't understand its power, though, until the documentary ended and the theater kept the lights very low. As I got up and started walking to the exit, I realized that most of the audience kept their seats. Very odd, since the credits and EVERYTHING had ended. The folks were just sitting and crying.

Art has historically been used to let people rethink and understand the events of their times. (Think Shakespeare.) This film is that type of "art".

When I saw this movie, I think what an optimistic person he was. The murderer's sentence was five years in the jail but it was not enough. Can I kill someone and say I don't mean it? What a ridiculous judgement! If killing people is not on purpose, the murder can be free from the jail?! Why did this judge make a disappointed sentence? Did he think about those people who was killed by the murderers and let the murderers avoid from the jail just because the murderers had great pressure or mental disorder? How dare the judge? Is there any justice in the world? This sentence is too lenient to accept. It's incredible!How I wish if there is another chance, the judge can do the right sentence!

A documentary of the successful career and assassination of San Francisco's first elected gay councilor.

This may be one of the best documentaries I have ever seen. I watched "Milk" years ago, and wish I had watched this documentary first. That Sean Penn movie is good, but never really seems to capture the historical importance of the whole thing.

Here, we see why Harvey was important, and we really get to know Dan White, who is the key figure in the whole thing. He was petty, vicious, and took his anger out on people in childish ways. And, of course, when that failed, he just liked to shoot people in the head multiple times.

Winning an Oscar for Best Documentary and several other awards, this film was certainly one of the very best that I have seen. It was stirring and eloquent and beautiful in showing the rise of someone, Harvey Milk, that really wanted to make a difference in the lives of all people.

It was, at the same time, a portrayal of the hate that still exists in California after the passage of Proposition 8. The trial of Dan White had a result that was no different that those of Klan members on trial for killing African-Americans in the South.

The election of Harvey Milk was an event that is equal to the election of Barack Obama, and for the same reason. He gave hope to all the "us's" who were without hope that they would ever be treated fairly by the dominant power structure.

This film tells a story that will inspire and infuriate anyone who sees it. Absolutely brilliant.

Perhaps this film was relevant in bygone times, but to the modern viewer it's just a bland documentary about an extremely minor political figure. Few young people nowadays will have heard of Harvey Milk, and nobody is missing out by not knowing about him because he just wasn't very interesting.

The film was decently put together, but the subject matter just isn't worthy of a great documentary. The high ratings are puzzling and are likely based on political views, not because it's a great or important film (it's not). You might find it interesting if you're into the history of the gay movement.

In fact, I don't like documentary film. However, I must say I was impressed by his status after I watched this film. He was a politician and a gay. In my opinion, he is a courageous man. He did not care who he was. He still strove for gay rights and for his dream. He just wanted to do himself. His deeds were not for fame, not for money. He just wanted everyone could treat them as ordinary people. In that times, you would be excluded when you did something different. In addition, people couldn't accept new concept easily. But he did not care what the mass thought about. It is hard to do that. If I were him, I would not do that, and I would take myself as an ordinary person. I think his spirit also stay in your mind. He is really a courageous man.

On November 27, 1978, Daniel James White walked into San Francisco's city hall. White had been elected to the city's Board of Supervisors in the 1977 election, Espousing what have become known as 'family values', he found himself increasingly in the minority on votes, and unable to to raise his family on the salary. He resigned on November 10, 1978, then changed his mind four days later. It was not up to him; Mayor George Moscone would have to reappoint him.

Moscone did not. On November 27, 1978, Daniel James White snuck into San Francisco's City Hall. He shot Moscone four times, killing him. White then walked across City Hall to Supervisor Harvey Milk's office and shot him five times, likewise killing him. Harvey Milk was the first openly gay elected official in California. White's trial introduced the term "Twinkie Defense" to the the judicial lexicon.

This movie won the Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature. In its examination of Milk's life and the aftermath of his murder, it is a model of how to tell such a story.

White served five years of a seven-year sentence, was paroled, and killed himself on October 21, 1985.

Current Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson was listed as a member of the Dan White Society in his college yearbook.

As a fan of Gus Van Sant's 2008 film Milk, I'm pretty aware of Harvey Milk's life and influence. I wasn't aware that Milk is pretty much a film adaptation of The Times of Harvey Milk. With a blend of archive footage and interviews, this documentary works at lightning speed pace within the 84 minutes for direct information and maximum emotional impact. It's got highly involving moments, truly allowing the importance of the events and the man to shine through, even if you don't live in California or aren't homosexual. Whilst it's often tearjerky, including scenes of the interviewees weeping, it's never overtly sentimental and always remains engaging. Although it's often abrupt at times, Harvey's death and reaction coming in around the hour mark, it's fascinating to explore the aftermath, especially with Dan White's infamous "twinkie defense." It gave me a new perspective on Harvey Milk as well, particularly in how he was a man who wasn't taken very seriously finally being taken seriously - an aspect of which Sean Penn's immediately celebrated Harvey Milk didn't live up to. Only with tragedy does the party and potential truly mean something. Terrific documentary filmmaking.

9/10