The title of Frost/Nixon, the Ron Howard-directed, Brian Grazer-produced movie based on the play recently featured on Broadway, concisely summarizes the play's plot. David Frost was a well-liked British TV show host who was imbued with a sudden surge of ambition and opportunism after witnessing the world-wide appeal Richard Nixon's televised resignation speech drew. Following Nixon's delivery of the speech,?Frost conceived the idea to interview the man himself with the hope that the segment would become infamous.

The interview took place only a few years after Nixon left office to take advantage of the wave of notoriety Watergate offered, but, as the slash in the title suggests, unlike the generously tell-all interviews we've become accustomed to, the Frost/Nixon exchange became a showdown between the men-"a duel," Nixon, played by Frank Langella, offers.

Moving from stage to screen is a tricky transition, and Frost/Nixon contains some kinks as a result of the shift. The film opens with actual footage of Watergate coverage, providing the preface to the subject of the story: However, rather than simply offering the viewers the visual benefits of cinema, the footage adds unnecessary elements that take away from the film.

The film builds the story on two fronts, one telling the tale as it happened and the other interspersing documentary-style interviews from the characters to further contextualize the event. I have not seen the play, so I'm not an authority as to where and how much the film diverged, but I can say with a decent amount of confidence that the faux-documentary was a cinematic device or, at the very least, an interpretation of Frost/Nixon's original format.

This aspect of the film, used most in the beginning, was generally ineffective in conveying the nuances of the story that are not expressed within the film's dominant narrative. While I can appreciate the extra effort, I'm not sure I understand the reasons behind its over usage. Often, it seemed distracting and provided little more than what the viewers could have presumed on their own from body language and facial expressions.

However, the film succeeds on its own terms in other ways, especially when it embraces its original incarnation. When Frost and Nixon sit down to their multi-layered interview, it takes the form of a boxing match, with phrases like "knock out," "pummel," and "throwing in the towel" injected at every opportunity. It is precisely during these exchanges when the film emerges as a successful adaptation. The scenes of the interview develop into an interweaving of media, with the characters from the play based on real-life televised interviews of Nixon and Frost transporting themselves to film, thus intergrating three different types of media: stage, small screen, and big screen. When you think of it in those terms, it's pretty mind-boggling. In these scenes, the function of the camera comes to life as the subtlety of the lighting and the variety of shots articulate the ways in which Frost/Nixon is not only a film, but a well-executed artistic venture.

As far as content is concerned, it's all there. Michael Sheen and Frank Langella embody the men they play, from their mannerisms to their unexpressed struggles. Indeed, there is so much development in each character that each man could probably precisely imitate any of Frost or Nixon's mannerisms.

But I am dubious about the film's keen implication regarding the historical impact of these interviews between Frost and Nixon. It attempts to build this up as a triumphant moment, when after several rounds of pummeling his opposition, Nixon is suddenly rendered the losing party-counted down for the knockout. It seems to have a displaced sense of importance; after all, this is not taught in history classes, or even brought up all that often as far as I can tell. Frost/Nixon does what film and stage can do: present a moment that we would all like to imagine was incredibly significant. And, whether or not it is particularly meaningful in following years, the real people who have suddenly become character develop a place in our subconscious that seems to override the notes along the walls and the captions underneath the pictures.