The Academy loves docudramas. It's so ironic -- when a LifeTime movie is "inspired by actual events", people ridicule it. However, make a major motion-picture which is reality-based and the Oscar voters will fall over themselves praising it. Just look at some Best Picture winners in recent history; Schindler's List, Titanic, Braveheart, A Beautiful Mind, and Million Dollar Baby. This year was no exception, as Milk won the Oscar for Best Actor (Sean Penn) and Best Original Screenplay (Dustin Lance Black). But, does the fact that a movie is taken from real life guarantee that it will be good?

Milk tells the story of Harvey Milk (Sean Penn). The story opens in New York City in 1970. Milk, an insurance salesman, meets Scott Smith (James Franco) and they spend the night together. Harvey admits that he wants to do more with his life now that he's turned 40. So, the two pack up and move to San Francisco, where Harvey opens a photo store. Soon, Harvey and Scott become aware of the large gay community in the area (specifically, the Castro district), and Harvey begins to hear stories of oppression and abuse from the authorities towards the homosexual community. Surrounded by a group of fellow gay men who believe in his cause, Harvey decides to run for city supervisor (which is like city council). He loses, but this only strengthens his resolve and he keeps running and recruiting more followers until he finally wins. However, when Harvey takes office, a strong anti-gay-rights movement (lead by Anita Bryant) begins to sweep the country and he soon finds himself embroiled in a debate which reaches much farther than his small neighborhood street.

Milk is one of those (relatively) small, but important historical dramas which recounts a story of how one man created change. Harvey Milk has been likened to the Martin Luther King of the gay rights movement and this comparison is very apt. This man never turned to violence and always wanted to settle issues through discourse and politics. His story is one which needs to be told as he's most likely well-known in California and in the gay community, but his life and actions aren't something which permeated society. (I lived through the period in which the film is set (but I was quite young) and growing up on the East Coast, I wasn't familiar with Harvey Milk until years later.)

Director Gus Van Sant and Screenwriter Dustin Lance Black have crafted a film which works very hard to capture the feel of the time. Van Sant seamlessly blends home movie and stock footage from the seventies within the film to give us a true feel for what The Castro was like at that time. The individuals who surrounded Harvey are present in the film, and this drives home how beloved he was. The story spans eight years and shows us how he went from humble businessman to a still humble public official.

The acting in the movie is top-notch. As usual, Penn loses himself in the role, and when Harvey suddenly grows a beard and ponytail, I honestly didn't recognize him. I for one think that Penn is one of those actors who is way too serious and it was good to see him play someone with a sense of humor and while the dramatic moments are powerful, it's the lighter moments where he shines. Josh Brolin is not only a dead-ringer for the real Dan White, but he brings a quiet intensity to the role of the man who can't seem to come to grips with the fact that everyone loves Harvey.

As good as Milk is, there are some problems with the film. We know why Harvey gets into politics (to help those around him), but we never learn why he chooses to run himself and not just help out in the community. It's vague as to why Mayor Moscone (Victor Garber) would be so supportive of such sensitive issues. The Jack (Diego Luna) just seems to come out of nowhere and we don't learn much about him. And, I knew that there was something else bothering me about the movie, but I couldn't put my finger on it until I watched Cadillac Records the following night. Milk is too subtle in its portrayal of the political climate of the time (bear with me, I do have a point). Harvey and his friends talk about the oppression of the homosexual community, but we never see it, save for some photos over the opening credits. Film is a visual medium and the film would have been much more powerful if there had been scenes showing these issues instead of simply having the characters discuss them. To that end, I found myself far more moved by the anecdotes about Harvey Milk in the special features than by the film itself.

That nitpicking aside, there's no doubt that Milk is a well-made and important film. The acting is great and the attention to detail superb. More importantly, the movie holds a mirror up to society and reminds us of our bizarre mistakes from the past.