"Hyde Park on Hudson" might forever be known as that other film in 2012 featuring a U.S. president — if anyone remembers it at all. Both films are entirely different portrayals, namely in the scope of both the stories they tell and the span of time in which they take place, but only one of them is giddy over being a period piece, and it's not "Lincoln."

Taking in place in 1939 prior the U.S. committing to what would become World War II, "Hudson" is a film mostly content with being pretty, excited by putting actors in period clothes who pretend to be world leaders. None of these performances are bad, (quite the opposite in fact) but the little piece of history they're reenacting lacks any bit of import.

Bill Murray as Franklin Roosevelt isn't even the center of the film. Instead it's our narrator, Daisy (Laura Linney), FDR's distant cousin, whose diary and memoirs Richard Nelson used to craft the screenplay. She relays a story of romance, but one that's modest and presumed, occurring up to and during the arrival of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth from England to Hyde Park on Hudson, home of FDR's mother and his home away from Washington.

The film invests a lot in presenting FDR in such a casual manner, but this notion of candid access is hardly thrilling, either because the man has been dead for almost 70 years, or because it barely shows him in the context of being president — just a man who people treat with great respect and admiration who is surrounded by a lot of people all the time. Any American who studied the president in school knows about his polio and how he was able to keep the country oblivious to it with cooperation from the press, so that's hardly a hook either.

Murray is certainly an unusual but inspired choice. Playing a light-hearted and relaxed FDR makes sense for him, though if tested it would be wrong to doubt his capability to command attention in the role. The film doesn't seem too interested in digging into his psyche, just peeling back the curtain enough to show a man who longed for the affections of women and whose outlook and world view was different from other people in positions of power during his time.

Linney is such a wasted talent as the meek and naive Daisy. Although she narrates throughout, she disappears in stretches, even after the script establishes very clearly that this is her story. She doesn't factor into the conflict until late, and that's if you can consider it conflict. Normally, choosing not to embellish the details of an alleged affair in melodramatic Hollywood fashion would be worthy of much commendation, but the details of their relationship are so vague and the process by which Daisy comes to have feelings for FDR and vice-versa so ambiguous that you feel nothing toward either of them.

The arrival of King George VI (Samuel West) and Queen Elizabeth (Olivia Colman) in Hyde Park provides the film a pair of interesting characters and ultimately something to happen in what would otherwise be a purposeless portrait of a president and his sometimes-lover cousin. George has just assumed power after his brother abdicated the throne and they come to America desperate to forge a partnership between England and the U.S.

Therein could be the conflict at the heart of "Hudson," but the film maintains its light and often jocular tone instead, despite a footnote suggesting the events depicted were crucial to the special relationship between the countries. In essence, much stock is put into the symbol of King George biting into a hot dog.

"Hyde Park on Hudson" is a pleasant film, but it presumes to be interesting on the basis that it depicts famous political figures and exposes a beloved president's unflattering personal life. Maybe that's an exaggerated assumption of the film's intent, but it doesn't tell a story of any kind as far as plot structure goes. It's a great advertisement for a film audiences would prefer to see about who FDR really was, but in and of itself, it fails to offer any acute insight.

~Steven C

Thanks for reading! Visit moviemusereviews.com for more

1939 was an off year for the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. The New Deal had run its course and the off year elections of the previous year had brought a lot more Republicans to both houses of Congress and they affectively blocked further reforming initiatives. But what they also did was bring an increasing isolationism to Congress both in numbers and in stridency. Farsighted people saw that sooner or later we'd be in another war with Germany with the United Kingdom as an ally again.

An unprecedented media event took place that year. King George VI and Queen Elizabeth became the first reigning British monarchs to visit the USA and FDR entertained them at his mother's place Hyde Park On Hudson which was the full title of the well known Roosevelt estate. It wasn't Franklin's place, it was that of his mother Sara Delano Roosevelt, an imperious woman who never liked her daughter-in-law Eleanor. As for the first lady, we now know it ceased to be a marriage long ago and was a political partnership. She had her own place down the road called Val Kill Cottage.

For the King and Queen who had ancestors with all kinds of marital arrangements this should have been nothing new. But Bertie and Elizabeth were something unique, a devoted married couple with absolutely no outside affairs on either side. Samuel West and Olivia Colman are the Royals and while both are a bit put off by FDR's personal life, the King is there on a mission of good will involving the very life of his country.

For state occasions Eleanor who is played by Olivia Williams is around, but FDR likes to have his cake and eat it too. He has both secretary Marguerite 'Missy' LeHand and cousin Margaret Suckley around as well. On that weekend Laura Linney as Suckley finds out she's just part of a harem and its Elizabeth Marvel as Missy who in the film's climax scene tells her the facts of life.

It's through the eyes of Margaret Suckley who lived to be a 100 years old that we view Hyde Park On Hudson. What's really good about this film is there is a nice bumper crop of good parts for women. And it's their performances that drive this film.

I was not really ready for Bill Murray as FDR though. Having seen such people as Ralph Bellamy, Dan O'Herlihy, and John Anderson do the part before Murray, he comes off poor in comparison.

What struck me also about the film was this was a meeting of two men who overcame handicaps. George VI with his speech impediment and FDR with infantile paralysis. Both those stories are told in better films like The King's Speech and Sunrise At Campobello. A little note taking was done by both in their meeting.

Hyde Park On Hudson is a good enough film, but the stories of both principals have been better told elsewhere.

"Hyde Park on Hudson" is a film with a rather low score on IMDB, as it's currently 5.8. With such a low score (making it a slightly below average picture), I really expected far less from this film. I think its low score can be attributed to several factors. It's not a 'big movie'. That means that it was never meant to be a big screen hit...more a simple movie with relatively modest expectations. It certainly is no blockbuster based on its style and pace. I also think it's about a topic that, frankly, most folks today simple couldn't care less about...unless you are a history teacher or lover of history. As a retired history teacher, it was exactly the sort of film I'd enjoy...but not most people. Finally, I am sure some were disappointed because although I felt Bill Murray was jut fine playing Franklin Roosevelt, his performance didn't seem like an exact imitation...more his homage to the man. And, they made him look FDR-ish...but it was never meant to be exactly him. Prosthetics and even more makeup might have done the trick...but this didn't seem to be the intent of the filmmakers.

The story is based on a series of letters apparently discovered after the death of FDR's distant cousin, Daisy (Laura Linney). While there had been rumors of their affair (as well as rumors of other affairs of Roosevelt), these letters proved that their friendship was, at times, far closer than just friends. However, the film is about the relationship but only when it first began as well as when it coincided with King George VI's visit to see Roosevelt at his Hyde Park residence in the late spring of 1939....just before the beginning of WWII in September of that same year.

I think limiting the scope of the film to mostly 1939 was a good choice and the film is less about the affair and more about the time period. Because of this, it really doesn't romanticize this adulterous affair....more just chronicles what happened and how it coincided with the King's visit. In other words, it's more like a snap shot of the period and is well worth seeing. In fact, I nearly gave the film a 9...it was so good in so many ways. The highlights for me were the cinematography, the lovely period music and incidental music as well as showing more of Roosevelt's personality than other overly idealized films (such as the rather saccharine "Sunrise at Campobello"). Well worth seeing, but certainly not a film for everyone. Most young people would be bored by it despite its quality.

By the way, I do have a couple final comments. First, I loved some of the moments in the film with just FDR and George VI. In particular, one little scene almost brought me to tears when FDR took a very fatherly sort of attitude towards the younger king. Second, and it relates to this, I wonder HOW the filmmakers knew about these moments, as Daisy was NOT present and I don't know if any other record of these thing existed. Perhaps the filmmakers made it up, perhaps it was just inspired by actual events or perhaps it was real...I really can't say.