Michael Mann’s The Insider takes a hard look at both Big Tobacco, their lies to the public, and at the importance of integrity in investigative journalism. The famous line about fifteen minutes of fame is mentioned at one point and how the opposite, infamy, once obtained, lasts a whole lot longer than fifteen minutes. That is why it is so important for our news to act with integrity and, watching this now in 2026, feels like something that our generation of anchors and news pundits have mostly lost. No longer can we watch a news outlet and not feel that what we are being served is filtered through an agenda. Mike Wallace, played in this film by Christopher Plummer, laments about what his legacy will be after he is gone as the world only sees what you did last, not everything that came before that. That has only become more so in the years since and we are starting to see disgraced news anchors playing every hand they have left to try and get back in the good graces of those they misled.
The film’s advertising leads you to believe that this is a film about taking on Big Tobacco and to a degree it is. But the opening scene gives you a hint as to what this film is really about. In this scene, we are introduced to CBS producer Lowell Bergman (Al Pacino), using his good name to convince the founder of Hezbollah, Sheikh Fadallah, to grant an interview to Mike Wallace. Even though the Sheikh’s bodyguards are armed and hostile, Bergman and Wallace stand firm against any attempt to disrupt their interview preparations.
Meanwhile, Dr. Jeffrey Wigand (Russell Crowe) has just been fired from his job as an executive for the Brown & Williamson tobacco company. With that termination comes a decent severance package and continuation of the health insurance that he needs for his daughter who has asthma. Bergman approaches him seeking help explaining some technical documents but is intrigued when Wigand agrees but insists that he cannot discuss anything else, citing a confidentiality agreement. This is tested a short time later when Brown & Williamson CEO Thomas Sandefur (Michael Gambon) calls him in for a meeting and tries to strongarm him into signing a more restrictive agreement under threat of losing his severance and insurance.
Wigand fights back, eventually agreeing to testify against his former employer that they knowingly added addicting chemicals to their tobacco products and lied under oath about their knowledge of it. Death threats start to come in and his wife files for divorce, leaving him. On top of that, infighting at CBS, where Mike Wallace and Bergman work, leads to their coverage of the affair being heavily truncated, editing out all footage of Wigand for fear of litigation. Bergman sees this as a betrayal from CBS as well as tarnishing his good name and that of 60 Minutes, the program he works for that was set to air the footage. He also feels that Mike Wallace betrayed his own convictions by siding with CBS over journalistic integrity.
Mike Wallace, who was still alive at the time this film was released, spoke up about the accuracy of the movie. It was based on an influential article on Jeffrey Wigand by journalist Marie Brenner in Vanity Fair, and Wallace said that the adaptation was quite accurate, though he disagreed with his own portrayal, feeling that the movie gave the impression that he took a long time to protest CBS’s corporate policies. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Plummer’s monologue as Wallace about looking down on his own mortality and facing what his legacy will be paints a portrait of a man who has made a career of integrity but fears it may all come crashing down if it all ends on a legal mistake on his part.
Later, he has words with the legal side of CBS, voicing his disdain for their actions in editing Wigand from their story, but the film makes it seem like he only got to that point after an intense conversation with Bergman where the man leaves his position rather than sacrificing his own code of ethics. Bergman sees it as a man is only as good as his word, and CBS, and Wallace, ended his streak of never breaking that word with a source. Wigand sees what happened as a betrayal by Bergman, too, which also wounds the man, personally.
There is so much about this film that is fictionalized; so much so that the movie calls itself out on this in text right before the end credits. I have never seen a film so blatantly call this to the attention of the viewers before. Research into the true events makes Mike Wallace’s assertion that the film is about three-quarters accurate seem a little generous. Perhaps he was unaware of the reality of what was happening with Wigand during all of this. The film depicts Wigand as being harassed by faceless goons and lawyers in an attempt to quiet him. This includes messages sent to his computer threatening to kill him and a bullet left in his mailbox. These events have been refuted; his wife has even stated that she believed the bullet in the mailbox was placed there by Wigand himself.
Other elements in the film, such as Bergman masterminding a key Mississippi lawsuit or leaking a crucial deposition, are also fabricated. Does this lessen the movie overall? Not really. This is not a documentary but a film that is designed to be entertaining first and foremost. We are here to get a piece of the real story, altered for dramatic purposes. None of the changes invalidate the message of the film nor do they change our opinions on Brown & Williamson, who ultimately were sued by all 50 states to the tune of $246 billion.
This film paints in broad brushstrokes. That could be looked at as a flaw, but in reality, it is a necessity to avoid bogging the movie down with a lot of legal mumbo jumbo that would only be of interest to the lawyers. We get the gist of what Brown & Williamson are being accused of and their legal strategy to discredit Wigand and intimidate him into not testifying. We also understand, on the surface level, the reasons why CBS Legal would be reticent to go to air with the unedited story in fear of being litigated out of business by a company with deep pockets.
In the end, we are being manipulated into a sense of pride that our lead, Bergman, is willing to walk away from a long career with 60 Minutes over a matter of integrity. This was made at a time when we were far less cynical about journalists and more prone to believe there were some like this with that level of integrity. The world no longer feels that way, and seeing a film that takes this stance feels a touch antiquated and quaint. It helps that Al Pacino is playing the part. It’s not an Oscar-worthy performance, but he lends a bit of gravitas to the proceedings. Christopher Plummer, though, delivers a performance that should have gotten recognition that year, though he was overlooked in favor of Russell Crowe, who was riding high on his newfound fame thanks to L.A. Confidential just two years prior.
This film starts out being about taking on Big Tobacco and ends up being all about journalistic integrity and the legacy powerful men leave behind them. Both things intermingle well on screen and leave us with a highly entertaining and thought-provoking film worthy of its spot on the Best Picture ballot. It may take liberal license with the facts, but that doesn’t make it any less effective at stirring up emotions and reminding us of a time when we could watch a news program and not think about whether we could trust what we were hearing.
Academy Award Nominations:
Best Picture: Michael Mann and Pieter Jan Brugge
Best Director: Michael Mann
Best Actor: Russell Crowe
Best Screenplay - Based on Material Previously Produced or Published: Michael Mann and Eric Roth
Best Cinematography: Dante Spinotti
Best Film Editing: William Goldberg, Paul Rubell, and David Rosenbloom
Best Sound: Andy Nelson, Doug Hemphill, and Lee Orloff
____________________________________________________
Release Date: November 5, 1999
Running Time: 158 Minutes
Rated R
Starring: Al Pacino, Russell Crowe, Christopher Plummer, Diane Venora, Philip Baker Hall, Lindsay Crouse, and Debi Mazar
Directed by: Michael Mann
Comments
Post a Comment