Recently over more than a few drinks, a friend of mine commented “You know I have not really got into documentaries. What are some good ones?” I think right now we are in the golden age of documentaries. This is because of Michael Moore. OK, Republicans keep reading for 30 seconds. Michael Moore has led this renaissance in documentaries because he has made three movies that each one broke the record for domestic box office for a documentary. 1989’s Roger and Me brought in 6.3 million. 2002’s Bowling for Columbine brought in 21.2 million (along with the top Prize at Cannes and an Oscar). 2004’s Fahrenheit 9/11 was the big winner with over 119 million. Documentaries are cheap to make (No stars, limited special effects, not a lot of advertising, any sound track, etc.) and can potentially make money. While most documentaries will not break 10 million, they can attract a strong following and produce multiple revenue streams in DVD purchases and provide prestige to studios when they are defending green lighting films such as Showgirls. Here are your lists of the 11 documentaries you need to see.
1. Heart of Darkness: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse – this documentary show why studios will give a director $250,000 to make a documentary that will probably break even and will possibly make allot of money. Heart of Darkness is a documentary about Francis Ford Coppola directing Apocalypse Now. Apocalypse Now is an amazing film with incredible performances. Coppola was on top of his game. His three previous films were The Godfather, The Godfather Part 2 and The Conversation (Two best picture wins and a nominee). Yeah, he was hot. Then he went to shoot Apocalypse. It was a disaster. Coppola fired his lead actor on the first day (Harvey Keitel), his replacement (Martin Sheen) had a nervous breakdown AND heart attack AND was still better to work with than his son, filming went over by 200 days, Marlon Brando showed up out of shape and refused to learn his lines and then Dennis Hopper, well he was being Dennis Hopper BEFORE rehab. It shows what a disaster making a big budget film can be. It also shows the potential for disaster that can happen when you record the making of a film. It also shows that no matter what goes wrong in the creative process a brilliant film can come out of it.
2. It Might Get Loud – I am just going to copy what I wrote about it when I ranked it one of the best films of the past decade.
Everyone with a soul has at one point wanted to be a rock star. If you are not a complete narcissist you wanted to play lead guitar instead of being the singer. It Might Get Loud will reawaken that part of you that came alive the first time you heard that first great guitar riff. It could be Nirvana’s “Smells like Teen Spirit”, Gun’s n’ Roses “Sweet Child of Mine”, Led Zeppelin’s “Whole Lot of Love”, The Who’s “Pinball Wizard” but whatever it was you knew that you had never really been alive until you heard that music and a part of you knew that nothing would ever be the same.
That first great rock song is like your first great love. You discovered it almost by accident. You felt fear, raw sexuality, and like you were becoming an adult all in a few seconds. It Might Get Loud makes you feel that way all over again.
It Might Get Loud is a documentary featuring Jack White of the White stripes, The Edge of U2 and Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin. Three great guitarist come together to talk music, to jam and talk about what influences them. The film comes across as a bystander who is a fan of great music who quietly sits while the three maestros experiment, jam, talk, joke and open themselves up in a way that you never see.
While most “Rock-umentries” (I hate that term. It is too contrived to have come from anywhere but a late 80s MTV staff meeting.) come across as a forced interview designed to say what genius the musicians are and that if you want to understand pure art you will buy their latest album. This documentary about musicians comes across as three people who are brought together because of their love of music and the guitar. You believe that despite the money, the fame, the adulation (aka groupies), that they would want to hang out on a Friday night in someone’s old house after a long week of work and play guitar.
This is the movie that is not a way to spend a Saturday night. This is the movie to watch alone. Then hang out with friends who like music (who really like music) ask the simple question “Which is a better Zeppelin song Rock n’ Roll or Whole Lot of Love?” in a bar that has a really good jukebox. Bring some quarters, a willingness to see where the conversation goes and blast the songs that need to be heard.
p.s. Ironically, my favorite Zeppelin song is “Going to California” not loud but still powerful and brilliant. The song that woke me up was “Stairway to Heaven” I was 13, my first kiss came three months later and life would never be the same.
3. Waiting for Superman – This is the second Davis Guggenheim suggestion (after It Might Get Loud). Ironically, of his three films, his two best did not win the Oscar for best documentary while the weakest of the three “An Inconvient Truth” (which is very good) did. Superman is a documentary that explores the state of public education in America. It explores the role of Teacher’s Union’s, raising kids who cannot add but have high self esteem and follows a group of children participating in a lottery to get into Charter Schools. The film ends with you finding out which children were accepted into Charter Schools and which ones are forced back into public schools. It is moving without playing on your heart strings. It also has the saddest ending of any film ever made. These are not characters. These are real people whose lives could have been changed with a simple twist of luck, but instead will be trapped in a circle of poverty that education is the only super hero that can save them.
4. Smartest Guys in the Room – John 8:3 “He that is without sin cast the first stone.” I think Jesus might make an exception about the executives at Enron. Smartest Guys tells the story of Enron’s rise and their financial collapse. This documents the excess of their executives, their decision to cause rolling blackouts in California, (The Governator should have told Maria that he just went in the wrong room during the blackout.), the political fallout (Gov. Gray Davis was voted out of office in California; George W. Bush’s largest campaign contributor was Enron), the impact to Wall Street, the loss of people’s 401K, it was devastating. Director Alex Gibney’s underlying them of how greed when taken to excess causes more problems than it removes is also explored in the next film on the list.
5. Casino Jack and the United States of Greed – this tells the story of imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramov and his relationship with Speaker of the House Tom Delay. I liked this film because I knew almost nothing about Abramov. This documentary told his story and how lobbying dollars would go through Abramov to Delay to members of Congress who supported Delay’s goals. It was a disturbing view of how things really get done in Washington. This film also explores the role of the Christian Right activist Ralph Reed were heavily involved in lobbying for Indian Casinos. It is incredibly disturbing. This is also another reason why Documentaries are a good film investment. This film made $174,000. The bio-pic “Casino Jack” about the same topic and stared Kevin Spacey (who is pretty good), Barry Pepper and Kelly Preston was a very good film and barely made 1 million dollars. Alex Gibney is the best director working in documentaries today. He is amazing.
6. ESPN’s 30 for 30 – yes this is a TV series that brings in some really amazing creative forces to address some interesting sports topics. Alex Gibney did a documentary on Steve Bartmen (Google him. If you are a Cubs fan you know exactly who he is.). Barry Levinson did a documentary on the Baltimore Colts Band. The series also featured stories on the USFL (best one in the series), Wayne Gretzky leaving Canada, Cancer Survivor Terry Fox’s attempt to run across Canada on one leg (warning: have some Kleenex around) and one on 2004 Red Sox World Series. Just like any series of short films there are going to be some misses but overall the series is amazing.
7. Murder Ball – if you like sports documentaries watch Murder Ball. This is a documentary about quadriplegic rugby players who play in wheel chairs. It is amazing. It changed m perspective on the disabled. The athletes (NEVER FOR ONE SECOND THINK THEY ARE NOT ATHLETES) are amazing. They will do anything to win. They have rivalries (some that are legitimate and others that are petty rivalries that people use for fuel to be better). They want to win.
8. Fall from Grace – Freedom of Speech vs. Freedom of Religion. This documentary is a true documentary about the Westboro Baptist Church and its minister Fred Phelps showing a fair and honest presentation of their core beliefs. Westboro Baptist church has for years protested at the funerals of US Soldiers who died in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. The church believes that the September 11th attacks were Gods punishment for Sexual Deviance of Americans. This documentary was made approximately three years before the Supreme Court ruled that their protest were legally protected. The documentary was originally screened for the Church before it was shown at any festivals. The church members were concerned that the film put them in too positive of a light and that some people would view the films as a propaganda piece. That is the best promotion about this film. It is honest, unflinching and accurately displays the group as they really are. You may hate what they stand for, but you get an unbiased view of their reality. This lets you see what they are really like and lets you form your own opinion instead of just reinforcing the opinion you had when you walked into the movie
9. Super Size Me – Being the funniest man in documentaries is sort of like being the nicest guy in prison. Their ain’t allot of good competition. Super Size Me director Morgan Spulock is very funny. He is your funniest friend to have a beer with. If it is 3:30 p.m. on a Friday when you do not have plans, you get a text message saying “Want to have a beer tonight?”You instantly know three things; 1. You will have a great time. 2. You will have some great conversations. 3. You will defiantly have more than 1 or 2 beers. DJ King Pigeon is my Morgan Spulock. Super Size Me is liked spending a month doing a crazy idea that was conceived at 2:30 a.m. after 2-3 beers have turned into Jaeger Bombs. Super Size Me documents how Spulock spent a month eating all 3 meals a day at McDonalds. He would only make a meal Super Sized if they asked him. The power of this documentary is shown when McDonalds, you might have heard of the restaurant, got rid of the Super Size meals after this documentary, that made only 11 million came out. Morgan Spurlock does not use this as a vehicle for corporate bashing but uses McDonalds as a reference point; he could have used Burger King, Wendy’s or any other fast food restaurant, to describe the obesity problem in the United States. Exploring School Meals, Exercise, and the role of a sedentary lifestyle on the physical and economic health of America. He took a silly concept and thanks largely to the force of his comedic personality take a potentially boring topic (Nutrition) and makes it entertaining.
Super Size Me works for the same reason that the show Friends and the movie Shrek work. They are all the story of very likable people going on a journey. You are instantly drawn to Spurlock not because of his looks, his charm, and his intellect but there is an everyman quality about him that shines through. He is easily relatable and very likable.
10. Man on a Wire – Massively overrated. It is a great concept full of great visual imagery that could have been heavy handed but was very well done. Man on a Wire describes how a French Tight Rope Walker broke in, strung a wire and walked between the towers of the World Trade Center. This story was great, but the film made it less interesting. This is one of the few topics that would be better as a bio-pic than it was as a documentary.
11. Exit Through the Gift Shop* - yes, Exit gets the ominous astrix. Is Exit really a documentary or is itself a piece of Graffiti art? Exit is described as a documentary about graffiti artist Banksy. He has achieved worldwide fame by not revealing his identity, not having his picture taken and more importantly by creating some of the best graffiti art in the world. Ironically, he became famous by being anonymous. This is one of the many questions to ask if what he is doing is for him or for massive self promotion. Google his stencils from the wall between Palestine and Israel. They are amazing. The film starts by describing the history of Graffiti art. This art form has many examples including mass producing iconic images (e.g. Atari Aliens, The Queen Mum and Andre the Giant)or ironic images (ex. Graffiti free zone in San Francisco) on public places. Technically it is vandalism. But the images are amazing, beautiful and as thought provoking as a piece in a museum. Banksy takes the camera and records how the “director” goes on a path to becoming a graffiti arts culminating in an amazingly successful art show in which the artist effectively outsourced the work to other artists. This film is a great commentary on how people “value” art and shows that the only real way for graffiti art to get back to its roots is to completely sell out as a way of saying “Fuck You! Pay $500,000 for a telephone booth with a pick ax in it. Tomorrow I will make a Che Guevara mural to be free for the world to view and enjoy. Thanks for financing my next trip to Israel. I will do a mural that the world will see for free. Go ahead and brag to your elitist friends about how you a “Master of the Universe” but at your heart you are truly Bohemian. You are lying to yourself and financing me. Oh yeah, thanks for renting ‘Exit through the Gift Shop’ I needed to buy more spray paint.
I was not familiar with his work when I saw this film. After seeing this film I purchased his coffee table book “Walls and Piece.” If it was meant to be an experimental film designed to laugh at film snobs the way his art shows will occasionally laugh at art snobs it worked. If it was designed to trigger thought and analysis about what really is art it worked, even if it was not a true documentary.
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Rutger Hauer: King of the Hobosplotation Film
Rutger Hauer will complete his Hobo Trilogy this year with the release of “Hobo with a Shotgun.” This will complete his trilogy that began twenty five years ago with “The Hitcher” and will buoyed by 1994’s “Surviving the Game”. This trilogy showed an acting and personal arch for Hauer.
1986’s “The Hitcher” was a thriller in which a young, handsome Hauer played a quiet hitchhiker who is picked up by cross country driver C. Thomas Howell. This showed him in what would end up being the type cast he fell into. He played the man with no name who sought to destroy other people seemingly without reason. This paralleled the perception of how the homeless were viewed in Ronald Reagan’s mid 80s America. They were considered violent outcasts who would destroy good people and America itself if we let them. The often forgotten part of this was the large number of people who were removed from Psychiatric Institutions and had nowhere else to go.
1994’s “Surviving the Game”, which also stared Ice-T, kept Hauer as the preditor, but now he was hunting homeless veteran Ice-T. Both of these parts have the hobo be “chosen” by the successful person. In the Hitcher, Howell picked up the stranger. In Game, Hauer gives a tryout to Ice-T by offering him $100 if he can run on a treadmill for 30 minutes. When you are hungry, tired and cold you will do anything for money. In addition, to the $100 Ice-T unknowingly “won” the right to be hunted by Hauer, John C. McGinley and F. Murry Abraham. Unfortunately, the only thing they killed was Abraham’s career. This eerily parallels the “Bum Fights” that people would organize in Bill Clinton’s Internet Bubble Funded 90s. In an era where money was considered accomplishments, and overnight financial success was confused with real accomplishment, a popular sport was for people to pay two homeless people to fight for $10. Winner takes all. Fortunately, with the turn of the century we abandoned that for Mixed Martial Arts.
The Trilogy concludes with “Hobo with a Shotgun.” Hauer is showing his age. He made his film debut almost forty years ago. He is playing a Hobo who is frustrated with a city run by corrupt police and evil criminals. He finally has enough and becomes a vigilant with; yep you guessed it, a shotgun. This is reflective of 2000s America. Governors are arrested for corruption. People argue that the President was not born in the United States. (Those people are completely insane, but they are still a voice.) Crime is on the rise. People want to change things and violence is seemingly the easiest way to solve this problem. It is the path of least resistance and least personal commitment to real lasting change. Unfortunately, that is America in 2011.
In all cases, The Hobo wins. He either kills the hunters or kills what is inside someone that makes us human. In all cases, the hobo accomplishes his mission. Hauer’s mission is to be a working actor. These films are low level entertainment. It captures your attention for 2 hours and will eventually become hangover TV on TBS on Saturday afternoons. The Hitcher and Surviving the Game made under $10,000,000 combined. I doubt Hobo with a Shotgun will break that total. These are workable movies. They cost under $1,000,000 and they make money. Rutger Hauer is a better actor than this. He has made some outstanding films, Blade Runner and the great Escape from Sobibor, but he is essentially a working actor. He makes two to three films a year, most of which you never hear of. He creates somewhat entertaining films and the studio makes money. This is how most of us survive. We find something we are good at. We make enough money to pay our bills. If we are lucky, we like our jobs 8 out of 10 days. Do we change the world? Nope. Are we the best in the world at what we do? Only one person is. We end up with good careers and if we are lucky great lives. Hauer seems to have done it. He has become a working actor. He has never been nominated for an acting award and never stared in a blockbuster movie. He has had a very good career and all jokes aside more people will watch Hobo with a Shotgun than anything any of us will do this year. Mr. Hauer. Mission Accomplished.
1986’s “The Hitcher” was a thriller in which a young, handsome Hauer played a quiet hitchhiker who is picked up by cross country driver C. Thomas Howell. This showed him in what would end up being the type cast he fell into. He played the man with no name who sought to destroy other people seemingly without reason. This paralleled the perception of how the homeless were viewed in Ronald Reagan’s mid 80s America. They were considered violent outcasts who would destroy good people and America itself if we let them. The often forgotten part of this was the large number of people who were removed from Psychiatric Institutions and had nowhere else to go.
1994’s “Surviving the Game”, which also stared Ice-T, kept Hauer as the preditor, but now he was hunting homeless veteran Ice-T. Both of these parts have the hobo be “chosen” by the successful person. In the Hitcher, Howell picked up the stranger. In Game, Hauer gives a tryout to Ice-T by offering him $100 if he can run on a treadmill for 30 minutes. When you are hungry, tired and cold you will do anything for money. In addition, to the $100 Ice-T unknowingly “won” the right to be hunted by Hauer, John C. McGinley and F. Murry Abraham. Unfortunately, the only thing they killed was Abraham’s career. This eerily parallels the “Bum Fights” that people would organize in Bill Clinton’s Internet Bubble Funded 90s. In an era where money was considered accomplishments, and overnight financial success was confused with real accomplishment, a popular sport was for people to pay two homeless people to fight for $10. Winner takes all. Fortunately, with the turn of the century we abandoned that for Mixed Martial Arts.
The Trilogy concludes with “Hobo with a Shotgun.” Hauer is showing his age. He made his film debut almost forty years ago. He is playing a Hobo who is frustrated with a city run by corrupt police and evil criminals. He finally has enough and becomes a vigilant with; yep you guessed it, a shotgun. This is reflective of 2000s America. Governors are arrested for corruption. People argue that the President was not born in the United States. (Those people are completely insane, but they are still a voice.) Crime is on the rise. People want to change things and violence is seemingly the easiest way to solve this problem. It is the path of least resistance and least personal commitment to real lasting change. Unfortunately, that is America in 2011.
In all cases, The Hobo wins. He either kills the hunters or kills what is inside someone that makes us human. In all cases, the hobo accomplishes his mission. Hauer’s mission is to be a working actor. These films are low level entertainment. It captures your attention for 2 hours and will eventually become hangover TV on TBS on Saturday afternoons. The Hitcher and Surviving the Game made under $10,000,000 combined. I doubt Hobo with a Shotgun will break that total. These are workable movies. They cost under $1,000,000 and they make money. Rutger Hauer is a better actor than this. He has made some outstanding films, Blade Runner and the great Escape from Sobibor, but he is essentially a working actor. He makes two to three films a year, most of which you never hear of. He creates somewhat entertaining films and the studio makes money. This is how most of us survive. We find something we are good at. We make enough money to pay our bills. If we are lucky, we like our jobs 8 out of 10 days. Do we change the world? Nope. Are we the best in the world at what we do? Only one person is. We end up with good careers and if we are lucky great lives. Hauer seems to have done it. He has become a working actor. He has never been nominated for an acting award and never stared in a blockbuster movie. He has had a very good career and all jokes aside more people will watch Hobo with a Shotgun than anything any of us will do this year. Mr. Hauer. Mission Accomplished.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Top 25 Movies of 2000s: 11 Hotel Rwanda
Recently, a survey was taken of Republicans in Mississippi about inter-racial marriage. Over 50% of the respondents believed that inter-racial marriage should be outlawed. Here is the link to the survey: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/nearly-of-mississippi-republicans-think-interracial-marriage-should-be-illegal.php This was disturbing for several reasons. The first is that half of the respondents said this. The second is that some people will say what is socially and politically correct but in their actions and their hearts they believe something else.
The actions and hearts of the world and a very, very few good people is explored in the film Hotel Rwanda. Hotel Rwanda is the true life story of a Hotel Owner in Rwanda named Paul Rusesabagina who in 1994 in the middle of a genocide that would ultimately murder over 800,000 people, that is more than the population of San Francisco, risked his own life to provide sanctuary in his small hotel.
Hotel Rwanda has three radically different and amazing performances. Nick Nolte, in his last great performance, as a United Nations Military Commander who is ordered to not engaged the murders. His pain, anger, frustration and indignation come through in a scene win a bar with Don Cheedle, who plays Paul Rusesabagina. This monologue echoes the underlying question of “Would the world have acted to stop the genocide if they people being murdered were white?”
Joaquim Phoenix gives the second best performance of his career (number one is Reservation Road). He plays a reporter/photographer sent to report on the genocide. His detached seemingly too cool for school false apathy serves as a great contrast to Nolte’s anger. Phoenix’s response to Cheedle asking why the world will not act when they find out the truth of “The world will watch this says this is horrible and go back to eating their dinner.” This shows that perhaps it was not racism that stopped the world from acting but general apathy.
The fulcrum that balances these two counterpoints that represents the world’s response is the brilliant Don Cheedle. If you only know him from the Ocean’s 11 movies check out this film. His character is forced to be a calm, iron butterfly that must be all things to all people to save the thousands of people who would otherwise perish. Paul Rusesabagina (Cheedle) does not ask permission to do the right thing. While Nolte and Phoenix character’s find excuses to let evil continue. Paul Rusesabagina (Cheedle) sees that there is evil in the world and he will do what he can to stop what he can. He does not save everyone, but he does save all he can.
This is one of the few bio-pics on my list. Please read about the true story of Hotel Rwanda on Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_Rwanda The world turned its back on innocent men, women and children. We let 800,000 be murdered. This should haunt us. We cannot change the past, but ask yourself these questions:
1. What evil did I stop today?
2. What evil did I create today?
The answers to those questions will tell you who you would be. The brave hotel owner, the soldier who would not fight, the journalist who would not feel or one of the people swinging the machetes.
The actions and hearts of the world and a very, very few good people is explored in the film Hotel Rwanda. Hotel Rwanda is the true life story of a Hotel Owner in Rwanda named Paul Rusesabagina who in 1994 in the middle of a genocide that would ultimately murder over 800,000 people, that is more than the population of San Francisco, risked his own life to provide sanctuary in his small hotel.
Hotel Rwanda has three radically different and amazing performances. Nick Nolte, in his last great performance, as a United Nations Military Commander who is ordered to not engaged the murders. His pain, anger, frustration and indignation come through in a scene win a bar with Don Cheedle, who plays Paul Rusesabagina. This monologue echoes the underlying question of “Would the world have acted to stop the genocide if they people being murdered were white?”
Joaquim Phoenix gives the second best performance of his career (number one is Reservation Road). He plays a reporter/photographer sent to report on the genocide. His detached seemingly too cool for school false apathy serves as a great contrast to Nolte’s anger. Phoenix’s response to Cheedle asking why the world will not act when they find out the truth of “The world will watch this says this is horrible and go back to eating their dinner.” This shows that perhaps it was not racism that stopped the world from acting but general apathy.
The fulcrum that balances these two counterpoints that represents the world’s response is the brilliant Don Cheedle. If you only know him from the Ocean’s 11 movies check out this film. His character is forced to be a calm, iron butterfly that must be all things to all people to save the thousands of people who would otherwise perish. Paul Rusesabagina (Cheedle) does not ask permission to do the right thing. While Nolte and Phoenix character’s find excuses to let evil continue. Paul Rusesabagina (Cheedle) sees that there is evil in the world and he will do what he can to stop what he can. He does not save everyone, but he does save all he can.
This is one of the few bio-pics on my list. Please read about the true story of Hotel Rwanda on Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_Rwanda The world turned its back on innocent men, women and children. We let 800,000 be murdered. This should haunt us. We cannot change the past, but ask yourself these questions:
1. What evil did I stop today?
2. What evil did I create today?
The answers to those questions will tell you who you would be. The brave hotel owner, the soldier who would not fight, the journalist who would not feel or one of the people swinging the machetes.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Great Scripts vs. Great Stories
“You can’t handle the truth.”
“Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life.”
“I’m the Dude, man.”
“We’re on a mission from God.”
“Greed is good.”
“I’m out of order. You’re out of order.”
“Is there a sign on my front yard that says “Dead (CENSORED) Storage””
“Hey Llama, how about a little something for the effort?”
“Snakes! I hate Snakes.”
“There are a million fine women in this world, but most of them won’t bring you Lasagna.”
“There is no fighting in the War Room.”
When reading these quotes you instantly knew what movie they were from.
A Few Good Men
Animal House
The Big Lebowski
The Blues Brothers
Wall Street
And Justice for All
Pulp Fiction
Caddyshack
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Clerks
Dr. Strangelove
All of these films have the common them of all being great scripts. You could watch them when they came out or 40 years after they were made and the dialog is still great. You hear these lines and you can instantly think of who said them, where in the movie they occurred and what happened next. These scripts also went into making the movie great. In some movies, they were just a part of what made them great.
Let’s compare Dr. Strangelove to Clerks.
Lead Actors: Peter Sellers vs. Brian O’Halloran: Peter Selers plays the President of the United States, a member of the Royal Air Force and a paralyzed Nazi Scientist. He makes all three incredibly funny. O’Halloran is good in the movie, but he is not a great actor.
Directors: Stanley Kubrik vs. Kevin Smith. Smith has made some very, very good movies but Kubrik is a legend. Kubrix was at the height of his art. The two films he did before Strangelove are: Spartacus and Lolita. The two films he did after are: 2001: a Space Odyssey and A Clockwork Orange. Essentially, he directed four of the 50 greatest films of all time in an 11 year period. Yeah, he was on his A Game.
Scripts: Both are perfect. They are radically different. Strangelove is much, much darker and a significantly smarter script. If it had missed just a little the film would have been horrible. At the height of the cold war, he made a very funny movie about a nuclear apocalypse. Clerks was cutting edge in how dialog was used in modern films. It’s very simple concept of showing how people talk in their everyday lives and about how we fill our day with seemingly dumb conversations (use of contractors building the new Death Star in Return of the Jedi) that we have ever day. In Strangelove, the script brought out the best in the actors, the director, and the cinematographer and provided them all with a vehicle for greatness. The Clerk’s script was the only thing keeping that movie together. If the script was anything less than brilliant the film would have been horrible.
The argument is that great actors made good scripts great. I will take it one step farther. I believe that if all elements of a film are outstanding they can make a mediocre script into a near perfect movie. The best example of this is “Philadelphia.” Ok, Ok, I know I am now in danger of losing one of my three followers (BTW, THANK YOU FOLLOWING MY BLOG. IT DOES MEAN A LOT TO ME.) Philadelphia, which deserves its own blog, is a great movie. It was made in 1993 (yes, it is almost 20 years old) at the height of the AIDS scare when it was still considered “A gay disease” at a time when Homophobia was far too common a belief. The acting is brilliant. Tom Hanks gave the best performance of his career. He also could not have pulled off that role at any other time. He was still considered a comic who acted. Denzel Washington, who was very underrated in the film, had only four really good dramatic roles prior to Philadelphia. They both stared in the film when they could easily disappear into their role and not be thought of as stars. The story arc is great. Supporting actors were truly supporting the story and not trying to show off for better camera time. The supporting cast was like the 1927 Yankees; Jason Robards (incredible in a role that could have become a cliché), Joanne Woodward, Antonio Banderas (before people knew who he was), Mary Steenburgen. All of these elements were perfect, but it is difficult to think of a single memorable line from the movie. There are a lot of great scenes but not great script moments.
Essentially, a perfect script can take great elements and make them an amazing movie (See Dr. Strangelove). A great script that is inventive and ground breaking can overcome elements that are mediocre and drag a movie into greatness (see Clerks). A mediocre script can generate a great movie ONLY IF all of the other elements Acting, Story, Directing, Soundtrack are perfect (see Philadelphia).
“Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life.”
“I’m the Dude, man.”
“We’re on a mission from God.”
“Greed is good.”
“I’m out of order. You’re out of order.”
“Is there a sign on my front yard that says “Dead (CENSORED) Storage””
“Hey Llama, how about a little something for the effort?”
“Snakes! I hate Snakes.”
“There are a million fine women in this world, but most of them won’t bring you Lasagna.”
“There is no fighting in the War Room.”
When reading these quotes you instantly knew what movie they were from.
A Few Good Men
Animal House
The Big Lebowski
The Blues Brothers
Wall Street
And Justice for All
Pulp Fiction
Caddyshack
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Clerks
Dr. Strangelove
All of these films have the common them of all being great scripts. You could watch them when they came out or 40 years after they were made and the dialog is still great. You hear these lines and you can instantly think of who said them, where in the movie they occurred and what happened next. These scripts also went into making the movie great. In some movies, they were just a part of what made them great.
Let’s compare Dr. Strangelove to Clerks.
Lead Actors: Peter Sellers vs. Brian O’Halloran: Peter Selers plays the President of the United States, a member of the Royal Air Force and a paralyzed Nazi Scientist. He makes all three incredibly funny. O’Halloran is good in the movie, but he is not a great actor.
Directors: Stanley Kubrik vs. Kevin Smith. Smith has made some very, very good movies but Kubrik is a legend. Kubrix was at the height of his art. The two films he did before Strangelove are: Spartacus and Lolita. The two films he did after are: 2001: a Space Odyssey and A Clockwork Orange. Essentially, he directed four of the 50 greatest films of all time in an 11 year period. Yeah, he was on his A Game.
Scripts: Both are perfect. They are radically different. Strangelove is much, much darker and a significantly smarter script. If it had missed just a little the film would have been horrible. At the height of the cold war, he made a very funny movie about a nuclear apocalypse. Clerks was cutting edge in how dialog was used in modern films. It’s very simple concept of showing how people talk in their everyday lives and about how we fill our day with seemingly dumb conversations (use of contractors building the new Death Star in Return of the Jedi) that we have ever day. In Strangelove, the script brought out the best in the actors, the director, and the cinematographer and provided them all with a vehicle for greatness. The Clerk’s script was the only thing keeping that movie together. If the script was anything less than brilliant the film would have been horrible.
The argument is that great actors made good scripts great. I will take it one step farther. I believe that if all elements of a film are outstanding they can make a mediocre script into a near perfect movie. The best example of this is “Philadelphia.” Ok, Ok, I know I am now in danger of losing one of my three followers (BTW, THANK YOU FOLLOWING MY BLOG. IT DOES MEAN A LOT TO ME.) Philadelphia, which deserves its own blog, is a great movie. It was made in 1993 (yes, it is almost 20 years old) at the height of the AIDS scare when it was still considered “A gay disease” at a time when Homophobia was far too common a belief. The acting is brilliant. Tom Hanks gave the best performance of his career. He also could not have pulled off that role at any other time. He was still considered a comic who acted. Denzel Washington, who was very underrated in the film, had only four really good dramatic roles prior to Philadelphia. They both stared in the film when they could easily disappear into their role and not be thought of as stars. The story arc is great. Supporting actors were truly supporting the story and not trying to show off for better camera time. The supporting cast was like the 1927 Yankees; Jason Robards (incredible in a role that could have become a cliché), Joanne Woodward, Antonio Banderas (before people knew who he was), Mary Steenburgen. All of these elements were perfect, but it is difficult to think of a single memorable line from the movie. There are a lot of great scenes but not great script moments.
Essentially, a perfect script can take great elements and make them an amazing movie (See Dr. Strangelove). A great script that is inventive and ground breaking can overcome elements that are mediocre and drag a movie into greatness (see Clerks). A mediocre script can generate a great movie ONLY IF all of the other elements Acting, Story, Directing, Soundtrack are perfect (see Philadelphia).
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Actress Hairstyle/News and Beer
If an actress cuts her hair short to be taken as a serious actress, she needs to be able to seriously act. It worked for Natalie Portman, Michelle Williams, Sigorney Weaver and Nicole Kidman. Not so much for Sharon Stone.
In honor of Actresses who believe that a short hairstyle will help them to be taken more seriously I have the Beer/News comparison. More proof that short hair does not automaticly give you gravity.
The Economist is like Guinness. It is the pinnacle of everything. It is rich and full of complex details and multiple layers. No one ever has Guinness as their first beer and no one reads an Economist as their first description of a new event.
Jon Stewart is like Blue Moon. Blue Moon does not seem like real beer and Jon Stewart does not seem like real news but if you are around either of them for a little bit you realize how amazing they are and that they are more than simple entertainment.
Glen Beck is like O’Doul’s. It seems real but there is no substance to it. You get all of the bad bitter taste but nothing is real.
Peter Sagle (Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me on NPR) is like Pabst Blue Ribbon. Inexpensive. Not overly good, but has become the coolest drink in the bar.
Bill O’Rilley is like Budweiser. He is the king of news media, but he is still not very good. If this former Inside Edition host is Budweiser does that make Mario Lopez Bud Lite?
Sheppard Smith is Tsonga Beer. He mispronounces so many words that he deserves a beer that he cannot pronounce. Despite his mispronunciations he is still the best thing on Fox news.
Carol Costello is Yunegling. It is a great beer that is hard to find. CNN should give her more air time.
NPR is a Sam Adams variety pack. It has some parts that are great. Some parts that are mediocre. None of it is bad, but it is not nearly as good as it think it is.
Crossfire is like a Michelob Black and Tan. An interesting idea of putting together two different elements, but like Michelob it is just bad.
In honor of Actresses who believe that a short hairstyle will help them to be taken more seriously I have the Beer/News comparison. More proof that short hair does not automaticly give you gravity.
The Economist is like Guinness. It is the pinnacle of everything. It is rich and full of complex details and multiple layers. No one ever has Guinness as their first beer and no one reads an Economist as their first description of a new event.
Jon Stewart is like Blue Moon. Blue Moon does not seem like real beer and Jon Stewart does not seem like real news but if you are around either of them for a little bit you realize how amazing they are and that they are more than simple entertainment.
Glen Beck is like O’Doul’s. It seems real but there is no substance to it. You get all of the bad bitter taste but nothing is real.
Peter Sagle (Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me on NPR) is like Pabst Blue Ribbon. Inexpensive. Not overly good, but has become the coolest drink in the bar.
Bill O’Rilley is like Budweiser. He is the king of news media, but he is still not very good. If this former Inside Edition host is Budweiser does that make Mario Lopez Bud Lite?
Sheppard Smith is Tsonga Beer. He mispronounces so many words that he deserves a beer that he cannot pronounce. Despite his mispronunciations he is still the best thing on Fox news.
Carol Costello is Yunegling. It is a great beer that is hard to find. CNN should give her more air time.
NPR is a Sam Adams variety pack. It has some parts that are great. Some parts that are mediocre. None of it is bad, but it is not nearly as good as it think it is.
Crossfire is like a Michelob Black and Tan. An interesting idea of putting together two different elements, but like Michelob it is just bad.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Ten best movies I saw in 2010
Yes, some of these movies did not come out in 2010. But these were the ten best movies I saw this year. I saw some in the theater, some on planes, many on Netflix but the rule was that I had to see if for the first time in 2010. This list has documentaries, independent darlings, comic book adaptations, and a movie that features the most bizarre sound track since South Park: Bigger, Longer, Uncut.
1. The Kids are All Right – I hope Mark Ruffalo gets at least an Oscar nomination for best supporting actor.
2. It Might Get Loud – one of the twenty best films of the decade. If you like guitar solos and you have not seen this quit reading this and update your Netflix Que.
3. The Joneses - this quirky comedy about the dangers of materialism and how we evaluate the success of our marriage and our life while examining the subconscious "who has the bigger MALE BODY PART in the suburbs” phenomena. It also makes us determine if we "need" a riding lawnmower with a TV to become a complete person.
4. Ghost Writer – the second of two Roman Polanski films on this list.
5. Kick Ass – a dark, dark, dark, dark, comedy about vigilantes. It will probably go down as Nicholas Cage’s last good movie.
6. Get Him to the Greek – it is not a great film, but it is fun. Props to P. Diddy for basically doing a very funny imitation of himself.
7. Mysterious Skin – this was the first film I watched strictly because Joseph Gordon Levit was the star. It will not be the last. The subject matter is disturbing but Levit is amazing. After watching him in 3rd Rock from the Sun, I never thought he could act nearly this good.
8. Death and The Maiden / Law Abiding Citizen – these two films both were about revenge on rapists. They were done very differently and both were amazing. In both films, you do not know who the good guy is and who the bad guy is. If you are deciding between the two go with Death and the Maiden. Sigourney Weaver and Ben Kingsley are better than Jamie Fox and Gerard Butler.
9. Up In the Air – if you are a consultant it is a documentary of our life. George Clooney is perfect. Easily one of his five best films and top three performances!
10. The Social Network – only down side is that expectations were too high. I thought Charlie Wilson’s War was better written. I thought Seven, Fight Club and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button were directed better.
1. The Kids are All Right – I hope Mark Ruffalo gets at least an Oscar nomination for best supporting actor.
2. It Might Get Loud – one of the twenty best films of the decade. If you like guitar solos and you have not seen this quit reading this and update your Netflix Que.
3. The Joneses - this quirky comedy about the dangers of materialism and how we evaluate the success of our marriage and our life while examining the subconscious "who has the bigger MALE BODY PART in the suburbs” phenomena. It also makes us determine if we "need" a riding lawnmower with a TV to become a complete person.
4. Ghost Writer – the second of two Roman Polanski films on this list.
5. Kick Ass – a dark, dark, dark, dark, comedy about vigilantes. It will probably go down as Nicholas Cage’s last good movie.
6. Get Him to the Greek – it is not a great film, but it is fun. Props to P. Diddy for basically doing a very funny imitation of himself.
7. Mysterious Skin – this was the first film I watched strictly because Joseph Gordon Levit was the star. It will not be the last. The subject matter is disturbing but Levit is amazing. After watching him in 3rd Rock from the Sun, I never thought he could act nearly this good.
8. Death and The Maiden / Law Abiding Citizen – these two films both were about revenge on rapists. They were done very differently and both were amazing. In both films, you do not know who the good guy is and who the bad guy is. If you are deciding between the two go with Death and the Maiden. Sigourney Weaver and Ben Kingsley are better than Jamie Fox and Gerard Butler.
9. Up In the Air – if you are a consultant it is a documentary of our life. George Clooney is perfect. Easily one of his five best films and top three performances!
10. The Social Network – only down side is that expectations were too high. I thought Charlie Wilson’s War was better written. I thought Seven, Fight Club and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button were directed better.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Top 25 Movies of 2000s: 13: The Namesake (2007)
Who am I? Am I a product of my environment? Am I a continuation of my culture and my namesake? Am I my own person? These are the questions presented in the massively under viewed “The Namesake.” The Namesake stars Kal Pen, which is a good thing and a bad thing. Primarily know for his Harold and Kumar go to White Castle films, in The Namesake he showed an amazing depth of ability, pain of a character and showed me more than I thought he was capable of as an actor. Unfortunately, most fans of Harold and Kumar would not want to see a coming of age film about a first generation Indian-American. Most art house film fans would automatically dismiss a film from the guy in “that stupid stoner film who was on House.” Both groups would miss out on a great film. Kal Pen can act!!!
We have all taken a job to pay a bill. Actors take jobs to pay their bills. See George Cloney in “Attack of the Killer Tomatoes”. See Denzel Washington in “Carbon Copy.” See Natalie Portman in “The Phantom Menace.”
There is an amazing scene (SPOILER ALERT) after Penn’s father died. At the time, Penn, newly out of college, was dating a rich white, blonde woman woman and essentially embracing her upper class lifestyle and completely ignoring his family. Then he gets the shocking news. His father dies. The scene follows with him shaving his head while great rap music plays in the background. The scenes blends a flashback with Penn’s own father shaving his head after his father died. This blend shows Penn returning to his heritage. This transformation foreshadows how he will address the relationship with his girlfriend and all future relationships.
The Namesake shows how someone evolves. He was the loyal son. Then he was his own person. They he became the person his family wanted him to be. The film concludes with no obvious answer. He realizes that his life journey does not have a map. Like most people in their 20s, he does not know what the right thing is for him, but he is discovering what is NOT the right path. This does not provide full enlightenment, but it does help to shape the person that he is becoming.
We have all taken a job to pay a bill. Actors take jobs to pay their bills. See George Cloney in “Attack of the Killer Tomatoes”. See Denzel Washington in “Carbon Copy.” See Natalie Portman in “The Phantom Menace.”
There is an amazing scene (SPOILER ALERT) after Penn’s father died. At the time, Penn, newly out of college, was dating a rich white, blonde woman woman and essentially embracing her upper class lifestyle and completely ignoring his family. Then he gets the shocking news. His father dies. The scene follows with him shaving his head while great rap music plays in the background. The scenes blends a flashback with Penn’s own father shaving his head after his father died. This blend shows Penn returning to his heritage. This transformation foreshadows how he will address the relationship with his girlfriend and all future relationships.
The Namesake shows how someone evolves. He was the loyal son. Then he was his own person. They he became the person his family wanted him to be. The film concludes with no obvious answer. He realizes that his life journey does not have a map. Like most people in their 20s, he does not know what the right thing is for him, but he is discovering what is NOT the right path. This does not provide full enlightenment, but it does help to shape the person that he is becoming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)