All the President’s Men: 1976, dir. Alan J. Pakula. Seen April 22, 2007 on DVD.
All the President’s Men shouldn’t be as interesting a movie as it is. It’s more than two hours long and features a couple of journalists doing a lot of research in service to a story that we already know about ourselves. They spend a lot of time on the phone, and knocking on doors, and digging through stacks of dull paperwork. We don’t see anything about their personal lives, if they even had any at that time; a large chunk of the movie is set in a newsroom. (I’m growing tired of the guy-centric Seventies movies with the token scene or two with some girlfriend or wife, myself, and I was relieved not to see that kind of unnecessary stuff in this movie. I swear, I think those scenes are in certain movies just to show that the male buddies aren’t gay.)
It’s not quite a buddy movie, either. These two guys are working together, and they do get along much better at the end than they do at the beginning, but there aren’t any great bonding moments. They argue over trays of fast food at McDonald’s, or while one is at the typewriter and the other is fussing over notes.
So what makes All the President’s Men work? Good acting — Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman as Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. The faces are instantly familiar, but it works the other way around, the good way: We imagine Woodward and Bernstein as looking like Redford and Hoffman. Wow, remember when Redford was that young? In one scene, where he’s walking home after a meeting at the garage, he looked eerily like Brad Pitt.
The ABC Project
I’d like to post here more often. And now that the spring film festival season is behind me, I’d like to watch more movies on DVD — I’ve got Netflix and I ought to use it, instead of being envious of the DVDs my husband is watching. So why not combine the two?
My Netflix queue is currently in alphabetical order, sort of. It’s not strict alphabetical order because that really is too, too anal retentive. (Netflix does not alphabetize the movies for you; you have to do it yourself, manually.) But all the A’s, B’s, C’s, etc. are grouped together. We’re talking about over 200 movies here, plus a few TV shows thrown in there on various people’s recommendations.
So here’s my plan: The ABC Project. It’s pretty simple: I’m going to get movies from Netflix in alphabetical order. First I’ll rent a movie with a title starting with A, then one with B, and so forth down the alphabet. And I intend to write a little something about each of these movies — not a formal review, but some thoughts about the film. I’m picking movies I haven’t seen before, or haven’t seen since childhood (I’m thinking it’s time to see Jaws and Rocky again). I have at least one movie in my queue for almost every letter of the alphabet — tons of “M” options but no “X” so far.
These aren’t the only movies I’m going to watch on DVD, because I can’t wait for some of those movies with end-of-alphabet titles. And there may have to be multiple “D” movies because it’s incredibly difficult for me to decide between several I’m dying to see. Two “B” movies, too, since I just read Anthony Lane’s essay on Barbara Stanwyck and want to see Baby Face. “L” is going to be even tougher. But I’m hoping that a little gimmick like The ABC Project will encourage me to write more about movies, and to watch the movies I get from Netflix sooner rather than later. (It took me a week to get to Jesus Camp.) Also, seeing good movies that I missed in theaters, and classics that I haven’t gotten around to watching yet, will make up nicely for the shortage of thought-provoking films in theaters during the summer months. Finally, it will get people off my back about my not having seen certain films that they feel are obligatory for film writers. I will not mention any titles, because I don’t want any of you doing that “whaaaat? how can you not have seen …” thing. You can do that after I write about those movies.
The “A” movie has already arrived: All the President’s Men. I never have seen it — okay, you can do that “whaaat?” routine now, if you must. I watched Dick instead — will Robert Redford be as entertaining a Bob Woodward as Will Ferrell? I’ll let you know.
Flakes and the future of films set in New Orleans
I saw the movie Flakes at SXSW this week. I was hoping for something good from Michael Lehmann, who directed Heathers back in the late 1980s. Then I found out that the movie was set (and probably shot) in New Orleans, and you couldn’t keep me away. Unfortunately, I was disappointed on several levels, especially as someone who grew up in the greater New Orleans area.
Flakes is a romantic comedy set around a “cereal bar” — like a coffeehouse, but serving bowls of cereal and milk. A rundown cereal bar on the edge of the Quarter is owned by Willie (Christopher Lloyd) and run by Neal (Aaron Stanford). However, Neal’s girlfriend Pussy Katz (Zooey Deschanel) wants Neal to take a week off and finish that great album he’s been working on, so he can send out the CD and sell it and become a successful musician and help fulfill their lifelong dream of living in a trailer.
Wait a second. Here is a movie set in New Orleans and someone has a lifelong dream of living in a trailer? Considering all the people who have lost their homes and are living in FEMA trailers, and the people who are actually about to be evicted from even those trailers and live who-knows-where, this seems to be in dubious taste.
Continue reading Flakes and the future of films set in New Orleans
the week before SXSW
I ought to post here more often, I know. In the meantime, it’s the week before SXSW Film Festival starts and I thought that I’d like to help all the film geeks coming to Austin. So I posted to Slackerwood:
A handy guide to SXSW Film Fest venues
Feel free to post comments to Slackerwood or email me if you think of ways to improve that entry — I want it to be as good as it can. Also, feel free to forward the URL. I’m hoping the info in the entry will be helpful. I’m working on a schedule to attend part of AFI Dallas at the end of this month, and I know shamefully little about Dallas movie theaters for someone who lives less than four hours away. I would love to see someone write a similar piece for AFI Dallas, or really, any film festival. Out-of-towners often need all the help they can get, especially if they’re the type of people who spend a lot of time sitting in dark rooms staring at screens.
genuine movie-critic moments, episode 2
Last October, my husband and I wanted to have a movie-night party at our house and show a horror movie, preferably a funny one and not too gory. I immediately suggested Night of the Living Dorks, a movie I saw at Fantastic Fest in 2005 and found very funny. You can read my review here. The Beau was a bit reluctant, but it didn’t matter, because we found out that the movie wasn’t available on DVD, at least not in this country. (It’s a German film — the original title was Die Nacht der lebenden Loser, which I think sounds better.) We ended up showing an episode from the Masters of Horror series instead, Joe Dante’s political satire/horror film Homecoming, which everyone enjoyed. I later included Homecoming on my list of funniest horror movies, especially if you don’t vote Republican.
I found out a few weeks ago that Night of the Living Dorks is finally getting a U.S. DVD release on Feb. 20, and looked forward to renting the movie to watch again, perhaps gently encouraging the still-skeptical Beau to watch it with me. As you might have guessed, I am a total sucker for any combination of comedy and horror, although this movie has very little horror and a lot of broad and silly comedy. The DVD is being released by Anchor Bay, which always seems to do a good job with DVD transfers and extras.
And then last night someone (hi, Scott) sent me a link to a picture of the DVD case for the U.S. release of Night of the Living Dorks. Check out the quote on the front (and the back) of the box — it’s from my review. And unlike the last time I found myself quoted, it’s not truncated to change the meaning.
I’m pleased and amused, and hopefully I won’t let this go to my head and become a quote whore. I’d hate to make eFilmCritic’s annual list — but let’s face it, I just don’t have that kind of personality. Meanwhile, the little kid inside my head is still jumping up and down and squealing, “I’m on a DVD box, I’m on a DVD box!” I suppose the real movie-critic moment will occur when I’m totally jaded about this sort of thing.
Indie news at Cinematical
You might have noticed that Cinematical, the film site to which I contribute news/reviews/features, has changed slightly in the past few weeks. AOL’s Moviefone blog has merged with the site. We also have a new editor in chief, longtime contributor Ryan Stewart, who’s helping us develop more recurring columns and interesting features.
One aspect of the Cinematical changes that I feel hasn’t had enough publicity and attention yet is the new subsite called Cinematical Indie. If you don’t want to read about the latest Harry Potter trailer or Lindsay Lohan’s rehab adventures, you ought to bookmark Cinematical Indie or its RSS feed. “Indie” in this case is a very broad term, meaning non-mainstream, and even includes news about classic older films.
Some indie-film news articles and reviews appear both on Cinematical and on Cinematical Indie — for example, Sundance coverage that attracts a broad range of interest. Most of my Vintage Image of the Day posts appear on both sites. However, there are some articles that appear only on Cinematical Indie, which is one reason why I recommend visiting the site regularly and often.
For example, right after Cinematical Indie launched, I posted “The Allure of Collecting 16mm Prints,” which is basically a heads-up about a short doc that Austin filmmaker Nick Robinson posted to YouTube. Because Cinematical Indie was new, hardly anyone read the entry. Normally I wouldn’t care, but I want to tell as many people as possible about Nick’s film (which is embedded into the article linked above) and encourage you all to see it. Go now. It’s only about 10 minutes long and it’s a fun glimpse into the world of collecting movies on 16mm film.
I’m hoping Cinematical Indie finds a devoted group of readers — there’s a lot of stuff on there worth your time. Jeffrey Anderson has a great weekly column called “400 Screens, 400 Blows” about movies in limited release. Cinematical Indie’s manager, Kim Voynar, is encouraging us all to write more about indie films, and frequently posts good reviews and interviews. I’m working with the editors on ideas for good features and columns myself. I want Cinematical Indie to flourish, so I’m asking all of you to pay a visit, maybe leave some comments, and come back soon. And then tell your film-geek friends. Otherwise, if the site attracts little interest, I may end up having to write more about celebrity gossip, and none of us would like that.
spending time with Ann and Molly
Ann Richards died in September. And Molly Ivins died just yesterday. However, that doesn’t mean we won’t ever get to see these great Texas women again. Both have appeared in documentaries that aren’t difficult to locate and watch.
If you’re in Austin, you’re in luck, because Texas Barbecue: A Love Story will be shown on KLRU’s series SXSW Presents this Tuesday, February 6 at 9 pm. The documentary about Texas barbecue and its biggest fans is narrated by Richards. And afterwards, you can hear a panel of learned film and barbecue experts — including me — discussing the film. If you don’t live in Austin, get the newly released DVD of Texas Barbecue: A Love Story to hear the former governor of Texas (as well as an aspiring gubernatorial candidate — Kinky Friedman also shows up briefly).
Richards is also listed as appearing in the documentary The Unforeseen, which premiered at Sundance this year, but has yet to screen in Austin. And on a much lighter note, there’s that fabulous episode of King of the Hill in which Hank moons Richards in one of those glass elevators at the Hyatt.
If you’re feeling too lazy to leave your computer screen, you can always watch the Ann Richards ad for Alamo Drafthouse on YouTube.
Molly Ivins has appeared in several documentaries, including Bush’s Brain and The Big Buy: Tom DeLay’s Stolen Congress. But the one I’d recommend renting, if you’re not offended by sex toys, is Dildo Diaries. I saw this movie a couple of years ago at Alamo Drafthouse Downtown with a sold-out and very lively crowd. Everyone enjoyed booing and hissing when Warren Chisum appeared onscreen; it was as good as an old-fashioned melodrama. Ivins shares some delightful stories about the sex-toy and sodomy laws in Texas.
another standby line at the BNAT
Last year was the first time I tried to get into the 24-hour film marathon known as the Butt-Numb-a-Thon (BNAT for short), by waiting in the standby line on the morning of the event. I wrote an essay about the standby line; it’s one of my favorites, so please go read it if you haven’t already.
The standby line was lots of fun in a film-geeky way, so I thought I’d try my luck again this year. Even if I didn’t get into BNAT, I could hang out with some other friends I knew would be in the line, and maybe meet some new film geeks. The time to line up for standby was an hour later this year, too, which was nice.
After seeing the sorts of things people brought to last year’s BNAT to help survive 24 hours in a theater, I decided to be prepared on the off-chance that I would actually get in. I cleaned out my purse, and had to remove my phone and camera. Suddenly the purse was twice as light as it ever had been. I filled the empty spaces with a small bag of clean socks and underwear, a spare toothbrush and travel toothpaste, and a tin of Altoids Tangerine Sours because those are great for keeping me awake. I also brought a blanket roll, the kind you take to picnics or Jazz Fest or whatever, which I figured could double as a pillow. I tried not to think about the fact that I was probably fussing over nothing. Last year, 45 people were in line, and maybe 15 got in.
now that’s a bad buzz
When I saw Casino Royale the other night, I witnessed the strongest reaction ever to a movie trailer … well, unless you count some of the vintage trailers shown before movies at Alamo Drafthouse, and that’s not at all the same thing. I mean the strongest reaction to a movie not yet released.
I was at a preview screening the night before Casino Royale officially released, and the theater was packed but fairly well-behaved. And then the trailer played. No, I’m not talking about the Apocalypto trailer, which seemed to leave people cold but didn’t generate a lot of reaction.
I’m talking about Rocky Balboa. The negative reaction was astounding. Most people seemed not to be aware that the movie had actually been made, that it would be released in the next month. “Unbelievable!” I heard. I think some people thought at first that it was a joke trailer. “They’re not seriously gonna make that.” “Aw no. You’re kidding.”
The audience as a whole was incredulous that Sylvester Stallone’s character would actually be returning to the ring and fighting, that this was being presented as any kind of realistic option. Stallone as a trainer, they might have bought. But the theater echoed with derisive laughter. Every time Stallone or Burt Young appeared on screen, they laughed. They snickered at “Junior” too.
If this were a highbrow crowd at one of the arthouse theaters, the reaction I saw to the trailer wouldn’t mean much to me. But the trailer played before Casino Royale, one of a number of trailers for obviously male-centric films (I started wondering if I would see a single non-wife in films in the next six months, then remembered the target demographic for a Bond film), and the audience was a mix of people who didn’t mind going to a second-rate multiplex for a free movie. In other words, apart from the press, not film geeks.
Rocky Balboa could turn out to be a great movie. I have no idea. But if people in general are reacting like they did to that trailer, it’s going to tank at the box office. Is it poor marketing, or is the premise truly that silly? Guess we’ll find out in a couple of weeks.
Holidailies update
I know, I can’t stop talking about Holidailies. Sometimes I’m amazed that the collaborative project is in its seventh year. I’m amazed that so many people want to sign up for the portal. I love that we keep coming up with new features … right now we’re working on a list of optional daily writing prompts, so if you’re stuck on a topic to write about on a certain day, you can always use the prompt topic. In addition, we were inspired by NaBloPoMo to create a Holidailies at Home randomizer for handy browsing. (The NaBloPoMo organizer was also kind enough to link to us, which I appreciate because we’ve picked up some new writers this year. Thank you, M. Kennedy!)
As of this moment, we have 139 people signed up for the portal and another 50 for Holidailies at Home, and registration is still open. We’ve got a full panel of readers ready to pick the Best of Holidailies entries; in fact, I’ve got a waiting list of readers. Wow. We filled all our sponsorship slots. Everything is set for Friday morning, when the posting begins. I can’t wait.
Side note: I said last time that Celluloid Eyes was going to participate in Holidailies last year. Then I went back and looked at last year’s Holidailies posts, and realized that it just doesn’t work well for Celluloid Eyes. I tend to focus on film-related writing here, and there’s so much personal stuff I prefer to write during the holiday season. So Celluloid Eyes is no longer on the Holidailies portal list. However, if you peek at the portal list, you might observe that I’m still planning to participate. And who knows, I might post here more often anyway. I’ve still got a few reviews to catch up on, and some other movie stuff to rant about.
Holidailies begins on Friday — if you’re looking for stuff to read in the next month, check it out. Repeatedly.