Monthly Archives: April 2011

04.15.11
by

Trumping Mr. Corman

The lie starts when you actually show up an hour early for a 7:40 am flight only to be kept waiting on the ground 90 minutes due to the airline’s clerical error.  It continues when you turn on the news and a senior member of Congress is telling you Planned Parenthood spends 90% of its time on abortion when every report and factoid tells us that is only 3% of its services.  It continues when you look at someone’s Facebook post and a top website admits it publishes writers all the time who it knows in advance are factually inaccurate.  It nearly ends when you watch “American Idol” or “Dancing With The Stars” and, clearly, the worst singer or dancer wasn’t voted off and someone more talented got the axe for favoritism.  But the lie truly ends when right before you go to bed the top organization in charge of rewarding positive portrayals of your minority group  gives an honor to a movie you find impossibly, horribly and forever indefensibly offensive to you (can’t say the name of the movie) [“I Love You, Phillip Morris”] or the group [GLAAD]).

In any event –-  Those were some of the lies I endured this past week.  Probably they are something else other than lies (right now I can’t think of what) but that seems the most apt description to me right now – a deception, a manipulation that isn’t true or as it should be.   But isn’t one person’s lie another person’s – truth?  Indifference?  Zen-like acceptance of the world?  Or just plain outrage – the kind of acceptance, indifference or outrage that fuels fringe-like groups coming to power in society or mediocre television, radio, film, theatre and the endless of revivals and remakes of such.  Perhaps I’m exaggerating.  But I don’t think so.  And remain ever hopeful that..

Donald Trump is another story.  He’s so slickly…Donald…that I and no one else knows — and no talking head that I’ve seen can tell us for sure —  if he’s a Grade A, #1 liar, a misunderstood truth-teller or something in between.  What everyone does seem to agree on is he’s our modern-day P.T. Barnum – meaning he’s one of our master showman.  Someone who knows how to generate white hot light, outrage, polarization and yes, even good will around himself or a particular person(s) or story.    (I’m not repeating his “lie” because you already know it).

Trump actually trumps truth AND lies because, in some strange way, he’s entertaining.  Most reality TV is entertaining, especially after a long day at the workhouse.  Or even worse —  a long day looking for work at a workhouse.   Any workhouse.

Forget the truth.  Just give us something to talk about (thank you, Bonnie Raitt, but it still shouldn’t have been the title of that Julia Roberts movie, sorry.).  Stephen Colbert some time ago coined the phrase “truthiness.”  Which means kinda, sorta, in a way – true.  But at the very least pleasantly (or unpleasantly) anecdotal.  Jon Stewart and Colbert make fun of this kind of thing and if someone gave me my own show or paid me more than I made for this blog ($000,000.00), I would too.  Gladly.

Entertainment can get away with being untrue because it’s a palatable lie and, at least on the surface, doesn’t really hurt anyone.  It actually often revels in the art of the lie or fudge or partial truth for the sake of drama or comedy.  The trick?  Well, a lawyer friend of mine once explained it to me – lying that is.  He was admittedly a master liar.  Actually, he reveled in that ability.  His advice:  “You have to put a grain of truth in the lie or no one will believe you.”  By the way, there wasn’t a smile when he said this.  He was dead serious and believed he was giving me rock solid guidance on how to advance in my career.

I might have followed it had I not I not been the worst liar in the world and a person who feels guilty if I get extra change in the market and don’t immediately give it back.   I’m not necessarily proud of these limitations but facts are facts. And at least I can sleep at night.  So does my friend.  And quite well.  At two different houses three times the size of mine, may I add.

Where were we?

Oh yes –- entertainment.

My first big exposure to that lie was when I started the weekly national box-office column at Daily Variety.  This was in the early 80s – years before the Internet, computers (I had a manual typewriter!!!) or cell phones.  Or before the movie grosses were a box-office derby reported on by all the morning shows, major media outlets and even the New York Times.

What I had to do was call each of the major and indie film distributors with movies debuting that weekend (no, it wasn’t a rotary dial) to find out “estimates” of what their film(s) made in ticket sales that weekend.  These numbers were reasonably accurate because studios crosschecked each other via their relationships with multiplex theatre chains and, frankly, their competitors.

Where I’d run into trouble was with independent distributors who often needed to report higher grosses for their films to get future funding and to show off what successes they were in order to compete for talent and other resources with the major studios.  That’s where Roger Corman comes in.

For those who don’t know (or recall), Roger Corman  was?  is known in some circle as King of the Bs (as in “B” movies) and producer of such low budget films as “Little Shop of Horrors,” “Death Race 2000” and  “Piranha.”  He is also the man who gave some of our best known filmmakers (Martin Scorcese, Francis Coppola, James Cameron) their first shots at directing features.

One week New World had released a film whose name I can’t now recall and the rep at the studio gave me a box-office gross report that was outrageously inflated.  Not the usual 10% margin or error but, like, 30-50%.  I knew this was so because a) every other distributor had the true figure, b) it made no sense that this low budget film could have a per screen average so high, and c) New World’s past reputation for gross reportage was, well (fill in the blank).  When I politely (yes, I was polite in those days) questioned the accuracy of the figure several times to several people I was told Roger Corman himself would call me.   Which he did.   The conversation went something like this:

Corman:  Nice to talk to you!

Me:  Same here!

Corman:  So –  the grosses on (name of film) are ($ dollar figure)  at (number in the hundreds) theatres.  Do you have any questions?

Me:  Yes. I’m told that the figures you gave me…(blah, blah, blah)

Corman:  These are the numbers I’m giving you.

Me:  Right.  Right, But….

Corman:  Are you saying I’m lying?

Me:  No, I didn’t say that.  But I have…

Corman:  These are the figures I’m giving you.

Me:  (Polite explanation of figures’ inaccuracy and corroboration from others). (More apologies) …So you see why it might seem a little…

…. A long silence.

Corman:  Then print what you want!

Click.

Me:  Hello?

Dial tone.

Me:  Hello?

Dial tone.

Corman knew exactly how to bridge the roads between entertainment and lies.   Quite efficiently.  When one watches Donald Trump and many of the others, one longs for such simplicity.

04.08.11
by

Don’t Remake Me… Let Me Go!

You know the drill. There’s nothing playing at the movie theatres worth seeing and why leave your house anyway when you’ve just spent too much money on a flat screen TV/sound system? Or — why not stay home when you don’t have the money to go out and your laptop’s bookmarked with key websites from which you can download any film you want and can outsmart the flaccid reach of federal authorities.  Yes, downloading is illegal but when was the last time you heard of anyone arrested for what they viewed in the privacy of their own homes (if that were the case, we’d all be in jail!) just for themselves and the date/friends they couldn’t afford to take out on the town — a predicament they (we) like to blame on the authorities, anyway.

I won’t tell you which of the above categories I fall into (you can guess) but suffice it to say at various points in my life I’ve fallen into both. And even now somewhere in- between.

This week I’m watching the two- hour premiere of AMC’s “The Killing” and the first three hours of HBO’s five-hour miniseries “Mildred Pierce” (that’s many hours I could have devoted to, well…something else) It’s comfortable – I’ve got my popcorn, soda, chocolate and kitchen nearby in case that’s not enough. Minutes, half an hour, then an hour goes by and I begin to realize — THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT THIS ALL THAT IS VAGUELY FAMILIAR – but not in a good way. And I’m not even at the movies.

“The Killing” had the moody atmosphere of a David Lynch film without much of the strangeness. That made it okay, but nothing special (and I’d rather be offended than bored because at least it wakes me out of my ennui. But wait – this isn’t a movie and I’m watching it at home so that criteria doesn’t apply). Then as I sped through the commercials (thank you – DVR) but not quite fast enough (curse you, clumsy remote control fingers) I come upon AMC’s promo for “The Killing” during “The Killing” and hear the words, “Who Killed Rose Larson?,” bragging about a special AMC “suspect tracker” and online clues that will keep you guessing and guessing as the truth behind the “Killing” unravels.

Being of a certain age, I finally realize. Didn’t David Lynch do television? Oh, “Twin Peaks, remember? Of course I remember the dancing midget little person, “Who Killed Laura Palmer?” You couldn’t have lived through the eighties or be any kind of film or television fan/student without remembering a show that became such a huge hit it even threw off Lynch and its creator Mark Frost because, guess what – they didn’t know who killed Laura Palmer at all because they didn’t think the damn show would be a hit! (I love that they didn’t because, well, that’s soooo David Lynch).

Unfortunately, I fear/know the makers of “The Killing” do know the truth (and a lot more) and that’s what’s wrong with the show.

“The Killing” is a remake of a hit Danish television series now a huge hit in England. It’s not bad, but watching it gives one the distinct feeling that no matter what the cast and director try to do, we’ve covered this territory before. Because we have. And in a far better way.

I had the same thought this morning when I turned on the news (liberal bias alert!) and saw the Republicans of Congress giving a press conference basically stating they are trying to save the American economy with massive budget cuts and the uncooperative president will leave them no choice but to shut the government down.

Is this 1995/6 or the 2010’s? Is John Boehner simply Newt Gingrich with a tan, elevator shoes and a swagger? Is Obama simply Bill Clinton with a tan? (going too far?) I don’t know, but once again, there’s something oddly familiar. And not in a good way. Because once again I’m getting bored and don’t think our current president can be anywhere near as entertaining as Mr. Clinton. But, I mean, who can?

Which is really the point when it comes to “Mildred Pierce.” It is extremely well-made, beautiful to look at, even has a bit of a resonant theme given the high unemployment in today’s world that certainly parallels the many out-of-work people in post Depression era Los Angeles. But as much as I loooove Kate Winslett, she couldn’t possibly be the campy fun of Joan Crawford. She’s actually acting the piece in a very believable dramatic way because writer-director Todd Haynes (the iconoclastic filmmaker who not only gave us “Velvet Goldmine” and “Safe,” but his brilliant first film“ The Karen Carpenter Story,” where he evokes the musical icon’s story with a cast of only Barbie dolls) seems determined to be hamstrung by sticking so closely to the book (remake) and the requirements of cliffhanging rising action of traditional cable TV moviemaking.

In short, I fear I’ve seen this story before. And not in a good way.

I start to wonder:

  • Is Libya, a rerun (co-run) of Afghanistan, which is a rerun of Iraq, which in turn is a remake of the Vietnam War?
  • Is Michelle Bachman a remake of Sarah Palin, after we had to briefly suffer through the even worse Palin remake that was Christine O’Donnell, which, let’s face it, no one (not even O’Donnell, I bet) really thinks worked
  • Isn’t the upcoming” “The Voice,” and “X-Factor” a remake of “American Idol?” But didn’t “America’s Got Talent” remake “Idol?” Sort of? But then again, “Idol” remade “Star Search” (that’s where Rosie O’Donnell and Brad Garrett were discovered, remember?), which was really a remake of one of my parents’ favorite shows, “Ted Mack’s Amateur Hour.”

Maybe one reason we’re not going out and paying for movies is because Russell Brand and Helen Mirren are starring in a remake of a film I vividly remember (and I’m not THAT old) called “Arthur.” Is it me, or does this film smell A MILLION MILES AWAY? Why is that? It can’t only be that it’s a remake, is it? I can remember the funny type A writer-director Steve Gordon who conceived the original “Arthur,” and had it financed by the then somewhat iconoclastic company called Orion. The proprietors being the former executives at United Artists responsible for original classics like “Annie Hall,” “Rocky” and “Network” who walked away because of interference and lack of any support from their corporate elders who didn’t crave originality. They then got their own financing and company and an original slate of films that included the original screenplay “Arthur.” It was a HUGE success seemingly out of nowhere, Gordon was hailed as a bit of a modern day Preston Sturges and then tragically died in 1983. Luckily, this was before the sad sequel to his comic gem, “Arthur on the Rocks,” and decades before the likely creative fiasco this weekend will become with this remake because I saw Helen Mirren on “Today” on Monday looking so oddly uncomfortable promoting it, and, well, if the Queen can’t divert me who can.

Maybe Martin Scorsese needs to do original films and not remakes like “Shutter Island,” which wasn’t bad but still feels like territory he’s traveled before (Oh come on, he’s not infallible). I know there is “Dragon Tattoo” fever but do you really think the American film is going to feel new? Yes, I know we’re all dying to see Barbra Streisand star in the film remake of “Gypsy,” but come on my brothers in gay and musical aficionados, do you really think….(fill in choice words)

It’s true “The Office” is a smash creative remake of the British series with Ricky Gervais and that “All In the Family” remade another British series, “Till Death Do Us Part.” And yeah, I’ll be tempted to see, the remake of, well, “Dune,” I suppose (not really, but fill in your own remake choice). But before writing me on that, think about the 2004 debacle called “The Stepford Wives,” then watch the 1975 original and consider — do you REALLY want to put your fingers to those keys and send me your objections? Do you? Do you?

Original is, of course, no recipe for success. But at least it has the chance of thoroughly offending me, rather than boring me to death. Which is, on its own, a victory. And it might even get me (us) off the couch and back into the movie theatre where I (we) belong.

Postscript: I won’t be watching Arnold Schwarzenegger’s newly proposed cartoon series called “The Governator,”” where he voices a superhero governor living on the Westside of Los Angeles who saves the world (presumably in between meetings with the state legislature). But it’s original, you say? Uh, I don’t think so. Not even slightly.