Scribe & Green on the BIG screen

There are far too many people out there writing “reviews of movie-films & articles about them with absolutely no clue what the hell they’re talking about." Here are 2 more of them! (Well, one of us knows what the h___ we're talking about, but we'll leave it up to you to decide who that is...) Ultimately, can two people as opposite as Scribe and Green agree on anything?? That's where the fun begins. Won't you join us? (Every now and then we'll add a guest review, just for kicks.)

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

An Unreasonable Man

SCRIBE'S I SAW THIS SCREENED AT A COLLEGE REVIEW:

Its always been difficult to tell whether or not Ralph Nader is a complex man or exactly what we see on the surface. He’s always been a driven, passionate person whose strength of conviction is second to none. An Unreasonable Man attempts to resolve this conundrum.

Going back to the early days of Nader’s consumer activism, all the way through the heyday of “Nader’s Raiders” and up to the 2000 Presidential election, the film leaves us with answers and some new questions.

The title of the documentary is derived from the following quote: "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903) Going on this definition, Nader is most certainly unreasonable, often to the extreme frustration of corporate America. His struggles with General Motors and their failed attempts to try and create a sex scandal with a man who may very well be without urges is rather entertaining.

In fact, the majority of the film is compelling and defies its two and a half hour running time. Crammed with interviews and archival footage, this doc literally covers all of its bases when examining its subject. We see Nader’s rise to prominence during the Sixties counter-culture movement and how his works paid off in the Seventies before politics finally caught up with him.

And that is where the film takes a decidedly darker turn. When in the late Seventies Nader’s friends start working for the Carter administration, we see how quickly his efforts were reversed. Carter didn’t live up to his promises but the arrival of Ronald Reagan and his pro-corporate, anti-government approach is nearly the death-knell for Nader. Once the Democrats begin accepting corporate donations on the same level as their Republican counterparts, Nader becomes a liability who is cast to the side.

The portion of the film that deals with Nader’s reinvention as a politician is often painful. He’s clearly out of his depth but he doesn’t seem to know it. His naiveté and perseverance would be inspiring if not for the fact that he sincerely doesn’t understand why he isn’t reaching more people. Even Pat Buchanan admires his ballsiness. Those who blame him for the outcome of the Bush/Gore campaign won’t find a repentant Nader here. What’s interesting is the split the election caused within his own camp.

Ultimately, Nader emerges as an essentially unchanged man, still an activist, still “unreasonable,” and still fascinating.


***** out of *****

GREEN’S “EVERYBODY ELSE’S DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK” REVIEW:

Recently, when I asked Scribe what he wanted to do next for this blog, he said he wanted to do another documentary. I rolled my eyes and asked him to give me a list of suspects. This one seemed to be the most interesting of a list of titles I had never heard of, so that‘s what I chose. Then there was the matter of finding a copy of the DVD, as I have been (and still am) without any library access all summer. Thanks to Amazon Marketplace, I was able to find a new copy for under $7 including shipping charges.

I must admit that I was less than enthusiastic about watching this documentary. Even when I finally watched it, I had to stop a few times to get up and walk around to keep myself alert. Blood running through the veins is a good thing, I told myself.

Vice Principal Wolters: “Corvair?”
Glenn Holland: “Yeah.”
Vice Principal Wolters: “I take it you didn’t read Ralph Nader’s book.”
Glenn Holland: “Well, unless Ralph is willing to buy me a new car, I’m going to have to stick with this one until the wheels fall off.”
Vice Principal Wolters: “Well, you might not have to wait that long. Heh, heh. Have a nice day.”

Mr. Nader, for better or worse, you are now immortalized in American cinema, forevermore. We now can proceed.

The quote above is from the movie Mr. Holland’s Opus is of course referring to chapter one of Nader’s book “Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile” which was published in the year that the film opens, 1965.

Thus begins the legacy of Ralph Nader and his rather sizable impact on consumer safety. Most of what he's done we don’t even realize and take for granted his efforts today as a matter of course.

I was surprised to learn how many organizations Nader helped to start and how many people he had working for him, at one time dubbed “Nader’s Raiders.”

You can hardly call this documentary objective in that the writers/directors are Nader's people. But that’s okay. This documentary is like Nader’s legacy piece. Something for future generations to understand what kind of man Nader was and what kind of passions drove him.

However, Darth Nader’s venture into politics as a third party candidate was an unmitigated disaster, even though the documentary puts a positive spin on it. Try as you might, you can’t solely put the blame of the failure of the Democrats losing the elections in 2000 and 2004 on Nader’s shoulders. But to deny his role in it is like denying that 2+2=4 or that the sky looks blue.

In this two party political system that we have in this country, in order to succeed within it you need to first conform to the rules before you can break them. If Nader had run as a member of either party first and won an election or two, who knows where his political impact would have been? Once you secure the nomination for an office, say that of President, then you can use your ideas and ideals to shape the party’s vision and focus. That a man of Nader's intelligence doesn't get this is baffling and amusing.

Watching this documentary, my respect for the man for his ideals, work, vision and impact has grown. I didn’t even have to watch the extra features on the second DVD to understand it. As well as the main documentary is assembled, I have no worries that the extras on disc 2 are equally as good and informative.

One thing that baffles me about the presentation of the first disc is that it contains deleted scenes. Why delete anything? It's not like these scenes were taking away from any dramatic effect. If you're going to invest two hours watching this documentary you might as well invest another 30 minutes or so. Length is irrelevant in a film like this.


***** out of *****

An Unreasonable Man (2006, NR, 122 minutes), starring Ralph Nader, Pat Buchanan, Phil Donahue, Howard Zinn, James Ridgeway, et. al. Written and directed by Henriette Mantel and Steve Skrovan.

Labels:

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Swing Vote

SCRIBE'S "IF THIS IS ONE OF THE RICHEST COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD, WHY IS IT SO MANY OF US CAN BARELY AFFORD LIVING HERE?" REVIEW:

I’m sad to say I put off seeing this movie when it saw a theatrical release because I was overwhelmed by politics at the time. My library has several copies and after having stared at them for the better part of a year, I decided to take one home and see if it was any good. It turned out to be better than that.

Swing Vote’s conceit is that the outcome of the presidential election comes down to literally one man, one vote. In this case, the vote belongs to Ernest “Bud” Johnson (Costner) a drunken yet lovable loser good ol’ boy who wouldn’t know a voting booth from a bathroom stall. Bud’s twelve-year old daughter Molly (Madeline Carroll, an incredible young actor) is a brooding, disappointed intellectual whose desire to see her father be more serious about life prompts her to talk him into voting. Sadly, he gets drunk that day, prompting Molly to sneak in and cast his vote just as a senile cleaning lady unplugs the voting machines and freezes the vote before its cast.

What results is a comedy about the political process that actually moves along at a steady clip. Bud is so damn likable that everything he does is fun to watch. The drama in the film is compelling as well, providing a nice counter-balance to a stretch of a premise. The scenes of the two political candidates portrayed by Kelsey Grammar and Dennis Hopper trying to woo him to their side are often hilarious and sometimes touching and depressing.

The best moments occur whenever Bud makes an easily misinterpreted comment to the press and the propaganda machines on both sides attempt to indulge what they think he meant. It’s a perfect showcase for the whoring involved in politics. The Democrats take a pro-life and anti-illegal immigration stance, while the Republicans take a pro-environmental and pro gay marriage stance. Eventually, both candidates realize just how far they’ve fallen to get this guy’s vote and that’s when the drama ensues.

The acting in the film is outstanding. Anyone who doubted Costner’s talent should be reassured by his performance in this one. The only weak link is a too-earnest performance by Paula Patton as a local reporter who breaks the story on Bud’s dubious voting experience, but she’s so pretty you can’t help but be drawn in by her enthusiasm.

This is one of those films with a smart screenplay that knows what to show and what to avoid showing. The somewhat ambiguous ending is necessary and works perfectly.


**** out of *****

GREEN’S “SCARING THE HELL OUT OF AMERICA” REVIEW:

What happens when one man has the power to decide the direction of America with his vote? Small town hick Bud Johnson (Kevin Costner) doesn’t believe his vote will make a difference - until it does, thanks to his eleven year old daughter Molly (Madeline Carroll). See, Bud’s the only one who can break the election day tie between the incumbent Republican President, Andrew Boone (Kelsey Grammer), and his Democratic challenger, Donald Greenleaf (Dennis Hopper). In order to court the voter, both candidates spend ten days in Bud’s small town of Texico, New Mexico, promising everything under the sun if Bud will vote for him. That Bud is the tie breaking vote is supposed to be a well guarded secret but is revealed by a local television reporter, Kate Madison (Paula Patton).

For whatever reason, this film slipped under my radar when it was released in 2008. My guess is that it didn’t get a whole lot of publicity, considering the ups and (mostly) downs of Kevin Costner’s career in the 2000’s. I’m not sure if this was one of Kevin Costner’s better roles and wonder if they could have chosen a different lead actor and still had a charming little movie. Even so, Costner's character is likable and the movie has a top notch supporting cast. What was surprising about this movie is the big screen debut of then eleven year old actress Madeline Carroll, who handles her role deftly and really steals the film from the glitz and accomplishments of the other cast members.

The script won’t wow you but it is good enough to keep you interested. You’d think the premise of the film is silly but after the silliness of the real life elections in 2000 and 2004, you just never can tell. I think the best line in the film is where Bud asks Kate "who is running, again (for President)?"

One thing about American films like this is that we have no problem lambasting our own political process and exposing the silliness that it contains. This film has three things going for it: no romantic scenes between Bud & Kate, though if the film were longer you could see it heading that way and two scenes in the final act, which I shall not reveal that a) we don’t need to see and b) because it makes you wonder…

This politically themed film will never be considered a classic along with the likes of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, but what it gives you is two solid hours of fruitful entertainment. The DVD extras include a short, but enjoyable ‘making of’ featurette and some deleted/extra scenes.

This film slipping under the radar as it did was good in a way because it enabled me to buy a brand new copy of the DVD for a dollar. No kidding. Nothing wrong with that boys and girls.


***½ out of *****

Swing Vote (2008, PG-13, 120 minutes), starring Kevin Costner, Madeline Carroll, Paula Patton, Dennis Hopper, Kelsey Grammer, Stanley Tucci, Nathan Lane and George Lopez. Written by Jason Richman and Joshua Michael Stern. Directed by Joshua Michael Stern.

Labels: