I've been busy watching movies, and I'll continue to be busy watching movies (for a little while at least). You can expect to see reviews of such random choices as Coffee and Cigarettes, The Terminal and Touching the Void. You don't want to miss those fresh-on-the-rental-shelves-for-a-while-now reviews. Check back often.
Inside Deep Throat
Review by Jon Waterman
***1/2
You’ve probably heard of the movie. Perhaps you’ve even seen it. Maybe you just know of the act (possibly from personal experience). It could be that you simply think of the Watergate scandal when you hear the words “Deep Throat.” That pornographic film did more than just influence the naming of the anonymous informant that helped take down Nixon. It influenced the culture and opened society’s eyes. It helped change the tides of perception and the production of the adult film industry. But that’s just the tip of the…well, let’s say “iceberg.” Don’t blow this one off as just a simple in and out story.
Here we have the latest effort from Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato who are coming back to documentary work after the abysmal and painful failure of a narrative “Party Monster.” Non-fiction is where they should stay, because this is their best yet. It seems as if their style is really coming along, slightly reminiscent of Errol Morris’ work or of Peter Wintonick and Mark Achbar’s “Manufacturing Consent” except with more interviews and solid, informative, non-redundant narration (by Dennis Hopper). Aside from all that, what really separates it is the natural humor that comes about. The major players are hilarious (usually through their mannerisms and personality quirks rather than by what they say). The supplemental celebrity interviews provide some of the more straightforward jokes (I’m looking at you Dick Cavett).
The celebrities also help round out the analysis, as they talk more about the movie as a pop culture phenomenon as outside observers. All the people have some connection to the era, the pornography industry, the sex trade, or smutty cult status – and usually a combination of these. You won’t hear me say this very often, but I felt they were underused. There were too many big names to go through. Dr. Ruth was heard from once. Larry Flynt and Al Goldstein only got a couple lines as well. Basically all of them got spread out too thin.
On the other hand, the main thread dealing with the fate of “Deep Throat” by itself was greatly represented. I walked out of the theater with a clear understanding of what happened and shocked at how some of the events took place. The film covered all the angles, the pros and the cons (double meaning intended). You get to know the people involved better and learn to like the good “smut peddlers” like director Gerard Damiano (who later in his career made the epic “Let My Puppets Come”) while still dismissing the more sleazy members of the production. One could make an argument that it didn’t cover the current industry and its relation to its groundbreaking predecessor enough. Although it does glance over the last twenty years or so within the industry, it pretty accurately shows the true impact that “Deep Throat” had, as well as the limitations of that impact.
Not too many people take pornography seriously, nor should they. This documentary shows that although it’s not a vital aspect of society, it’s still important and can have a great impact. You can still have an earnest discussion about the topic while making the snide remarks or witty comments. There’s a lot to laugh at. There’s a lot to marvel at. There’s a lot of nudity to look at [and a tiny bit of hardcore action (come on, you have to see the deep throat in a movie about a movie about it)]. This most likely won’t change your viewpoint on pornography, but it’s a fascinating story to watch anyway. Unless you’re easily offended, see it with friends and strike up a conversation afterwards.
++++++++
The Cheat (1915)
Review by Jon Waterman
***1/2
Money hungry Edith Hardy keeps spending and spending all of her husband’s investment cash. He’s working on something huge, and wants her to cut back for a very short time while he waits for his stock to explode. But, of course she can’t go without money and still maintain her regal spot in society. So, as Treasurer, she takes the money from the Red Cross fund and invests it into another stock, which fails. With the money gone, the only thing she can do to remake the cash is to beg her admirer friend.
Cecil B. DeMille proves himself a great director here by pulling together all the right elements to tell an effective story. Wilfred Buckland’s art direction is nothing short of amazing. The set designs are elaborate and prove to be multi-faceted when combined with Alvin Wyckoff’s cinematography. The lighting is surprisingly atmospheric. Instead of simply always lighting for exposure, the scene is lit to reflect the mood of the scene. Backgrounds are cloaked in darkness and a faint glow hovers around the key objects within the room. In addition, the film itself is tinted to further convey the emotions of the scene (but mostly used to distinguish between different times of day and between interior and exterior scenes). However, this tinting is a little unnerving and off-putting when two tones are cut together. In general, the composition is better than average, but the film contains one great shot. It’s of the admirer, Haka Arakau (played by Sessue Hayakawa) in the courtroom watching the proceedings while book-ended by his cohorts.
What’s not as great is the acting. Hayakawa is functional at best and Jack Dean (playing the husband Dick Hardy – get your giggles out now, sicko) overcompensates for the lack of spoken words with exaggerated movements. Fannie Ward (Edith) does a little of the same, but mostly it’s in the eyes. She rolls them peepers all over the place. They’re big enough to make it work to some extent, and I much prefer a roaming eye to wildly moving body parts (well…on film at least).
The job gets done, nonetheless. The actors are able to convey the story quite well without the aide of audible dialogue and minimal title cards. Writers Jeanie Macpherson (formerly a prolific actress who played miniscule parts in over 100 films) and Hector Turnbull (a writer) have given us a story with a couple twists and turns. I can honestly say I didn’t expect the film to turn out the way it did. There are some problems. Obviously the stock market worked much differently back then, if you can lose the entire ten thousand dollar investment in one night. The stock didn’t just go down a little? Isn’t it still on the market at all? Also, I didn’t have much sympathy for Edith, because her husband’s request was quite reasonable. You don’t get to know the husband well enough to root for him, either, so there’s no real hero to keep it going. Despite these flaws, the movie still works. It’s what’s not on the title cards that’s most important, and the interchanges your mind makes up will probably be better than what would have been written anyway.
The movie isn’t very flattering towards Asians or towards women at all. But if you can look past the negative implications and any potential racial stereotyping by considering the time period in which it was made and it shouldn’t be too hard to enjoy.
Inside Deep Throat
Review by Jon Waterman
***1/2
You’ve probably heard of the movie. Perhaps you’ve even seen it. Maybe you just know of the act (possibly from personal experience). It could be that you simply think of the Watergate scandal when you hear the words “Deep Throat.” That pornographic film did more than just influence the naming of the anonymous informant that helped take down Nixon. It influenced the culture and opened society’s eyes. It helped change the tides of perception and the production of the adult film industry. But that’s just the tip of the…well, let’s say “iceberg.” Don’t blow this one off as just a simple in and out story.
Here we have the latest effort from Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato who are coming back to documentary work after the abysmal and painful failure of a narrative “Party Monster.” Non-fiction is where they should stay, because this is their best yet. It seems as if their style is really coming along, slightly reminiscent of Errol Morris’ work or of Peter Wintonick and Mark Achbar’s “Manufacturing Consent” except with more interviews and solid, informative, non-redundant narration (by Dennis Hopper). Aside from all that, what really separates it is the natural humor that comes about. The major players are hilarious (usually through their mannerisms and personality quirks rather than by what they say). The supplemental celebrity interviews provide some of the more straightforward jokes (I’m looking at you Dick Cavett).
The celebrities also help round out the analysis, as they talk more about the movie as a pop culture phenomenon as outside observers. All the people have some connection to the era, the pornography industry, the sex trade, or smutty cult status – and usually a combination of these. You won’t hear me say this very often, but I felt they were underused. There were too many big names to go through. Dr. Ruth was heard from once. Larry Flynt and Al Goldstein only got a couple lines as well. Basically all of them got spread out too thin.
On the other hand, the main thread dealing with the fate of “Deep Throat” by itself was greatly represented. I walked out of the theater with a clear understanding of what happened and shocked at how some of the events took place. The film covered all the angles, the pros and the cons (double meaning intended). You get to know the people involved better and learn to like the good “smut peddlers” like director Gerard Damiano (who later in his career made the epic “Let My Puppets Come”) while still dismissing the more sleazy members of the production. One could make an argument that it didn’t cover the current industry and its relation to its groundbreaking predecessor enough. Although it does glance over the last twenty years or so within the industry, it pretty accurately shows the true impact that “Deep Throat” had, as well as the limitations of that impact.
Not too many people take pornography seriously, nor should they. This documentary shows that although it’s not a vital aspect of society, it’s still important and can have a great impact. You can still have an earnest discussion about the topic while making the snide remarks or witty comments. There’s a lot to laugh at. There’s a lot to marvel at. There’s a lot of nudity to look at [and a tiny bit of hardcore action (come on, you have to see the deep throat in a movie about a movie about it)]. This most likely won’t change your viewpoint on pornography, but it’s a fascinating story to watch anyway. Unless you’re easily offended, see it with friends and strike up a conversation afterwards.
++++++++
The Cheat (1915)
Review by Jon Waterman
***1/2
Money hungry Edith Hardy keeps spending and spending all of her husband’s investment cash. He’s working on something huge, and wants her to cut back for a very short time while he waits for his stock to explode. But, of course she can’t go without money and still maintain her regal spot in society. So, as Treasurer, she takes the money from the Red Cross fund and invests it into another stock, which fails. With the money gone, the only thing she can do to remake the cash is to beg her admirer friend.
Cecil B. DeMille proves himself a great director here by pulling together all the right elements to tell an effective story. Wilfred Buckland’s art direction is nothing short of amazing. The set designs are elaborate and prove to be multi-faceted when combined with Alvin Wyckoff’s cinematography. The lighting is surprisingly atmospheric. Instead of simply always lighting for exposure, the scene is lit to reflect the mood of the scene. Backgrounds are cloaked in darkness and a faint glow hovers around the key objects within the room. In addition, the film itself is tinted to further convey the emotions of the scene (but mostly used to distinguish between different times of day and between interior and exterior scenes). However, this tinting is a little unnerving and off-putting when two tones are cut together. In general, the composition is better than average, but the film contains one great shot. It’s of the admirer, Haka Arakau (played by Sessue Hayakawa) in the courtroom watching the proceedings while book-ended by his cohorts.
What’s not as great is the acting. Hayakawa is functional at best and Jack Dean (playing the husband Dick Hardy – get your giggles out now, sicko) overcompensates for the lack of spoken words with exaggerated movements. Fannie Ward (Edith) does a little of the same, but mostly it’s in the eyes. She rolls them peepers all over the place. They’re big enough to make it work to some extent, and I much prefer a roaming eye to wildly moving body parts (well…on film at least).
The job gets done, nonetheless. The actors are able to convey the story quite well without the aide of audible dialogue and minimal title cards. Writers Jeanie Macpherson (formerly a prolific actress who played miniscule parts in over 100 films) and Hector Turnbull (a writer) have given us a story with a couple twists and turns. I can honestly say I didn’t expect the film to turn out the way it did. There are some problems. Obviously the stock market worked much differently back then, if you can lose the entire ten thousand dollar investment in one night. The stock didn’t just go down a little? Isn’t it still on the market at all? Also, I didn’t have much sympathy for Edith, because her husband’s request was quite reasonable. You don’t get to know the husband well enough to root for him, either, so there’s no real hero to keep it going. Despite these flaws, the movie still works. It’s what’s not on the title cards that’s most important, and the interchanges your mind makes up will probably be better than what would have been written anyway.
The movie isn’t very flattering towards Asians or towards women at all. But if you can look past the negative implications and any potential racial stereotyping by considering the time period in which it was made and it shouldn’t be too hard to enjoy.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home