Save The Internet

On December 26, I wrote an article called Who Owns The Internet pointing to the dangers of allowing the telecoms to control access speeds and access, period. They have lobbied key Congressmen to have provisions taken out of a bill that would have ensured net neutrality. The watered down bill is now before the House Energy and Commerce Committee and vocal opposition can make a real difference, possibly to get the language stronger.

Take a look at the link above which is a good primer on this issue and will take you a spot where you can write your congressperson. Mine is Anna Eschoo who is on the committee and is on the right side of this issue. In any case, make your voice heard, it does help. The open, democratic nature of the web has changed all of our lives for the better and it should not be taken for granted.

Fun With Dick and Jane

I definitely had at least as much fun with Dick and Jane as I did with Johnny Cash or Ed Murrow, the subjects of the two films I just reviewed, both of which were Oscar darlings. Comedies always get the shaft (pun intended), but this Dick was Jim Carrey. He's fabulous and the movie was both funny and thought-provoking. The commentary/comedy track was less so, but the self-admitted Hollywood pinkos get most of their shots off in the film, which sets the remake in the wake of an Enron-like company implosion.

Despite the overblown sets and physical gags, there's a serious irony at play here and the barbs are no-holds-barred. A list of world-class cons is thanked at the end and includes such luminaries as Ken Lay, Skilling, Fastow, Koslowski, Ebbers and more. We see the wide pendulum swings up and down in the life of the capitalistic middle class at the turn of the century in America. Lovely and funny as it is portrayed here, it's not easy to watch because it is recent, it is real. Should we be shouting "too soon", like those watching the 9-11 films?

Certainly Enron, Worldcom, Tyco and Adelphia directly and indirectly affected as many lives as the bombers. You can't compare economic disaster to loss of life, but both are real and lasting tragedies. The latter isn't as photogenic, but, it was made so here and I commend Dean Parisot for allowing us to look at losing one's career, house, pride and just about everything else in an easily digestible, entertaining way.

We watch compassionately as this happy go lucky couple who has everything deals with true loss and hardship. The farce doesn't give us anything that rings true except the embarrassment, cover-up and desperation. Robbery dressed as Sonny and Cher or working at Wal-Mart are not options for most, though this concept was beautifully covered before in Albert Brooks' classic Lost In America. Most of us face the less telegenic task of phoning and emailing all day, trying to get careers and lives and security back. But, if you're looking for humor in massive heartache, and we all do... this DVD is true to its name - fun, and well worth watching.

Walk The Line

I walked the line between two streams of thought during this film: number one; why do I have to sit here listening to Joaquin Phoenix instead of the Cash voice and two; Ray was better. Having said that, it's hard for me to not like a musical biopic, even though I'm not a particularly big fan of Johnny Cash or country music. Despite the choice of vocals, I liked this film, particularly its focus on the road shows Cash played with Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Roy Orbison and Carl Perkins, all his contemporaries who were then signed with Sun Records in the early 50's.

Once Cash sung for Sam Phillips my interest in watching the Johnny Cash story diminished and my desire to watch the Sam Phillips biopic grew. While Taylor Hackford fleshed out a solid portrayal of Ahmet Ertegun in Ray, this film teased with a scene of Sam Phillips taking Cash from a flat, ordinary gospel singer to the true artist by telling him to look inside and find his true voice. This is when we hear Joaquin launch into such a poor rendition of Walk The Line we wonder why Phillips would have been interested, but then, he got to listen to Cash, no such luck for us.

Why should Cash license for a biopic when they would have clearly preferred the money from the makers of some hemorrhoid ointment, to whom they licensed Ring of Fire for a commercial a few years back? For God's sake, June wrote that about her burning love for Johnny. I mean really, have they no pride? They did give the rights to their music for this film and I can't understand why the performances weren't used. On the whole commentary track, Mangold offered no clue.

But back to Sam Philips, this is the guy who brought us B.B. King, Howlin' Wolf, Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Roy Orbison and Carl Perkins, in addition to Cash. When you think about what music was in Memphis, and throughout the south, in the early 50's... it was slow dirge gospel in a slow paced culture. We are talking upright basses here. These traveling road shows of souped up music and screaming teens jumping around in gymnasiums were quite a stretch. To this day, we've rarely seen a performer like Jerry Lee Lewis, the guy was truly out there and this film does point to an enormous change in the musical landscape that was happening in that time and place.

I think this was the true birthplace of rock and roll. Maybe Alan Freed coined the term and got radio more involved, maybe Dick Clark was the ultimate popularizer, once it got to TV, but Sun and Sam is the real seed change, as he tells these turned on white boys to tune in and then recorded them, set up shows and let them go. One night in '54 Elvis was recording the same old country tunes in basically the same way they'd been sung forever and got bored, so he picked up a guitar and started speeding up That's Alright Mama. This is when Sam heard what he'd been waiting for. He knew it when he heard it. He recorded it on his two Ampex 350s. And the rest is history. Music was forever changed from that point on. Rockabilly soon became rock and roll.

This film did help me understand the relationship between country and rock in a deeper, fuller way. I hadn't realized that Cash was country music's biggest seller, at least till Garth Brooks, and I didn't find it out from this film, which focused exclusively, unfortunately, on his early years. He is also one of only three artists to be included in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, the Country Music Hall of Fame and the Songwriters Hall of Fame. Again, that fact, and his unique ability to crossover into so many types of music, was not included in the film or commentary.

The film did help me understand the man, the role of his brother, who died as a child (something he shares with Ray Charles, Elvis and Joaquin Phoenix) and the role that Johnny Cash played in musical history, at least early rock music history. There was too much time spent on the first marriage and the kids, who played no real historical role and didn't do much to help us understand the man, much less the music. His relationship with June and the love and admiration he felt for her was portrayed well and Reese was able to convey some of her strength and spunk.

Although this film has flaws it is certainly worth seeing on DVD. The commentary track adds lots of personal insight from Jim Mangold, who directed and co-wrote the script over a four year period as they tried to get a studio to back this film. With a $28M budget, which is extremely low for a musical with two bankable stars, who were attached, it took four years to get this film made. Ray had not yet come out, and even with the success of this film and Ray, which won many awards and was a hit, it is still incredibly tough to get a biopic financed in any major way.

The Janis Joplin biopic with Pink was shelved, as well as the Hendrix biopic with Andre 3000. These are two musicals that would have been fascinating, and it is truly sad that they fell apart. How can you go wrong with Pink and Andre? Pink does a medley of Joplin songs at her concerts that blew me (and everyone else) away and Andre is the closest we're ever going to get to a reincarnation of Jimi Hendrix, so let's not wait till the guy's 40, OK?.

So, go out and buy this DVD, because, as Mangold points out, that's what you have to do if you like films like this and want to see more, which I do. It's either this or more comic book and video game derivatives. These biopics are the closest we'll ever get to musicals again and it's our folklore, our musical culture and history. We look at the artists, their lives, but all the while they are looking back at us. Or, I guess I should say we are looking back at ourselves in the mirror, because we all idolized these people. We were their fans. When I see Jerry Garcia's biopic, there I'll be, right in the front row. We watched these artists perform their music, listened to their records and now we watch their lives play out as they change the world around them.

Good Night And Good Luck

This slow moving, black and white ode to when newsmen had balls is definitely more appropriate for the DVD set. Watching Frank Langella's face 30 feet high is something I don't need to see. Yes, he's commanding as the towering Bill Paley, who did indeed allow Ed Murrow to tackle Joe McCarthy head on, but then you would miss George Clooney's commentary track. I did find it interesting to find out that they put that vapid Rosemary Clooney-like singer in because they "needed a girl".

Clooney also points out that what ultimately took McCarthy down were the Republicans, once he started targeting their heros, like Eisenhower. And perhaps that is what he hopes for here. It is happening. Bush is losing the support of his original backers and this is, increasingly, a problem for him.

You can't help liking George Clooney. No one can. While Paul Haggis, Ang Lee, Philip & Reese skulked around, George was the man of the hour at the Oscars this year, and this movie is the main reason why. George kowtows to no one, when Diana dies, and Gawker Stalker abounds, George is willing to stand up and be counted. He was brought up by a button down newsman dad who taught him to stand up for what he believes and not be afraid to speak out. So, I guess it's not surprising he would make a film glorifying someone like this. Murrow definitely had the same quality.

We live in an age of such ass-kissing phonies that folks just find people with guts refreshing, even if they don't particularly care about the issue at hand. Let's face it, paparazzi annoyance is something the general public does not relate to, but George is still willing to speak out, so he's the darling of Hollywood. I like him too because the fakely self-effacing, affable guy is almost always on the right side of the issue. The issue discussed in the movie ripped at our freedoms in a way paparazzi don't, McCarthy was a Senator and had power, people's lives were destroyed and those in the media were indeed buckling to the red-baiting, turning in friends, changing editorial and artistic product.

He takes on the politicos who rise up on the fears they can monger among the unwashed masses. Gee, if I were studying this in some college class, and I'm sure it will be, (although I had some shmuck law professor tell a whole class once that McCarthyism had little affect on mainstream America) the first question they would ask is why is this movie being made in 2005? What is going on today that mirrors this situation? Can you say Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove, Bush? Why can't we launch a decent investigation anymore? The GOPs got their big extravaganza... can't we get some fucking public embarrassment big enough for closure here?

These little dribs and drabs with Scooter and the Dissident Generals (good band name) is not cutting it at all. We do need some McCarthy/ Lewinskygate type denouement to galvanize all the right-thinking people who have been on autopilot for the past six years. Unfortunately, we're gonna need something prettier and more interesting than Good Night and Good Luck to do that. It's a good DVD, nice features, had good buzz and press, I recommend renting it, but it's just too old looking and irrelevant feeling to get much color up.

The companion feature discusses the way TV news has changed over the years. Just as money and technology have changed music, they have changed news. News used to stand for truth and objectivity. The American public used to have far less options and far more trust in terms of its news. Straight news is, by nature, somewhat repetitive and dry. Murder, mayhem, weather, war... that stuff never stops. There are only so many ways you can make it interesting, especially when you're competing with 80 channels, blackberrries, iPods, videogames and 70 hour workweeks (should we really wonder why every content company is tanking?)

The stalwart anchors of television are now in hospitals or de-perking from cooking segments. We've got the fake Fox news, right-wing news and now the new, fledgeling Al Franken left-wing news, and the fake news spots I reported on last week.... it's crazy. No one knows who or what to believe any more. Increasingly, people are seeking security in numbers and are turning to search engines and blogs to ascertain accuracy. In fact, I just happened to click on Napsterization today and they had an interesting comparison of blogs relative to bigger internet news venues, check out the link above. The average age of the viewers, for all three network newscasts, is 60. CBS couldn't even offer Couric a raise, that's how much they need that audience.

The combined audience for the evening news is down to 30 million, less than half of its 1969 high, but is still a huge audience. And the network that went from Murrow to Couric is going the way of Williams and Vargas and infiltrating the web with a vengeance, so it won't join the ranks of the dinosaurs. Williams is on MSNBC.com, blogs and does podcasts. Vargas streamed a preview to her first news broadcast. Couric clearly wants on the web. According to IPA, 66% of of internet video watchers are viewing news. With RSS, anyone in the modern world is used to getting their news hot and fresh, the only ones willing to wait till 6:30 just finished up the early bird special.

Murrow lived in an age where he was widely viewed and highly trusted. His word meant a lot in turning the tide against McCarthy, just as Cronkite played a pivotal role in turning the Vietnam War around. I think Clooney wishes for a day when we had figures like this to help us as a society, maybe would like to play that role in real life, perhaps he can. It will fall to the movie stars to do it, because there are few newscasters with that kind of influence today. Maybe what Clooney would really like is for some of his peers to step up to the plate with films like his, that shed light and ask questions instead of what so many of his Oceans 11-111 pals do, go for the lifestyle and bucks, without any real regard for social justice. Well, Brad's in Namibia and Julia's on B'way, so maybe he is persuasive. With any luck, maybe there'll be a few politically conscious films this fall to gear up the mid-term elections.