Showing posts with label docudramas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label docudramas. Show all posts

Thursday, October 1, 2020

The experience of women via the life of Gloria Steinem forms the heart of Julie Taymor's new film, THE GLORIAS


I suspect that, should most of us -- us aged, anyway -- look back on our own lives, we will see not simply one single person at various stages but a number of different characters, each one a part of who we have finally come to be. When I first heard of the idea for THE GLORIAS -- that its leading character, the famous Gloria Steinem, would be protrayed by several different actresses -- I wondered if this would end up more a stunt than an artful portrayal. Given that the director of the film is Julie Taymor (shown below) and its screenwriters Ms Taymor and playwright Sarah Ruhl (adapting from Ms Steinem's own book), I should have expected a lot more. That's certainly what I got.

From the film's opening, featuring the simultaneous use of color and black-and-white cinematography (by Rodrigo Prieto), and the quick introduction of these Glorias -- the child (Ryan Keira Armstrong), the almost-teen (Lulu Wilson), the young adult (Alicia Vikander), the fully mature woman (Julianne Moore) and finally Ms Steinem herself -- the filmmaking proves so limpid and graceful that it immediately carries us away. 

With very few exceptions (the times when the movie grows a little too preachy), The Glorias continues in that fashion throughout. (Even when it's preachy, that preaching is so on-the-mark and worth hearing that TrustMovies did not mind all that much.)


From her early days when Steinem had to travel, a bus was what she could afford, so the movie spends a lot of time on the bus in which all four-aged Glorias bond and chat and question each other about the past. This is smartly woven into the timeline of Gloria's life -- with her family, in school, traveling in India, as a budding journalist and working woman, her founding of Ms Magazine, and finally her career as activist and spokesperson for women's liberation. (That's Ms Moore, above, right, with Lorraine Toussaint as Flo Kennedy.)


Much of this we heard and seen previously (most recently on Hulu's excellent series about Phyllis Schlafly and friends, Mrs. America) yet here it still has plenty of wit and force. And, yes, as has been pointed out, even at its near-two-and-one-half-hour running time, the movie glides along the surface of this life, albeit with great skill and feeling. (Above is Ms Vikander, bridling at her sex object role at her magazine job.)


What gives The Glorias its remarkable depth comes from the movie's ability to keep its theme in constant (yet almost never belabored) focus: the place and plight of women worldwide, as seen through the eyes and life of Ms Steinem. The is quietly imbued in every scene by every performance (the film editor is Sabine Hoffman), and the overall effect has a growing power that slowly rises to a marvelous pitch and volume simply by being ever-present. (Above, right, Janelle Monáe as Dorothy Pitman Hughes. 


By the finale of The Glorias, you will be proud and thrilled by all that's been accomplished, even as you're chastened and saddened by what is needed still. Unless of course you're a white male (or female) supremacist. (Or one of those movie critics who dislikes the work of Ms Taymor.)


From Roadside Attractions and LD Entertainment and running 2 hours and 27 minutes, the movie opened via digital streaming exclusively on Amazon Prime Video (free to members) yesterday, September 30. Even if you think you already know all about Gloria, take a chance on this one. (That's Bette Midler, above, right, who makes a terrific Bella Abzug.)

Sunday, September 16, 2018

Lee Liberman's Sunday Corner for September: HITLER'S CIRCLE OF EVIL via Netflix


We are looking and looking harder at the most violent, amoral dictatorship in the modern era and there are many new WWII movies to satisfy. Are we all preoccupied with the totalitarian state at the same time for the same reason? Despite much difference between the era of Hitler and our own, some similar strains are worrying today. Hitler’s Reich was a cult of trumped up magic and messianic ideology; 2018 is a personality cult of Trump. Cults are not recipes for governance. The 10-part British-made documentary/docudrama, HITLER'S CIRCLE OF EVIL, now streaming on Netflix, depicts the Hitler saga from the point of view of the players in his inner circle — his cabinet of sycophants. The series has generally been lauded for accuracy; it features interviews with assorted historians and docudrama’d visuals. In the period following WWI, moderate politics wasn’t working; the extremes veered further left and right than our own left and right. In the 1920’s-30’s it was communist/socialist versus heroic/messianic. The democratic Weimar Republic had emerged to replace the Kaiser; it struggled to govern during the depression that followed the 1929 Wall Street crash and the dire reparations the Allies imposed on Germany after WWI. Poverty and misery were gifts to the messianic Hitler movement.

Hitler’s story started with Dietrich Eckart, a playwright and poet of the far right and believer in the occult Thule society, which held that Aryans had become weakened by inferior races and sought a messiah, a “genius superman”. Eckart was a founder of the National Socialist Party, which became the Nazi Party. When Hitler spoke at a meeting, Eckart was amazed; here was ‘THE ONE’. Nazi fervor sprang from a theory of mythic Aryan superiority. Eckart’s famous play (making him rich) based on Henrik Ibsen’s ‘Peer Gynt’ is the story of Germanic superhero, Gynt, struggling against trolls/Jews. (Note that Anti-Semitism had been part of the world landscape almost from the creation of Christianity, long before the Nazi rise. The Reich weaponized Jews, Communists, Allies using propaganda.) Eckart finds in Hitler the rough stone he can polish, who can take the message to the people. (Roger Ailes, Steve Bannon, and Roger Stone chose Trump to do the same.) Eckart and Hitler bonded as teacher-pupil, father-son. Near death in 1923, Eckart is said to have written a friend: “Follow Hitler! He will dance, but it is I who will have called the tune…. Do not mourn for me; I shall have influenced history more than any other German.” Hitler called Eckart the spiritual father of Nazism and dedicated Mein Kampf to him.

Next up is Rudolf Hess, a military man, pilot, loyalist to the Thule Society. Hess met Hitler at early party meetings and was besotted. In prison together after the Beer Hall Putsch of 1923, Hitler’s first and futile attempt to gain power, Hess counseled Hitler to shun violence and win at the ballot box. Uncredited, he helped Hitler write Mein Kampf in prison and supported him head, heart, and soul (an unrelated source reports they were lovers). Following prison, they suppressed the street thuggery of party member and military colleague, Ernst Röhm, and reshaped the Nazi party to win power through elections, losing cycles before they began to win. (Below, Hess with Hitler.)

Hess’s title was deputy Fuhrer but he wasn’t Machiavellian enough to survive the power machinations of the inner circle. In 1941, to regain his Fuhrer’s love, he flew alone, in secret to Britain to offer a peace deal; his British captors found him paranoid and mentally unstable. He was never again free; his colleagues were condemned to death at Nuremberg. Hess aged in Spandau Prison where he hung himself in 1987 at 93.

 After the Nazi’s had won a governing majority in the Reichstag in 1933, a one-party state began to consolidate and Hitler’s inner circle became like cats in a bag, asserts historian Guy Walters. Backstabbing and jockeying for favor and reward were encouraged. Manipulative Martin Bormann, for instance, morphed from drone to queen bee. Hess’s subordinate, Bormann seized on the seemingly mundane job of renovating Hitler’s Bavarian Alps chalet, wooing Hitler with the creation of what would become a grand second house of state. At the new mountain court, the inner circle, ‘the Berghof set’, would be feted and forced to ‘suck up’ to the boss. Bormann, the ’Brown Eminence’, gained control over Hitler’s finances and the party coffers, becoming gatekeeper and requiring servility by the others; Hess was completely marginalized. Bormann and Goring became mortal enemies; Himmler and Goebbels hated each other and both hated Goring. The ‘morality’ of the party became sophistication on one hand and depravity on the other, as Hitler’s chintz sofas were where they made plans to invade Poland and Russia and ‘purify’ Germany. (Below the renovated Berghof “mountain home”, bombed in 1945, now in ruins.)

Heinrich Himmler was thought weird even by Hitler, though both believed in the occult and ‘blood and soil’ mythology. Racial Germanic myths and symbols became Himmler’s religion. Too young for service in WWI, he craved militarism and soon gained a full portfolio of all internal and external police and security, his efficiency amplified by ruthless subordinate Reinhard Heydrich. They oversaw the extermination camps in which 11-14 million mostly Polish and Soviet citizens were killed. But pursuing his fetish, Himmler used camp slave labor to restore and embellish Wewelsburg Castle, dating from the early 1600’s, which he had acquired as an indoctrination center. It became a Nazi Camelot and the spiritual home of the SS where Himmler reenacted his fantasy of being a pre-Christian Saxon king. He took the forked cross (the swastika), a symbol of the sun throughout antiquity, coopting its beauty and humanity, likely forever. Wewelsburg, dubbed Nazi-land, is said to be an excursion for present day Germans as an object lesson of civil society run amok.


Joseph Goebbels: If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State. 

Dubbed the ‘Poison Dwarf’, Goebbels was a writer, womanizer, and ground-breaking propagandist. As minister, he controlled the press, including the ‘new media’ of radio and film, and applied commercial advertising to politics, employing slogans and subliminal cues to shape morale and public opinion. Propaganda became the art form under Goebbels that is now practiced cheerfully by our right wing (Stone, Hannity, Carlson, Limbaugh, etc). The external enemies were the Allies who subjugated Germany with reparations; the internal enemies were Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, Bolsheviks, and ‘degenerate’ social trends. Below, a poster in the U.S. Holocaust Museum reads: “Behind the enemy powers: the Jew”.

“The fat man ate, drank, and made riotously merry…..” wrote James Holland in World War II Magazine, 2016, about Hermann Göring, head of the Luftwaffe: “Göring’s dandy image made him a persistent figure of ridicule. But Hermann Göring was a colossus in every way: a wily Machiavellian with an outsize IQ, skilled at combining charm, guile, and ruthlessness to get what he wanted…..” Hitler called him “man of steel”. (Cartoon below)

Göring became president of the Reichstag and muscled Hitler’s path to a one-party state. He accumulated oligarchic power and extravagant wealth, but his eye was off the ball — the Luftwaffe was heading into war with capable bombers but ill thought-out, sometimes inhumane deployment of assets. Goring boasted that his fliers would wipe out the Allied retreat from Dunkirk. But the Royal Air Force defended strategically and 338,000 Allied troops escaped. Hubris also misled expectations about the Battle of Britain. British radar and (the first) strategic, coordinated air defense kept the carelessly deployed Luftwaffe at bay (below the Spitfire and Hurricane, British mainstays). That loss led to fighting on two-fronts (European and Soviet) and the Luftwaffe’s slow demise. New jet-powered planes enabled Göring to persuade Hitler that the Luftwaffe could rebound, making him Hitler’s chosen successor to the last few days. But Bormann loathed Göring and convinced Hitler he was a turncoat. Göring was arrested, but soon after, Hitler, Bormann, and the Reich were dead anyway. Himmler took poison after his British capture and Goring took cyanide moments before he was to be hung at Nuremberg.

As defeat closed in on Hitler, he gave the ‘Nero’ order to destroy Germany’s infrastructure. It wasn’t followed, and the rats began to scurry off the ship. A lack of knowledge, rigor, and humanity doomed the Nazi’s; the Allies were in possession of these virtues. In the last year, Hitler deteriorated physically and mentally, swinging from irrational euphoria to out-of-control rage, often hallucinating and delusional. Of all likely disease possibilities put forward by physicians (including tertiary syphilis and Parkinson’s), I like schizoaffective: brief reactive psychoses in a narcissistic personality unable to withstand reality.


The above post is written by our 
monthly correspondent, Lee Liberman

Saturday, September 30, 2017

Blu-ray/Digital/DVDebut: Jonathan Teplitzky's remarkable, stirring docudrama, CHURCHILL


CHURCHILL got past me when the film hit theaters earlier this year, but I'm very pleased to have caught up with it for its home video debut. It represents the best work director Jonathan Teplitzsky (Burning Man, The Railway Man) has so far given us, and it has a screenplay written by historian and first-timer screenwriter Alex von Tunzelmann that is remarkable in its ability to produce singular moments of great drama with subtlety, elegance, wit and feeling. One of the most memorable scenes I can recall in a long while is here: between Winston Churchill (a great Brian Cox) and King George VI (James Purefoy, as moving and surprising as you will have seen this versatile actor ).

The above scene, as well as several more equally as fine, dot this quiet but surprisingly suspenseful, compelling movie that details the enormous burden Churchill experienced, as D-Day approached, and the Prime Minister -- still experiencing the trauma of the earlier wartime blunder/ massacre he had been large responsible for at Gallipoli -- felt so strongly against the approaching operation. As written, acted by an ace cast, and directed with wonderful elegance and restraint by Teplitzky (shown above), these scenes combine to form one of the better docudramas of recent times. This is an intimate movie, using mostly interiors, with the exteriors located at the seaside or in country houses, so there's little need for big-budget sets and scenes flooded with extras.

Instead we get the drama of decision-making, of politics behind the scenes, and of relationships -- Churchill's with his wife, Clementine (the wonderful Miranda Richardson, above, with Mr. Cox); and with everyone from The King to General Eisenhower (John Slattery, below, left), Field Marshall Montgomery (Julian Wadham), and especially his aide-de-camp (a lovely, smart and deeply felt performance from Richard Durden).

This is one chapter of Winston Churchill's life for which the man would probably not want to be best remembered, but it's an important one nonetheless. TrustMovies must admit to half expecting the movie to be something of a "duty" he needed to view. Nonsense. Instead it proved surprising, thrilling in its singular manner, and full of pulsating life. It's a beautiful film in every way. Stick it on your "must" list.

From Cohen Media Group, Churchill arrives on DVD, Digital and Blu-ray (the transfer is impeccable, and the "making of" bonus feature quite worth seeing) this Tuesday, October 3 -- for purchase and/or rental.

Monday, October 19, 2015

JASON AND SHIRLEY: Stephen Winter's docu-drama of that famously unseen documentary


The name Jason Holliday may ring a bell with certain of us older folk -- movie-lovers who might have caught, during its brief theatrical run, Shirley Clarke's film, Portrait of Jason, during which, over a continuous half day and night, she filmed the man who went by the name of Jason Holliday and who was a drug-and-alcohol-addled black, gay hustler. Up until then (the film was shot in 1966 and released in '67), the "civilized" white world had seen nothing like this. either on film or most probably in real life.

Consequently the documentary, "scandalous" as it seemed at the time, was given a public (and sometimes critical) equivalent of a tar-and-feathering and promptly run out of town. Nowadays, of course, you can see this sort of narcissistic confessional on what seems like every other TV show -- from Dr. Phil and Ru Paul to the "housewives" of.. to you name it -- as our populace, desperate for fifteen minutes of fame, says and does its Can-you-top-this? routine in front of a camera so as to be properly "seen and appreciated."

All of which brings us to JASON AND SHIRLEY, the new docudrama from writer/director Stephen Winter (shown at left), that imagines what might have happened during and in between those twelve hours of shooting that went on in order to bring Portrait of Jason to fruition. In this new version, Jason is portrayed by Jack Waters (above, left) and Shirley by Sarah Schulman (above, right). TrustMovies saw the original film during its New York theatrical debut nearly fifty years ago and, as a 26-year old young, closeted, gay, white man, was properly appalled by what he saw. His horizons have expanded some since then, and he would love to see the film again today, with age, experience, and at least a bit more maturity on his side.

Interestingly enough, early last year the indispensable Milestone Films brought the restored movie back into a brief theatrical release and, toward the end of the year, onto Blu-ray and DVD. So comparisons can be easily made, for anyone interested. My initial response to this new film mirrors to some extent my original response a half century ago: embarrassment for the man at the center of it all who drinks himself into a stupor and generally makes an ass of himself, beginning to end. That Mr. Waters seems the utter embodiment of Mr. Holliday only adds to the very believable skeeviness of it all.

As I recall, Ms Clark was mostly left out of the original film, as documentarians so often were back in the day when their subjects were "all." Here, we see Shirley almost as much as we do Jason, and what we see is not very nice. Clark, as pictured in the new film, wants to get at Jason's core by any means necessary. Even if that core, as it turns out, seems as shallow and cliche-ridden as the fellow's exterior. And yet... Clark's films always probed the society in which her protagonists lived, and they showed us race and economics and especially power from the POV of those who possessed damn little of the latter. Her films are critiques of much more than their characters.

In any case, Clark was an artist, and as that charming, smart and woefully underseen movie Chic! informed us so beautifully, artists can get away with this shit because they have -- in addition to their huge ego and complete unconcern for anyone else,-- their art to back them up. So, while Clark may have been a crap human being in some respects, she delivers the goods in others.

Mr. Holliday, however, is something else. A failed just-about-everything, he doesn't seem to have possessed the talent, strength or determination to follow through on anything he supposedly wanted, although this new film tells us that he finally did do a single performance of his one-man show. Otherwise, he muses, reminisces about his life (which may be mostly fantasy), and Mr. Winter allows that fantasy or memory to take shape along the way, so that we flit in and out -- as Holliday grows drunker and more stoned -- of his life, his past, his needs and desires.

One one level Jason is the complete victim, on another he does possess a kind of strength -- as a gay, black hustler, he's tripled-whammied with nothing left to lose -- so it is possible to think of him, in the society of this mid-20th-century time, as something similar to concentration-camp Jews, whose only thing left is whatever self-respect they can muster in whatever manner it takes.  He's been marginalized -- granted, he's had a hand in his own marginalization -- to the point of obscurity, yet has bounced back by virtue of his ability to transgress and then revel in it.

The new film is nearly a half hour shorter than its predecessor, which is, as I recall, a kind of blessing. Yet, oddly enough, what the movie has made me want to do is revisit that original and see how it appears to me now. Overall Jason and Shirley is well-cast, -acted, -written (the two stars had a hand in this, it seems) and -directed, and it does build slowly a certain head of steam, culminating in the appearance of Jason's friend, the semi-famous actor Carl Lee (played with gravity and great appeal by Orran Farmer), whom Shirley puts to work in a craven manner designed to "break" our poor "hero." Fireworks (of a sort) ensue, but do they achieve the intended result? You will see.

Meanwhile, Jason and Shirley, begins a week's theatrical run at MoMA in New York City, today, Monday, October 19. Down the line, I imagine it will eventually reach a much wider audience via DVD and digital streaming.