PART 1: THE STRANGE CASE OF THE WHITE EXECUTIVE JET
Well we had our fun last column with "Jason vs. Predator" and etc. but this time, before we get to the nerdy shit, we gotta talk about Iraq. And before we even get to that I gotta bring up something I bet most of you haven't even heard about: the mysterious "white executive jet" that the press casually connected yesterday to Flight 93, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. I don't know the significance of this jet but I think it's a good example of the big pile of lies we americans keep getting buried under, without much complaint.
It all begins with an article in Newsday and other sources about "Moussaoui Jury to Get Sept. 11 'Replay' - Videos, airliner cockpit recordings to be offered." The story is basically a press release rewrite about prosecutors' plans for the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the nutball who they want to execute in connection with the hijackings even though he was in jail at the time.
What's odd about this article is this new admission that comes out of the blue about the existence of another plane:
"Additional recordings would be played from the cockpit of an executive jet that tracked Flight 93 on Sept. 11, according to written proposals subject to approval by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema."
Now look man I'm no researching expert but I did some searching and as far as I can tell this plane has never been mentioned or explained before. There were many witnesses of the crash who said they saw a white jet flying above Flight 93, or nearby immediately after the crash. Many witnesses thought this was a military jet that shot the plane down. Others disagreed. At the time, the FBI refused to confirm the presence of the second plane, then said they mispoke by not denying its presence. Except for some of the Pennsylvania press, these stories were dropped within a day or two and never mentioned again. The plane was forced down by the passengers, end of story. Why would there be another plane?
But now, as if nobody thought differently, there was another plane.
This new information brings up alot of questions:
1. What does it mean that it was "tracking" Flight 93? Why was some plane full of mysterious rich dudes able to do this if the military wasn't?
2. If this plane was really there then why did the government hide it until now?
3. Why was this plane of mysterious rich dudes in the air at a time when all civilian flights were grounded?
4. Who was on the plane, why were they there, what were they trying to do, how did they do it, where did they go afterwards, why are they hiding their identities?
The article does nothing to answer these questions, or acknowledge that they exist. It does offer a little more information that only makes it all more suspicious:
"The government said it would play the cockpit voice recordings from Flight 93 and the executive jet in open court, but asked Brinkema to keep both recordings and their transcripts from dissemination outside the courtroom.
"An official for NetJets, a company that sells shares in private business aircraft, confirmed that the plane tracking Flight 93 belonged to the company. The official, who asked not to be named, said the company was asked not to comment on the Sept. 11 flight but would not say who made the request."
My guess is that the government was lying to us before, and now they're lying to us again (soon under oath) to hide that they shot down a plane that may have already been commandeered by its innocent passengers. But I don't know. What the fuck happened? is an important question but I'm more concerned with why doesn't the press care? If this information can come out without raising any eyebrows, then what the fuck is wrong with our national eyebrows?
There are two possibilities here that both look bad: either the government hid this plane from us before, or they are making it up now. We also know that they are either lying to hide the presence of a military jet, or (more sinister, in my opinion) there was a fucking EXECUTIVE JET tailing a hijacked plane! And nobody yet has found this worth writing a story about to find out, you know, what the hell? Whatever the deal is, a free and responsible press would be all over this story, trying to figure out what this plane was, why it was there, what exactly it did and who was on it. But I can't find a single story about it yet (can you?) Instead they just slip it in casually like it's a trivial detail. And this is the same sorry ass press we have to count on to give the suckers who are open to another oil war in Iraq reliable information.
PART 2: IRAQ ATTACK 2
So about Iraq. I mean they are really layin the propaganda on thick now and it's turning into the mad tea party on tv and the radio.
They keep claiming that there are no plans to attack Iraq. And then they talk about when are we gonna attack Iraq. They've gotten us so used to the fact that they're gonna attack Iraq for no reason that they're getting people to argue over before they attack Iraq for no reason, shouldn't they first tell Congress that they are going to attack Iraq for no reason?
Well hey, that's not the argument. They shouldn't attack Iraq. But if they were, then yes, they would be required by the constitution to have congress declare war. I mean that's how it worked when we were still using parts of the constitution.
They did a hearing already. The gyst of it was hey, we have no plans to attack Iraq. But since you brought it up, why don't you convince us to attack Iraq.
Then they piled it on about how Iraq has deadly weapons, etc. etc. One person they accidentally forgot to invite is this arms inspector Scott Ritter, who has been everywhere questioning whether Iraq really could have weapons. Look him up if you haven't read about him. He is a republican, he believes in war, he's even part of that select minority of people who voted for George W. Bush. And I know that doesn't make him sound like the ripest banana on the tree but he does know these issues a fuck of alot better than I do, and he still says in no uncertain terms that a war is not justified.
And now they're going through the old refusing to negotiate routine. First they say that the problem is that Saddam won't let inspectors in. Then Saddam says look, you can send Congress in for 3 weeks, and they can bring any inspectors they want, just like you've been asking for forever. But our government, not willing to settle for peaceful solutions, says no, we're not interested. And also even if he does allow inspectors in, we would still attack. I mean, we're not going to, there are no plans, but I mean we would though, still, is what I mean. You know.
Sure, be suspicious of the offer. But also take it. That's how you deal with problems in the real world, you negotiate. You try to convince people of things. You don't just blow the shit out of everybody that has nothing to do with it, and expect the one asshole in the palace to change. That's terrorism.
You don't see this on CNN, but I'd bet that at least 20%-30% of americans, and a much larger perecentage in other countries, believe that Bush is a madman or idiot, that he is a zealot, that he stole the office, that he is a criminal who is using his time in office to steal more money for corporations, to weaken the constitution, and to make billions off of weapons by killing millions of people around the world.
So we don't take him seriously when, for example, he claims that he is going to cut down on corporate crime. We don't expect to see anyone from Enron, Halliburton or Harken get arrested (or detained indefinitely without charges). But we still try to talk sense into the guy. We don't just say, "Bah, let's nuke him."
Unlike Bush, bin Laden and Hussein, we normal people don't believe in terrorism. We figure these three are being unreasonable, we tell them what they're wrong about. And I think alot of us would enjoy seeing all three of them in jail by any means possible. But we're not gonna go blow up hospitals in Virginia and starve Washington DC to death to convince Bush to leave the white house.
But that's the thing. The goal here really isn't to get weapons inspectors in, or even to replace Hussein. They need a war or two, any war or two. This is yet another war about money and power - a war about keeping Bush's popularity up (by destroying lives AND the economy), about controlling more oil, about filling the pockets of Bush's many colleagues, golfing buddies and parents who make their millions through the manufacturing of deadly weapons. I mean if we run out of wars, how are we gonna keep justifying this military budget?
The real threat to them is not Saddam, but peace. So be prepared for the propaganda avalanche. Let's not forget PART 1 in this series, I believe it was called OPERATION KILL THE RAGHEADS. And wasn't that a shitty movie. The thing I remember most is how everybody wore yellow ribbons and shirts that said "Support our troops" on them. I always wondered how it was supporting troops to send them in to risk their lives over oil, and how it was spitting in their face to say hey, get them the fuck out of there.
It was a big PR swindle - trick everybody into thinking there are only two choices. Either you support the war, or you pee all over the poor saps who have to fight it.
Well now here it is a decade later and I don't see any of you assholes with the bumper stickers supporting the tens of thousands of Gulf War vets who are saying wait, no seriously, I DO have a mysterious disease. Even if the government says I don't. Where is your ribbon for that? Where are your Gulf War Syndrome commemorative collector cards? Collect all symptoms.
I don't know who came up with "Support our troops" but I'll bet it was a PR firm. Possibly the same one hired by Kuwait that notoriously cooked up a fake story about soldiers killing babies to convince Americans to go to war.
And now we're dealing with a regime made up of many of the same people, who this time promised to run the country like a corporation, who are intimately involved in at least 3 major corporate fraud scandals, who are trying hard to make us forget about the recession that is already making us forget about the either a) complete moronic incompetence or b) deliberate backturning that led to some shit that went down last september. I don't know if you remember that. This is also the regime that openly said they were going to lie to us during what they saw as a war that would never end, who tried to open a department of propaganda, whose figurehead is the son of the ex-CIA madman who pioneered the Media Blackout war when he invaded both Panama and Iraq during one four year presidency.
So man, I can't wait to see what they come up with to convince us this time around. My guess is that they'll say Saddam is behind the recent rash of kidnappings. Or maybe he pushed those miners into the mine.
I know I am rambling on but I need to get this out. Let's think about this bullshit real quick. Yes, Iraq, like the US, is run by an unelected nutball. And let's pretend, although it is obviously a load of horseshit, that Iraq really has somehow managed to build from scratch a stockpile of chemical or nuclear weapons without it being detected. Hell, let's even pretend they have, let's say, almost one tenth as many deadly weapons as we do. (which even fuckin George Bush wouldn't claim with a straight face)
EVEN THEN, in that fantasy world, it's hard to ignore the reality of who's done what in the past. Has Iraq done anything to harm american citizens, ever? Not much. Not over here, not over there. I mean hell, even when we sent in troops to kill them, when we used experimental weapons like a tank/bulldozer that buried people alive, and when we started blowin up their hospitals pretending we thought they were weapons factories, they didn't do all that much in self defense.
On the other hand, we did attack them, killing alot of their civilians. We destroyed their infrastructure, and then, just to rub it in, we killed an estimated 1.5 civilians through 11 years of sanctions. This continues, even while we "fight" against "terrorism," we're starving people to death. It almost makes you want to support the fuckin war, just to get it over with.
So really, who poses a threat to who here?
If you agree, please do us all a favor and NEVER SHUT UP about it. Write your corporately owned senators, call talk radio, write newspapers, rant on the internet (like me), bring it up at work, sign petitions. These guys are democrats, but oh well. Please sign their petition, or at least read it, because it makes some good points.
----
PART 3: THE GOOD NEWS
There is some good news, though. The bastards are already appealing it, but I had to smile when I saw the headline "Judge orders U.S. government to release names of 9/11 detainees"
It means a fuckin lot when an individual like me actually thinks a judge is cool. This gal gets the thumbs up from me for writing, "the first priority of the judicial branch must be to ensure that our government always operates within the statutory and constitutional constraints which distinguish a democracy from a dictatorship." That's in about half the articles you'll find on this ruling. They just kind of throw it in there without acknowledging that a federal judge has just stated that Bush is trying to be a dictator.
----
PART 4: MORE BAD NEWS, THOUGH
Remember how as soon as it was announced, we knew the "WAR ON TERRORISM" was just gonna be a blanket excuse for every damn thing? Well just in case you haven't seen any appalling enough examples, here's one where our friendly government is using it to protect... now this may surprise you... an oil company. 11 Indonesian villagers have filed a lawsuit saying that "Exxon Mobil, which operates a natural gas field in the province, paid and directed Indonesian security forces that carried out murder, torture and rape in the course of protecting the company's operations in the 1990s."
So we're saying hey, this might interfere. I mean I know on the surface it sounds like it doesn't make any god damn sense at all, but this business of stopping murder, torture and rape, you know - it could interfere with the business of stopping terrorism. And it could interfere with US interests, you know, like pumping oil, and like murdering, torturing and raping people. Or, you know, I mean, what I mean to say is, erm, hahem. Uh... please join me in "God Bless America."
This article will make you wanna fuckin puke
----
PART 5: THE NERDY SHIT - DIGITAL PROJECTION AND VIDEO
Oh yeah, but, uh, movies. Last week I saw SIGNS at Seattle's Cinerama, which I always considered the best theater in Seattle. That might have to change because now they seem to project everything digitally.
When the Boeing Digital logo came up I wasn't the only one who groaned. A young man behind me told his girlfriend "digital projection sucks!" And I doubt he heard it from me.
I must admit though that SIGNS looked better digital than YODA ATTACK did. I think it's because of the mostly shadowy cinematographism. During the Yoda picture, it was the brightly lit scenes, anything with sunlight or a bright white, that was noticeably pixelated. This time around it was distracting early on and then I kind of forgot about it.
But I did notice another flaw with the projection. Whenever the camera panned, it caused a bit of a flickering. This is something you see alot with real projection. According to my sources, there is a shutter which looks sort of like a propellor, that spins around to cover and then uncover the frame at a certain rate to help create the illusion of the moving pictures. This is what Cinema is all about, in my opinion, is the illusion of moving pictures. But let me get off of my soap box.
The point is that if this propellor deal is not lined up quite right, it does not hit at the exact right moment, and this can damage the illusion. It can create a flickering on the image that is most noticeable when the camera pans (moves sideways). So you might feel kinda sick as the camera does one of them establishing shots with some rock song playing to show all the people walkin on the street or whatever.
A digital projector doesn't need this propellor deal though, but it manages to have the same problem. This time I don't think it's a maintenance problem that could be fixed if the projectionist knew what they were doing. I think the technology just hasn't caught up yet. It's not able to process the information fast enough. I'm sure this problem will be solved eventually but for now it's yet another reason why digital projection doesn't live up to the hype.
Digital video, though, I gotta admit I'm getting softer on that. At least when it's used properly. I watched two new movies this week that were shot on the digital video, and it didn't bother me on either one.
On one hand you had FULL FRONTAL which used a JULIEN THE DONKEY BOY approach, grinding the shit out of the footage so that it just looks as hideous as possible. Most critics seem to be saying this is the worst photography they've ever seen, but I liked it. It's not trying to imitate film or amateur porn, it's creating a look of its own that's so muddy and blobby at times it is almost abstract.
Now this isn't a look I want to see all the time but it worked here. And I definitely prefer it to movies like BAMBOOZLED where it looks like they're trying to imitate a film look and doing a really, really bad job.
On the other hand there was SPY KIDS PART 2 which was using the more obvious approach of just pretending its film. This is the "high end dv" you hear about, the same thing they used for YODA ATTACK and VIDOCQ. And you know if I didn't read it already, I woulda assumed this was film.
I think this is more significant than YODA ATTACK because although it's still a movie with a real big budget and studio backing, it is much lower and made by a dude who doesn't own his own effects company. He was still able to make a movie jammed full of ridiculous computer effects, and it is probaly true that he couldn'ta done it if he had to shoot it all on film and then wait for it to be developed to make sure it turned out all right. But he still made a movie that, at least to the casual observer such as myself, appears to be on real film. A real movie. (except about kids with gadgets flying around in submarines and swordfighting against skeletons and shit)
So it's still gonna take a while but these are two movies that demonstrate that 1) digital video doesn't necessarily have to look like garbage and 2) we are slowly edging toward that promise that computers can make big epic movies on modest budgets.
thanks,
Vern
A YEAR AGO, SOME SHIT WENT DOWN
September 11th, 2002
REMEMBER SEPTEMBER 11TH. NEVER FORGET.
Yeah, I forgot about september 11th for like, 22 minutes there. Good thing every tv station, magazine and newspaper was there to catch me.
I on the other hand am confident that you all remember what happened that morning a year ago, and where you were when you found out, and what your first thought was. And you remember watching all that TV and reading all those articles and trying to decipher what exactly happened and what it all meant. And all the people full of hot air, including me, tried to take it all and boil it all down into words and concepts. Why do they hate us? What now? blah blah fucking blah.
Now it's a year later and you see it kind of differently. For those of us lucky enough to avoid losing anyone close, the pain starts to fade. We've gotten desensitized to it. We can sit back and see how wrong people were about certain things. Like, of course, "irony is dead." Some people just really hate irony, it turns out, and they tried to use September 11th as a good cutoff point. But then John Ashcroft put a drape over the blind justice statue and irony was hotter than ever.
And we know that "they hate us because of our freedom", if it was right at all, wasn't exactly painting a clear picture. Since September 11th, the terrorists have done nothing but run and hide, while it was the Bush Regime and post-irony Justice Department that was whipping up ways to push laws through Congress without them being read or debated, lift domestic spying laws, use secret tribunals, lock up people indefinitely with no evidence or charges or access to lawyers or the public, blatantly violate various articles of the Geneva Convention with their prisoners of war, bully dissenters, disable the freedom of information act, interrogate and polygraph congress, set up a secret shadow government, release terror warnings to take media time away from scandals, blatantly lie about 9-11 foreknowledge, etc.
And we know that all that courage and service and rising to the occasion shit wasn't ever practiced by our supposed-to-be elected officials. During the 58% of his term that he's spent not on vacation, Bush has done nothing but take advantage of disasters. 9-11 happens, so let's start some wars. Worldcom happens, so now we can forget about Enron, who loaned me that plane you see in the background of all my campaign photos. But really, I hardly knew them. Wildfires happen, let's throw out environmental laws to "protect from wildfires." I'm surprised he hasn't overthrown gun control laws as his "Plan to Stop These Kidnappings." (On the other hand, at this point he probaly doesn't want the citizens have guns.)
And they keep mentioning 9-11 as an excuse for the atrocities they fantasize about committing in Iraq. Oh by the way, we won't apologize for killing that family of 23 at a wedding party in Afghanistan, because we still think there was some mysterious invisible gunman there somewhere, despite all evidence to the contrary, and we blame it on him. But how dare you turn a blind eye to the great loss America has suffered. The consequences of not committing atrocities around the world to help our oil companies and weapons manufacturers are greater than those of not committing atrocities around the world to help our oil companies and weapons manufacturers.
And of course the new, sensitive media that the old, crass media talked about after September 11th... well, they still don't exist. I just read in somebody's column that the winner of the American Idol game show (or was it Fear Factor?) is supposed to sing at a memorial in Washington DC. If that isn't a sign of human atrocity as pre-packaged corporate product, I don't know what is.
Well I don't want any part in that so I'm gonna keep it short. I'd just like to say that I'm happy to see most of the tasteless hooplah has at least been centered around grieving and loss, not nationalism. On the anniversary of Hiroshima you see candles floating in a lake to represent the lost lives, you don't see flagwaving to represent we're gonna send our children to burn down your villages, in case you were involved. And that's the way it should be. Let's keep it clean, folks.
I'll probaly write another column about some new dvds later this week. Until then, I hope you are all safe and fighting the good fight.
thanks friends,
Vern
Recommended links:
Ever hear the one about the daughter of a Kuwaiti diplomat coached by a Washington DC PR firm to tell Congress lies about Iraqis killing babies? Or the non-existent Iraqi troops positioned to attack Saudi Arabia? A must read story from the Christian Science Monitor about the lies used to start IRAQ ATACK 1 and how the same people are in pre-production for the sequel.
Then read this story about Bush and Blair telling lies just the other day and then having to admit they were "mistaken." They both misread "no indication of Iraq having achieved its programme goal of producing nuclear weapons or of Iraq having retained a physical capability for the production of weapon-useable nuclear material or having clandestinely obtained such material" as "six months away from nuclear weapons." Also, they both mistakenly thought that satellite photos that didn't show anything in particular showed nuclear weapon factories. Just an honest mistake when you're doing some light browsing to justify massive murder and mayhem.
Bush is still promising to ask Congress before he starts a war with Iraq. He's still deciding, you know. The enormous troop buildup in the region must be for some other war, then.
I told you before, and now the Bush regime is admitting it: they oppose the World Court because they know their sorry asses will end up in it.
And on that note, there's the other disaster anniversary today, the 25th anniversary of our overthrow of Chile.
So many americans have this idea that we represent truth and justice around the world. Well, maybe I do, and you do, and Superman does. But our government doesn't. When you look at this list of treaties, resolutions and laws that we have violated or opposed recently, it makes Uncle Sam look a big asshole.
A GOOD MONTH FOR THE DVDs OF BADASS CINEMA
Yeah I know, this Iraq deal is getting even worse but let's just take one fuckin column to talk about what I used to talk about, the movies.
This month has been hard on the wallet not just because of the economy but also because of numerous high quality dvd releases of important films of Badass Cinema. Today I will take some time to review a few of those dvds.
First of all we got my pick for the best movie of the year so far, BLADE II. I feel I have already written enough about the many fine qualities of this picture so I will focus this review only on the many fine dvd extras brought to you by one of our best directors, Mr. Guillermo del Toro. This is a part of the "New Line Platinum Series" which I have come to know and trust as a series of dvds with extra material above and beyond your "theatrical trailer" or your "chapter stops" or even your "weblinks." (Does anybody really have a DVD-ROM drive? And if so, do they really need a dvd to figure out how to find the web site for BONES?) BLADE II is no exception, in fact it has even better extras than BLADE I.
Mr. del Toro acts as your host, introducing the deleted scenes by saying in his thick Mexican accent, "This is what we would like to call 'Sperm Removal', but we will call it deleted scenes" and "What you are about to see is mostly crap." It's true, these extra scenes are not particularly exciting, but the optional commentary makes them pretty interesting for us filmatic enthusiatists. I especially liked learning that Michael Jackson (who knows Wesley Snipes from one of his videos, I think) wanted a part in the movie, so del Toro wrote a scene where the princess walks in on a vampire pervert fondling a plastic bag full of entrails. Unfortunately Jackson could not work the scene into his schedule.
Del Toro is a very likable and vulgar presence throughout the extras. On the in-depth making of the movie documentary there is a scene where the composer Marco Beltrami tries to explain to his orchestra, over a microphone, a special sound effect del Toro has asked him to have them record. Del Toro interupts, grabs the microphone and says, "No no no. Don't listen to him. He's been masturbating in the corner for five minutes."
On his commentary track he gives alot of insight into the "comic book feel" of the movie, giving a good argument for how his movie is more faithful to the spirit of children's comic books than most. He also boasts about the unacknowledged technical breakthroughs in the movie, correctly bragging that people can't always tell what is done on a computer and what isn't. (One shot I thought was computer was apparently a puppet.) At the same time he's alot harder on the movie than I am, getting worked up about a couple of phoney looking shots and laughing heartily at some corny dialogue, at one point even telling the viewer to "switch it over to Goyer" to find out if the writer defends the dialogue on his own commentary track.
Goyer's track is with Wesley Snipes and that's a good one too. Wesley is most proud of his action, and does alot of "boom boom boom"s and "oooooooooohhhhhh"s as he watches the fights. But what's entertaining is that he hates the songs they used in the movie and gets very emotional in complaining about them. He says that the song played while the Blood Pack gets ready for the assault on the club should make you say "These guys are badasses, I wanna go with them" but instead makes you say "No, you guys go ahead, I'll stay here."
I remember reading somewhere that even if you hated the remake of PLANET OF THE APES (because, let's face it, you did) you had to buy the dvd for all the great extras. I think that's a load of horseshit so I won't make that argument for BLADE II. Instead I will say that if you are only buying it for the extras and do not appreciate the power of BLADE II then I don't know what your fuckin problem is, pal.
I was almost as excited about another New Line Platinum Edition, this one for THE MACK starring Max Julien as Goldy, the Mack. Mr. Julien is pretty much only known for his starring role in this movie but I consider him one of the true heroes of blaxploitation because he wrote two of the very best, this one and CLEOPATRA JONES.
THE MACK was already on dvd, but this release is a landmark because it's the first time ever that a blaxploitation movie got a real special edition dvd. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate my dirt cheap, no frills, no bells, no whistles, no anything at all CLEOPATRA JONES, and of course I will always cherish the "ass whooping savings" of the Dolemite box set. But damn it's good to see THE MACK receiving the honor of Platinum Editionhood. The disc doesn't have as many extras as BLADE II, and the commentary is one of those ones where they edit together clips from various interviews instead of actually having the people together in a room watching and commentary-ing on the movie. But at least there IS a commentary, and there is also a 45 minute documentary that gives alot of background on the movie that I never knew. Did you know that they were caught in a struggle between the Black Panthers and the Ward Brothers crime syndicate, paying both for protection? I didn't. I didn't know that the Player's Ball and Player's Picnic in the movie were filmed at the actual events, or that Frank Ward, in the movie, is a real pimp playing himself. I mean it turns out I didn't know a whole fucking lot about THE MACK.
Also it turns out I've never reviewed this movie and it's a shame because this is probaly my favorite blaxploitation movie. I love the retarded charm of the Rudy Ray Moore pictures, and the heart and soul Curtis brought to SUPERFLY, and you can't beat Jim Kelly or Fred the Hammer Williamson, and to a lesser extent I also enjoy old John Shaft with his turtleneck and his attitude. And obviously there's Pam Grier and I already mentioned the great CLEOPATRA JONES. But THE MACK is better.
Watching this documentary, I started to realize why. This is the most realistic fictional account of the pimp world. It takes obvious influence from the Iceberg Slim books, but apparently it also had to do with alot of hard research, using the Ward brothers both to insure filming in Oakland was possible and to make the portrayals accurate. The director is a white dude but he is a documentationist and he uses those skills to get some of the real Oakland underbelly into the movie. The movie has a bit of the arty guerilla independent spirit of SWEET SWEETBACK'S BAAADAASSSS SONG, but none of the intense boredom or weird shit that leaves you scratching your head wondering if you even know what just happened. (No offense Melvin.)
The perfect casting of the charming Max Julien works to show how a charismatic pimp can "control a bitch's mind." But Goldy is more than some smooth talking guy in a fur coat. It is not just the pimp shit that makes him an interesting character. Max Julien gives this dude real emotions. It's a dubious way of fighting The Man but he makes it seem sincere. And the movie never demonizes him or whitewashes him. In one scene he passes out money to kids and makes them promise to stay in school. But then he yells at one for saying "I wanna be like you, Goldy" and a woman on the street complains about that fuckin pimp coming around the kids again.
I haven't even mentioned Richard Pryor. I remember when I first saw it, I thought he was gonna be The Mack. Actually he's kind of the sidekick and it was filmed just after his breakthrough role in LADY SINGS THE BLUES. He's whiny and vulnerable, and probaly alot like the real Richard Pryor. I always wondered why he didn't have a bigger part - turns out Max Julien had to beg the producers to let him on the movie, then he got in a fist fight with the director and that night tried to kill him, so, you know, he got fired. They still say he's a genius, though.
If you think you like the black films of the '70s and you haven't seen THE MACK, get to work buddy.
Next we got a whole trilogy here, practically. We got the three Tarantino pictures, all with new special edition double disc dvds. Now keep in mind, double disc doesn't mean jack shit these days because discs are no longer double sided. What happened was, and I am not joking, the studios decided that dvd viewers don't understand having two sides. I guess in a world with no records, they think people have forgotten about the concept of side 1 and side 2. And it didn't occur to them to, you know, try to explain it. So now a single movie with a couple extras gets spread across two discs, even though before they could fit both DESPERADO and EL MARIACHI and plenty of extras for both on ONE disc. They can do it, and I can prove it. Come over to my house and we'll watch them.
Anyway that said, all three of these are real good pictures and good special editions and they fill up the discs. The most exciting is JACKIE BROWN because it's never been on dvd before. I love that movie and take pity on the people who wanted some showy SNATCH type garbage and still don't appreciate it for what it is.
Now I was late to catch on to Tarantino, on account of some complications in my life situation, and I haven't found the time to take part in this backlash where you pretend that you never liked him and refuse to admit the obvious fact that, obnoxious personality or not, he is a truly talented director. The biggest myth is the one about "Tarantino is a good writer but he's not a very good director because he doesn't have the camera flying all over the place, which is what directors do." JACKIE BROWN more than anything shows that this young man knows what the fuck he's doing. You don't just get this many classic performances in one movie by accident. I am not just talking about the knock you on your ass star turns by Pam Grier and Robert Forster. I am also talking about Samuel L. Jackson as Ordell Robie, who is both hilarious and terrifying, easily one of Mr. Jackson's most standout performances. And I am talking about Bridget Fonda as snakelike stoner girl Melanie. And most of all I am talking about Robert fuckin Deniro, playing a role unlike any he's done before, stealing every scene he's in even though he's usually just sittin on a couch in the background with a dumb look on his face. He makes it completely plausible that a quiet, lovable lunk would get so frazzled when he can't remember where he parked that he'd shoot Melanie in the face. And even better is when he tries to explain what he did to Ordell.
My favorite scene in the movie though is the one with Chris Tucker, where Ordell comes over to his hotel room and tries to talk him into doing a job that involves riding in a trunk. He really doesn't want to do it, and he knows something's wrong, and he tries to get out of it but he owes Ordell and he's afraid of him. And Tarantino says Chris Tucker improvised the line, "Man, you catchin a nigga off guard with this shit." I think Chris Tucker is a real funny dude and I think alot of it's because he's such a good actor he makes you believe he really means the stupid shit he's saying. This scene supports my theory because it's alot more scary than it is funny, and he's great.
The special edition doesn't have a commentary or anything, because Tarantino doesn't like them. But it has a good documentary, some deleted scenes, a recent interview with Tarantino looking back at Jackie Brown, Siskel and Ebert's review of the movie, and a bunch of other shit. Tarantino can seem kind of full of himself in the interviews but I like that they let him just ramble on and on. It's the opposite of those press kit documentaries where they just use dumb little soundbites. Also, this set has pretty huge galleries of trailers for old Pam Grier and Robert Forster movies. Not just a couple, a whole shitload of them.
I also got the new PULP FICTION set and I haven't got a chance to rewatch it yet, but the extras make a real good time capsule for the explosion that happened when that movie came out. You get to see Tarantino's Palm d'or acceptance speech (with the french lady yelling "scandal!" and Tarantino laughing), an entire Charlie Rose interview with Tarantino, a full episode of Siskel and Ebert where they talked about the Tarantino phenomenon (and still won't admit they were wrong about RESERVOIR DOGS) and Michael Moore interviewing Tarantino and Samuel L. Jackson at the Independent Spirit Awards.
But of the three Tarantino dvds the one I've gotten the most out of is actually RESERVOIR DOGS. I hadn't watched this movie in a little while and I forgot how fuckin good it was. If you can get yourself to forget all about the Tarantino phenomenon, you can watch this movie again and remember where it all came from.
Sure, you have a hard time accepting Tarantino as a criminal in the opening now that you know who the dude is. And at the time it was great to acknowledge that criminals talk about TV and shit (especially when they're not allowed to talk about their backgrounds), and now that's become a cliche. But the movie is so much more than that. Watching it again it seemed like there were at least a dozen moments of undeniable brilliance. My very favorite is when Harvey Keitel and Steve Buscemi get in an argument, start fighting and pull their guns on each other. Buscemi ends up on the floor in that famous pose you see on the posters, and the camera slooooowly pulls back and eventually reveals Mr. Blonde, who we have heard all about but only now seen, just standing there watching. The macho one liner he delivers is classic but it's overshadowed by the fact that he's sipping on a Coke, proving in one image that he's the maniac they've made him out to be, because he stopped for fast food during his getaway from the diamond shop bloodbath.
I mean there's all kinds of shit like this. There's the legendary torture scene, and the way it reveals who the undercover cop is. There's Mr. Blonde and Nice Guy Eddie wrestling like high school kids in Joe's office, knocking over chairs and calling each other gay while Joe yells, "Knock it off, I'm sick of this shit!" There's Tim Roth covered in blood, screaming in agony in the backseat of the car while Harvey Keitel tries to hold his hand, tell him not to die and drive at the same time. All this bonding and honor and shit, and all this brutal post-violence that still hasn't been recaptured in a movie. I mean how many movies are there with long, agonizing conversations between two horribly wounded people as they bleed to death? It's a movie about a movie about your same old failed caper but you feel like you've never seen a movie like this before.
Also this movie has the one real action scene Tarantino has done to date, Mr. Pink's getaway after the robbery. That's the real deal. That's real life. None of this fancy movie bullshit. The guns sound real, the people on the sidewalks sound real, the adrenaline rush is real. That's what I was talking about when I was complaining about the music being so distracting in WINDTALKERS. Those war scenes, they gotta feel like this if they're gonna work. This is what they invented that one word "bravura" for.
And there's the little details. Like did you ever notice this one? Mr. Orange has to imagine every trivial detail of his fictional "commode story" in case anybody asks questions. They do, and he already knows the answers. But then when Nice Guy Eddie, a real criminal, tells his story about the waitress gluing a guy's dick to his chest, he says "He did things to her" and someone asks, "Did things to her? Did what kind of things to her?" and all he can say is, "I don't know, he did things."
Now I should warn you, I think there is a rat in the Artisan dvd department, trying to sabotage their releases. All the interviews on this disc have embarassing "joke" intros with wacky music and titles where they pretend Chris Penn is being interviewed in the back of a truck or that Eddie Bunker kidnapped the camera crew after they interviewed him. Wocka wocka wocka. Also they got a couple phoney extras like a ridiculous radio play and a "Reservoir Dogs Style Guide" that's gotta be the worst dvd extra since the "documentary" on the first release of FIRST BLOOD. But if you can get past that shit there's some really interesting business on here.
If you rent it some time and you don't have time to watch all of it, the one do-not-miss item is the "Tribute to Lawrence Tierney." Lawrence is of course the real life ex-con character actor who plays the boss, Joe Cabot (the guy Mr. Orange describes saying "motherfucker looks just like The Thing.") He died last year but instead of doing some dishonest cornball tribute to him as an actor, they just have people from the movie telling legends about what a lunatic he was. Tarantino and Bunker both tell about getting in fist fights with him, and there is a long uninterupted clip of Chris Penn's hilarious story about Tierney inviting himself over to his house.
There's alot of other good stuff too, lots of detail. Not just about the movie itself (like the deleted scenes, MACK style edited together commentary, interviews, three different critics doing commentary on selected scenes etc.) there's also material about directors who influenced the movie, the other directors who were at Sundance that year, and the history of film noir (even interviewing the motherfuckin man, Donald Westlake, the alter ego of Richard Stark).
The one thing I thought was missing, I would've liked to see them put this CITY ON FIRE bullshit to rest once and for all. If I was Tarantino I woulda arranged to get Mike White's "Who Do You Think You're Fooling" documentary on the disc and get it over with. There is alot of talk about all the influences that went into the movie but only in one of the critic's commentaries is there a direct reference to the "it's a ripoff of CITY ON FIRE" claims.
The one Tarantino criticism that's more annoying than "he uses plot elements from other movies, and that makes it irrelevant that his execution is outstanding" is "he's only made three movies."
I'm not going to use the "YOU make three movies and then you can talk" argument, because that's just as asinine. I've never baked a wedding cake but I'm still gonna complain if it has cigarette butts and meal worms in it. I'm not gonna say, "Well, I don't like it personally but then I've never baked a wedding cake with my own hands." That's a dumb argument.
What is a good argument is, those are three really great movies, as you can see by watching these dvds. I would rather he take his time and make movies like JACKIE BROWN every several years than just whip the shit out and give us LETHAL WEAPON 4 or something every October. Also, there are directors who have only done one or two really good, or one pretty good movie, and we still get excited about them. For example I know many people were excited for this month's first time dvd releases of NEAR DARK and RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD. And you can't tell me that Kathryn Bigelow or Dan O'Bannon have the equivalent of RESERVOIR DOGS, PULP FICTION and JACKIE BROWN under either of their belts. But I'd still want to shake their hands if I saw them.
Actually it would be cool if Tarantino did FRIDAY 4, though.
this concludes my dvd column, thanks. p.s. send me free dvds. I had to pay for all this shit. you know how the economy is. come on dvd companies get with the fuckin program. e-mail me for mailing info.
--VERN
back to Vern