list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Capturing the Friedmans on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Capturing_the_Friedmans/220072/default.aspx Title: Capturing the Friedmans
Year: 2003
Director: Andrew Jarecki
Plot: Arnold and Elaine Friedman were a seemingly typical couple living in Great Neck, NY, in the 1980s. Arnold was an outgoing and well-liked schoolteacher with an interest in electronics who also ran a private computer school out of their home. Elaine, a reserved but caring woman, helped look after the couple's three sons, Jesse, Seth, and David. All appeared to be happy in their lives until November 1987, when police raided the Friedman home after Arnold and Jesse were accused of multiple counts of child molestation. A search revealed that Arnold owned a sizable collection of child pornography, and he confessed to some of the charges placed against him; Jesse, however, firmly insisted he was innocent. As the investigation against the Friedmans went on, public opinion regarding the case became more and more heated, but not all of the testimony against Arnold and Jesse matched up, and some began to wonder just how many of the charges filed against the family had merit. Remarkably enough, in the midst of these crises which threatened to destroy the family from within, the Friedmans continued to take part in one of their favorite pastimes -- shooting home videos of their day-to-day lives, offering a fly-on-the-wall look at a family struggling (and often failing) to hold themselves together in the wake of unthinkable accusations. Filmmaker Andrew Jarecki not only documented the legal and emotional struggles of the Friedman family with his own cameras, but was given access to the family's archive of home videos, and the result was Capturing the Friedmans, a documentary which keeps its primary focus on the Friedman family while also investigating the merits or faults in the charges levied against them. Capturing the Friedmans received an enthusiastic reception in its screening at the 2003 Sundance Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 1
Number of Lists: 27
Number of blog posts: 4
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Tue, 12 May 2009 03:08:04 GMTCapturing the Friedmans2003Andrew JareckiArnold and Elaine Friedman were a seemingly typical couple living in Great Neck, NY, in the 1980s. Arnold was an outgoing and well-liked schoolteacher with an interest in electronics who also ran a private computer school out of their home. Elaine, a reserved but caring woman, helped look after the couple's three sons, Jesse, Seth, and David. All appeared to be happy in their lives until November 1987, when police raided the Friedman home after Arnold and Jesse were accused of multiple counts of child molestation. A search revealed that Arnold owned a sizable collection of child pornography, and he confessed to some of the charges placed against him; Jesse, however, firmly insisted he was innocent. As the investigation against the Friedmans went on, public opinion regarding the case became more and more heated, but not all of the testimony against Arnold and Jesse matched up, and some began to wonder just how many of the charges filed against the family had merit. Remarkably enough, in the midst of these crises which threatened to destroy the family from within, the Friedmans continued to take part in one of their favorite pastimes -- shooting home videos of their day-to-day lives, offering a fly-on-the-wall look at a family struggling (and often failing) to hold themselves together in the wake of unthinkable accusations. Filmmaker Andrew Jarecki not only documented the legal and emotional struggles of the Friedman family with his own cameras, but was given access to the family's archive of home videos, and the result was Capturing the Friedmans, a documentary which keeps its primary focus on the Friedman family while also investigating the merits or faults in the charges levied against them. Capturing the Friedmans received an enthusiastic reception in its screening at the 2003 Sundance Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide1Slightly Tagged (1-5)2744http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t37036cbyjy.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Capturing_the_Friedmans/220072/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/11/11/37228.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/11/2008 6:01:24 PM
Body: The holidays are coming, and that either means spending time with your dysfunctional family or escaping them for the movies … where you’re likely to be met by other, fictional dysfunctional families. Already this season, Rachel Getting Married introduced us to the f’ed up faux masala of the Buchman clan, and later this month we get to follow Vince Vaughn and Reese Witherspoon as they’re pulled into their separate quadrants of kin in Four Christmases. Also, for those who think dysfunction is an American tradition, this weekend sees the release of the French film A Christmas Tale (Un conte de Noël), which unites the two major premises of dysfunctional family movies by being set during the holidays and involving an ill family member. With two more weeks left until Thanksgiving, after which we might not want to think about another family, real or cinematic, for the rest of our lives, it’s a perfect time to celebrate those dysfunctional tribes we love the best. Literally thousands of movies feature such families, though, so we’re sure to have left out some of your favorites. Definitely chime in below, and/or join the discussion currently going on over in our Top 5 group. The Corleones in The Godfather, The Godfather Part II and The Godfather Part III Any film about a family business is sure to qualify, but none exhibit more dysfunction than those in which the business is the mafia. Some other good examples include the Tempios of The Funeral and the Russian clan in Eastern Promises. But there’s no doubt that the Corleones take the cake. Maybe it’s Fredo’s fault, because inspiring fratricide is certainly evidence of a failing family. No, the Corleones are dysfunctional from the time Fredo and his siblings are little children, when Vito enters his family into a life of crime, from which none of its members will be able to escape. The “Johnsons” in Pink Flamingos If you only define dysfunctional as non-functioning, you leave out a great number of truly dysfunctional families, the kind that apparently gets along quite fine on their own but which doesn’t function within society. Think the Hewitts in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre films and the motley crew made up of Sycamores, Vanderhofs, Carmichaels and others in You Can’t Take it With You. Technically the “Johnsons” are an internally functioning group, and they even have an official place in society as “the filtiest people alive,” but with a shit-eating matriarch, an egg-obsessed granny and a son who likes to have sex employing live chickens, it doesn’t really get much more abnormal, and therefore dysfunctional, than this family. The Lisbons in The Virgin Suicides Both abnormal and non-functioning, it also doesn’t get much more dysfunctional than a family in which the kids commit collective suicide (well, one of them started the trend early). The Tenenbaums in The Royal Tenenbaums They’re clearly born out of Salinger’s Glass family, and their situation is so common that A Christmas Tale almost seems like a French remake of the Wes Anderson’s movie. But the Tenenbaums have come to be one of the most beloved dysfunctional families in cinema, so it’d be a crime to leave them off this list. They’re so popular that many fans probably wouldn’t mind having such an asshole for a father as long as they got to be a member of the family, similar to the dreams of outsider Eli Cash (Owen Wilson). Also, there are probably some guys out there who dream of having Margot (Gwyneth Paltrow) as a non-blood-related sister — as long as she’s really into making out with adopted-family siblings. The Aibellis in Spanking the Monkey Non-blood-related “incest” is one thing, but the Tenenbaums have nothing on the dysfunction of the Aibellis, with their motherloving son, Ray (Jeremy Davies), and the disturbingly consentual — though alcohol-induced — sex that occurs one awkward summer. The only incestuous family that might actually be more dysfunctional is the Cross clan of Chinatown. The Proffitts in Overboard The movie’s tone allows it to seem like such an innocently fun premise, but imagine a family in real life that would kidnap and exploit an amnesiac woman the way Dean Proffitt (Kurt Russell) and his four sons do. And imagine the woman who escapes this situation only to return in a Stockholm syndrome-as-happy-ending decision. Not only is it immoral, illegal and unlikely, it’s highly dysfunctional. The Crumbs in Crumb Dysfunctional families are obviously not limited to fiction, so it’s necessary to cite at least one documentary. Again, it’s difficult to narrow down. There are the scandal-stricken Friedmans of Capturing the Friedmans, the daffy duo in Grey Gardens (and The Beales of Grey Gardens) and the fraternal foursome of Brother’s Keeper. But it’s comic artist R. Crumb’s family that comes off as the most interestingly screwed up. Equally expected and revealing for a man of Crumb’s odd nature, reclusive brother Charles, bowel-cleansing Maxon and uncomfortable mother Beatrice are almost too strange to believe real. The Browns in Buffalo ‘66 Dysfunctional family movies often peak with their respective dinner scenes, in which uncomfortable announcements are made or food is thrown or climactic fights occur. None are funnier, however, than the reunion meal between Billy Brown (Vincent Gallo) and his unloving parents (Angelica Huston and Ben Gazzara). Mom ignores her son in order to watch football while Dad mostly hits on Billy’s pretend wife (Christina Ricci). The Dilwegs in The Pharmacist W.C. Fields has given us a few of the funniest dysfunctional families in film, and many fans would quickly reference the Sousés from The Bank Dick as his greatest tribe. But its this family from Fields’ earlier short The Pharmacist that should come to mind first, if only thanks to the daughter who shakes a martini with a pogo stick and eats the family pet after being denied supper. Radha’s family in Mother India The entire genre of melodrama offers up worthy selections for this list, but Bollywood arguably makes the most dysfunctional family melodramas of all, perhaps because a lot of them are meant as allegories for the dysfunctions of the Indian subcontinent. Mother India is possibly the most significant example from Indian cinema, even more than monumental films like Pather Panchali that aren’t of the Bollywood tradition. The film has all the necessary components: the metaphorically castrated and eventually abandoning patriarch; the desperate yet enduring matriarch; the sons who follow paths on separate side of the law. There’s even a familial sacrifice that’s comparable to the one in The Godfather Part II. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 23:01:24 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/11/2008 6:01:24 PMThe holidays are coming, and that either means spending time with your dysfunctional family or escaping them for the movies … where you’re likely to be met by other, fictional dysfunctional families. Already this season, Rachel Getting Married introduced us to the f’ed up faux masala of the Buchman clan, and later this month we get to follow Vince Vaughn and Reese Witherspoon as they’re pulled into their separate quadrants of kin in Four Christmases. Also, for those who think dysfunction is an American tradition, this weekend sees the release of the French film A Christmas Tale (Un conte de Noël), which unites the two major premises of dysfunctional family movies by being set during the holidays and involving an ill family member. With two more weeks left until Thanksgiving, after which we might not want to think about another family, real or cinematic, for the rest of our lives, it’s a perfect time to celebrate those dysfunctional tribes we love the best. Literally thousands of movies feature such families, though, so we’re sure to have left out some of your favorites. Definitely chime in below, and/or join the discussion currently going on over in our Top 5 group. The Corleones in The Godfather, The Godfather Part II and The Godfather Part III Any film about a family business is sure to qualify, but none exhibit more dysfunction than those in which the business is the mafia. Some other good examples include the Tempios of The Funeral and the Russian clan in Eastern Promises. But there’s no doubt that the Corleones take the cake. Maybe it’s Fredo’s fault, because inspiring fratricide is certainly evidence of a failing family. No, the Corleones are dysfunctional from the time Fredo and his siblings are little children, when Vito enters his family into a life of crime, from which none of its members will be able to escape. The “Johnsons” in Pink Flamingos If you only define dysfunctional as non-functioning, you leave out a great number of truly dysfunctional families, the kind that apparently gets along quite fine on their own but which doesn’t function within society. Think the Hewitts in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre films and the motley crew made up of Sycamores, Vanderhofs, Carmichaels and others in You Can’t Take it With You. Technically the “Johnsons” are an internally functioning group, and they even have an official place in society as “the filtiest people alive,” but with a shit-eating matriarch, an egg-obsessed granny and a son who likes to have sex employing live chickens, it doesn’t really get much more abnormal, and therefore dysfunctional, than this family. The Lisbons in The Virgin Suicides Both abnormal and non-functioning, it also doesn’t get much more dysfunctional than a family in which the kids commit collective suicide (well, one of them started the trend early). The Tenenbaums in The Royal Tenenbaums They’re clearly born out of Salinger’s Glass family, and their situation is so common that A Christmas Tale almost seems like a French remake of the Wes Anderson’s movie. But the Tenenbaums have come to be one of the most beloved dysfunctional families in cinema, so it’d be a crime to leave them off this list. They’re so popular that many fans probably wouldn’t mind having such an asshole for a father as long as they got to be a member of the family, similar to the dreams of outsider Eli Cash (Owen Wilson). Also, there are probably some guys out there who dream of having Margot (Gwyneth Paltrow) as a non-blood-related sister — as long as she’s really into making out with adopted-family siblings. The Aibellis in Spanking the Monkey Non-blood-related “incest” is one thing, but the Tenenbaums have nothing on the dysfunction of the Aibellis, with their motherloving son, Ray (Jeremy Davies), and the disturbingly consentual — though alcohol-induced — sex that occurs one awkward summer. The only incestuous family that might actually be more dysfunctional is the Cross clan of Chinatown. The Proffitts in Overboard The movie’s tone allows it to seem like such an innocently fun premise, but imagine a family in real life that would kidnap and exploit an amnesiac woman the way Dean Proffitt (Kurt Russell) and his four sons do. And imagine the woman who escapes this situation only to return in a Stockholm syndrome-as-happy-ending decision. Not only is it immoral, illegal and unlikely, it’s highly dysfunctional. The Crumbs in Crumb Dysfunctional families are obviously not limited to fiction, so it’s necessary to cite at least one documentary. Again, it’s difficult to narrow down. There are the scandal-stricken Friedmans of Capturing the Friedmans, the daffy duo in Grey Gardens (and The Beales of Grey Gardens) and the fraternal foursome of Brother’s Keeper. But it’s comic artist R. Crumb’s family that comes off as the most interestingly screwed up. Equally expected and revealing for a man of Crumb’s odd nature, reclusive brother Charles, bowel-cleansing Maxon and uncomfortable mother Beatrice are almost too strange to believe real. The Browns in Buffalo ‘66 Dysfunctional family movies often peak with their respective dinner scenes, in which uncomfortable announcements are made or food is thrown or climactic fights occur. None are funnier, however, than the reunion meal between Billy Brown (Vincent Gallo) and his unloving parents (Angelica Huston and Ben Gazzara). Mom ignores her son in order to watch football while Dad mostly hits on Billy’s pretend wife (Christina Ricci). The Dilwegs in The Pharmacist W.C. Fields has given us a few of the funniest dysfunctional families in film, and many fans would quickly reference the Sousés from The Bank Dick as his greatest tribe. But its this family from Fields’ earlier short The Pharmacist that should come to mind first, if only thanks to the daughter who shakes a martini with a pogo stick and eats the family pet after being denied supper. Radha’s family in Mother India The entire genre of melodrama offers up worthy selections for this list, but Bollywood arguably makes the most dysfunctional family melodramas of all, perhaps because a lot of them are meant as allegories for the dysfunctions of the Indian subcontinent. Mother India is possibly the most significant example from Indian cinema, even more than monumental films like Pather Panchali that aren’t of the Bollywood tradition. The film has all the necessary components: the metaphorically castrated and eventually abandoning patriarch; the desperate yet enduring matriarch; the sons who follow paths on separate side of the law. There’s even a familial sacrifice that’s comparable to the one in The Godfather Part II. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/cinemarian/archive/2008/5/13/28982.aspx Post By: CinemaRian
Post To: CinemaRian Blog
Post Date: 5/13/2008 7:58:39 PM
Body: Capturing the Friedmans is the kind of movie that makes you hate life. You want a genie to appear out of a bottle and tell you what the truth is and what the hell is going on. After watching for two hours, I wasnt sure whether the protagonist was an innocent kid who had his youth wrongfully stolen from him and his reputation stained forever, or evil monster who deserves to be in prison for life. The movie is a documentary about the destruction of a family in Great Neck, New York, after the father and youngest son are arrested for heinous crimes in 1987. Arnold Friedman was a well liked and award winning teacher in the community, until he was caught buying child pornography in a police sting. The police noted that he gave private piano and computer lessons at his home. After interviewing children in the computer class, they arrested Arnold and his 18-year old son Jesse, as the children reported that they molested and raped dozens of them. But the film then takes a very weird turn. David Friedman, Jesses brother, bought a video camera and documents the family arguments (a third brother, Seth, declined to be interviewed for the film but does appear in the family videos). Why anyone would want to record their family disintegrating is beyond me, but the footage on the video is surreal. On the night before Arnold is to go to prison for the rest of his life, no one seems to phased by it- they mess around have fun. This is not nervous laughter, its just weird. What is also disturbing is David and Seths treatment of their mother. Although Arnold has confessed public and privately to some sick behavior (such as molesting his brother as a teenager), David goes into deniel and blames his mother for all the problems. He thinks the family has been framed by the police and that Arnold is completely innocent. I felt so much sympathy for this woman, at times I wanted to slap David. But then the film takes another even stranger turn. The director, Andrew Jarecki, begins to compile a compelling case that Jesse may actually be innocent. Some children in the computer class confess that they told the police what they want to hear, one of their parents says that the police were on a fishing expedition. Jarecki interviews a reporter who has done extensive work with child abuse cases and finds that in the 80s, police often honestly but wrongfully used techniques that pressure victims into false statements and some times even implant false memories. While it seems likely to me that Arnold must have done something wrong, Jesse may be an innocent victim. Or maybe not. I went back and forth on this so many times during the movie I lost count. There is strong evidence both ways and the police appear to be honest individuals who just wanted to see justice done. Unlike the detectives in The Thin Blue Line, they do no appear to be liars or incompetent. If they did anything wrong, they were overzealous in protecting children, which is hard to be angry at. By the end of the film, you are so tired of this family, how every single of one of them except the mother is either completely delusional or in denial. And the nagging question of Jesse will stay with you. His life is either unspeakable tragic or unspeakably evil, and the frightening thing is that you just dont know. Capturing the Friedmans (2002)
]]>Tue, 13 May 2008 23:58:39 GMTCinemaRianCinemaRian Blog5/13/2008 7:58:39 PMCapturing the Friedmans is the kind of movie that makes you hate life. You want a genie to appear out of a bottle and tell you what the truth is and what the hell is going on. After watching for two hours, I wasnt sure whether the protagonist was an innocent kid who had his youth wrongfully stolen from him and his reputation stained forever, or evil monster who deserves to be in prison for life. The movie is a documentary about the destruction of a family in Great Neck, New York, after the father and youngest son are arrested for heinous crimes in 1987. Arnold Friedman was a well liked and award winning teacher in the community, until he was caught buying child pornography in a police sting. The police noted that he gave private piano and computer lessons at his home. After interviewing children in the computer class, they arrested Arnold and his 18-year old son Jesse, as the children reported that they molested and raped dozens of them. But the film then takes a very weird turn. David Friedman, Jesses brother, bought a video camera and documents the family arguments (a third brother, Seth, declined to be interviewed for the film but does appear in the family videos). Why anyone would want to record their family disintegrating is beyond me, but the footage on the video is surreal. On the night before Arnold is to go to prison for the rest of his life, no one seems to phased by it- they mess around have fun. This is not nervous laughter, its just weird. What is also disturbing is David and Seths treatment of their mother. Although Arnold has confessed public and privately to some sick behavior (such as molesting his brother as a teenager), David goes into deniel and blames his mother for all the problems. He thinks the family has been framed by the police and that Arnold is completely innocent. I felt so much sympathy for this woman, at times I wanted to slap David. But then the film takes another even stranger turn. The director, Andrew Jarecki, begins to compile a compelling case that Jesse may actually be innocent. Some children in the computer class confess that they told the police what they want to hear, one of their parents says that the police were on a fishing expedition. Jarecki interviews a reporter who has done extensive work with child abuse cases and finds that in the 80s, police often honestly but wrongfully used techniques that pressure victims into false statements and some times even implant false memories. While it seems likely to me that Arnold must have done something wrong, Jesse may be an innocent victim. Or maybe not. I went back and forth on this so many times during the movie I lost count. There is strong evidence both ways and the police appear to be honest individuals who just wanted to see justice done. Unlike the detectives in The Thin Blue Line, they do no appear to be liars or incompetent. If they did anything wrong, they were overzealous in protecting children, which is hard to be angry at. By the end of the film, you are so tired of this family, how every single of one of them except the mother is either completely delusional or in denial. And the nagging question of Jesse will stay with you. His life is either unspeakable tragic or unspeakably evil, and the frightening thing is that you just dont know. Capturing the Friedmans (2002) http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/1/22/24201.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/22/2008 11:01:11 AM
Body: The Oscar nominations have been announced, and because we all need to complain about at least one thing every year, let my gripe be with the Jonny Greenwood snub (apparently his score was disqualified). Karina will be sharing her own analysis later today. Stay tuned. It’s been a serious topic that Sundance isn’t the buying frenzy we all thought it would be. But when distributors talk about a filmmaker needing to pay them, it’s really a bad time for the festival. I guess if one of the Jarecki brothers has to abandon documentary filmmaking for a feature debut starring Kirsten Dunst and Ryan Gosling, I’d rather it be Andrew (Capturing the Friedmans) than Eugene (Why We Fight), even if the trailer for All Good Things will be able to sneakily advertise the film as being “From Oscar-nominated director Andrew Jarecki.” Adrian Brody as Leonard Chess and Jeffrey Wright as Muddy Waters may be the best recording exec/recording artist casting pair-up since Ray’s Curtis Armstrong and Jamie Foxx, but I really just want to know who Cedric the Entertainer will be portraying. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:01:11 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/22/2008 11:01:11 AM The Oscar nominations have been announced, and because we all need to complain about at least one thing every year, let my gripe be with the Jonny Greenwood snub (apparently his score was disqualified). Karina will be sharing her own analysis later today. Stay tuned. It’s been a serious topic that Sundance isn’t the buying frenzy we all thought it would be. But when distributors talk about a filmmaker needing to pay them, it’s really a bad time for the festival. I guess if one of the Jarecki brothers has to abandon documentary filmmaking for a feature debut starring Kirsten Dunst and Ryan Gosling, I’d rather it be Andrew (Capturing the Friedmans) than Eugene (Why We Fight), even if the trailer for All Good Things will be able to sneakily advertise the film as being “From Oscar-nominated director Andrew Jarecki.” Adrian Brody as Leonard Chess and Jeffrey Wright as Muddy Waters may be the best recording exec/recording artist casting pair-up since Ray’s Curtis Armstrong and Jamie Foxx, but I really just want to know who Cedric the Entertainer will be portraying. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/paul/archive/2006/8/23/2635.aspx Post By: paul
Post To: paul on spout.com
Post Date: 8/23/2006 2:49:00 PM
Body: Originally posted 8/13/06 on SpoutBlog.com51 Birch Street is a documentary of a filmmaker, Doug Block, going down the slippery slope of revisiting his parents' marriage after his mom's death. It was an inadvertent project. Like Capturing the Friedmans, most of the footage was shot as home video without any inkling it would become scenes of a story. The film is dense and introspective. It demands you to either look closely at your own relationships or tune out. As a married man, I don't think I could tune it out. In a way, having the opportunity to look at a marriage this way is like a wish come true. It's an examination of a couple at the end of life--not an examination of what this marriage was supposed to be, but what it was: prickly, difficult, boring, estranged, warm, loving, limited, broken and, on some level, successful. Early in the film, the image of marriage is mentioned. Doug's mom and dad--and most of their friends--got married with the sense that life would be like the movies. He even has photos of them looking like movie stars. His dad returns from WWII fit and handsome. He and his girl "fall madly in love" (meaning an intense physical attraction). They get married. The film depicts two movie-inspired images of marriage. Image number one could be called the Silver Screen Romance. In my mind it's Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn embracing. That image was "marriage." It was quickly followed up with image number two: Perfect Suburban Life. Picture an image in a glossy home magazine of the perfect family sitting down to breakfast. "Family." These are the images real life has to stack up against. No wonder the messiness of life can feel like a tumor that needs to be cut out. What I love about little no-budget documentaries like Doug's is they hold up the image of what life (in this case marriage) really is. It's sobering. Honestly, I'm tempted to say it should be shown to every couple applying for a marriage license. It's tempting to say we're more enlightened now. We know Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn aren't how it's really supposed to be, and that 1950's women were repressed. We know those images are false. But what about Julia Roberts and Hugh Grant? Oh yeah, they're just movies. They're not real. But when the credits roll on those films and I feel a subtle disappointment my relationship isn't more like what I just watched, that feeling is real. I can't deny the feeling. These are the images I'm talking about. Something false, yet something created to make me feel good so I'll pay eight dollars for a ticket. It comes home from the theater with me as a feeling of what my relationship lacks. All for an eight dollar ticket. I'd rather have 51 Birch Street.
]]>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:49:00 GMTpaulpaul on spout.com8/23/2006 2:49:00 PMOriginally posted 8/13/06 on SpoutBlog.com51 Birch Street is a documentary of a filmmaker, Doug Block, going down the slippery slope of revisiting his parents' marriage after his mom's death. It was an inadvertent project. Like Capturing the Friedmans, most of the footage was shot as home video without any inkling it would become scenes of a story. The film is dense and introspective. It demands you to either look closely at your own relationships or tune out. As a married man, I don't think I could tune it out. In a way, having the opportunity to look at a marriage this way is like a wish come true. It's an examination of a couple at the end of life--not an examination of what this marriage was supposed to be, but what it was: prickly, difficult, boring, estranged, warm, loving, limited, broken and, on some level, successful. Early in the film, the image of marriage is mentioned. Doug's mom and dad--and most of their friends--got married with the sense that life would be like the movies. He even has photos of them looking like movie stars. His dad returns from WWII fit and handsome. He and his girl "fall madly in love" (meaning an intense physical attraction). They get married. The film depicts two movie-inspired images of marriage. Image number one could be called the Silver Screen Romance. In my mind it's Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn embracing. That image was "marriage." It was quickly followed up with image number two: Perfect Suburban Life. Picture an image in a glossy home magazine of the perfect family sitting down to breakfast. "Family." These are the images real life has to stack up against. No wonder the messiness of life can feel like a tumor that needs to be cut out. What I love about little no-budget documentaries like Doug's is they hold up the image of what life (in this case marriage) really is. It's sobering. Honestly, I'm tempted to say it should be shown to every couple applying for a marriage license. It's tempting to say we're more enlightened now. We know Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn aren't how it's really supposed to be, and that 1950's women were repressed. We know those images are false. But what about Julia Roberts and Hugh Grant? Oh yeah, they're just movies. They're not real. But when the credits roll on those films and I feel a subtle disappointment my relationship isn't more like what I just watched, that feeling is real. I can't deny the feeling. These are the images I'm talking about. Something false, yet something created to make me feel good so I'll pay eight dollars for a ticket. It comes home from the theater with me as a feeling of what my relationship lacks. All for an eight dollar ticket. I'd rather have 51 Birch Street. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/clown/MemberTagFilms.aspxclown
Number of films tagged: 235

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 25

]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:04:09 GMT2351525Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/familystrife/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamilystrife
Number of films tagged: 213

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 12

]]>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:02:37 GMT213912Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sexualabuse/MemberTagFilms.aspxsexualabuse
Number of films tagged: 109

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

]]>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 03:09:06 GMT10933Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/homemovies/MemberTagFilms.aspxhomemovies
Number of films tagged: 99

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 13:07:26 GMT9922Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sexcrime/MemberTagFilms.aspxsexcrime
Number of films tagged: 35

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 13:02:22 GMT3522Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/leapfrog/MemberTagFilms.aspxleapfrog
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:29:23 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mediacircus/MemberTagFilms.aspxmediacircus
Number of films tagged: 63

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:07:10 GMT6311Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/childmolestation/MemberTagFilms.aspxchildmolestation
Number of films tagged: 23

Number of people who tagged: 0

Number of times used: 0

]]>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:01:21 GMT2300Tag