list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around The Lord of the Rings [Film Series] 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/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_Film_Series/223970/default.aspx Title: The Lord of the Rings [Film Series]
Plot: The Lord of the Rings film trilogy comprises three live action fantasy epic films: The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Set in the fictional world of Middle-earth, the three films follow the young Hobbit Frodo Baggins as he and a Fellowship embark on a quest to destroy the One Ring, and thus ensure the destruction of the Dark Lord Sauron. However, the Fellowship breaks and Frodo continues the quest together with his loyal companion Sam and the treacherous Gollum. Meanwhile, the wizard Gandalf and Aragorn, heir in exile to the throne of Gondor, unite and rally the Free Peoples of Middle-earth in several battles culminating in the War of the Ring. The wizard Saruman is defeated, The Ring is destroyed, and Sauron and his forces are vanquished.
Times Tagged: 13
Number of Lists: 19
Number of blog posts: 23
Number of discussion threads: 13
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Sun, 08 Mar 2009 14:01:32 GMTThe Lord of the Rings [Film Series]The Lord of the Rings film trilogy comprises three live action fantasy epic films: <a href-"http://www.spout.com/films/201797/default.aspx">The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring</a>, <a href="http://www.spout.com/films/214504/default.aspx">The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers</a> and <a href="http://www.spout.com/films/220058/default.aspx">The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King</a>. Set in the fictional world of Middle-earth, the three films follow the young Hobbit Frodo Baggins as he and a Fellowship embark on a quest to destroy the One Ring, and thus ensure the destruction of the Dark Lord Sauron. However, the Fellowship breaks and Frodo continues the quest together with his loyal companion Sam and the treacherous Gollum. Meanwhile, the wizard Gandalf and Aragorn, heir in exile to the throne of Gondor, unite and rally the Free Peoples of Middle-earth in several battles culminating in the War of the Ring. The wizard Saruman is defeated, The Ring is destroyed, and Sauron and his forces are vanquished.13Tag Target (>10)1923134http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s223970.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_Film_Series/223970/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/pepper-ann/archive/2009/2/12/40411.aspx Post By: Pepper-Ann
Post To: Pepper-Ann Blog
Post Date: 2/12/2009 3:01:28 AM
Body: First of all, I'm a fan of the books. So that may make a difference. But this trilogy is fantastic. It may be a little slow at times. Especially in the second movie which was my least favorite because of the Ents. But all of the actors did a great job not to mention the gorgeous cinematography which I could look at all day. Everytime I watch this I find something new. Whether it's a camera angle I didn't notice, or a different facial expression. Definitely a must see for fantasy fans. Even without Tom Bombadil.
]]>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 08:01:28 GMTPepper-AnnPepper-Ann Blog2/12/2009 3:01:28 AMFirst of all, I'm a fan of the books. So that may make a difference. But this trilogy is fantastic. It may be a little slow at times. Especially in the second movie which was my least favorite because of the Ents. But all of the actors did a great job not to mention the gorgeous cinematography which I could look at all day. Everytime I watch this I find something new. Whether it's a camera angle I didn't notice, or a different facial expression. Definitely a must see for fantasy fans. Even without Tom Bombadil. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/12/22/38725.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 12/22/2008 3:00:49 PM
Body: I wish I were more familiar with the cartoon Thundercats so that I could properly appreciate this new fan-made trailer. And yet it’s such a well-done video that it’s hard to even think I could appreciate it more than I already do. Someone clearly put way too much time into this thing, picking out appropriate segments from Troy, the Lord of the Rings trilogy and other films, and digitally painting the faces of Brad Pitt, Vin Diesel and Hugh Jackman (and an actress nobody seems to be able to identify). It’s so terrific that the real Thundercats movie (potentially arriving in 2010) will no doubt be a disappointment in comparison (perhaps as bad as this old fake Thundercats movie trailer). In fact, this version’s awkward CG-rendered Snarf is likely better than what Warner Bros. will give us (the actual film is reportedly going to be entirely computer-animated). I was going to initially say that this is the best fake trailer I’ve ever seen, but I probably say that too often. Plus, I’m going to stick with the Where’s Waldo parody of The Bourne Identity for that honor. Still, this is one of the best I’ve seen in terms of technical achievement. [via Hollywood-Elsewhere] Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:00:49 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com12/22/2008 3:00:49 PMI wish I were more familiar with the cartoon Thundercats so that I could properly appreciate this new fan-made trailer. And yet it’s such a well-done video that it’s hard to even think I could appreciate it more than I already do. Someone clearly put way too much time into this thing, picking out appropriate segments from Troy, the Lord of the Rings trilogy and other films, and digitally painting the faces of Brad Pitt, Vin Diesel and Hugh Jackman (and an actress nobody seems to be able to identify). It’s so terrific that the real Thundercats movie (potentially arriving in 2010) will no doubt be a disappointment in comparison (perhaps as bad as this old fake Thundercats movie trailer). In fact, this version’s awkward CG-rendered Snarf is likely better than what Warner Bros. will give us (the actual film is reportedly going to be entirely computer-animated). I was going to initially say that this is the best fake trailer I’ve ever seen, but I probably say that too often. Plus, I’m going to stick with the Where’s Waldo parody of The Bourne Identity for that honor. Still, this is one of the best I’ve seen in terms of technical achievement. [via Hollywood-Elsewhere] Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/lmstanley/archive/2008/12/3/37888.aspx Post By: lmstanley
Post To: lmstanley Blog
Post Date: 12/3/2008 10:48:59 AM
Body: I am a huge fan of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I read the books way back when and the movies go above and beyond in keeping true the characters, the story, and Middle-earth. I don't think that you have to be a huge fantasy film fan to enjoy this series. If you dig a good story then you'll find the time to make it through all three films. Completely worth the watch. Just talking about it makes me want to spend a day doing nothing but watching all three over again.
]]>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 15:48:59 GMTlmstanleylmstanley Blog12/3/2008 10:48:59 AMI am a huge fan of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I read the books way back when and the movies go above and beyond in keeping true the characters, the story, and Middle-earth. I don't think that you have to be a huge fantasy film fan to enjoy this series. If you dig a good story then you'll find the time to make it through all three films. Completely worth the watch. Just talking about it makes me want to spend a day doing nothing but watching all three over again. http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/10/30/36819.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 10/30/2008 5:00:46 PM
Body: TV and film critic Andrew Johnston (long with Time Out New York, more recently a contributor at The House Next Door) died over the weekend at age 40, after a battle with cancer. I didn’t know Andrew personally, but I knew his writing through his Mad Men recaps at The House, which this season I began religiously checking every Sunday night after watching each new episode twice in a row. Now House Next Door creator Matt Zoller Seitz has published a tribute to Johnston, which is a must-read whether you’re familiar with his criticism or not. Two things pop out: first, Johnston leaves behind a legacy of supporting other film and media writers, most notably by helping them get jobs. As Seitz writes, He believed in talent and originality and singularity of artistic expression, and he dedicated his professional and personal life to seeking out those qualities, nurturing them and doing all he could to help anyone who exemplified them find an audience…Many, many more working critics have their own versions of these anecdotes. The all end the same way: Andrew gave me my start. And second, if as a member of the critics community Johnston was active in nurturing underdogs, as a critic he did the same. Seitz details Johnston’s fight, as a member of the exclusive New York Film Critics Circle, to push to have The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King recognized by the older-skewing, arguably elitist group as the Best Picture of its year. He succeeded, and it was a victory for more than that specific film: Andrew considered it the award not just a deserved accolade for a mammoth and unexpectedly well-executed project, but a bouquet tossed to fantasy and science fiction buffs whose enthusiasms were more often mocked by the critical establishment. The NYFCC award paved the way for Return of the King to sweep the Oscars that year, and for other critics to proclaim their love of the trilogy openly, without the usual qualifiers. You can read Seitz’s full piece here. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:00:46 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog10/30/2008 5:00:46 PMTV and film critic Andrew Johnston (long with Time Out New York, more recently a contributor at The House Next Door) died over the weekend at age 40, after a battle with cancer. I didn’t know Andrew personally, but I knew his writing through his Mad Men recaps at The House, which this season I began religiously checking every Sunday night after watching each new episode twice in a row. Now House Next Door creator Matt Zoller Seitz has published a tribute to Johnston, which is a must-read whether you’re familiar with his criticism or not. Two things pop out: first, Johnston leaves behind a legacy of supporting other film and media writers, most notably by helping them get jobs. As Seitz writes, He believed in talent and originality and singularity of artistic expression, and he dedicated his professional and personal life to seeking out those qualities, nurturing them and doing all he could to help anyone who exemplified them find an audience…Many, many more working critics have their own versions of these anecdotes. The all end the same way: Andrew gave me my start. And second, if as a member of the critics community Johnston was active in nurturing underdogs, as a critic he did the same. Seitz details Johnston’s fight, as a member of the exclusive New York Film Critics Circle, to push to have The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King recognized by the older-skewing, arguably elitist group as the Best Picture of its year. He succeeded, and it was a victory for more than that specific film: Andrew considered it the award not just a deserved accolade for a mammoth and unexpectedly well-executed project, but a bouquet tossed to fantasy and science fiction buffs whose enthusiasms were more often mocked by the critical establishment. The NYFCC award paved the way for Return of the King to sweep the Oscars that year, and for other critics to proclaim their love of the trilogy openly, without the usual qualifiers. You can read Seitz’s full piece here. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/30/36817.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/30/2008 5:00:34 PM
Body: TV and film critic Andrew Johnston (long with Time Out New York, more recently a contributor at The House Next Door) died over the weekend at age 40, after a battle with cancer. I didn’t know Andrew personally, but I knew his writing through his Mad Men recaps at The House, which this season I began religiously checking every Sunday night after watching each new episode twice in a row. Now House Next Door creator Matt Zoller Seitz has published a tribute to Johnston, which is a must-read whether you’re familiar with his criticism or not. Two things pop out: first, Johnston leaves behind a legacy of supporting other film and media writers, most notably by helping them get jobs. As Seitz writes, He believed in talent and originality and singularity of artistic expression, and he dedicated his professional and personal life to seeking out those qualities, nurturing them and doing all he could to help anyone who exemplified them find an audience…Many, many more working critics have their own versions of these anecdotes. The all end the same way: Andrew gave me my start. And second, if as a member of the critics community Johnston was active in nurturing underdogs, as a critic he did the same. Seitz details Johnston’s fight, as a member of the exclusive New York Film Critics Circle, to push to have The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King recognized by the older-skewing, arguably elitist group as the Best Picture of its year. He succeeded, and it was a victory for more than that specific film: Andrew considered it the award not just a deserved accolade for a mammoth and unexpectedly well-executed project, but a bouquet tossed to fantasy and science fiction buffs whose enthusiasms were more often mocked by the critical establishment. The NYFCC award paved the way for Return of the King to sweep the Oscars that year, and for other critics to proclaim their love of the trilogy openly, without the usual qualifiers. You can read Seitz’s full piece here. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:00:34 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/30/2008 5:00:34 PMTV and film critic Andrew Johnston (long with Time Out New York, more recently a contributor at The House Next Door) died over the weekend at age 40, after a battle with cancer. I didn’t know Andrew personally, but I knew his writing through his Mad Men recaps at The House, which this season I began religiously checking every Sunday night after watching each new episode twice in a row. Now House Next Door creator Matt Zoller Seitz has published a tribute to Johnston, which is a must-read whether you’re familiar with his criticism or not. Two things pop out: first, Johnston leaves behind a legacy of supporting other film and media writers, most notably by helping them get jobs. As Seitz writes, He believed in talent and originality and singularity of artistic expression, and he dedicated his professional and personal life to seeking out those qualities, nurturing them and doing all he could to help anyone who exemplified them find an audience…Many, many more working critics have their own versions of these anecdotes. The all end the same way: Andrew gave me my start. And second, if as a member of the critics community Johnston was active in nurturing underdogs, as a critic he did the same. Seitz details Johnston’s fight, as a member of the exclusive New York Film Critics Circle, to push to have The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King recognized by the older-skewing, arguably elitist group as the Best Picture of its year. He succeeded, and it was a victory for more than that specific film: Andrew considered it the award not just a deserved accolade for a mammoth and unexpectedly well-executed project, but a bouquet tossed to fantasy and science fiction buffs whose enthusiasms were more often mocked by the critical establishment. The NYFCC award paved the way for Return of the King to sweep the Oscars that year, and for other critics to proclaim their love of the trilogy openly, without the usual qualifiers. You can read Seitz’s full piece here. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Games_that_should_be_movies_and_High_School_Hor/190/36566/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 10/21/2008 11:46:49 PM
Body: Video Games 1.) Contra - Rambo meets Alien. Could be pretty fun. 2.) Castevania - Killing Dracula. As long as Uwe Boll doesn't direct could be interesting. 3.) Kid Icarus - Kid with wings fighting ancient Greek monsters. 4.) Metroid - Badass chick pummeling aliens with an assortment of weapons. 5.) Legend of Zelda - The Sword in the Stone / Legend / Lord of the Rings.
]]>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 03:46:49 GMTmercurialTop 510/21/2008 11:46:49 PMVideo Games 1.) Contra - Rambo meets Alien. Could be pretty fun. 2.) Castevania - Killing Dracula. As long as Uwe Boll doesn't direct could be interesting. 3.) Kid Icarus - Kid with wings fighting ancient Greek monsters. 4.) Metroid - Badass chick pummeling aliens with an assortment of weapons. 5.) Legend of Zelda - The Sword in the Stone / Legend / Lord of the Rings. http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_September_29_Gimme_Some_Drugs/625/35749/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Dr_Gor
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 9/30/2008 10:57:16 PM
Body: OOH! One More! The Lord Of The Rings trilogy ... just what do you think that "pipe-weed" that everyone keeps smoking is? (this is explained a little more thoroughly in the books) ...
]]>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:57:16 GMTDr_GorWeekly Theme9/30/2008 10:57:16 PM OOH! One More! The Lord Of The Rings trilogy ... just what do you think that "pipe-weed" that everyone keeps smoking is? (this is explained a little more thoroughly in the books) ... http://www.spout.com/groups/The_Film_Library/Re_3_10_to_Yuma_Best_adaptation_ever/512/35349/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: TheWorkingDead
Post To: The Film Library
Post Date: 9/21/2008 4:01:08 PM
Body: [quote user="seely"] I was a little surprised not to see a thread on this here, but I have to say, I think the latest adaptation of 3:10 to Yuma could be one of the best paper-to-film adaptations, ever. Every role seemed flawlessly cast (and I don't even really like Russell Crowe), and the dialogue was delivered beautifully and accurately. Now, granted 3:10 is a short story, so therefore I think it naturally works better for a 2hrs adaptation than say, 400 pages of Lord of the Rings , which I feel were excellent given their constraints--but definately strayed from the original story in more places than one and sometimes lacked what I felt when I read the original books. I'm not sure quite what it was about 3:10, but it just seemed flawless. I felt as though I were re-reading the story and picturing the scenes in my mind, and not sitting in a theatre watching it on a big screen. Brilliant. Anyone care to agree/disagree? Curious to see what others have to say... [/quote] I haven't yet seen 3:10, and I have to admit I wasn't even aware that it was a short story first. But you've really piqued my interest, so I'm going to make a concerted effort to see this one, and because I'm like this, I'll probably hunt down the original story, too. Welcome to the group!
]]>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 20:01:08 GMTTheWorkingDeadThe Film Library9/21/2008 4:01:08 PM[quote user="seely"] I was a little surprised not to see a thread on this here, but I have to say, I think the latest adaptation of 3:10 to Yuma could be one of the best paper-to-film adaptations, ever. Every role seemed flawlessly cast (and I don't even really like Russell Crowe), and the dialogue was delivered beautifully and accurately. Now, granted 3:10 is a short story, so therefore I think it naturally works better for a 2hrs adaptation than say, 400 pages of Lord of the Rings , which I feel were excellent given their constraints--but definately strayed from the original story in more places than one and sometimes lacked what I felt when I read the original books. I'm not sure quite what it was about 3:10, but it just seemed flawless. I felt as though I were re-reading the story and picturing the scenes in my mind, and not sitting in a theatre watching it on a big screen. Brilliant. Anyone care to agree/disagree? Curious to see what others have to say... [/quote] I haven't yet seen 3:10, and I have to admit I wasn't even aware that it was a short story first. But you've really piqued my interest, so I'm going to make a concerted effort to see this one, and because I'm like this, I'll probably hunt down the original story, too. Welcome to the group! http://www.spout.com/groups/The_Film_Library/3_10_to_Yuma_Best_adaptation_ever/512/35142/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: seely
Post To: The Film Library
Post Date: 9/15/2008 10:42:15 AM
Body: I was a little surprised not to see a thread on this here, but I have to say, I think the latest adaptation of 3:10 to Yuma could be one of the best paper-to-film adaptations, ever. Every role seemed flawlessly cast (and I don't even really like Russell Crowe), and the dialogue was delivered beautifully and accurately. Now, granted 3:10 is a short story, so therefore I think it naturally works better for a 2hrs adaptation than say, 400 pages of Lord of the Rings , which I feel were excellent given their constraints--but definately strayed from the original story in more places than one and sometimes lacked what I felt when I read the original books. I'm not sure quite what it was about 3:10, but it just seemed flawless. I felt as though I were re-reading the story and picturing the scenes in my mind, and not sitting in a theatre watching it on a big screen. Brilliant. Anyone care to agree/disagree? Curious to see what others have to say...
]]>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:42:15 GMTseelyThe Film Library9/15/2008 10:42:15 AMI was a little surprised not to see a thread on this here, but I have to say, I think the latest adaptation of 3:10 to Yuma could be one of the best paper-to-film adaptations, ever. Every role seemed flawlessly cast (and I don't even really like Russell Crowe), and the dialogue was delivered beautifully and accurately. Now, granted 3:10 is a short story, so therefore I think it naturally works better for a 2hrs adaptation than say, 400 pages of Lord of the Rings , which I feel were excellent given their constraints--but definately strayed from the original story in more places than one and sometimes lacked what I felt when I read the original books. I'm not sure quite what it was about 3:10, but it just seemed flawless. I felt as though I were re-reading the story and picturing the scenes in my mind, and not sitting in a theatre watching it on a big screen. Brilliant. Anyone care to agree/disagree? Curious to see what others have to say... http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/7/3/32056.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 7/3/2008 11:00:39 AM
Body: My version of The Godfather would open with a voice in the darkness saying, “I don’t believe in America. The American Dream is a once-beguiling fairy tale; show’s over, y’all.” But The Dream is still real to many people, and the violence that powerful private interests have done to it in the last century pains them like a kidney punch. Gonzo journalism pioneer Hunter S. Thompson was one of the wounded, and so is Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Taxi to the Darkside), the far more straight-laced director of the entertaining documentary Gonzo: The Life and Work of Hunter S. Thompson. They share a proprietary sense of outrage over abuses of power they’ve witnessed in their times. For them, America’s Nixons, Enrons and Bush-Cheneys have desecrated the church, the front lawn. For all their passionate trouble-making, there’s no denying that Gibney and the late Thompson, two white males who came up through America’s hallowed institutions (Thompson through the U.S. Air Force; Gibney through Yale), are insiders. When I went to interview Gibney about Gonzo, I remembered the film’s procession of leathery right-wingers and elites, former Thompson nemeses, who have warm, friendly things to say about “Dr. Gonzo” now that he’s dead, now that his caricature as a gun-toting drughead has endured beyond his politics. I wondered if, in the end, being inside got the hole dug any better than chucking rocks from outside. STEVEN BOONE: On the way over here I was reading the introduction to John Steinbeck’s The Pearl, and the person mentioned that, with the publishing of The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck had his greatest fame, his greatest success. With that, you’d think he would have found some comfort, but he was actually a bit in despair that he was being embraced by the very elite forces he was critiquing. Of course, you have Hunter Thompson with his downward spiral… For you, with this recent run of success, is there any kind of… ALEX GIBNEY: Despair? (laughs) SB: (laughs) Well, regret…? Second thoughts? “Where do I go from here?” AG: I have to be honest with you. I haven’t experienced that. I haven’t reached that kind of– I mean, first of all, okay, I won the Oscar. I feel great, believe me. Walking around with that statue, you feel like Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings. But I feel like there’s so many other interesting things to do. One of the salvations is to keep having a next project to do and you focus on that, even as you’re looking back. So you don’t spend all day looking your name up on Google. SB: Well, I do, but– AG: (laughs) But not all day, maybe 12 or 13 hours. SB: (laughs) Right. But I look at your body of work and I see a certain political conviction behind it. AG: Right. SB: It’s critical, but it is from the perspective of an insider, sort of like your colleague Charles Ferguson with No End in Sight. You came up through Yale, you came up through UCLA, you have your Oscars and your Emmys. You have your… sanction from certain institutions. Does it complicate matters for you going forward? AG: I understand what you’re getting at and I think it does, to some extent. The danger part always comes with celebrity, you know? You end up going out on the circuit, to some extent and then you get comfortable hanging around with other celebrities and then suddenly– it’s like being an insider journalist in Washington. Hunter talked about that in the campaign trail book [Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72]. He said, “I’m just gonna blow in here and blow out. I don’t have to worry about being here four, five, six years from now, trying to play a game, make sure that this person’s comfortable, that person’s comfortable.” It’s a little bit easier when you go in and out. But I do think, you know, I’ve had great opportunities. I’ve had a private school education, I went to a good university, I went to a good film school and I know a lot of powerful people. It turns out that that is a good advantage for me because I tend to do films about the perps rather than the victims. When you try to get inside and see what’s going on with the people who are committing these grand crimes, it helps to have access to those connections, sometimes because otherwise you don’t get in the door. But the question is, at some point, do you become one of those people? (laughs) SB: That’s the question. AG: That’s the question. Well, you’ll see. You’ll be my judge, and you’ll let me know. (laughs) SB: But do you ever feel that inner conflict, with maybe posing a certain question or, I don’t know, just bringing a bad vibe into the room…? Have you ever felt yourself back away because, “Hey, this is a nice guy, a decent person.” Sort of like when Hunter Thompson was in the car with Nixon, said he was a pleasant guy to talk football with. AG: Right. Well, you you always have to kind of separate. One of the big things I’ve learned is… My sister in law once said it: “Everybody’s nice.” And you sit with people in a room and sometimes they’re total assholes and you say, “Well, fuck them,” right? But sometimes they’re very nice and solicitous and charming and it is true: When you get close, your tendency is not to–almost kind of a Stockholm Syndrome takes over. But you realize that there are a lot of nice people out there who do horrible things. SB: How do you contrast yourself with other filmmakers at your level of success dealing with similar subjects– let’s say Michael Moore or Nick– AG: Everybody’s got their own style. Everybody always asks me about Michael. I always say that Michael does his own thing. There’s no illusion when you go see a Michael Moore film. You know it’s a Michael Moore film and you’re getting what you get. The only people that piss me off are the one that try to hide stuff, pretend to be doing one thing and doing something else. SB: Like who? AG: Well, um… Trying to think now… There was, a number of years ago, somebody doing a film about the civil rights movement and they actually faked some archival footage of the movement. They did a re-creation but they intercut it freely with actual footage from the events. SB: Whaa? Fox News? AG: No, no. It was on HBO. And there was a big hue and cry over it because it wasn’t like a re-creation where you know the filmmakers shot this with actors. That I have a real problem with. SB: Well, I was a little uncertain at some points in Gonzo. Actually, I’m pretty sure that when we were listening to audio tape of Thompson and his attorney on the road to Vegas that what I was seeing was a re-enactment. AG: Right. SB: But it was pretty slick. AB: It was. Two things I’ll say about that. First of all, we’re trying to do some fun stuff like Hunter did, like claiming Muskey’s high on this drug called Ebogaine. This kind of tall tale telling. But at the beginning of the film, you see this photograph of Hunter with a gun pointed at a typewriter. Zoom into his hand, where it hard-cuts to a real hand firing the gun. I think its a clue to the audience, you know, “Buyer beware, there’s gonna be some wild stuff.” We’re going to be playing around. Even with that [road trip] sequence, which I love… We shot it with actors who look a lot like Hunter and Oscar. We had the audio tape and we’d go out and shoot Super 8, kind of a home movie. But the deeper into that home movie you get, suddenly you start to see the action from three or four different angles, and you gota be thinking, “This is not a home movie.” SB: Sort of mirroring Hunter’s techniques, sliding in and out of reality. AG: That’s right. SB: Drawing out the people who are really reading closely. AG: Right. There’s a moment where it’s ambiguous. That’s okay, as long as you resolve that moment at the end. SB: It kind of reminds me of a documentary I saw a few years back, How to Draw a Bunny, about the artist Ray Johnson. AG: Oh, I heard about that one. Was that a good film? SB: It’s a good film, and in style it’s playful and kind of a series of stunts in the way that Johnson’s work was. [A moment of giddy Netflix chitchat ensues, and then:] SB: What would Hunter Thompson have to say about these times we’re living in now, or can you speak for him? AG: I don’t know if I can, but he got very depressed when Bush won in ‘04 and not long after that he committed suicide. I think it’s too much to say that that’s what drove him to suicide. There are lots of other factors that are not so pretty. But I think he would say that we’re seeing the triumph of fear and loathing over that other part of the American character, this sense of idealism. Bush represented to him that aspect of the United States that goes back to its inception. At the same time, he was a big Bobby Kennedy fan and big McGovern fan. I think he’d be an Obama guy now. He would say, “Here’s somebody who understands the need for a prime actor in the theater of American politics. A “together Hunter”–as his wife says– not the drug-addled drunk. The other Hunter would have something to say about it. SB: Would you be with him on that Obama support? AG: I am. I like Obama and I think he does speak to a better possibility. My only concern is, will he end up being… Will he make too many compromises once he’s in power? But you know he’s been through the rough and tumble of Illinois politics, so I’m sure he knows better than I how to navigate that stuff. He stirs peple’s idealism in a way that few people have done in the last 30 years. SB: That’s what ties you to Hunter in my eyes. I view it with a little bit of awe, this kind of idealism underneath it all. Far from cynicism, it’s an idealism that’s been abused– a real sense of connection to America as a concept, American values. AG: At least that possibility. Not always the reality, but at least the dream. He was always obsessed with the American Dream. I share with Hunter the love of that novel The Great Gatsby. The green light at the end of the dock. It’s destructive because there’s the illusion of mobility and possibility that can be very damaging. That’s why [Thompson] set the death of the American Dream in a casino, where it seems like you can roll the dice and win the big one and then you’re the rich man who gets the penthouse, when in fact you’re always playing against the house and the house always wins. At the same time, that green light at the end of the dock is also a sense of real possibility. There are moments when America makes good on that myth. You can get angry when people abuse that myth and only pretend that it’s so, but you can also celebrate that, from time to time, it’s for real. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 15:00:39 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com7/3/2008 11:00:39 AM My version of The Godfather would open with a voice in the darkness saying, “I don’t believe in America. The American Dream is a once-beguiling fairy tale; show’s over, y’all.” But The Dream is still real to many people, and the violence that powerful private interests have done to it in the last century pains them like a kidney punch. Gonzo journalism pioneer Hunter S. Thompson was one of the wounded, and so is Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Taxi to the Darkside), the far more straight-laced director of the entertaining documentary Gonzo: The Life and Work of Hunter S. Thompson. They share a proprietary sense of outrage over abuses of power they’ve witnessed in their times. For them, America’s Nixons, Enrons and Bush-Cheneys have desecrated the church, the front lawn. For all their passionate trouble-making, there’s no denying that Gibney and the late Thompson, two white males who came up through America’s hallowed institutions (Thompson through the U.S. Air Force; Gibney through Yale), are insiders. When I went to interview Gibney about Gonzo, I remembered the film’s procession of leathery right-wingers and elites, former Thompson nemeses, who have warm, friendly things to say about “Dr. Gonzo” now that he’s dead, now that his caricature as a gun-toting drughead has endured beyond his politics. I wondered if, in the end, being inside got the hole dug any better than chucking rocks from outside. STEVEN BOONE: On the way over here I was reading the introduction to John Steinbeck’s The Pearl, and the person mentioned that, with the publishing of The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck had his greatest fame, his greatest success. With that, you’d think he would have found some comfort, but he was actually a bit in despair that he was being embraced by the very elite forces he was critiquing. Of course, you have Hunter Thompson with his downward spiral… For you, with this recent run of success, is there any kind of… ALEX GIBNEY: Despair? (laughs) SB: (laughs) Well, regret…? Second thoughts? “Where do I go from here?” AG: I have to be honest with you. I haven’t experienced that. I haven’t reached that kind of– I mean, first of all, okay, I won the Oscar. I feel great, believe me. Walking around with that statue, you feel like Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings. But I feel like there’s so many other interesting things to do. One of the salvations is to keep having a next project to do and you focus on that, even as you’re looking back. So you don’t spend all day looking your name up on Google. SB: Well, I do, but– AG: (laughs) But not all day, maybe 12 or 13 hours. SB: (laughs) Right. But I look at your body of work and I see a certain political conviction behind it. AG: Right. SB: It’s critical, but it is from the perspective of an insider, sort of like your colleague Charles Ferguson with No End in Sight. You came up through Yale, you came up through UCLA, you have your Oscars and your Emmys. You have your… sanction from certain institutions. Does it complicate matters for you going forward? AG: I understand what you’re getting at and I think it does, to some extent. The danger part always comes with celebrity, you know? You end up going out on the circuit, to some extent and then you get comfortable hanging around with other celebrities and then suddenly– it’s like being an insider journalist in Washington. Hunter talked about that in the campaign trail book [Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72]. He said, “I’m just gonna blow in here and blow out. I don’t have to worry about being here four, five, six years from now, trying to play a game, make sure that this person’s comfortable, that person’s comfortable.” It’s a little bit easier when you go in and out. But I do think, you know, I’ve had great opportunities. I’ve had a private school education, I went to a good university, I went to a good film school and I know a lot of powerful people. It turns out that that is a good advantage for me because I tend to do films about the perps rather than the victims. When you try to get inside and see what’s going on with the people who are committing these grand crimes, it helps to have access to those connections, sometimes because otherwise you don’t get in the door. But the question is, at some point, do you become one of those people? (laughs) SB: That’s the question. AG: That’s the question. Well, you’ll see. You’ll be my judge, and you’ll let me know. (laughs) SB: But do you ever feel that inner conflict, with maybe posing a certain question or, I don’t know, just bringing a bad vibe into the room…? Have you ever felt yourself back away because, “Hey, this is a nice guy, a decent person.” Sort of like when Hunter Thompson was in the car with Nixon, said he was a pleasant guy to talk football with. AG: Right. Well, you you always have to kind of separate. One of the big things I’ve learned is… My sister in law once said it: “Everybody’s nice.” And you sit with people in a room and sometimes they’re total assholes and you say, “Well, fuck them,” right? But sometimes they’re very nice and solicitous and charming and it is true: When you get close, your tendency is not to–almost kind of a Stockholm Syndrome takes over. But you realize that there are a lot of nice people out there who do horrible things. SB: How do you contrast yourself with other filmmakers at your level of success dealing with similar subjects– let’s say Michael Moore or Nick– AG: Everybody’s got their own style. Everybody always asks me about Michael. I always say that Michael does his own thing. There’s no illusion when you go see a Michael Moore film. You know it’s a Michael Moore film and you’re getting what you get. The only people that piss me off are the one that try to hide stuff, pretend to be doing one thing and doing something else. SB: Like who? AG: Well, um… Trying to think now… There was, a number of years ago, somebody doing a film about the civil rights movement and they actually faked some archival footage of the movement. They did a re-creation but they intercut it freely with actual footage from the events. SB: Whaa? Fox News? AG: No, no. It was on HBO. And there was a big hue and cry over it because it wasn’t like a re-creation where you know the filmmakers shot this with actors. That I have a real problem with. SB: Well, I was a little uncertain at some points in Gonzo. Actually, I’m pretty sure that when we were listening to audio tape of Thompson and his attorney on the road to Vegas that what I was seeing was a re-enactment. AG: Right. SB: But it was pretty slick. AB: It was. Two things I’ll say about that. First of all, we’re trying to do some fun stuff like Hunter did, like claiming Muskey’s high on this drug called Ebogaine. This kind of tall tale telling. But at the beginning of the film, you see this photograph of Hunter with a gun pointed at a typewriter. Zoom into his hand, where it hard-cuts to a real hand firing the gun. I think its a clue to the audience, you know, “Buyer beware, there’s gonna be some wild stuff.” We’re going to be playing around. Even with that [road trip] sequence, which I love… We shot it with actors who look a lot like Hunter and Oscar. We had the audio tape and we’d go out and shoot Super 8, kind of a home movie. But the deeper into that home movie you get, suddenly you start to see the action from three or four different angles, and you gota be thinking, “This is not a home movie.” SB: Sort of mirroring Hunter’s techniques, sliding in and out of reality. AG: That’s right. SB: Drawing out the people who are really reading closely. AG: Right. There’s a moment where it’s ambiguous. That’s okay, as long as you resolve that moment at the end. SB: It kind of reminds me of a documentary I saw a few years back, How to Draw a Bunny, about the artist Ray Johnson. AG: Oh, I heard about that one. Was that a good film? SB: It’s a good film, and in style it’s playful and kind of a series of stunts in the way that Johnson’s work was. [A moment of giddy Netflix chitchat ensues, and then:] SB: What would Hunter Thompson have to say about these times we’re living in now, or can you speak for him? AG: I don’t know if I can, but he got very depressed when Bush won in ‘04 and not long after that he committed suicide. I think it’s too much to say that that’s what drove him to suicide. There are lots of other factors that are not so pretty. But I think he would say that we’re seeing the triumph of fear and loathing over that other part of the American character, this sense of idealism. Bush represented to him that aspect of the United States that goes back to its inception. At the same time, he was a big Bobby Kennedy fan and big McGovern fan. I think he’d be an Obama guy now. He would say, “Here’s somebody who understands the need for a prime actor in the theater of American politics. A “together Hunter”–as his wife says– not the drug-addled drunk. The other Hunter would have something to say about it. SB: Would you be with him on that Obama support? AG: I am. I like Obama and I think he does speak to a better possibility. My only concern is, will he end up being… Will he make too many compromises once he’s in power? But you know he’s been through the rough and tumble of Illinois politics, so I’m sure he knows better than I how to navigate that stuff. He stirs peple’s idealism in a way that few people have done in the last 30 years. SB: That’s what ties you to Hunter in my eyes. I view it with a little bit of awe, this kind of idealism underneath it all. Far from cynicism, it’s an idealism that’s been abused– a real sense of connection to America as a concept, American values. AG: At least that possibility. Not always the reality, but at least the dream. He was always obsessed with the American Dream. I share with Hunter the love of that novel The Great Gatsby. The green light at the end of the dock. It’s destructive because there’s the illusion of mobility and possibility that can be very damaging. That’s why [Thompson] set the death of the American Dream in a casino, where it seems like you can roll the dice and win the big one and then you’re the rich man who gets the penthouse, when in fact you’re always playing against the house and the house always wins. At the same time, that green light at the end of the dock is also a sense of real possibility. There are moments when America makes good on that myth. You can get angry when people abuse that myth and only pretend that it’s so, but you can also celebrate that, from time to time, it’s for real. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Classic/MemberTagFilms.aspxClassic
Number of films tagged: 816

Number of people who tagged: 312

Number of times used: 1453

]]>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 22:54:36 GMT8163121453Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/creative/MemberTagFilms.aspxcreative
Number of films tagged: 15

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 21

]]>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 21:43:44 GMT151821Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/genious/MemberTagFilms.aspxgenious
Number of films tagged: 5

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 5

]]>Wed, 07 May 2008 16:23:53 GMT555Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/jawesome/MemberTagFilms.aspxjawesome
Number of films tagged: 113

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 118

]]>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:03:02 GMT1135118Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/BoxSets/MemberTagFilms.aspxBoxSets
Number of films tagged: 25

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 27

]]>Sat, 23 Jun 2007 07:48:13 GMT25327Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/elijahwood/MemberTagFilms.aspxelijahwood
Number of films tagged: 4

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 4

]]>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:50:06 GMT424Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/middle-age/MemberTagFilms.aspxmiddle-age
Number of films tagged: 5

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 5

]]>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:16:53 GMT525Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/ianmckellen/MemberTagFilms.aspxianmckellen
Number of films tagged: 4

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 4

]]>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:50:06 GMT414Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/jrrtolkien/MemberTagFilms.aspxjrrtolkien
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sat, 23 Jun 2007 07:48:13 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/livtyler/MemberTagFilms.aspxlivtyler
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 2

]]>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:50:06 GMT212Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/peterjackson/MemberTagFilms.aspxpeterjackson
Number of films tagged: 3

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 3

]]>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:50:06 GMT313Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/seanastin/MemberTagFilms.aspxseanastin
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 2

]]>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:50:06 GMT212Tag