list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Downfall 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/Downfall/233555/default.aspx Title: Downfall
Year: 2005
Director: Oliver Hirschbiegel
Plot: The last ten days of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime are seen through the eyes of a young woman in his employ in this historical drama from Germany. Traudl Junge (Alexandra Maria Lara) was 22 years old when, in the fall of 1942, she was hired to be personal secretary to Adolf Hitler (Bruno Ganz). In April of 1945, Junge was still working for Hitler as forces were bearing down on Germany and the leader retreated to a secret bunker in Berlin for what would prove to be the last ten days of his life, as well as that of the Third Reich. As Hitler's mistress Eva Braun (Juliane Köhler) attempts to throw a cheerful birthday party for her man, Hitler's closest associates, including Heinrich Himmler (Ulrich Noethen), Joseph Goebbels (Ulrich Matthes), and Albert Speer (Heino Ferch), urge him to flee the city with only Goebbels maintaining any illusions that the Third Reich has any hope of survival. Hitler refuses to leave Berlin, and he spends his final days ranting and raving to Junge, blaming all around him as he tries to understand where his leadership went wrong. Meanwhile, Goebbels and his wife round up their six children and bring them to the bunker as Berlin begins to topple, determined to take their lives rather than face the Allies after Germany's certain defeat. Der Untergang (aka The Downfall) was based in part on the memoirs of the real-life Traudl Junge, whose experiences also formed the basis of the 2002 documentary Im Toten Winkel: Hitlers Sekretarin (aka Blind Spot: Hitler's Secretary). ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 26
Number of Lists: 20
Number of blog posts: 12
Number of discussion threads: 3
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 12:56:07 GMTDownfall2005Oliver HirschbiegelThe last ten days of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime are seen through the eyes of a young woman in his employ in this historical drama from Germany. Traudl Junge (<a href="/players/P___270677/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Alexandra Maria Lara</a>) was 22 years old when, in the fall of 1942, she was hired to be personal secretary to Adolf Hitler (<a href="/players/P____25786/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Bruno Ganz</a>). In April of 1945, Junge was still working for Hitler as forces were bearing down on Germany and the leader retreated to a secret bunker in Berlin for what would prove to be the last ten days of his life, as well as that of the Third Reich. As Hitler's mistress Eva Braun (Juliane Köhler) attempts to throw a cheerful birthday party for her man, Hitler's closest associates, including Heinrich Himmler (Ulrich Noethen), Joseph Goebbels (Ulrich Matthes), and Albert Speer (Heino Ferch), urge him to flee the city with only Goebbels maintaining any illusions that the Third Reich has any hope of survival. Hitler refuses to leave Berlin, and he spends his final days ranting and raving to Junge, blaming all around him as he tries to understand where his leadership went wrong. Meanwhile, Goebbels and his wife round up their six children and bring them to the bunker as Berlin begins to topple, determined to take their lives rather than face the Allies after Germany's certain defeat. Der Untergang (aka The Downfall) was based in part on the memoirs of the real-life Traudl Junge, whose experiences also formed the basis of the 2002 documentary Im Toten Winkel: Hitlers Sekretarin (aka Blind Spot: Hitler's Secretary). ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide26Tag Target (>10)201234http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t61541qq40j.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Downfall/233555/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/27/39965.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/27/2009 1:01:20 PM
Body: In 10 out of 14 years, the winner of the Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role has gone on to win the Academy Award for Best Actress. If this year marks the 11th such congruence, Meryl Streep will take home the Oscar. Yet there is an odd circumstance with the Academy’s nominations that hurts Streep’s chances. Another one of the Academy’s Best Actress contenders also received a SAG Award Sunday night: Kate Winslet, who won the supporting actress trophy for The Reader. At the Oscars, this role has been recognized as a lead performance, one that is likely a favorite to win. Yes, it is a strange situation, one that shocked and confused Oscar prognosticators (especially this writer) on Thursday morning. Winslet’s Reader performance was campaigned as a supporting role, and she was recognized as such by the Golden Globes, the Broadcast Film Critics Association, the Chicago Film Critics Association and of course the Screen Actors Guild. A few organizations did nominate her for a lead award for The Reader, though few people take the Satellites seriously, and the BAFTA Awards are different than most in that they permit Winslet to compete against herself in the same category (she is also nominated for Best Leading Actress for Revolutionary Road). Some now believe the Academy’s deviation will in fact cost Winslet the Oscar she could have won in the supporting field. Either voters will be confused about what film she’s nominated for (unless I’m simply less observant than elderly Academy members, which may indeed be the case), or she will now split the majority vote with Streep and thus allow Anne Hathaway or Melissa Leo to slip ahead (Angelina Jolie is believed to have no shot). Another idea is that voters will dismiss Winslet due to doubts over which category the performance belongs in. But since enough members of the Academy made it a point to nominate her as lead actress in the first place, this is hardly a reasonable theory. Also potentially without merit is the Holocaust factor, which seems to be the most popular argument for why Winslet is now a shoo-in to win the Oscar. This is an old favorite for Oscar oddsmakers, but it may not actually apply here. Still, when The Reader made surprise appearances in the Best Picture and Best Director categories last Thursday, one of the first familiar quotes to show up online was “there’s no business like Shoah business.” Yet the Academy already failed to nominate shortlisted documentary Blessed Is the Match, despite its Holocaust subject matter, and they also ignored related features such as The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Adam Resurrected, Good and Valkyrie (meanwhile Defiance was only recognized by the music branch). So, certainly the Holocaust fetish thing is not a sure thing. It doesn’t even necessarily carry over to Israeli Oscar nominee Waltz With Bashir, as much as people may try to tie that documentary’s favorable odds to its association with the oft-mocked trend (actually could the doc now suffer with pro-Israel Academy members if it makes them think too much about war crimes committed against Palestinians?). Also, Winslet’s role as a sympathetic concentration camp guard should be as exclusive to the fetish as was (her Reader co-star) Bruno Ganz’s brilliant, Oscar-worthy portrayal of Hitler in Downfall. Even if she has told press that she neither liked nor sympathized with her character. So, then, what are plausible factors in Winslet’s likelihood of winning the Oscar? Well, there is the damage caused by Streep, who has certain advantage in the race for winning the lead SAG Award (which she apparently expected to lose to Winslet), as well as for winning kudos from critic circles, such as the Broadcast Film Critics Association (where she tied with Hathaway). Yet on the other hand, there are all those supporting wins in Winslet and The Reader’s favor, not to mention the triumph she had over Streep at the Golden Globes, even if it was recognition for another performance. There is also the belief that this is simply Winslet’s year to win after losing five previous Oscar races. However, as much as it seems Streep doesn’t need another Academy Award, she has in fact lost her last ten Oscar bids and hasn’t won in more than 25 years. Meanwhile, Winslet has plenty of great years left in her and will surely have more chances in the future. One additional factor could put Winslet’s odds just past Streep’s, and that factor’s name is Harvey Weinstein. Whether the Oscar-hungry exec is simply holding his high ground with the Academy or he’s making a greater push for his company’s film in order to spite Scott Rudin (producer of Streep’s film, Doubt, and a former producer of The Reader) is unclear and beside the point. Many people immediately cursed his name when they saw The Reader make its surprise appearances in the top categories (Nikki Finke believes the film partly prevailed because the Academy wanted to honor Rudin, Winslet and Daldry for having to put up with “that nasty oaf”). Even better than the Harvey factor, though, is the actual quality of Winslet’s work. Sure, worth of talent is all but dead in the modern Hollywood, particularly where the Oscars are concerned, but as a deal breaker in a race between two actresses who are truly brilliant thespians, it could very well be consequential. And between Winslet and Streep, this year the former has the advantage. Streep’s Oscar-nominated role has been viewed by some as overdone, and her other performance in 2008 was in a musical comedy. Winslet, on the other hand, will benefit for giving two Oscar-worthy lead performances, only one of which was nominated. And any voters who initially made the attempt to nominate her for Best Actress for Revolutionary Road may surely choose Winslet with that other unrecognized performance in mind (Anne Thompson agrees she’ll win for both films). With another neck-and-neck race in the Best Actor category and (also thanks to the Academy’s unpredictable deviation from the Winslet campaigns) a lack of a frontrunner in the Best Supporting Actress race, this year’s Oscars are shaping up to be a difficult game to bet on. Knowing that the Academy can be counted on for surprises, it’s possible that Streep will win. Even Hathaway may have a shot (though her time will more likely come from a future supporting role). But if you’re a gambling man who hates to lose, I’d recommend putting your chips on Winslet for Best Actress. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:01:20 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/27/2009 1:01:20 PMIn 10 out of 14 years, the winner of the Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role has gone on to win the Academy Award for Best Actress. If this year marks the 11th such congruence, Meryl Streep will take home the Oscar. Yet there is an odd circumstance with the Academy’s nominations that hurts Streep’s chances. Another one of the Academy’s Best Actress contenders also received a SAG Award Sunday night: Kate Winslet, who won the supporting actress trophy for The Reader. At the Oscars, this role has been recognized as a lead performance, one that is likely a favorite to win. Yes, it is a strange situation, one that shocked and confused Oscar prognosticators (especially this writer) on Thursday morning. Winslet’s Reader performance was campaigned as a supporting role, and she was recognized as such by the Golden Globes, the Broadcast Film Critics Association, the Chicago Film Critics Association and of course the Screen Actors Guild. A few organizations did nominate her for a lead award for The Reader, though few people take the Satellites seriously, and the BAFTA Awards are different than most in that they permit Winslet to compete against herself in the same category (she is also nominated for Best Leading Actress for Revolutionary Road). Some now believe the Academy’s deviation will in fact cost Winslet the Oscar she could have won in the supporting field. Either voters will be confused about what film she’s nominated for (unless I’m simply less observant than elderly Academy members, which may indeed be the case), or she will now split the majority vote with Streep and thus allow Anne Hathaway or Melissa Leo to slip ahead (Angelina Jolie is believed to have no shot). Another idea is that voters will dismiss Winslet due to doubts over which category the performance belongs in. But since enough members of the Academy made it a point to nominate her as lead actress in the first place, this is hardly a reasonable theory. Also potentially without merit is the Holocaust factor, which seems to be the most popular argument for why Winslet is now a shoo-in to win the Oscar. This is an old favorite for Oscar oddsmakers, but it may not actually apply here. Still, when The Reader made surprise appearances in the Best Picture and Best Director categories last Thursday, one of the first familiar quotes to show up online was “there’s no business like Shoah business.” Yet the Academy already failed to nominate shortlisted documentary Blessed Is the Match, despite its Holocaust subject matter, and they also ignored related features such as The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Adam Resurrected, Good and Valkyrie (meanwhile Defiance was only recognized by the music branch). So, certainly the Holocaust fetish thing is not a sure thing. It doesn’t even necessarily carry over to Israeli Oscar nominee Waltz With Bashir, as much as people may try to tie that documentary’s favorable odds to its association with the oft-mocked trend (actually could the doc now suffer with pro-Israel Academy members if it makes them think too much about war crimes committed against Palestinians?). Also, Winslet’s role as a sympathetic concentration camp guard should be as exclusive to the fetish as was (her Reader co-star) Bruno Ganz’s brilliant, Oscar-worthy portrayal of Hitler in Downfall. Even if she has told press that she neither liked nor sympathized with her character. So, then, what are plausible factors in Winslet’s likelihood of winning the Oscar? Well, there is the damage caused by Streep, who has certain advantage in the race for winning the lead SAG Award (which she apparently expected to lose to Winslet), as well as for winning kudos from critic circles, such as the Broadcast Film Critics Association (where she tied with Hathaway). Yet on the other hand, there are all those supporting wins in Winslet and The Reader’s favor, not to mention the triumph she had over Streep at the Golden Globes, even if it was recognition for another performance. There is also the belief that this is simply Winslet’s year to win after losing five previous Oscar races. However, as much as it seems Streep doesn’t need another Academy Award, she has in fact lost her last ten Oscar bids and hasn’t won in more than 25 years. Meanwhile, Winslet has plenty of great years left in her and will surely have more chances in the future. One additional factor could put Winslet’s odds just past Streep’s, and that factor’s name is Harvey Weinstein. Whether the Oscar-hungry exec is simply holding his high ground with the Academy or he’s making a greater push for his company’s film in order to spite Scott Rudin (producer of Streep’s film, Doubt, and a former producer of The Reader) is unclear and beside the point. Many people immediately cursed his name when they saw The Reader make its surprise appearances in the top categories (Nikki Finke believes the film partly prevailed because the Academy wanted to honor Rudin, Winslet and Daldry for having to put up with “that nasty oaf”). Even better than the Harvey factor, though, is the actual quality of Winslet’s work. Sure, worth of talent is all but dead in the modern Hollywood, particularly where the Oscars are concerned, but as a deal breaker in a race between two actresses who are truly brilliant thespians, it could very well be consequential. And between Winslet and Streep, this year the former has the advantage. Streep’s Oscar-nominated role has been viewed by some as overdone, and her other performance in 2008 was in a musical comedy. Winslet, on the other hand, will benefit for giving two Oscar-worthy lead performances, only one of which was nominated. And any voters who initially made the attempt to nominate her for Best Actress for Revolutionary Road may surely choose Winslet with that other unrecognized performance in mind (Anne Thompson agrees she’ll win for both films). With another neck-and-neck race in the Best Actor category and (also thanks to the Academy’s unpredictable deviation from the Winslet campaigns) a lack of a frontrunner in the Best Supporting Actress race, this year’s Oscars are shaping up to be a difficult game to bet on. Knowing that the Academy can be counted on for surprises, it’s possible that Streep will win. Even Hathaway may have a shot (though her time will more likely come from a future supporting role). But if you’re a gambling man who hates to lose, I’d recommend putting your chips on Winslet for Best Actress. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/12/18/38568.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 12/18/2008 5:00:50 PM
Body: Don’t you just hate when the movies make you care about a bigot? Sure, racists are technically humans, but that doesn’t mean we need to sympathize with them, right? No matter how great the film, it should be very difficult to accept the softening of intolerant people. Yet the lovable racist is not uncommon in cinema. In fact, out in theaters right now are two films dealing with this type of character. The Reader presents a cold Concentration Camp guard (Kate Winslet) for whom we’re meant to shed a tear, and Gran Torino focuses on a War Veteran stereotype (Clint Eastwood) who may evoke from the audience as much amusement as disgust. Maybe it’s like picking a scab, watching these kinds of movies. Some great films, such as Downfall, may only welcome an understanding of someone so heinous as Adolph Hitler, but other films have allowed us to totally enjoy racist protagonists of lesser offense. Check out the following examples to see some of the many intolerant heroes we’ve easily tolerated. Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) in The Searchers (1956) Compared to many classic westerns, John Ford’s The Searchers is not necessarily racist towards Native Americans. Yet it does feature one of the most unapologetically racist characters in film history, one who influenced many subsequent intolerants like Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and Anakin Skywalker in Attack of the Clones. Ethan is such a badass bigot that he’d even kill his own niece for mating with a Commanche. Despite all his racism, though, audiences can’t help but like Ethan throughout much of The Searchers, because although Ford clearly looks down upon his hatred, the film also treats the character as a heroic man of his time. It’s a love him and hate him at the same time sort of thing. Pino (John Turturro) in Do the Right Thing (1989) In a way, almost everyone in Spike Lee’s classic is at least a little bit racist, evident in the famous slur montage. But it’s Pino who is the most ignorant, calling black people “the N word” on a regular basis. Yet we may forgive him, just as Mookie (Lee) does, because his bigotry is brought about through a combo of stupidity and culture. After all, if he’s a fan of Magic Johnson and Eddie Murphy, he can’t be a true racist. Right? Melvin Udall (Jack Nicholson) in As Good as It Gets (1997) He’s portrayed as mostly hateful towards gays and women, but Melvin is also plenty racist. He tells Frank (Cuba Gooding Jr.) to “think white” and earlier, when yelling for police, he shouts, “Assault and battery! And you’re black!” But who can resist Jack? He may be a total bigot, but it’s okay, because he’s got OCD and he’s ultimately good to a sick little boy and his mother (Helen Hunt). He even reluctantly bonds with the gay neighbor (Greg Kinnear). What’s not to love about this Oscar-winning character? Borat Sagdiyev (Sacha Baron Cohen) in Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006) Whether you’re Rob Corddry in Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay or Billy Bob Thornton in any number of films, it’s okay to be a bigot if you’re hilariously extreme in your intolerance. Sacha Baron Cohen takes the cake with his Borat character, though, when it comes to loveable racists. Hey, it’s satire! He holds up a mirror to explore our own racism, displayed best in a pre-film scene from Da Ali G Show, in which an audience of rednecks joins him in singing, “Throw the Jew Down the Well.” In the movie, he similarly gets applause at a rodeo for suggesting America kills all Iraqi men, women and children. Shaun (Thomas Turgoose) in This Is England (2006) He’s the most adorable little skinhead ever, so how can we stop loving Shaun when he ignorantly joins up with the Nationalist ex-con Combo (Stephen Graham)? Isn’t it cute when Shaun is being racist towards the Pakistani shopkeeper? It’s not like he’s the real bigot; that’s Combo. Shaun is just too young to understand at age 12 that losing his father to the Falkland War is not an excuse for racism. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:00:50 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com12/18/2008 5:00:50 PMDon’t you just hate when the movies make you care about a bigot? Sure, racists are technically humans, but that doesn’t mean we need to sympathize with them, right? No matter how great the film, it should be very difficult to accept the softening of intolerant people. Yet the lovable racist is not uncommon in cinema. In fact, out in theaters right now are two films dealing with this type of character. The Reader presents a cold Concentration Camp guard (Kate Winslet) for whom we’re meant to shed a tear, and Gran Torino focuses on a War Veteran stereotype (Clint Eastwood) who may evoke from the audience as much amusement as disgust. Maybe it’s like picking a scab, watching these kinds of movies. Some great films, such as Downfall, may only welcome an understanding of someone so heinous as Adolph Hitler, but other films have allowed us to totally enjoy racist protagonists of lesser offense. Check out the following examples to see some of the many intolerant heroes we’ve easily tolerated. Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) in The Searchers (1956) Compared to many classic westerns, John Ford’s The Searchers is not necessarily racist towards Native Americans. Yet it does feature one of the most unapologetically racist characters in film history, one who influenced many subsequent intolerants like Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and Anakin Skywalker in Attack of the Clones. Ethan is such a badass bigot that he’d even kill his own niece for mating with a Commanche. Despite all his racism, though, audiences can’t help but like Ethan throughout much of The Searchers, because although Ford clearly looks down upon his hatred, the film also treats the character as a heroic man of his time. It’s a love him and hate him at the same time sort of thing. Pino (John Turturro) in Do the Right Thing (1989) In a way, almost everyone in Spike Lee’s classic is at least a little bit racist, evident in the famous slur montage. But it’s Pino who is the most ignorant, calling black people “the N word” on a regular basis. Yet we may forgive him, just as Mookie (Lee) does, because his bigotry is brought about through a combo of stupidity and culture. After all, if he’s a fan of Magic Johnson and Eddie Murphy, he can’t be a true racist. Right? Melvin Udall (Jack Nicholson) in As Good as It Gets (1997) He’s portrayed as mostly hateful towards gays and women, but Melvin is also plenty racist. He tells Frank (Cuba Gooding Jr.) to “think white” and earlier, when yelling for police, he shouts, “Assault and battery! And you’re black!” But who can resist Jack? He may be a total bigot, but it’s okay, because he’s got OCD and he’s ultimately good to a sick little boy and his mother (Helen Hunt). He even reluctantly bonds with the gay neighbor (Greg Kinnear). What’s not to love about this Oscar-winning character? Borat Sagdiyev (Sacha Baron Cohen) in Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006) Whether you’re Rob Corddry in Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay or Billy Bob Thornton in any number of films, it’s okay to be a bigot if you’re hilariously extreme in your intolerance. Sacha Baron Cohen takes the cake with his Borat character, though, when it comes to loveable racists. Hey, it’s satire! He holds up a mirror to explore our own racism, displayed best in a pre-film scene from Da Ali G Show, in which an audience of rednecks joins him in singing, “Throw the Jew Down the Well.” In the movie, he similarly gets applause at a rodeo for suggesting America kills all Iraqi men, women and children. Shaun (Thomas Turgoose) in This Is England (2006) He’s the most adorable little skinhead ever, so how can we stop loving Shaun when he ignorantly joins up with the Nationalist ex-con Combo (Stephen Graham)? Isn’t it cute when Shaun is being racist towards the Pakistani shopkeeper? It’s not like he’s the real bigot; that’s Combo. Shaun is just too young to understand at age 12 that losing his father to the Falkland War is not an excuse for racism. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/12/3/37896.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 12/3/2008 3:00:52 PM
Body: It’s more difficult to be convincing as a real person when acting on film than on the stage. The camera can get closer and your image ends up projected many times larger than life size. So, despite giving a Tony Award-winning performance as Richard Nixon in the theater version of Frost/Nixon, Frank Langella was not initially thought of as worthy to reprise the role in Ron Howard’s movie adaptation of the play. Part of it was that he’s not a big name, but another reason was that he looks nothing like Tricky Dick. Ultimately, Langella did get the part, and while he doesn’t resemble the former president, he apparently does a bang up job in the role. But the transition could easily have been as awkward as Ralph Bellamy’s reprisal of his Tony-winning portrayal of Franklin Roosevelt in Sunrise at Campobello. In the film version of that play, Bellamy’s vocal impersonation comes off more like a Scottish brogue (he sounds exactly like Sean Connery, in fact) than FDR’s signature “Locust Valley lockjaw.”  Instead, Langella is on track for an Oscar nomination, and is sure to join the following actors who also gave convincing performances as world leaders. As a handicap, SpoutBlog has limited the selections to modern era leaders whose real persona exists on film/tape and are therefore more easily comparable to actors’ representations. 10. Anthony Hopkins as President Richard Nixon in Nixon (1995) The performance is exaggerated almost to the point of out-doing Dan Hedaya’s comedic portrayal in Dick, but Hopkins’ Nixon isn’t the failure that many reviews criticized it as. The art of a convincing portrait is not so much about presenting an exact likeness as it is about expressing a perspective, and Oliver Stone’s employment of Hannibal Lecter as the (then) most hated president brought the viewpoint across right away. It may not be Hopkins’ best Oscar-nominated presidential performance (that would be his John Quincy Adams in Amistad), but it is one of his most spectacular accomplishments. 9. Josh Brolin as President George W. Bush in W. (2008) Stone surprisingly went a different way with his latest presidential biopic (which was not, as has been claimed, the first film about a sitting president; see #6). Brolin is much less a caricature than was expected, and the actor even welcomes sympathy from Bush-haters. It’s not necessarily an exact impersonation; it’s better. Brolin makes the role his own while also doing some requisite aping, and it’s a performance that should garner him an Oscar nomination next month. 8. James Brolin as President Ronald Reagan in The Reagans (2003) Like son, like father, though instead of appropriately portraying the elder Bush (he might have done as well as James Cromwell in W.), Josh Brolin’s father plays that president’s predecessor in this made-for-TV biopic. He looks a little silly in the role, but James Brolin does an excellent job with the voice and the overall execution of the actor-turned-leader’s public persona. The conservatives may have hated the movie, but the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences were convinced enough to nominate Brolin for an Emmy Award. 7. Jerry Haleva as Saddam Hussein in The Big Lebowski (1998) Sometimes professional impersonators are the most perfect people to play figures on the big screen. Unfortunately, people like Queen Elizabeth look-alike Jeannette Charles (The Naked Gun; European Vacation, Austin Powers in Goldmember) aren’t famous enough or talented enough actors to carry a whole film like The Queen. The late Haleva made a career out of portraying the Iraqi dictator, appearing prominently in such comedies as Hot Shots!, Hot Shots! Part Deux and Jane Austen’s Mafia! But it’s his silent performance in The Big Lebowski that works best (though his lisped Hussein in the Hot Shots! sequel is hilarious). Even Hussein’s own sons could have made the mistake of thinking it was the real dictator up there on the screen. 6. Bruce Greenwood as President John F. Kennedy in Thirteen Days (2000) Back in the 1960s, President Kennedy got to be part of the casting process for Warner Bros.’ depiction of him in the WWII drama PT 109. His selection of Cliff Robertson was fine, but if he’d been alive long enough to also assist the production of Thirteen Days, he would have surely agreed with the casting of Bruce Greenwood. The actor doesn’t look much like JFK in this non-biopic about the Cuban Missile Crisis, but to agree with Kevin Costner, Greenwood is Kennedy in the film, only bettered by Steven Culp as RFK. Too bad Costner has to be in there at all. As usual his talent for accents is atrocious, but at least he didn’t bother attempting to play the president. Greenwood was definitely deserving of an Oscar nod for his portrayal, but apparently only one presidential role (Jeff Bridges in The Contender) was enough for the 2001 Supporting Actor race. 5. Gary Sinise as President Harry S. Truman in Truman (1995) The problem with famous actors portraying well-known real-life figures is that the audience more than likely sees the actor first. It’s a problem with most of the portrayals on this list, and it’s certainly true for Gary Sinise in the role of Truman. He looks just like Gary Sinise with some necessary prosthetics. And his voice is distinctly his own, too, despite an attempt at the accent. Yet the performance is engaging enough to make the viewer forget all that and become adequately convinced enough to accept Sinise as the president with the difficult task of ending World War II through drastic measures. 4. Bruno Ganz as Adolph Hitler in Downfall (2004) It’s easy to play Hitler; just don the signature mustache and you’re good to go. Ganz went above and beyond, though, to not just convincingly represent the Nazi dictator but also to capture his thought-non-existent humanity. His voice is perfection and his overall performance is astounding. Had the three-dimensionality of the portrayal not been so controversial, Ganz could have garnered an Academy Award nomination. 3. Edward Hermann as President Franklin Roosevelt in Annie (1982) A lot of actors have attempted FDR, from Bellamy in Sunrise at Campobello to Kenneth Branagh in Warm Springs (and let’s not forget Jon Voight’s laughable turn in Pearl Harbor), but nobody else is as good as Hermann, who played the four-term president in two TV movies prior to reprising the role in this screen version of the lovable Broadway musical. The only reason he deserves more credit here than for his two Emmy-nominated portrayals is because in Annie he joins in to sing “Tomorrow” with the li’l titular orphan, and that’s believably something the real FDR would have taken much pleasure in. 2. Michael Sheen as Prime Minister Tony Blair in The Queen (2006) Langella and his Frost/Nixon costar, Michael Sheen, are equally being recognized for their performances in that film. But a couple of years ago, Sheen was upstaged by the Oscar-winning Helen Mirren in The Queen. Still, despite his lack of a deserved nod from the Academy, he was highly acclaimed for his portrayal of Tony Blair, a role he’d already perfected in the British TV movie The Deal (from the same writer-director pair as The Queen). And the performance rushed him to the top ranks of acting talent, allowing him to be unquestionably worthy of reprising his stage role as David Frost and easily thought of as a front-runner for the Oscars this time around. 1. Martin Sheen as President John F. Kennedy in Kennedy (1983) Sheen was so good as JFK in this TV miniseries that in The Goonies “Mouth” (Corey Feldman) confuses the president for the actor on a 50-cent piece. And well, Mouth, as Cyndi Lauper sings on the soundtrack, “What’s good enough for you is good enough for me. It’s good enough. It’s good enough for me. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:00:52 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com12/3/2008 3:00:52 PMIt’s more difficult to be convincing as a real person when acting on film than on the stage. The camera can get closer and your image ends up projected many times larger than life size. So, despite giving a Tony Award-winning performance as Richard Nixon in the theater version of Frost/Nixon, Frank Langella was not initially thought of as worthy to reprise the role in Ron Howard’s movie adaptation of the play. Part of it was that he’s not a big name, but another reason was that he looks nothing like Tricky Dick. Ultimately, Langella did get the part, and while he doesn’t resemble the former president, he apparently does a bang up job in the role. But the transition could easily have been as awkward as Ralph Bellamy’s reprisal of his Tony-winning portrayal of Franklin Roosevelt in Sunrise at Campobello. In the film version of that play, Bellamy’s vocal impersonation comes off more like a Scottish brogue (he sounds exactly like Sean Connery, in fact) than FDR’s signature “Locust Valley lockjaw.”  Instead, Langella is on track for an Oscar nomination, and is sure to join the following actors who also gave convincing performances as world leaders. As a handicap, SpoutBlog has limited the selections to modern era leaders whose real persona exists on film/tape and are therefore more easily comparable to actors’ representations. 10. Anthony Hopkins as President Richard Nixon in Nixon (1995) The performance is exaggerated almost to the point of out-doing Dan Hedaya’s comedic portrayal in Dick, but Hopkins’ Nixon isn’t the failure that many reviews criticized it as. The art of a convincing portrait is not so much about presenting an exact likeness as it is about expressing a perspective, and Oliver Stone’s employment of Hannibal Lecter as the (then) most hated president brought the viewpoint across right away. It may not be Hopkins’ best Oscar-nominated presidential performance (that would be his John Quincy Adams in Amistad), but it is one of his most spectacular accomplishments. 9. Josh Brolin as President George W. Bush in W. (2008) Stone surprisingly went a different way with his latest presidential biopic (which was not, as has been claimed, the first film about a sitting president; see #6). Brolin is much less a caricature than was expected, and the actor even welcomes sympathy from Bush-haters. It’s not necessarily an exact impersonation; it’s better. Brolin makes the role his own while also doing some requisite aping, and it’s a performance that should garner him an Oscar nomination next month. 8. James Brolin as President Ronald Reagan in The Reagans (2003) Like son, like father, though instead of appropriately portraying the elder Bush (he might have done as well as James Cromwell in W.), Josh Brolin’s father plays that president’s predecessor in this made-for-TV biopic. He looks a little silly in the role, but James Brolin does an excellent job with the voice and the overall execution of the actor-turned-leader’s public persona. The conservatives may have hated the movie, but the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences were convinced enough to nominate Brolin for an Emmy Award. 7. Jerry Haleva as Saddam Hussein in The Big Lebowski (1998) Sometimes professional impersonators are the most perfect people to play figures on the big screen. Unfortunately, people like Queen Elizabeth look-alike Jeannette Charles (The Naked Gun; European Vacation, Austin Powers in Goldmember) aren’t famous enough or talented enough actors to carry a whole film like The Queen. The late Haleva made a career out of portraying the Iraqi dictator, appearing prominently in such comedies as Hot Shots!, Hot Shots! Part Deux and Jane Austen’s Mafia! But it’s his silent performance in The Big Lebowski that works best (though his lisped Hussein in the Hot Shots! sequel is hilarious). Even Hussein’s own sons could have made the mistake of thinking it was the real dictator up there on the screen. 6. Bruce Greenwood as President John F. Kennedy in Thirteen Days (2000) Back in the 1960s, President Kennedy got to be part of the casting process for Warner Bros.’ depiction of him in the WWII drama PT 109. His selection of Cliff Robertson was fine, but if he’d been alive long enough to also assist the production of Thirteen Days, he would have surely agreed with the casting of Bruce Greenwood. The actor doesn’t look much like JFK in this non-biopic about the Cuban Missile Crisis, but to agree with Kevin Costner, Greenwood is Kennedy in the film, only bettered by Steven Culp as RFK. Too bad Costner has to be in there at all. As usual his talent for accents is atrocious, but at least he didn’t bother attempting to play the president. Greenwood was definitely deserving of an Oscar nod for his portrayal, but apparently only one presidential role (Jeff Bridges in The Contender) was enough for the 2001 Supporting Actor race. 5. Gary Sinise as President Harry S. Truman in Truman (1995) The problem with famous actors portraying well-known real-life figures is that the audience more than likely sees the actor first. It’s a problem with most of the portrayals on this list, and it’s certainly true for Gary Sinise in the role of Truman. He looks just like Gary Sinise with some necessary prosthetics. And his voice is distinctly his own, too, despite an attempt at the accent. Yet the performance is engaging enough to make the viewer forget all that and become adequately convinced enough to accept Sinise as the president with the difficult task of ending World War II through drastic measures. 4. Bruno Ganz as Adolph Hitler in Downfall (2004) It’s easy to play Hitler; just don the signature mustache and you’re good to go. Ganz went above and beyond, though, to not just convincingly represent the Nazi dictator but also to capture his thought-non-existent humanity. His voice is perfection and his overall performance is astounding. Had the three-dimensionality of the portrayal not been so controversial, Ganz could have garnered an Academy Award nomination. 3. Edward Hermann as President Franklin Roosevelt in Annie (1982) A lot of actors have attempted FDR, from Bellamy in Sunrise at Campobello to Kenneth Branagh in Warm Springs (and let’s not forget Jon Voight’s laughable turn in Pearl Harbor), but nobody else is as good as Hermann, who played the four-term president in two TV movies prior to reprising the role in this screen version of the lovable Broadway musical. The only reason he deserves more credit here than for his two Emmy-nominated portrayals is because in Annie he joins in to sing “Tomorrow” with the li’l titular orphan, and that’s believably something the real FDR would have taken much pleasure in. 2. Michael Sheen as Prime Minister Tony Blair in The Queen (2006) Langella and his Frost/Nixon costar, Michael Sheen, are equally being recognized for their performances in that film. But a couple of years ago, Sheen was upstaged by the Oscar-winning Helen Mirren in The Queen. Still, despite his lack of a deserved nod from the Academy, he was highly acclaimed for his portrayal of Tony Blair, a role he’d already perfected in the British TV movie The Deal (from the same writer-director pair as The Queen). And the performance rushed him to the top ranks of acting talent, allowing him to be unquestionably worthy of reprising his stage role as David Frost and easily thought of as a front-runner for the Oscars this time around. 1. Martin Sheen as President John F. Kennedy in Kennedy (1983) Sheen was so good as JFK in this TV miniseries that in The Goonies “Mouth” (Corey Feldman) confuses the president for the actor on a 50-cent piece. And well, Mouth, as Cyndi Lauper sings on the soundtrack, “What’s good enough for you is good enough for me. It’s good enough. It’s good enough for me. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/11/13/37289.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/13/2008 5:00:46 PM
Body: Danny Boyle’s new crowd-pleasing film Slumdog Millionaire was originally intended to be shot entirely in English, but apparently due to the preferences of a casting director, about a third of the movie is in Hindi. While this fraction may not be enough to call it a foreign-language film, it could have been enough to turn off subtitle-fearing audiences were the movie not so otherwise accessible due to its feel-good, “Hollywood-style” story involving star-crossed romance, destiny and an ultimate “love conquers all” message. Also, the movie breaks free from one off-putting foreign film tradition by following Man on Fire, Night Watch and TV’s Heroes into the realm of non-traditional subtitling. Slumdog received a standing ovation at the Toronto Film Festival, where it won the People’s Choice Award, and it could very well extend its popularity in the direction of the multiplex crowd. If it’s a hit with moviegoers who aren’t typically open to world cinema, this could be the chance for similarly feel-good foreign films to cross over and reach a wider audience, whether they be upcoming releases like the Sundance-winning Captain Abu Raed or titles from the past that could always use more Netflix-queue love. And so, in the hopes that Slumdog could help open the door to further foreign film consumption, SpoutBlog presents this guide to the most accessible world cinema titles from the past ten years. For every entry-level film on the list, we name a couple of more intermediate titled in the same vein — just in case you get hooked. Amelie Spout.com user leeroy711 recently referred to this imaginative French film as the foreign-language cinema’s “gateway drug.” And it’s certainly true that its fanciful romantic story and colorful tone have won the favor of many a young adult not previously accustomed to European cinema. Never mind that it makes stalking seem a little too precious and innocent — the film’s whimsical title character (played delightfully by Audrey Tautou), full of good intentions and lots of heart, will have you wishing you had such a thoughtful and inventive pursuer. Also worth checking out: A Very Long Engagement; Love Me If You Dare The Chorus Hollywood sometimes seems to have cornered the market on movies about inspirational teachers, especially those involving music instruction. But this French film proves that foreign films can have similarly motivational stories about great educators and their newly encouraged students. Also worth checking out: Small Voices; Monsieur Ibrahim City of God This Brazilian film set in the favelas of Rio can be quite violent, enough to have been compared to gangster films like Goodfellas (though Goodfellas doesn’t have any little kids being shot in the foot). But at its center is the uplifting tale of a boy who makes it out of the slums in order to become a successful writer. Also worth checking out: City of Men (both the TV series and the feature film) Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon Martial arts cinema has long been an accessible genre to a large enough portion of Americans, but this film, which became the top grossing foreign-language title in the U.S. (not counting The Passion of the Christ), has managed to acquire fans that don’t normally go for kung fu and wuxia. The main attraction that makes this title more appealing than most is likely its production value, which with its beautiful cinematography and well-crafted special effects allows it to compare to romantic epics out of Hollywood. Also worth checking out: Hero; House of Flying Daggers Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India The running time of 3 hrs. 43 min. probably seems like a deterrent, but this Bollywood film really does feel a lot shorter than it is. Really. And anyway its compelling story of an underdog cricket team is familiar enough that you don’t have to pay too much attention if you don’t have the time — though it will be difficult to let your attention stray except for during some of the less-adequately translated musical numbers that aren’t so significant or relatable to most Western viewers. Just think of this film as your typical Hollywood sports movie, except instead of the final game being quickly highlighted in the last 30 minutes, it’s seemingly depicted in its entirety for more than an hour. And yes, the ending is a crowd-pleaser. Also worth checking out: The Cup; Monsoon Wedding Life is Beautiful This Oscar-winning film is so feel-good that it comes close to overkill. In fact, a decade after its release, it’s easy to forget just how entertaining it is. Just as we’re more likely to remember the stomach ache after gorging ourselves with delicious sweets or the hangover that follows a great night of drinking, moviegoers often recall only the obnoxiousness that came with an overexposed and over-awarded Roberto Benigni. But don’t let the cynics keep you from enjoying such a heartwarming and inspiriting tale of a “real life Prince Charming.” Also worth checking out: I Served the King of England The Motorcycle Diaries Hollywood could actually take a cue from this film the next time it wants to make one of those prequels detailing the life of an iconic villain (ex: Hannibal Rising), at least if it wants audiences to like the guy enough to forget he grows up to be a murderous rebel. Whether or not you like who and what Ernesto Guevara becomes in the years after The Motorcycle Diaries takes place, you’ll have no trouble falling for his younger self as he ditches his privileged life and devotes himself to a colony of lepers. Also worth checking out: Downfall Pan’s Labyrinth In the tradition of such dark yet magical stories as Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz, a little girl encounters strange creatures and kind of winds up a princess. It’s ultimately a very sad and depressing film, but the ending at least pretends to be happy, enough that you might think your eyes are watering with tears of joy. Also worth checking out: City of Lost Children Run Lola Run It’s extremely fast-paced, a little bit MTV, a little bit video game, and it features a character you really want to root for, especially because she’s narratively allotted a few do-overs in order to make things right. And mainstream moviegoers love stories of both chance and second chances. Roger Ebert also noted in his review that it’s the kind of film that could play in a sports bar, so perhaps it’s even more of a gateway foreign film for sports fans than Lagaan. Also worth checking out: The Princess and the Warrior; Amores perros Tsotsi Like City of God, this film involves a crime-ridden ghetto, but it’s even more accessible than that film despite its lack of inspiring upward mobility. It could probably appeal most to fans of American “urban” gangster films, but any mainstream moviegoer should enjoy the conventional plot involving a thug who accidentally kidnaps a baby and then changes morally as a result. Also worth checking out: Kolya; Central Station Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:00:46 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/13/2008 5:00:46 PMDanny Boyle’s new crowd-pleasing film Slumdog Millionaire was originally intended to be shot entirely in English, but apparently due to the preferences of a casting director, about a third of the movie is in Hindi. While this fraction may not be enough to call it a foreign-language film, it could have been enough to turn off subtitle-fearing audiences were the movie not so otherwise accessible due to its feel-good, “Hollywood-style” story involving star-crossed romance, destiny and an ultimate “love conquers all” message. Also, the movie breaks free from one off-putting foreign film tradition by following Man on Fire, Night Watch and TV’s Heroes into the realm of non-traditional subtitling. Slumdog received a standing ovation at the Toronto Film Festival, where it won the People’s Choice Award, and it could very well extend its popularity in the direction of the multiplex crowd. If it’s a hit with moviegoers who aren’t typically open to world cinema, this could be the chance for similarly feel-good foreign films to cross over and reach a wider audience, whether they be upcoming releases like the Sundance-winning Captain Abu Raed or titles from the past that could always use more Netflix-queue love. And so, in the hopes that Slumdog could help open the door to further foreign film consumption, SpoutBlog presents this guide to the most accessible world cinema titles from the past ten years. For every entry-level film on the list, we name a couple of more intermediate titled in the same vein — just in case you get hooked. Amelie Spout.com user leeroy711 recently referred to this imaginative French film as the foreign-language cinema’s “gateway drug.” And it’s certainly true that its fanciful romantic story and colorful tone have won the favor of many a young adult not previously accustomed to European cinema. Never mind that it makes stalking seem a little too precious and innocent — the film’s whimsical title character (played delightfully by Audrey Tautou), full of good intentions and lots of heart, will have you wishing you had such a thoughtful and inventive pursuer. Also worth checking out: A Very Long Engagement; Love Me If You Dare The Chorus Hollywood sometimes seems to have cornered the market on movies about inspirational teachers, especially those involving music instruction. But this French film proves that foreign films can have similarly motivational stories about great educators and their newly encouraged students. Also worth checking out: Small Voices; Monsieur Ibrahim City of God This Brazilian film set in the favelas of Rio can be quite violent, enough to have been compared to gangster films like Goodfellas (though Goodfellas doesn’t have any little kids being shot in the foot). But at its center is the uplifting tale of a boy who makes it out of the slums in order to become a successful writer. Also worth checking out: City of Men (both the TV series and the feature film) Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon Martial arts cinema has long been an accessible genre to a large enough portion of Americans, but this film, which became the top grossing foreign-language title in the U.S. (not counting The Passion of the Christ), has managed to acquire fans that don’t normally go for kung fu and wuxia. The main attraction that makes this title more appealing than most is likely its production value, which with its beautiful cinematography and well-crafted special effects allows it to compare to romantic epics out of Hollywood. Also worth checking out: Hero; House of Flying Daggers Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India The running time of 3 hrs. 43 min. probably seems like a deterrent, but this Bollywood film really does feel a lot shorter than it is. Really. And anyway its compelling story of an underdog cricket team is familiar enough that you don’t have to pay too much attention if you don’t have the time — though it will be difficult to let your attention stray except for during some of the less-adequately translated musical numbers that aren’t so significant or relatable to most Western viewers. Just think of this film as your typical Hollywood sports movie, except instead of the final game being quickly highlighted in the last 30 minutes, it’s seemingly depicted in its entirety for more than an hour. And yes, the ending is a crowd-pleaser. Also worth checking out: The Cup; Monsoon Wedding Life is Beautiful This Oscar-winning film is so feel-good that it comes close to overkill. In fact, a decade after its release, it’s easy to forget just how entertaining it is. Just as we’re more likely to remember the stomach ache after gorging ourselves with delicious sweets or the hangover that follows a great night of drinking, moviegoers often recall only the obnoxiousness that came with an overexposed and over-awarded Roberto Benigni. But don’t let the cynics keep you from enjoying such a heartwarming and inspiriting tale of a “real life Prince Charming.” Also worth checking out: I Served the King of England The Motorcycle Diaries Hollywood could actually take a cue from this film the next time it wants to make one of those prequels detailing the life of an iconic villain (ex: Hannibal Rising), at least if it wants audiences to like the guy enough to forget he grows up to be a murderous rebel. Whether or not you like who and what Ernesto Guevara becomes in the years after The Motorcycle Diaries takes place, you’ll have no trouble falling for his younger self as he ditches his privileged life and devotes himself to a colony of lepers. Also worth checking out: Downfall Pan’s Labyrinth In the tradition of such dark yet magical stories as Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz, a little girl encounters strange creatures and kind of winds up a princess. It’s ultimately a very sad and depressing film, but the ending at least pretends to be happy, enough that you might think your eyes are watering with tears of joy. Also worth checking out: City of Lost Children Run Lola Run It’s extremely fast-paced, a little bit MTV, a little bit video game, and it features a character you really want to root for, especially because she’s narratively allotted a few do-overs in order to make things right. And mainstream moviegoers love stories of both chance and second chances. Roger Ebert also noted in his review that it’s the kind of film that could play in a sports bar, so perhaps it’s even more of a gateway foreign film for sports fans than Lagaan. Also worth checking out: The Princess and the Warrior; Amores perros Tsotsi Like City of God, this film involves a crime-ridden ghetto, but it’s even more accessible than that film despite its lack of inspiring upward mobility. It could probably appeal most to fans of American “urban” gangster films, but any mainstream moviegoer should enjoy the conventional plot involving a thug who accidentally kidnaps a baby and then changes morally as a result. Also worth checking out: Kolya; Central Station Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Depressing_holidays_dysfunctional_families_fo/190/37174/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 11/10/2008 10:25:59 PM
Body: [quote user="SkyPilot"] 10 Most Accessible Foreign Language Films of the Last 10 Years** **I had to laugh when Risselada called Amelie the "gateway drug" of foreign films in this Top 5 Overrated Movies discussion. (Hey Rizzo, I can't find that quote now, did you delete it?) [/quote] That was me. I was adding to what Rizzo had allready said something to the effect that Amelie seems to be the movie that people who maybe wouldn't otherwise see foreign movies will cling to as "their favorite foreign film" So........... with that, here's my list: 1. Pan's Labyrinth (2006) 2. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000) 3. Run Lola Run (1998) 4. Amélie (2001) 5. Downfall (2004) 6. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007) 7. The Lives of Others (2006) 8. Night Watch (2004) 9. City of God (2002) 10. Volver (2006)
]]>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 03:25:59 GMTleeroy711Top 511/10/2008 10:25:59 PM[quote user="SkyPilot"] 10 Most Accessible Foreign Language Films of the Last 10 Years** **I had to laugh when Risselada called Amelie the "gateway drug" of foreign films in this Top 5 Overrated Movies discussion. (Hey Rizzo, I can't find that quote now, did you delete it?) [/quote] That was me. I was adding to what Rizzo had allready said something to the effect that Amelie seems to be the movie that people who maybe wouldn't otherwise see foreign movies will cling to as "their favorite foreign film" So........... with that, here's my list: 1. Pan's Labyrinth (2006) 2. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000) 3. Run Lola Run (1998) 4. Am&eacute;lie (2001) 5. Downfall (2004) 6. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007) 7. The Lives of Others (2006) 8. Night Watch (2004) 9. City of God (2002) 10. Volver (2006) http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/10/27/36690.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 10/27/2008 12:01:00 PM
Body: Way back in May, I discovered (long after the rest of the world, I though) that the 2005 German film Downfall had become unlikely fodder for a huge number of YouTube spoofs. This weekend, Virginia Heffernan looked into the meme for the New York Times. In my post, I commented on the irony that although millions of people have now been exposed to Downfall via the various YouTube spoofs, the videos don’t work as compelling advertisements for the movie itself. Now Heffernan notes that the ubiquity of Downfall as seen out of context not only fails to promote the film, but actually damages the experience of watching it: In fact, the lesson of the parodies seems to be that Downfall was a closeted Hitler comedy. Having seen the spoofs before seeing the movie, I find it virtually impossible now to watch the film with a straight face. Ganz, the Swiss actor, takes his performance seriously. But something in the character name “Adolf Hitler” also seems to have liberated Ganz to play flat-out melodrama. His goofy, trembling, hopeless rage — in which is wedged a vituperative aria aimed at the traitors he perceives everywhere — recalls nothing so much as Jeremy Piven’s raving meltdowns as the jerk agent Ari on the HBO comedy Entourage. From Oscar nomination to Entourage comparisons in three years flat? That’s probably the best argument I’ve ever heard against Free Use. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:01:00 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog10/27/2008 12:01:00 PM Way back in May, I discovered (long after the rest of the world, I though) that the 2005 German film Downfall had become unlikely fodder for a huge number of YouTube spoofs. This weekend, Virginia Heffernan looked into the meme for the New York Times. In my post, I commented on the irony that although millions of people have now been exposed to Downfall via the various YouTube spoofs, the videos don’t work as compelling advertisements for the movie itself. Now Heffernan notes that the ubiquity of Downfall as seen out of context not only fails to promote the film, but actually damages the experience of watching it: In fact, the lesson of the parodies seems to be that Downfall was a closeted Hitler comedy. Having seen the spoofs before seeing the movie, I find it virtually impossible now to watch the film with a straight face. Ganz, the Swiss actor, takes his performance seriously. But something in the character name “Adolf Hitler” also seems to have liberated Ganz to play flat-out melodrama. His goofy, trembling, hopeless rage — in which is wedged a vituperative aria aimed at the traitors he perceives everywhere — recalls nothing so much as Jeremy Piven’s raving meltdowns as the jerk agent Ari on the HBO comedy Entourage. From Oscar nomination to Entourage comparisons in three years flat? That’s probably the best argument I’ve ever heard against Free Use. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/27/36689.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/27/2008 12:00:49 PM
Body: Way back in May, I discovered (long after the rest of the world, I though) that the 2005 German film Downfall had become unlikely fodder for a huge number of YouTube spoofs. This weekend, Virginia Heffernan looked into the meme for the New York Times. In my post, I commented on the irony that although millions of people have now been exposed to Downfall via the various YouTube spoofs, the videos don’t work as compelling advertisements for the movie itself. Now Heffernan notes that the ubiquity of Downfall as seen out of context not only fails to promote the film, but actually damages the experience of watching it: In fact, the lesson of the parodies seems to be that Downfall was a closeted Hitler comedy. Having seen the spoofs before seeing the movie, I find it virtually impossible now to watch the film with a straight face. Ganz, the Swiss actor, takes his performance seriously. But something in the character name “Adolf Hitler” also seems to have liberated Ganz to play flat-out melodrama. His goofy, trembling, hopeless rage — in which is wedged a vituperative aria aimed at the traitors he perceives everywhere — recalls nothing so much as Jeremy Piven’s raving meltdowns as the jerk agent Ari on the HBO comedy Entourage. From Oscar nomination to Entourage comparisons in three years flat? That’s probably the best argument I’ve ever heard against Free Use. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:00:49 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/27/2008 12:00:49 PM Way back in May, I discovered (long after the rest of the world, I though) that the 2005 German film Downfall had become unlikely fodder for a huge number of YouTube spoofs. This weekend, Virginia Heffernan looked into the meme for the New York Times. In my post, I commented on the irony that although millions of people have now been exposed to Downfall via the various YouTube spoofs, the videos don’t work as compelling advertisements for the movie itself. Now Heffernan notes that the ubiquity of Downfall as seen out of context not only fails to promote the film, but actually damages the experience of watching it: In fact, the lesson of the parodies seems to be that Downfall was a closeted Hitler comedy. Having seen the spoofs before seeing the movie, I find it virtually impossible now to watch the film with a straight face. Ganz, the Swiss actor, takes his performance seriously. But something in the character name “Adolf Hitler” also seems to have liberated Ganz to play flat-out melodrama. His goofy, trembling, hopeless rage — in which is wedged a vituperative aria aimed at the traitors he perceives everywhere — recalls nothing so much as Jeremy Piven’s raving meltdowns as the jerk agent Ari on the HBO comedy Entourage. From Oscar nomination to Entourage comparisons in three years flat? That’s probably the best argument I’ve ever heard against Free Use. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/joem18b/archive/2008/9/25/35552.aspx Post By: joem18b
Post To: joem18b Blog
Post Date: 9/25/2008 7:04:22 PM
Body: O Ano em Que Meus Pais Saíram de Férias (2006)***** SPOILERS *****The Year My Parents Went On Vaction tells the story of a pre-teen boy in São Paulo, Brazil, separated from his parents during a military coup in 1970. As the army takes over, the country is distracted in part by Brazil's successes in the World Cup of that year (sort of like following the pennant race or NFL football in the U.S. as the country's financial system implodes). The movie is pleasant, never dull, well shot, with a delicate score that adds to the feelings of sadness and loss inherent in the plot (the director threw out the first score written for the movie; Beto Villares then did it over and got it right).TYMPWOV begins with a mother and father taking their son to grandfather's house in São Paulo. The three are riding in a VW bug, '65 or earlier. A Brazilian friend suggests that for verisimilitude, they should have been in a Renault or Citroen, because the bug was the inexpensive car of youth and the lower middle-class; her family always drove French cars. Be that as it may, the movie's streets are rife with vintage bugs and VW buses, though I did spot a Renault or two. I mention this because the first car that I bought and paid for with my own money was a new '67 bug from Belmont Motors in Massachusetts, powder blue. It has been sitting since 1981 or so in a succession of company parking lots, progressively degenerating until, paint gone, wheels seized, flowering weeds growing from dirt caught in the chassis crevicles, it looks so bad that I was ordered to have it towed off the property because it had become an eyesore, at least to one sorehead in the company who remained anonymous - the bug's engine refusing to start, a hole in the floor threatening to release the battery under the back seat like a bomb dropped from its bay at the first speed bump, the windows opaque as my glasses in the Turkish bath down the street. Fortunately, my son stepped up and volunteered to restore the car as a hobby. He abstracted it on a flatbed towtruck via Raul's Towing Service to his driveway, where it sat, partially disassembled, for a week or two before the city, at the behest of neighbors or a cruising patrol car, ordered him to remove it. He rolled the poor thing into his garage, wheels now at least freed, out of sight behind closed doors, and since then he has ordered replacement parts from an unending list. He tells me that there are two sources from which to obtain these parts: (a) a quality manufacturer somewhere or other, or (b)Brazil. You want quality, you go to the quality manufacturer; you want cheap, you go to Brazil. I don't know if that's true or not but when I replaced a bumper a long time ago, it had a "Made in Brazil" sticker on the inside surface. One tap by another vehicle and the bumper folded up like an origami noodle. Also, curiously, '67 door handles are unavailable. But the point is, if you're a bug lover you might want to give TYMPWOV a little love for that reason if for no other.Director/writer Cao Hamburger and his co-writer, Claudio Galperin, were both born in São Paulo in 1962 and were eight years old when General Emilio Medici engineered his coup. Hamburger's parents "went on vacation" at that time, but only for a few weeks. In this movie, Hamburger and Galperin share some of their childhood experiences growing up in the cultural melting-pot of São Paulo. Hamburger's father came from a German/Jewish family that emigrated to Brazil before World War II. His mother was of Italian/Catholic stock, though both parents were non-religious scientists as he grew up. He says that he began thinking about São Paulo's mix of cultures and his roots while living and feeling like an outsider in London, another city where races and nationalities mingle. According to Hamburger (and my Brazilian friends), Brazil is deeply divided over socio-economic class issues (the rich, a small middle-class, and the poor) but is accepting of emigrants; he refers to Brazilian culture as Samba culture - "Samba" here meaning, roughly, "let's all dance together." In fact, Hamburger started out with all sorts of ideas for the movie, but while making it settled on the idea of enjoying the brief periods of sunshine in life on a cloudy day. The movie was made on a medium budget by Brazilian standards. Since the success of films like Central Station and City of God, Hamburger says, funding opportunities for cinema have gotten a lot better. He used professionals as well as non-actors from the community, which in the film is a conservative Jewish neighborhood. Today, Hamburger says, this neighborhood is Korean, but since he is exploring his own roots, for the purposes of the film it remains Jewish. Hamburger spent four months finding an empty apartment building to use for the shoot; the movie was filmed completely on location.So often in making a movie, the director starts out with an idea and massages it until a theme for the film is produced. This process can extend over years with input from editors, writers, friends, family, and assorted other sources while the director chases funding, as I describe in my review of Manda Bala. Hamburger's initial inspiration was to examine the mixture of cultures in Brazil, and from that grew the idea of examining a year in the life of a boy growing up in the same time and place that Hamburger and Galperin did. During the making of the movie, the military coup and contemperaneous world-cup excitement in the film emerged, according to the director, as metaphors for life. It seems to me that some of these metaphors crop up post-production but perhaps I'm just metaphor-blind or metaphor-averse. Does a movie metaphor count if it's discovered after the movie is finished? Does it count if a reviewer invokes it, rather than the director? I do like the way that Claudia Llosa, for example, disavows metaphors in her Maven-reviewed Madeinusa, a movie which could easily be weighed down with them. I'm guessing that Hamburger's military coup and World Cup would remain in the movie whether Hamburger deemed them metaphors or not. As it is, he has one more thing to talk about during interviews. Anyway, the coup represents a dark day and the World-Cup victory represents a shaft of sunlight breaking through the gloom of that day. The dark day is life under the military regime and the sunlight represents those moments in life that you must embrace in order to get through the bad patches - did I just nest a metaphor within a metaphor there? The life of goalies in general is also a metaphor in the movie, but if the victory is a bright shaft of sunlight, what is the goalie? A meteorite the size of Oshgosh? Who knows? The gray day/sunlight metaphor, applied to my own personal life, would be like at my work, where my boss would be dictator General Emilio Medici, and out of the grinding gray of morning I would emerge at lunchtime to sit down across from Izzy Vulvano and beat his pants off playing Magic and using my special red and black deck. Also the movie is about dealing with our loneliness and our connections to others, how we make them and break them and move on. Is the movie itself a metaphor for that, or just a movie about that? Also, the director does not agree that soccer is the opiate of the masses, exploited by the junta in this case to maintain calm. Hamburger is going for gray day/sunshine here, not gray day/opium. And having mentioned Manda Bala above, note that this whole movie unfurled without a kidnapping or fried frog in sight, but only because the whole country is under siege from an autocratic military dictatorship rather than a scourge of corrupt politicians and kidnapping-for-profit criminal thugs.Strangely, Hamburger's soccer metaphor gets turned on its head at the end of the movie. Irony? Another layer? Or just part of the movie that doesn't conform to a simple, stumbled-upon talking point? I thought about calling Hamburger and asking him, but nobody likes a wiseass.When the metaphorical army arrives in Michel's neighborhood and starts dragging young men out of their union offices in São Paulo, clubbing them and hurling them into vans while the boy's parents are in hiding, it occurred to me to wonder whether such scenes are automatically more powerful when filmed in the country where they are supposed to have happened, in the language in which they happened, by victims or the relatives of victims of the evils portrayed. Or, for a subtitle-hating country like America, could such a scene be made more visceral and moving if shot in Hollywood for U.S. consumption? For example, would Der Untergang or The Lives of Others have retained their energy or even gained some, if they had been made, shot for shot, in the U.S. with U.S. actors instead of Germans? Ennio De Concini tried it with xxAlec Guiness playing Hitler but I think we can agree that that didn't work as well as Bruno Ganz doing it. Being a cinema snob, I would say without cavil that it is intuitively obvious that the Brazilian version of the coup or the German version of Hitler's last days cannot fail to have an innate power, if well enough done, that a U.S. version could never match. But hold on. Summer Palace provides a dramatic take on Tiananmen Square and the events there in 1989, yet I've heard plenty of squawking (from round eyes) about its failure to do justice to that historic conflict. Would a movie about Tiananmen, made along the lines of The Last Emperor, fare better in the U.S? Could Gettysburg withstand a transfer to Japan; if Kurosawa made it, might it even improve in the eyes of the Japanese? Or in the eyes of American viewers as well? How to assign metrics to questions like these? It's easy to just say that the better the filmmaker, the better the film, for all informed viewers of taste. Do the French still love Jerry Lewis? Are Hollywood blockbusters still the biggest grossers all around the world? And children in movies - does the fact that the child is native to a country foreign to the viewer and speaks a foreign language have any effect one way or the other on that viewer? Rather than approaching these questions from first principles, maybe the thing to do is to evaluate a hundred movies or so, make a call on each, and examine the results for trends.And speaking of children, how do they learn to act so well? Or isn't learning involved? Teens act in high-school drama classes and plays - they're learning something there, I guess. They act in community theater, especially in locations where drama in the schools is being cut. Adults go to drama school, but often act badly in films anyway. And yet I see movie after movie in which children act just fine (Mother of Mine, Wondrous Oblivion, Birth, Kabluey (where the kids are caricatures, but good caricatures.) On the other hand, that kid in The Dick Van Dyke Show... ouch.). Is aging an antidote to natural inborn talent? As we grow up, do we lose our ability to act? Or are these children, who seem to be acting so well, actually not doing much at all? In TYMPWOV, is the boy mostly just running around, looking upset, and playing with his tabletop soccer set, or is he interacting with others and... well, acting. I called the Stella Adler School in Manhattan to ask these questions, but the woman I spoke to told me that the youngest students they enroll are 14-year-olds (eight Saturday classes from 10 to 6, $800. No waiting list.) I asked the woman if the under-14s I see in the movies have been trained, or if whatever they show is just natural ability. She could only surmise. I asked if the Stella Adler Saturday classes have produced some success stories; she said yes, but didn't name anybody I've heard of. She didn't have much else to say about younger children and their appearances in movies, so I called a school out in the Valley (Sherman Oaks) which takes kids as young as 8. Sherman Oaks is up the 405 from Santa Monica, just over the hills from Hollywood. The fellow I spoke to told me flatly that every young person onscreen today has taken classes. He listed graduates from his school now appearing in Desperate Housewives, Everyone Hates Chris, etc., etc. (Classes from 10 to noon on Saturdays.) Agents and casting directors visit frequently, nominally as "class assistants," but actually trolling for talent; or maybe just trying to make a living. For example:****For Young actors:Howard MeltzerHannah Montana Casting DirectorTV Intensive - Saturday, October 4thIn each class session, the children work on a scene. In addition, there is instruction in preparation, auditioning, so forth. Camps and career-placement services are available. I asked the fellow whether children start out with talent and then lose it, or whether talent is distributed among children in the same proportion as among adults, and if so, what the classes might add to that. According to him, we're all natural-born actors. As children, we play-act all the time, but as we age, we forget how much fun that acting can be. Acting classes, like organized sports, are just a modern way of letting children continue to have fun. And just as you won't be playing in the NFL or NBA unless you associate yourself with an organized program, just so you won't break into Hollywood without connections. Plus, I'm now getting casting calls for some reason.Hamburger claims to have auditioned more than a thousand children looking for his stars in TYMPWOV. When he found the boy and girl that he wanted for the leads, Michel Joelsas and Daniela Piepszyk, he changed the script to fit them. Joelsas had never acted in a movie before (like Magaly Solier in Madeinusa, who had never even been in a movie theater when Claudia Llosa made her the lead in her movie). Hamburger says that Joelsas had talent and other characteristics of his personality that helped him to compose the character, such as "his shyness, his introspection, his curiosity about life, and his strength." And his "intelligence and a sense of observation. And he had strong charisma. He's also got a certain shyness and an inner strength." Hamburger introduced all the children in his movie slowly to the characters that they were to play, perhaps Mike Leigh-like. There was improvisation. None of the kids saw a script during the shooting of the movie. So no acting class there, unless you count Hamburger's direction; TYMPWOV argues for inborn talent, but only in one in a thousand or so. “The way I work with them is the most important element. I treat them as intelligent people. They are not children. They are spiritual, intelligent human beings. What I look for in casting children is charisma and talent, but, more than that, I want smart people. There is a very natural sense - especially the kids with their reactions...We worked a lot to have this very natural feel, but there is a lot of work behind it.” So roll the film of Michel's audition. What the heck did this kid have to do when he came through the door, number 1013, with Hamburger languishing there in his director's chair, in order to get picked boss boy? Bark like a dog? I coulda been a contender? Put on blackface, fall to his knees, and sing Mammy? We'll never know. Now my niece - those auditions are brutal. She crawls on her belly like a reptile. They badger her about her tattoos. Surely there were tattoos in Shakespeare's time, weren't there, even if they weren't coupling ferrets over You Suck! in red and green on her shoulder blades?When I say that the kids were fine in the movie, I just mean that I watched the movie and never found myself thinking, "This kid is acting." What they were actually doing onscreen, I wasn't exactly paying attention to. Sometimes in a movie I do think about what the child is up to: when Cameron Bright gets into the bath with a naked Nicole Kidman in Birth, I found myself speculating about how that was accomplished without breaking any laws. When Dylan Baker has a talk with his son in Happiness, about Baker's pedophilia and his abuse of the boy's sleepover friend the night before, I knew in advance that Baker was actually talking to the air and his son's reaction shots were filmed later. But in general, I don't sit watching for signs that actors are acting, child or otherwise. Mary Badham and Phillip Alford in To Kill a Mockingbird? How much were they given to do? Can't remember. Scout narrates the movie, but as an adult. Are kids mostly asked to just look worried, or angry, or confused? How often does a kid have to laugh in a movie? What's the story on kid monologs? 726,000 Google hits for "kid monologs," including the following from Henry V:BOY: As young as I am, I have observed these three swashers. I am boy to all three; but all three, though they would serve me, could not be man to me; for indeed three such antics do not amount to a man. For Bardolph, he is white-livered and red-faced; by the means whereof 'a faces it out, but fights not. For Pistol, he hath a killing tongue and a quiet sword; by the means whereof 'a breaks word and keeps whole weapons. For Nym, he hath heard that men of few words are the best men, and therefore he scorns to say his prayers, lest 'a should be thought a coward; but his few bad words are matched with as few good deeds, for 'a never broke any man's head but his own, and that was against a post when he was drunk. They will steal anything, and call it purchase. Bardolph stole a lute-case, bore it twelve leagues, and sold it for three halfpence. Nym and Bardolph are sworn brothers in filching, and in Calais they stole a fire-shovel. I knew by that piece of service the men would carry coals. They would have me as familiar with men's pockets as their gloves or handkerchers; which makes much against my manhood, if I should take from another's pocket to put into mine; for it is plain pocketing up of wrongs. I must leave them and seek some better service. Their villainy goes against my weak stomach, and therefore I must cast it up.Wow. Maybe Michel laid that one on Hamburger.When I think of "bad acting," am I just reacting to bad line readings? In Son of Rambow, the boys have a lot to say and every once in a while I'd raise an eyebrow. In TYMPWOV, Joelsas and Peipszyk and the other kids are required to show their chops as follows:First twenty-five minutes: Michel (Joelsas) is the only child in the first quarter of the movie, except for a brief interaction with Hanna (Piepszyk). He plays by himself, asks his parents questions, looks out the car window at the big city and, by the way, narrates the film creditably. Sustains hugs from his parents. (As a child, I was hugged by a woman in a play once and I had to stand there and take it with a smile.) This is a good-looking young man. The camera loves him. So he walks, runs, waits, frowns at strange food, pisses in a flowerpot. It all looks real to me. I guess that's acting.Second twenty-five minutes: Michel gets slapped, runs away, cooks in the kitchen, kills time around the house. Now some face time with Hanna - mild dialog - but since I don't speak Portuguese, how can I evaluate their line readings? Rats. (And by the way, watching the movie, I mostly couldn't distinguish Portuguese from Yiddish; be nice if the subtitles would indicate which was being spoken - and ditto for Swedish and Finnish in Mother of Mine). At 39 minutes (out of 100), Michel meets Hanna's friends, three boys. They refer to Michel as the goy. Ten minutes of ensemble child acting; all five seem a little stiff, but they're just meeting each other for the first time, so maybe in real life they would be stiff. Will the stiffness persist? Now Michel settles in with his neighbor, the elderly Shlomo next door, and makes friends throughout the neighborhood. He's not asked to say much by Hamburger, but he does a lot of worrying about his parents, running around the neighborhood, so on. At the halfway point in the film, the World Cup begins. Third twenty-five minutes: First World-Cup match with everyone watching; Michel spending time alone again in the apartment; then with a whole crowd of kids - minimal dialog; back home at the one-hour mark. Second match. Polish Jew, Italian Jew, Greek, African, German Jew, Hamburger really pushing the melting-pot theme. Local soccer game. Narration by boy. He wants to be a goalie. Another World-Cup match (sees first with Shlomo, second at the union, third with the old women. Local kids game with Michel as goalie. Piepszyk gives him a gift in a one-on-one scene with dialog. Michel goes to synagogue.Final twenty-five minutes: The kids do an excellent acting job at a bar mitzvah celebration. And then some acting by Joelsas, as he helps a young union member hide from the army and secret police. Emoting, face to face with an adult! Some intense moments. Then more alone time for the boy, now coping with his worries in a more mature way than at the beginning. And the final soccer match, and more perfect-pitch behavior from Joelsas. And drama to wrap up. The boy has charisma, for sure. I believed him, from start to finish, and the other kids too.And lest I forget, every time a goal was scored, everybody whooped and waved their arms in the air and I wondered if all the women in Brazil were shaving under their arms in 1970. According to a Brazilian I asked, the answer is yes. Looks come first in Brazil, she told me, and that includes proper underarm maintenance.
]]>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 23:04:22 GMTjoem18bjoem18b Blog9/25/2008 7:04:22 PMO Ano em Que Meus Pais Sa&iacute;ram de F&eacute;rias (2006)***** SPOILERS *****The Year My Parents Went On Vaction tells the story of a pre-teen boy in S&atilde;o Paulo, Brazil, separated from his parents during a military coup in 1970. As the army takes over, the country is distracted in part by Brazil's successes in the World Cup of that year (sort of like following the pennant race or NFL football in the U.S. as the country's financial system implodes). The movie is pleasant, never dull, well shot, with a delicate score that adds to the feelings of sadness and loss inherent in the plot (the director threw out the first score written for the movie; Beto Villares then did it over and got it right).TYMPWOV begins with a mother and father taking their son to grandfather's house in S&atilde;o Paulo. The three are riding in a VW bug, '65 or earlier. A Brazilian friend suggests that for verisimilitude, they should have been in a Renault or Citroen, because the bug was the inexpensive car of youth and the lower middle-class; her family always drove French cars. Be that as it may, the movie's streets are rife with vintage bugs and VW buses, though I did spot a Renault or two. I mention this because the first car that I bought and paid for with my own money was a new '67 bug from Belmont Motors in Massachusetts, powder blue. It has been sitting since 1981 or so in a succession of company parking lots, progressively degenerating until, paint gone, wheels seized, flowering weeds growing from dirt caught in the chassis crevicles, it looks so bad that I was ordered to have it towed off the property because it had become an eyesore, at least to one sorehead in the company who remained anonymous - the bug's engine refusing to start, a hole in the floor threatening to release the battery under the back seat like a bomb dropped from its bay at the first speed bump, the windows opaque as my glasses in the Turkish bath down the street. Fortunately, my son stepped up and volunteered to restore the car as a hobby. He abstracted it on a flatbed towtruck via Raul's Towing Service to his driveway, where it sat, partially disassembled, for a week or two before the city, at the behest of neighbors or a cruising patrol car, ordered him to remove it. He rolled the poor thing into his garage, wheels now at least freed, out of sight behind closed doors, and since then he has ordered replacement parts from an unending list. He tells me that there are two sources from which to obtain these parts: (a) a quality manufacturer somewhere or other, or (b)Brazil. You want quality, you go to the quality manufacturer; you want cheap, you go to Brazil. I don't know if that's true or not but when I replaced a bumper a long time ago, it had a "Made in Brazil" sticker on the inside surface. One tap by another vehicle and the bumper folded up like an origami noodle. Also, curiously, '67 door handles are unavailable. But the point is, if you're a bug lover you might want to give TYMPWOV a little love for that reason if for no other.Director/writer Cao Hamburger and his co-writer, Claudio Galperin, were both born in S&atilde;o Paulo in 1962 and were eight years old when General Emilio Medici engineered his coup. Hamburger's parents "went on vacation" at that time, but only for a few weeks. In this movie, Hamburger and Galperin share some of their childhood experiences growing up in the cultural melting-pot of S&atilde;o Paulo. Hamburger's father came from a German/Jewish family that emigrated to Brazil before World War II. His mother was of Italian/Catholic stock, though both parents were non-religious scientists as he grew up. He says that he began thinking about S&atilde;o Paulo's mix of cultures and his roots while living and feeling like an outsider in London, another city where races and nationalities mingle. According to Hamburger (and my Brazilian friends), Brazil is deeply divided over socio-economic class issues (the rich, a small middle-class, and the poor) but is accepting of emigrants; he refers to Brazilian culture as Samba culture - "Samba" here meaning, roughly, "let's all dance together." In fact, Hamburger started out with all sorts of ideas for the movie, but while making it settled on the idea of enjoying the brief periods of sunshine in life on a cloudy day. The movie was made on a medium budget by Brazilian standards. Since the success of films like Central Station and City of God, Hamburger says, funding opportunities for cinema have gotten a lot better. He used professionals as well as non-actors from the community, which in the film is a conservative Jewish neighborhood. Today, Hamburger says, this neighborhood is Korean, but since he is exploring his own roots, for the purposes of the film it remains Jewish. Hamburger spent four months finding an empty apartment building to use for the shoot; the movie was filmed completely on location.So often in making a movie, the director starts out with an idea and massages it until a theme for the film is produced. This process can extend over years with input from editors, writers, friends, family, and assorted other sources while the director chases funding, as I describe in my review of Manda Bala. Hamburger's initial inspiration was to examine the mixture of cultures in Brazil, and from that grew the idea of examining a year in the life of a boy growing up in the same time and place that Hamburger and Galperin did. During the making of the movie, the military coup and contemperaneous world-cup excitement in the film emerged, according to the director, as metaphors for life. It seems to me that some of these metaphors crop up post-production but perhaps I'm just metaphor-blind or metaphor-averse. Does a movie metaphor count if it's discovered after the movie is finished? Does it count if a reviewer invokes it, rather than the director? I do like the way that Claudia Llosa, for example, disavows metaphors in her Maven-reviewed Madeinusa, a movie which could easily be weighed down with them. I'm guessing that Hamburger's military coup and World Cup would remain in the movie whether Hamburger deemed them metaphors or not. As it is, he has one more thing to talk about during interviews. Anyway, the coup represents a dark day and the World-Cup victory represents a shaft of sunlight breaking through the gloom of that day. The dark day is life under the military regime and the sunlight represents those moments in life that you must embrace in order to get through the bad patches - did I just nest a metaphor within a metaphor there? The life of goalies in general is also a metaphor in the movie, but if the victory is a bright shaft of sunlight, what is the goalie? A meteorite the size of Oshgosh? Who knows? The gray day/sunlight metaphor, applied to my own personal life, would be like at my work, where my boss would be dictator General Emilio Medici, and out of the grinding gray of morning I would emerge at lunchtime to sit down across from Izzy Vulvano and beat his pants off playing Magic and using my special red and black deck. Also the movie is about dealing with our loneliness and our connections to others, how we make them and break them and move on. Is the movie itself a metaphor for that, or just a movie about that? Also, the director does not agree that soccer is the opiate of the masses, exploited by the junta in this case to maintain calm. Hamburger is going for gray day/sunshine here, not gray day/opium. And having mentioned Manda Bala above, note that this whole movie unfurled without a kidnapping or fried frog in sight, but only because the whole country is under siege from an autocratic military dictatorship rather than a scourge of corrupt politicians and kidnapping-for-profit criminal thugs.Strangely, Hamburger's soccer metaphor gets turned on its head at the end of the movie. Irony? Another layer? Or just part of the movie that doesn't conform to a simple, stumbled-upon talking point? I thought about calling Hamburger and asking him, but nobody likes a wiseass.When the metaphorical army arrives in Michel's neighborhood and starts dragging young men out of their union offices in S&atilde;o Paulo, clubbing them and hurling them into vans while the boy's parents are in hiding, it occurred to me to wonder whether such scenes are automatically more powerful when filmed in the country where they are supposed to have happened, in the language in which they happened, by victims or the relatives of victims of the evils portrayed. Or, for a subtitle-hating country like America, could such a scene be made more visceral and moving if shot in Hollywood for U.S. consumption? For example, would Der Untergang or The Lives of Others have retained their energy or even gained some, if they had been made, shot for shot, in the U.S. with U.S. actors instead of Germans? Ennio De Concini tried it with xxAlec Guiness playing Hitler but I think we can agree that that didn't work as well as Bruno Ganz doing it. Being a cinema snob, I would say without cavil that it is intuitively obvious that the Brazilian version of the coup or the German version of Hitler's last days cannot fail to have an innate power, if well enough done, that a U.S. version could never match. But hold on. Summer Palace provides a dramatic take on Tiananmen Square and the events there in 1989, yet I've heard plenty of squawking (from round eyes) about its failure to do justice to that historic conflict. Would a movie about Tiananmen, made along the lines of The Last Emperor, fare better in the U.S? Could Gettysburg withstand a transfer to Japan; if Kurosawa made it, might it even improve in the eyes of the Japanese? Or in the eyes of American viewers as well? How to assign metrics to questions like these? It's easy to just say that the better the filmmaker, the better the film, for all informed viewers of taste. Do the French still love Jerry Lewis? Are Hollywood blockbusters still the biggest grossers all around the world? And children in movies - does the fact that the child is native to a country foreign to the viewer and speaks a foreign language have any effect one way or the other on that viewer? Rather than approaching these questions from first principles, maybe the thing to do is to evaluate a hundred movies or so, make a call on each, and examine the results for trends.And speaking of children, how do they learn to act so well? Or isn't learning involved? Teens act in high-school drama classes and plays - they're learning something there, I guess. They act in community theater, especially in locations where drama in the schools is being cut. Adults go to drama school, but often act badly in films anyway. And yet I see movie after movie in which children act just fine (Mother of Mine, Wondrous Oblivion, Birth, Kabluey (where the kids are caricatures, but good caricatures.) On the other hand, that kid in The Dick Van Dyke Show... ouch.). Is aging an antidote to natural inborn talent? As we grow up, do we lose our ability to act? Or are these children, who seem to be acting so well, actually not doing much at all? In TYMPWOV, is the boy mostly just running around, looking upset, and playing with his tabletop soccer set, or is he interacting with others and... well, acting. I called the Stella Adler School in Manhattan to ask these questions, but the woman I spoke to told me that the youngest students they enroll are 14-year-olds (eight Saturday classes from 10 to 6, $800. No waiting list.) I asked the woman if the under-14s I see in the movies have been trained, or if whatever they show is just natural ability. She could only surmise. I asked if the Stella Adler Saturday classes have produced some success stories; she said yes, but didn't name anybody I've heard of. She didn't have much else to say about younger children and their appearances in movies, so I called a school out in the Valley (Sherman Oaks) which takes kids as young as 8. Sherman Oaks is up the 405 from Santa Monica, just over the hills from Hollywood. The fellow I spoke to told me flatly that every young person onscreen today has taken classes. He listed graduates from his school now appearing in Desperate Housewives, Everyone Hates Chris, etc., etc. (Classes from 10 to noon on Saturdays.) Agents and casting directors visit frequently, nominally as "class assistants," but actually trolling for talent; or maybe just trying to make a living. For example:****For Young actors:Howard MeltzerHannah Montana Casting DirectorTV Intensive - Saturday, October 4thIn each class session, the children work on a scene. In addition, there is instruction in preparation, auditioning, so forth. Camps and career-placement services are available. I asked the fellow whether children start out with talent and then lose it, or whether talent is distributed among children in the same proportion as among adults, and if so, what the classes might add to that. According to him, we're all natural-born actors. As children, we play-act all the time, but as we age, we forget how much fun that acting can be. Acting classes, like organized sports, are just a modern way of letting children continue to have fun. And just as you won't be playing in the NFL or NBA unless you associate yourself with an organized program, just so you won't break into Hollywood without connections. Plus, I'm now getting casting calls for some reason.Hamburger claims to have auditioned more than a thousand children looking for his stars in TYMPWOV. When he found the boy and girl that he wanted for the leads, Michel Joelsas and Daniela Piepszyk, he changed the script to fit them. Joelsas had never acted in a movie before (like Magaly Solier in Madeinusa, who had never even been in a movie theater when Claudia Llosa made her the lead in her movie). Hamburger says that Joelsas had talent and other characteristics of his personality that helped him to compose the character, such as "his shyness, his introspection, his curiosity about life, and his strength." And his "intelligence and a sense of observation. And he had strong charisma. He's also got a certain shyness and an inner strength." Hamburger introduced all the children in his movie slowly to the characters that they were to play, perhaps Mike Leigh-like. There was improvisation. None of the kids saw a script during the shooting of the movie. So no acting class there, unless you count Hamburger's direction; TYMPWOV argues for inborn talent, but only in one in a thousand or so. &ldquo;The way I work with them is the most important element. I treat them as intelligent people. They are not children. They are spiritual, intelligent human beings. What I look for in casting children is charisma and talent, but, more than that, I want smart people. There is a very natural sense - especially the kids with their reactions...We worked a lot to have this very natural feel, but there is a lot of work behind it.&rdquo; So roll the film of Michel's audition. What the heck did this kid have to do when he came through the door, number 1013, with Hamburger languishing there in his director's chair, in order to get picked boss boy? Bark like a dog? I coulda been a contender? Put on blackface, fall to his knees, and sing Mammy? We'll never know. Now my niece - those auditions are brutal. She crawls on her belly like a reptile. They badger her about her tattoos. Surely there were tattoos in Shakespeare's time, weren't there, even if they weren't coupling ferrets over You Suck! in red and green on her shoulder blades?When I say that the kids were fine in the movie, I just mean that I watched the movie and never found myself thinking, "This kid is acting." What they were actually doing onscreen, I wasn't exactly paying attention to. Sometimes in a movie I do think about what the child is up to: when Cameron Bright gets into the bath with a naked Nicole Kidman in Birth, I found myself speculating about how that was accomplished without breaking any laws. When Dylan Baker has a talk with his son in Happiness, about Baker's pedophilia and his abuse of the boy's sleepover friend the night before, I knew in advance that Baker was actually talking to the air and his son's reaction shots were filmed later. But in general, I don't sit watching for signs that actors are acting, child or otherwise. Mary Badham and Phillip Alford in To Kill a Mockingbird? How much were they given to do? Can't remember. Scout narrates the movie, but as an adult. Are kids mostly asked to just look worried, or angry, or confused? How often does a kid have to laugh in a movie? What's the story on kid monologs? 726,000 Google hits for "kid monologs," including the following from Henry V:BOY: As young as I am, I have observed these three swashers. I am boy to all three; but all three, though they would serve me, could not be man to me; for indeed three such antics do not amount to a man. For Bardolph, he is white-livered and red-faced; by the means whereof 'a faces it out, but fights not. For Pistol, he hath a killing tongue and a quiet sword; by the means whereof 'a breaks word and keeps whole weapons. For Nym, he hath heard that men of few words are the best men, and therefore he scorns to say his prayers, lest 'a should be thought a coward; but his few bad words are matched with as few good deeds, for 'a never broke any man's head but his own, and that was against a post when he was drunk. They will steal anything, and call it purchase. Bardolph stole a lute-case, bore it twelve leagues, and sold it for three halfpence. Nym and Bardolph are sworn brothers in filching, and in Calais they stole a fire-shovel. I knew by that piece of service the men would carry coals. They would have me as familiar with men's pockets as their gloves or handkerchers; which makes much against my manhood, if I should take from another's pocket to put into mine; for it is plain pocketing up of wrongs. I must leave them and seek some better service. Their villainy goes against my weak stomach, and therefore I must cast it up.Wow. Maybe Michel laid that one on Hamburger.When I think of "bad acting," am I just reacting to bad line readings? In Son of Rambow, the boys have a lot to say and every once in a while I'd raise an eyebrow. In TYMPWOV, Joelsas and Peipszyk and the other kids are required to show their chops as follows:First twenty-five minutes: Michel (Joelsas) is the only child in the first quarter of the movie, except for a brief interaction with Hanna (Piepszyk). He plays by himself, asks his parents questions, looks out the car window at the big city and, by the way, narrates the film creditably. Sustains hugs from his parents. (As a child, I was hugged by a woman in a play once and I had to stand there and take it with a smile.) This is a good-looking young man. The camera loves him. So he walks, runs, waits, frowns at strange food, pisses in a flowerpot. It all looks real to me. I guess that's acting.Second twenty-five minutes: Michel gets slapped, runs away, cooks in the kitchen, kills time around the house. Now some face time with Hanna - mild dialog - but since I don't speak Portuguese, how can I evaluate their line readings? Rats. (And by the way, watching the movie, I mostly couldn't distinguish Portuguese from Yiddish; be nice if the subtitles would indicate which was being spoken - and ditto for Swedish and Finnish in Mother of Mine). At 39 minutes (out of 100), Michel meets Hanna's friends, three boys. They refer to Michel as the goy. Ten minutes of ensemble child acting; all five seem a little stiff, but they're just meeting each other for the first time, so maybe in real life they would be stiff. Will the stiffness persist? Now Michel settles in with his neighbor, the elderly Shlomo next door, and makes friends throughout the neighborhood. He's not asked to say much by Hamburger, but he does a lot of worrying about his parents, running around the neighborhood, so on. At the halfway point in the film, the World Cup begins. Third twenty-five minutes: First World-Cup match with everyone watching; Michel spending time alone again in the apartment; then with a whole crowd of kids - minimal dialog; back home at the one-hour mark. Second match. Polish Jew, Italian Jew, Greek, African, German Jew, Hamburger really pushing the melting-pot theme. Local soccer game. Narration by boy. He wants to be a goalie. Another World-Cup match (sees first with Shlomo, second at the union, third with the old women. Local kids game with Michel as goalie. Piepszyk gives him a gift in a one-on-one scene with dialog. Michel goes to synagogue.Final twenty-five minutes: The kids do an excellent acting job at a bar mitzvah celebration. And then some acting by Joelsas, as he helps a young union member hide from the army and secret police. Emoting, face to face with an adult! Some intense moments. Then more alone time for the boy, now coping with his worries in a more mature way than at the beginning. And the final soccer match, and more perfect-pitch behavior from Joelsas. And drama to wrap up. The boy has charisma, for sure. I believed him, from start to finish, and the other kids too.And lest I forget, every time a goal was scored, everybody whooped and waved their arms in the air and I wondered if all the women in Brazil were shaving under their arms in 1970. According to a Brazilian I asked, the answer is yes. Looks come first in Brazil, she told me, and that includes proper underarm maintenance. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/5/12/28691.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 5/12/2008 5:01:10 PM
Body: I was really into that video that was going around last week, of the scene from Downfall transformed via subtitles into the story of Hillary Clinton’s last stand––not just because I dislike Hillary Clinton, but because there’s a goofiness to it that makes it seem more clever than your typical “this politician is just like Hitler!” joke. A lot of my favorite parts are too obscene to excerpt, although I do like it when s/he slams “those fainting sissies over at MoveOn.org” for “choking on their tofu because I voted for the Iraq war!” But I think I was most impressed by what I thought was the novel choice of material––a 3-year old German film detourned into YouTube propaganda? How imaginative! Um, turns out, it’s not as novel as I thought. A twitter from Chuck Tryon alerted me to the news that Downfall has been the basis of YouTube parodies long before the Hillary clip came to light. Many of these parodies reconfigure Hitler as a frustrated Xbox user; Hitler also has problems using Vista, is unhappy to hear that his favorite soccer team has lost the Champions League Final, and is absolutely irate at an underling’s suggestion that he buy a new Mustang. There are so many Downfall spoofs on YouTube that I’m almost positive I was the last one to know that spoofing Downfall was, like, a thing that people did. Almost all of these clips have view counts on YouTube in the six or seven figures. Downfall was the second-highest grossing foreign language film of 2005, but it still only made about $5.5 million. Almost certainly, more people in this country have now seen a clip from the film wrangled into a new context than would have ever seen the film in its original state. Downfall thus becomes part of the cultural conversation, but at the same time, it seems unlikely that any of these clips could effectively function as commercials for the film. Maybe it’s sad or maybe it’s totally appropriate, but it seems clear that the general YouTube user would be able to summon way more excitement for the concept of Hitler on the phone with Microsoft tech support, than they would for the concept of Hitler…doing Hitler stuff. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 12 May 2008 21:01:10 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com5/12/2008 5:01:10 PM I was really into that video that was going around last week, of the scene from Downfall transformed via subtitles into the story of Hillary Clinton’s last stand––not just because I dislike Hillary Clinton, but because there’s a goofiness to it that makes it seem more clever than your typical “this politician is just like Hitler!” joke. A lot of my favorite parts are too obscene to excerpt, although I do like it when s/he slams “those fainting sissies over at MoveOn.org” for “choking on their tofu because I voted for the Iraq war!” But I think I was most impressed by what I thought was the novel choice of material––a 3-year old German film detourned into YouTube propaganda? How imaginative! Um, turns out, it’s not as novel as I thought. A twitter from Chuck Tryon alerted me to the news that Downfall has been the basis of YouTube parodies long before the Hillary clip came to light. Many of these parodies reconfigure Hitler as a frustrated Xbox user; Hitler also has problems using Vista, is unhappy to hear that his favorite soccer team has lost the Champions League Final, and is absolutely irate at an underling’s suggestion that he buy a new Mustang. There are so many Downfall spoofs on YouTube that I’m almost positive I was the last one to know that spoofing Downfall was, like, a thing that people did. Almost all of these clips have view counts on YouTube in the six or seven figures. Downfall was the second-highest grossing foreign language film of 2005, but it still only made about $5.5 million. Almost certainly, more people in this country have now seen a clip from the film wrangled into a new context than would have ever seen the film in its original state. Downfall thus becomes part of the cultural conversation, but at the same time, it seems unlikely that any of these clips could effectively function as commercials for the film. Maybe it’s sad or maybe it’s totally appropriate, but it seems clear that the general YouTube user would be able to summon way more excitement for the concept of Hitler on the phone with Microsoft tech support, than they would for the concept of Hitler…doing Hitler stuff. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/5/12/28667.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 5/12/2008 4:00:48 PM
Body: I was really into that video that was going around last week, of the scene from Downfall transformed via subtitles into the story of Hillary Clinton’s last stand––not just because I dislike Hillary Clinton, but because there’s a goofiness to it that makes it seem more clever than your typical “this politician is just like Hitler!” joke. A lot of my favorite parts are too obscene to excerpt, although I do like it when s/he slams “those fainting sissies over at MoveOn.org” for “choking on their tofu because I voted for the Iraq war!” But I think I was most impressed by what I thought was the novel choice of material––a 3-year old German film detourned into YouTube propaganda? How imaginative! Um, turns out, it’s not as novel as I thought. A twitter from Chuck Tryon alerted me to the news that Downfall has been the basis of YouTube parodies long before the Hillary clip came to light. Many of these parodies reconfigure Hitler as a frustrated Xbox user; Hitler also has problems using Vista, is unhappy to hear that his favorite soccer team has lost the Champions League Final, and is absolutely irate at an underling’s suggestion that he buy a new Mustang. There are so many Downfall spoofs on YouTube that I’m almost positive I was the last one to know that spoofing Downfall was, like, a thing that people did. Almost all of these clips have view counts on YouTube in the six or seven figures. Downfall was the second-highest grossing foreign language film of 2005, but it still only made about $5.5 million. Almost certainly, more people in this country have now seen a clip from the film wrangled into a new context than would have ever seen the film in its original state. Downfall thus becomes part of the cultural conversation, but at the same time, it seems unlikely that any of these clips could effectively function as commercials for the film. Maybe it’s sad or maybe it’s totally appropriate, but it seems clear that the general YouTube user would be able to summon way more excitement for the concept of Hitler on the phone with Microsoft tech support, than they would for the concept of Hitler…doing Hitler stuff. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Mon, 12 May 2008 20:00:48 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog5/12/2008 4:00:48 PM I was really into that video that was going around last week, of the scene from Downfall transformed via subtitles into the story of Hillary Clinton’s last stand––not just because I dislike Hillary Clinton, but because there’s a goofiness to it that makes it seem more clever than your typical “this politician is just like Hitler!” joke. A lot of my favorite parts are too obscene to excerpt, although I do like it when s/he slams “those fainting sissies over at MoveOn.org” for “choking on their tofu because I voted for the Iraq war!” But I think I was most impressed by what I thought was the novel choice of material––a 3-year old German film detourned into YouTube propaganda? How imaginative! Um, turns out, it’s not as novel as I thought. A twitter from Chuck Tryon alerted me to the news that Downfall has been the basis of YouTube parodies long before the Hillary clip came to light. Many of these parodies reconfigure Hitler as a frustrated Xbox user; Hitler also has problems using Vista, is unhappy to hear that his favorite soccer team has lost the Champions League Final, and is absolutely irate at an underling’s suggestion that he buy a new Mustang. There are so many Downfall spoofs on YouTube that I’m almost positive I was the last one to know that spoofing Downfall was, like, a thing that people did. Almost all of these clips have view counts on YouTube in the six or seven figures. Downfall was the second-highest grossing foreign language film of 2005, but it still only made about $5.5 million. Almost certainly, more people in this country have now seen a clip from the film wrangled into a new context than would have ever seen the film in its original state. Downfall thus becomes part of the cultural conversation, but at the same time, it seems unlikely that any of these clips could effectively function as commercials for the film. Maybe it’s sad or maybe it’s totally appropriate, but it seems clear that the general YouTube user would be able to summon way more excitement for the concept of Hitler on the phone with Microsoft tech support, than they would for the concept of Hitler…doing Hitler stuff. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/amazing/MemberTagFilms.aspxamazing
Number of films tagged: 179

Number of people who tagged: 156

Number of times used: 253

]]>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 05:49:13 GMT179156253Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/german/MemberTagFilms.aspxgerman
Number of films tagged: 50

Number of people who tagged: 42

Number of times used: 66

]]>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 00:47:40 GMT504266Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/WWII/MemberTagFilms.aspxWWII
Number of films tagged: 58

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 75

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:49:02 GMT584175Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/nazi/MemberTagFilms.aspxnazi
Number of films tagged: 428

Number of people who tagged: 36

Number of times used: 67

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:50:17 GMT4283667Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/germany/MemberTagFilms.aspxgermany
Number of films tagged: 873

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 53

]]>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:51:44 GMT8733153Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/foreign/MemberTagFilms.aspxforeign
Number of films tagged: 491

Number of people who tagged: 30

Number of times used: 421

]]>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:41:30 GMT49130421Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Nazis/MemberTagFilms.aspxNazis
Number of films tagged: 24

Number of people who tagged: 19

Number of times used: 27

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:50:17 GMT241927Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/birthday/MemberTagFilms.aspxbirthday
Number of films tagged: 269

Number of people who tagged: 16

Number of times used: 46

]]>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:02:40 GMT2691646Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/hitler/MemberTagFilms.aspxhitler
Number of films tagged: 16

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 20

]]>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:58:04 GMT161420Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/nazism/MemberTagFilms.aspxnazism
Number of films tagged: 894

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 10

]]>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:02:21 GMT894910Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/secretary/MemberTagFilms.aspxsecretary
Number of films tagged: 435

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 9

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:00:02 GMT43589Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/leader/MemberTagFilms.aspxleader
Number of films tagged: 798

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 10

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:13:22 GMT798710Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/regime/MemberTagFilms.aspxregime
Number of films tagged: 91

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

]]>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:02:10 GMT9133Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Let-me-see-your-war-face/MemberTagFilms.aspxLet-me-see-your-war-face
Number of films tagged: 10

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 10

]]>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:58:38 GMT10210Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/bunker/MemberTagFilms.aspxbunker
Number of films tagged: 19

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:53:40 GMT1911Tag