list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson 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/Gonzo_The_Life_and_Work_of_Dr_Hunter_S_Thompson/360918/default.aspx Title: Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson
Year: 2007
Plot: Few journalists have attained the notoriety of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson. His legendary status is due as much to his scintillating writing as his outrageous antics. He became a living legend whose persona often overshadowed his work. However, Thompson's steadfast ability to remain true to his convictions created an entirely new style of journalism, dubbed "gonzo," and has solidified his place in history as one of America's most influential writers and rebels.

Fueled by a raging libido, Wild Turkey, and superhuman doses of drugs, Thompson was a true iconoclast: goring sacred cows with impunity, hilarity, and a steely-eyed obsession to right wrongs. Focusing on the good doctor's heyday--from 1965 to 1975--the film also includes clips of never-before-seen (and heard) home movies and audiotapes, and passages from unpublished manuscripts. Director Alex Gibney intelligently interviews a broad spectrum of Thompson's peers and paints a three-dimensional portrait that reveals what a larger-than-life icon he was, a man whose actions both attracted and repelled the people closest to him. What's remarkable is how daring he truly was in taking on the establishment and how absent that voice is today. His passing created a void that may never be filled, but Gibney's terrific film, in doing justice to the writer, the legend, and the man, at least helps preserve his legacy.
Times Tagged: 68
Number of Lists: 9
Number of blog posts: 8
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:04:38 GMTGonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson2007Few journalists have attained the notoriety of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson. His legendary status is due as much to his scintillating writing as his outrageous antics. He became a living legend whose persona often overshadowed his work. However, Thompson's steadfast ability to remain true to his convictions created an entirely new style of journalism, dubbed "gonzo," and has solidified his place in history as one of America's most influential writers and rebels. <br><br> Fueled by a raging libido, Wild Turkey, and superhuman doses of drugs, Thompson was a true iconoclast: goring sacred cows with impunity, hilarity, and a steely-eyed obsession to right wrongs. Focusing on the good doctor's heyday--from 1965 to 1975--the film also includes clips of never-before-seen (and heard) home movies and audiotapes, and passages from unpublished manuscripts. Director Alex Gibney intelligently interviews a broad spectrum of Thompson's peers and paints a three-dimensional portrait that reveals what a larger-than-life icon he was, a man whose actions both attracted and repelled the people closest to him. What's remarkable is how daring he truly was in taking on the establishment and how absent that voice is today. His passing created a void that may never be filled, but Gibney's terrific film, in doing justice to the writer, the legend, and the man, at least helps preserve his legacy.68Tag Target (>10)984http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s360918.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Gonzo_The_Life_and_Work_of_Dr_Hunter_S_Thompson/360918/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/tenenbaums/archive/2009/4/22/41687.aspx Post By: Tenenbaums
Post To: Tenenbaums Blog
Post Date: 4/22/2009 10:04:38 AM
Body: It's been over a year since I saw Gonzo at the Full Frame Documentary Film Festival, so I guess the press embargo has been lifted.... A good, cumulative retrospective of Thompson's life, but Hunter fans have seen most of this elsewhere and, though fun (it's Hunter; it's can't not be fun), it has a lot of problems. The film has plenty going for it, including significant celebrity participation (i.e. Johnny Depp reading passages from Hunter's work), but director Alex Gibney really stumbles in certain places, notably by visually reenacting multiple passages. The only one that works is the "Taco Stand" scene from "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas." The dialogue here is strong enough to stand on its own, and Gibney honors it by shooting Duke and Dr. Gonzo from below the waist. However, in a passage describing a werewolf running through the streets, Gibney turns to a literal interpretation, and the scene's hokiness goes beyond ridiculous. It's nice to see footage from Hunter's funeral and in-depth coverage of the McGovern campaign, but Gibney loses significant credibility by failing to mention or depict the years of physical pain that led to Hunter's suicide. In an interview included in Entertainment Weekly, the director says, "'I think it's bullshit, the idea that Hunter's killing himself is a heroic act — it's the act of a narcissist. I never met [Thompson], so I went in fresh and cold, and I wasn't on anybody's side.'' Try as Gibney may, Hunter is automatically a polarizing character and any effort to depict his life is going to include honest footage of Hunter's unforgivingly consistent personality. Such footage will give viewers with all ranges of interest in the good doctor an honest portrayal of him, regardless of the personal bias of a rogue director. To omit the reason behind Hunter's suicide is doing the man and those who followed his career a disservice. As such, Gibney's editorializing handicaps a potentially great work.
]]>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:04:38 GMTTenenbaumsTenenbaums Blog4/22/2009 10:04:38 AMIt's been over a year since I saw Gonzo at the Full Frame Documentary Film Festival, so I guess the press embargo has been lifted.... A good, cumulative retrospective of Thompson's life, but Hunter fans have seen most of this elsewhere and, though fun (it's Hunter; it's can't not be fun), it has a lot of problems. The film has plenty going for it, including significant celebrity participation (i.e. Johnny Depp reading passages from Hunter's work), but director Alex Gibney really stumbles in certain places, notably by visually reenacting multiple passages. The only one that works is the "Taco Stand" scene from "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas." The dialogue here is strong enough to stand on its own, and Gibney honors it by shooting Duke and Dr. Gonzo from below the waist. However, in a passage describing a werewolf running through the streets, Gibney turns to a literal interpretation, and the scene's hokiness goes beyond ridiculous. It's nice to see footage from Hunter's funeral and in-depth coverage of the McGovern campaign, but Gibney loses significant credibility by failing to mention or depict the years of physical pain that led to Hunter's suicide. In an interview included in Entertainment Weekly, the director says, "'I think it's bullshit, the idea that Hunter's killing himself is a heroic act &mdash; it's the act of a narcissist. I never met [Thompson], so I went in fresh and cold, and I wasn't on anybody's side.'' Try as Gibney may, Hunter is automatically a polarizing character and any effort to depict his life is going to include honest footage of Hunter's unforgivingly consistent personality. Such footage will give viewers with all ranges of interest in the good doctor an honest portrayal of him, regardless of the personal bias of a rogue director. To omit the reason behind Hunter's suicide is doing the man and those who followed his career a disservice. As such, Gibney's editorializing handicaps a potentially great work. http://www.spout.com/blogs/jimbell/archive/2008/12/2/37859.aspx Post By: JimBell
Post To: JimBell Blog
Post Date: 12/2/2008 3:47:25 PM
Body: Gonzo (2008) is not a particularly good documentary, but it is a fine homage to Hunter S. Thompson, gonzo journalist par excellence. Yes, homage—“special honour or respect expressed publicly.” So if you’re looking for an reasoned, balanced assessment of Hunter’s career, you won’t find it here. I’m not sure why the excellent documentary film maker Alex Gibney (“Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room”) chose to pay homage, but I can guess. Based on Gibney’s other films and comments he has made about his other work, I’d guess that Alex wished that the wild journalist Hunter was still around to take the mickey out of the Bush administration. (Hunter shot himself in 2005.) Gonzo would have been much better if it had been made after Obama’s election. As it is, the film is tough to watch. Although Hunter is presented in a positive light, he is not a likeable person—angry, kind, wildly excessive, always critical, not much of a father or husband, a serious drug addict--and we really don’t see much evidence of his being kind. The documentary glosses many of the negatives. As Roger Ebert asked of a man who drank a bottle of hard liquor a day and topped it up with miscellaneous drugs—No hangover? If you haven’t read Hunter’s gonzo journalism, you’ll get snippets read by Johnny Depp, but gonzo journalism was not about snippets, it was about rambling, self-absorbed, crazy riffing on serious topics. Although we see why Hunter invented such extreme reporting—he was an angry idealist—we don’t see why he remained trapped in a gonzo lifestyle until, as he predicted, he killed himself. The film is too respectful—something Hunter never was!
]]>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:47:25 GMTJimBellJimBell Blog12/2/2008 3:47:25 PMGonzo (2008) is not a particularly good documentary, but it is a fine homage to Hunter S. Thompson, gonzo journalist par excellence. Yes, homage&mdash;&ldquo;special honour or respect expressed publicly.&rdquo; So if you&rsquo;re looking for an reasoned, balanced assessment of Hunter&rsquo;s career, you won&rsquo;t find it here. I&rsquo;m not sure why the excellent documentary film maker Alex Gibney (&ldquo;Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room&rdquo;) chose to pay homage, but I can guess. Based on Gibney&rsquo;s other films and comments he has made about his other work, I&rsquo;d guess that Alex wished that the wild journalist Hunter was still around to take the mickey out of the Bush administration. (Hunter shot himself in 2005.) Gonzo would have been much better if it had been made after Obama&rsquo;s election. As it is, the film is tough to watch. Although Hunter is presented in a positive light, he is not a likeable person&mdash;angry, kind, wildly excessive, always critical, not much of a father or husband, a serious drug addict--and we really don&rsquo;t see much evidence of his being kind. The documentary glosses many of the negatives. As Roger Ebert asked of a man who drank a bottle of hard liquor a day and topped it up with miscellaneous drugs&mdash;No hangover? If you haven&rsquo;t read Hunter&rsquo;s gonzo journalism, you&rsquo;ll get snippets read by Johnny Depp, but gonzo journalism was not about snippets, it was about rambling, self-absorbed, crazy riffing on serious topics. Although we see why Hunter invented such extreme reporting&mdash;he was an angry idealist&mdash;we don&rsquo;t see why he remained trapped in a gonzo lifestyle until, as he predicted, he killed himself. The film is too respectful&mdash;something Hunter never was! http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/11/24/37595.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/24/2008 7:01:27 PM
Body: When the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announces a shortlist for one of its Oscar categories, many critics immediately focus on what titles are missing. Religulous was snubbed! Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired was punished for having a “secret” qualifying run! The Academy’s rules for eligibility must be amended! Such reactions were seen all over the web last week as awards season pundits looked at the narrowed-down list of 15 Feature Documentary hopefuls and criticized the Academy for its omissions. But the better response (which is the one SpoutBlog had) is to primarily address and celebrate the included films, not just for being contenders for the Feature Documentary Oscar but also for being showcased in general. The wonderful thing about shortlists is that they expand further the idea that it’s great just to be nominated. For feature documentaries, particularly those without a lot of media and major distributor attention, it is also great just to be shortlisted. Non-fiction film fans may now see this as an opportunity to take note of some documentaries that weren’t previously on their radar (unfortunately none of these films are actually allowed to advertise their recent achievement of being shortlisted). But the Academy Awards are, of course, still a competition. So, while we take notice of the 15 semi-finalists for the Feature Documentary Oscar, we shall also weigh their chances of being selected for the final five and predict which titles are likely to be announced as nominees on January 22. 1. Blessed Is the Match: The Life and Death of Hannah Senesh It’s a constant joke that any film related to the Holocaust is guaranteed an Oscar nomination. Obviously this is a generalization based on common trend, and not every Holocaust doc has in fact been recognized by the Academy, but if such a film is good enough to reach the shortlist, there is a very good chance that it will also be nominated. And since there hasn’t been a feature doc on the subject nominated since 2002, it’s probably time for a new one to get the spotlight. Blessed is narrated by Oscar-nominee Joan Allen and details the courageous life of Hannah Senesh, who took part in a mission to rescue Hungary’s Jews. If Hollywood doesn’t nominate this doc, it will probably at least use it as a springboard from which to produce an Oscar-bait dramatization about Senesh in the near future. 2. Trouble the Water Never mind the fact that it’s one of the best-reviewed films of the year, this is the Academy’s first chance to get behind the Katrina issue. Though some mistakenly see the Feature Documentary Oscar as primarily a category with which to showcase its favored causes rather than recognizing the actual best documentary filmmaking of the year, there is a miniscule amount of truth in the matter. It’s part of the reason that the Holocaust-doc joke is so often made, and it’s also why the films Born Into Brothels and An Inconvenient Truth were named winners, despite their being subject-over-style kinds of documentaries. Trouble the Water is a tad bit sloppy, but it has the subject matter and enough inspirational substance to receive a nomination. 3. Encounters at the End of the World This may be the Academy’s chance to make up for their exclusion of Werner Herzog’s Grizzly Man a few years back or simply honor a filmmaker who has been important to the non-fiction genre for decades. Also, with their snub of Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, the Academy Documentary Branch could use this as more opportunity to distinguish and make an example out of the difference between a theatrical documentary and a television documentary (as David Poland recently pointed out, “if you are a TV doc, be a TV doc…if you are a theatrical doc, that is what the Oscars reward”). People who went to see Encounters recommended it on the basis that it needs to be seen on a big screen, which is not often said about documentaries. Other things it has going for it are a shared location with Oscar-winner March of the Penguins (even if Herzog starts the film addressing that this is not like that film) and a slight relevance to the global warming issue, which is one of the Academy’s currently favored issues. 4. Standard Operating Procedure The Academy Documentary Branch does seem to favor former nominees in their category, perhaps due to the number of documentarians who turn to fiction filmmaking after breaking out in non-fiction (maybe that explains their snub of Barbara Kopple recently after her attempt into fiction). So Morris, who was infamously rejected by the Academy with his monumental film The Thin Blue Line, and who later won the Oscar for The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons Learned from the Life of Robert S. McNamara, should be given another go. It also helps that Standard Operating Procedure is the sole Iraq War-relevant documentary in the bunch, an interesting fact given how many films dealing with this topic have been shortlisted in the past few years. Even though last year the Oscar was given to a similarly themed doc about torture and prisoner abuse, the issue is likely still one that the Academy feels strongly about. Of course, speaking of that film, Taxi to the Dark Side, its director’s latest film was not shortlisted. 5. Man on Wire This is the highest grossing (and best-reviewed) of the 15 shortlisted films, and that could mean a lot, even if it is only the fifth top grossing doc of the year. The Academy is hardly a sucker for popular documentaries, but most years since Michael Moore was honored in 2002 have seen at least one popular doc, such as Super Size Me, March of the Penguins and Moore’s Sicko. In fact, only four of the ten top grossing (non-IMAX, non-concert, non-compilation, non-reality TV-based) documentaries have not been nominated for an Oscar. The only drawback for Man on Wire could be that it features a very large percentage of re-enactment or dramatization, and even if the Academy’s rules have a greater permission for these kinds of documentaries than in the days of The Thin Blue Line’s snub, it’s very possible that members of the Academy Documentary Branch are more appreciable towards one of the films that aren’t so heavily dependent on re-enactments. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:01:27 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/24/2008 7:01:27 PMWhen the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announces a shortlist for one of its Oscar categories, many critics immediately focus on what titles are missing. Religulous was snubbed! Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired was punished for having a “secret” qualifying run! The Academy’s rules for eligibility must be amended! Such reactions were seen all over the web last week as awards season pundits looked at the narrowed-down list of 15 Feature Documentary hopefuls and criticized the Academy for its omissions. But the better response (which is the one SpoutBlog had) is to primarily address and celebrate the included films, not just for being contenders for the Feature Documentary Oscar but also for being showcased in general. The wonderful thing about shortlists is that they expand further the idea that it’s great just to be nominated. For feature documentaries, particularly those without a lot of media and major distributor attention, it is also great just to be shortlisted. Non-fiction film fans may now see this as an opportunity to take note of some documentaries that weren’t previously on their radar (unfortunately none of these films are actually allowed to advertise their recent achievement of being shortlisted). But the Academy Awards are, of course, still a competition. So, while we take notice of the 15 semi-finalists for the Feature Documentary Oscar, we shall also weigh their chances of being selected for the final five and predict which titles are likely to be announced as nominees on January 22. 1. Blessed Is the Match: The Life and Death of Hannah Senesh It’s a constant joke that any film related to the Holocaust is guaranteed an Oscar nomination. Obviously this is a generalization based on common trend, and not every Holocaust doc has in fact been recognized by the Academy, but if such a film is good enough to reach the shortlist, there is a very good chance that it will also be nominated. And since there hasn’t been a feature doc on the subject nominated since 2002, it’s probably time for a new one to get the spotlight. Blessed is narrated by Oscar-nominee Joan Allen and details the courageous life of Hannah Senesh, who took part in a mission to rescue Hungary’s Jews. If Hollywood doesn’t nominate this doc, it will probably at least use it as a springboard from which to produce an Oscar-bait dramatization about Senesh in the near future. 2. Trouble the Water Never mind the fact that it’s one of the best-reviewed films of the year, this is the Academy’s first chance to get behind the Katrina issue. Though some mistakenly see the Feature Documentary Oscar as primarily a category with which to showcase its favored causes rather than recognizing the actual best documentary filmmaking of the year, there is a miniscule amount of truth in the matter. It’s part of the reason that the Holocaust-doc joke is so often made, and it’s also why the films Born Into Brothels and An Inconvenient Truth were named winners, despite their being subject-over-style kinds of documentaries. Trouble the Water is a tad bit sloppy, but it has the subject matter and enough inspirational substance to receive a nomination. 3. Encounters at the End of the World This may be the Academy’s chance to make up for their exclusion of Werner Herzog’s Grizzly Man a few years back or simply honor a filmmaker who has been important to the non-fiction genre for decades. Also, with their snub of Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, the Academy Documentary Branch could use this as more opportunity to distinguish and make an example out of the difference between a theatrical documentary and a television documentary (as David Poland recently pointed out, “if you are a TV doc, be a TV doc…if you are a theatrical doc, that is what the Oscars reward”). People who went to see Encounters recommended it on the basis that it needs to be seen on a big screen, which is not often said about documentaries. Other things it has going for it are a shared location with Oscar-winner March of the Penguins (even if Herzog starts the film addressing that this is not like that film) and a slight relevance to the global warming issue, which is one of the Academy’s currently favored issues. 4. Standard Operating Procedure The Academy Documentary Branch does seem to favor former nominees in their category, perhaps due to the number of documentarians who turn to fiction filmmaking after breaking out in non-fiction (maybe that explains their snub of Barbara Kopple recently after her attempt into fiction). So Morris, who was infamously rejected by the Academy with his monumental film The Thin Blue Line, and who later won the Oscar for The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons Learned from the Life of Robert S. McNamara, should be given another go. It also helps that Standard Operating Procedure is the sole Iraq War-relevant documentary in the bunch, an interesting fact given how many films dealing with this topic have been shortlisted in the past few years. Even though last year the Oscar was given to a similarly themed doc about torture and prisoner abuse, the issue is likely still one that the Academy feels strongly about. Of course, speaking of that film, Taxi to the Dark Side, its director’s latest film was not shortlisted. 5. Man on Wire This is the highest grossing (and best-reviewed) of the 15 shortlisted films, and that could mean a lot, even if it is only the fifth top grossing doc of the year. The Academy is hardly a sucker for popular documentaries, but most years since Michael Moore was honored in 2002 have seen at least one popular doc, such as Super Size Me, March of the Penguins and Moore’s Sicko. In fact, only four of the ten top grossing (non-IMAX, non-concert, non-compilation, non-reality TV-based) documentaries have not been nominated for an Oscar. The only drawback for Man on Wire could be that it features a very large percentage of re-enactment or dramatization, and even if the Academy’s rules have a greater permission for these kinds of documentaries than in the days of The Thin Blue Line’s snub, it’s very possible that members of the Academy Documentary Branch are more appreciable towards one of the films that aren’t so heavily dependent on re-enactments. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/7/3/32056.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 7/3/2008 11:00:39 AM
Body: My version of The Godfather would open with a voice in the darkness saying, “I don’t believe in America. The American Dream is a once-beguiling fairy tale; show’s over, y’all.” But The Dream is still real to many people, and the violence that powerful private interests have done to it in the last century pains them like a kidney punch. Gonzo journalism pioneer Hunter S. Thompson was one of the wounded, and so is Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Taxi to the Darkside), the far more straight-laced director of the entertaining documentary Gonzo: The Life and Work of Hunter S. Thompson. They share a proprietary sense of outrage over abuses of power they’ve witnessed in their times. For them, America’s Nixons, Enrons and Bush-Cheneys have desecrated the church, the front lawn. For all their passionate trouble-making, there’s no denying that Gibney and the late Thompson, two white males who came up through America’s hallowed institutions (Thompson through the U.S. Air Force; Gibney through Yale), are insiders. When I went to interview Gibney about Gonzo, I remembered the film’s procession of leathery right-wingers and elites, former Thompson nemeses, who have warm, friendly things to say about “Dr. Gonzo” now that he’s dead, now that his caricature as a gun-toting drughead has endured beyond his politics. I wondered if, in the end, being inside got the hole dug any better than chucking rocks from outside. STEVEN BOONE: On the way over here I was reading the introduction to John Steinbeck’s The Pearl, and the person mentioned that, with the publishing of The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck had his greatest fame, his greatest success. With that, you’d think he would have found some comfort, but he was actually a bit in despair that he was being embraced by the very elite forces he was critiquing. Of course, you have Hunter Thompson with his downward spiral… For you, with this recent run of success, is there any kind of… ALEX GIBNEY: Despair? (laughs) SB: (laughs) Well, regret…? Second thoughts? “Where do I go from here?” AG: I have to be honest with you. I haven’t experienced that. I haven’t reached that kind of– I mean, first of all, okay, I won the Oscar. I feel great, believe me. Walking around with that statue, you feel like Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings. But I feel like there’s so many other interesting things to do. One of the salvations is to keep having a next project to do and you focus on that, even as you’re looking back. So you don’t spend all day looking your name up on Google. SB: Well, I do, but– AG: (laughs) But not all day, maybe 12 or 13 hours. SB: (laughs) Right. But I look at your body of work and I see a certain political conviction behind it. AG: Right. SB: It’s critical, but it is from the perspective of an insider, sort of like your colleague Charles Ferguson with No End in Sight. You came up through Yale, you came up through UCLA, you have your Oscars and your Emmys. You have your… sanction from certain institutions. Does it complicate matters for you going forward? AG: I understand what you’re getting at and I think it does, to some extent. The danger part always comes with celebrity, you know? You end up going out on the circuit, to some extent and then you get comfortable hanging around with other celebrities and then suddenly– it’s like being an insider journalist in Washington. Hunter talked about that in the campaign trail book [Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72]. He said, “I’m just gonna blow in here and blow out. I don’t have to worry about being here four, five, six years from now, trying to play a game, make sure that this person’s comfortable, that person’s comfortable.” It’s a little bit easier when you go in and out. But I do think, you know, I’ve had great opportunities. I’ve had a private school education, I went to a good university, I went to a good film school and I know a lot of powerful people. It turns out that that is a good advantage for me because I tend to do films about the perps rather than the victims. When you try to get inside and see what’s going on with the people who are committing these grand crimes, it helps to have access to those connections, sometimes because otherwise you don’t get in the door. But the question is, at some point, do you become one of those people? (laughs) SB: That’s the question. AG: That’s the question. Well, you’ll see. You’ll be my judge, and you’ll let me know. (laughs) SB: But do you ever feel that inner conflict, with maybe posing a certain question or, I don’t know, just bringing a bad vibe into the room…? Have you ever felt yourself back away because, “Hey, this is a nice guy, a decent person.” Sort of like when Hunter Thompson was in the car with Nixon, said he was a pleasant guy to talk football with. AG: Right. Well, you you always have to kind of separate. One of the big things I’ve learned is… My sister in law once said it: “Everybody’s nice.” And you sit with people in a room and sometimes they’re total assholes and you say, “Well, fuck them,” right? But sometimes they’re very nice and solicitous and charming and it is true: When you get close, your tendency is not to–almost kind of a Stockholm Syndrome takes over. But you realize that there are a lot of nice people out there who do horrible things. SB: How do you contrast yourself with other filmmakers at your level of success dealing with similar subjects– let’s say Michael Moore or Nick– AG: Everybody’s got their own style. Everybody always asks me about Michael. I always say that Michael does his own thing. There’s no illusion when you go see a Michael Moore film. You know it’s a Michael Moore film and you’re getting what you get. The only people that piss me off are the one that try to hide stuff, pretend to be doing one thing and doing something else. SB: Like who? AG: Well, um… Trying to think now… There was, a number of years ago, somebody doing a film about the civil rights movement and they actually faked some archival footage of the movement. They did a re-creation but they intercut it freely with actual footage from the events. SB: Whaa? Fox News? AG: No, no. It was on HBO. And there was a big hue and cry over it because it wasn’t like a re-creation where you know the filmmakers shot this with actors. That I have a real problem with. SB: Well, I was a little uncertain at some points in Gonzo. Actually, I’m pretty sure that when we were listening to audio tape of Thompson and his attorney on the road to Vegas that what I was seeing was a re-enactment. AG: Right. SB: But it was pretty slick. AB: It was. Two things I’ll say about that. First of all, we’re trying to do some fun stuff like Hunter did, like claiming Muskey’s high on this drug called Ebogaine. This kind of tall tale telling. But at the beginning of the film, you see this photograph of Hunter with a gun pointed at a typewriter. Zoom into his hand, where it hard-cuts to a real hand firing the gun. I think its a clue to the audience, you know, “Buyer beware, there’s gonna be some wild stuff.” We’re going to be playing around. Even with that [road trip] sequence, which I love… We shot it with actors who look a lot like Hunter and Oscar. We had the audio tape and we’d go out and shoot Super 8, kind of a home movie. But the deeper into that home movie you get, suddenly you start to see the action from three or four different angles, and you gota be thinking, “This is not a home movie.” SB: Sort of mirroring Hunter’s techniques, sliding in and out of reality. AG: That’s right. SB: Drawing out the people who are really reading closely. AG: Right. There’s a moment where it’s ambiguous. That’s okay, as long as you resolve that moment at the end. SB: It kind of reminds me of a documentary I saw a few years back, How to Draw a Bunny, about the artist Ray Johnson. AG: Oh, I heard about that one. Was that a good film? SB: It’s a good film, and in style it’s playful and kind of a series of stunts in the way that Johnson’s work was. [A moment of giddy Netflix chitchat ensues, and then:] SB: What would Hunter Thompson have to say about these times we’re living in now, or can you speak for him? AG: I don’t know if I can, but he got very depressed when Bush won in ‘04 and not long after that he committed suicide. I think it’s too much to say that that’s what drove him to suicide. There are lots of other factors that are not so pretty. But I think he would say that we’re seeing the triumph of fear and loathing over that other part of the American character, this sense of idealism. Bush represented to him that aspect of the United States that goes back to its inception. At the same time, he was a big Bobby Kennedy fan and big McGovern fan. I think he’d be an Obama guy now. He would say, “Here’s somebody who understands the need for a prime actor in the theater of American politics. A “together Hunter”–as his wife says– not the drug-addled drunk. The other Hunter would have something to say about it. SB: Would you be with him on that Obama support? AG: I am. I like Obama and I think he does speak to a better possibility. My only concern is, will he end up being… Will he make too many compromises once he’s in power? But you know he’s been through the rough and tumble of Illinois politics, so I’m sure he knows better than I how to navigate that stuff. He stirs peple’s idealism in a way that few people have done in the last 30 years. SB: That’s what ties you to Hunter in my eyes. I view it with a little bit of awe, this kind of idealism underneath it all. Far from cynicism, it’s an idealism that’s been abused– a real sense of connection to America as a concept, American values. AG: At least that possibility. Not always the reality, but at least the dream. He was always obsessed with the American Dream. I share with Hunter the love of that novel The Great Gatsby. The green light at the end of the dock. It’s destructive because there’s the illusion of mobility and possibility that can be very damaging. That’s why [Thompson] set the death of the American Dream in a casino, where it seems like you can roll the dice and win the big one and then you’re the rich man who gets the penthouse, when in fact you’re always playing against the house and the house always wins. At the same time, that green light at the end of the dock is also a sense of real possibility. There are moments when America makes good on that myth. You can get angry when people abuse that myth and only pretend that it’s so, but you can also celebrate that, from time to time, it’s for real. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 15:00:39 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com7/3/2008 11:00:39 AM My version of The Godfather would open with a voice in the darkness saying, “I don’t believe in America. The American Dream is a once-beguiling fairy tale; show’s over, y’all.” But The Dream is still real to many people, and the violence that powerful private interests have done to it in the last century pains them like a kidney punch. Gonzo journalism pioneer Hunter S. Thompson was one of the wounded, and so is Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Taxi to the Darkside), the far more straight-laced director of the entertaining documentary Gonzo: The Life and Work of Hunter S. Thompson. They share a proprietary sense of outrage over abuses of power they’ve witnessed in their times. For them, America’s Nixons, Enrons and Bush-Cheneys have desecrated the church, the front lawn. For all their passionate trouble-making, there’s no denying that Gibney and the late Thompson, two white males who came up through America’s hallowed institutions (Thompson through the U.S. Air Force; Gibney through Yale), are insiders. When I went to interview Gibney about Gonzo, I remembered the film’s procession of leathery right-wingers and elites, former Thompson nemeses, who have warm, friendly things to say about “Dr. Gonzo” now that he’s dead, now that his caricature as a gun-toting drughead has endured beyond his politics. I wondered if, in the end, being inside got the hole dug any better than chucking rocks from outside. STEVEN BOONE: On the way over here I was reading the introduction to John Steinbeck’s The Pearl, and the person mentioned that, with the publishing of The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck had his greatest fame, his greatest success. With that, you’d think he would have found some comfort, but he was actually a bit in despair that he was being embraced by the very elite forces he was critiquing. Of course, you have Hunter Thompson with his downward spiral… For you, with this recent run of success, is there any kind of… ALEX GIBNEY: Despair? (laughs) SB: (laughs) Well, regret…? Second thoughts? “Where do I go from here?” AG: I have to be honest with you. I haven’t experienced that. I haven’t reached that kind of– I mean, first of all, okay, I won the Oscar. I feel great, believe me. Walking around with that statue, you feel like Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings. But I feel like there’s so many other interesting things to do. One of the salvations is to keep having a next project to do and you focus on that, even as you’re looking back. So you don’t spend all day looking your name up on Google. SB: Well, I do, but– AG: (laughs) But not all day, maybe 12 or 13 hours. SB: (laughs) Right. But I look at your body of work and I see a certain political conviction behind it. AG: Right. SB: It’s critical, but it is from the perspective of an insider, sort of like your colleague Charles Ferguson with No End in Sight. You came up through Yale, you came up through UCLA, you have your Oscars and your Emmys. You have your… sanction from certain institutions. Does it complicate matters for you going forward? AG: I understand what you’re getting at and I think it does, to some extent. The danger part always comes with celebrity, you know? You end up going out on the circuit, to some extent and then you get comfortable hanging around with other celebrities and then suddenly– it’s like being an insider journalist in Washington. Hunter talked about that in the campaign trail book [Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72]. He said, “I’m just gonna blow in here and blow out. I don’t have to worry about being here four, five, six years from now, trying to play a game, make sure that this person’s comfortable, that person’s comfortable.” It’s a little bit easier when you go in and out. But I do think, you know, I’ve had great opportunities. I’ve had a private school education, I went to a good university, I went to a good film school and I know a lot of powerful people. It turns out that that is a good advantage for me because I tend to do films about the perps rather than the victims. When you try to get inside and see what’s going on with the people who are committing these grand crimes, it helps to have access to those connections, sometimes because otherwise you don’t get in the door. But the question is, at some point, do you become one of those people? (laughs) SB: That’s the question. AG: That’s the question. Well, you’ll see. You’ll be my judge, and you’ll let me know. (laughs) SB: But do you ever feel that inner conflict, with maybe posing a certain question or, I don’t know, just bringing a bad vibe into the room…? Have you ever felt yourself back away because, “Hey, this is a nice guy, a decent person.” Sort of like when Hunter Thompson was in the car with Nixon, said he was a pleasant guy to talk football with. AG: Right. Well, you you always have to kind of separate. One of the big things I’ve learned is… My sister in law once said it: “Everybody’s nice.” And you sit with people in a room and sometimes they’re total assholes and you say, “Well, fuck them,” right? But sometimes they’re very nice and solicitous and charming and it is true: When you get close, your tendency is not to–almost kind of a Stockholm Syndrome takes over. But you realize that there are a lot of nice people out there who do horrible things. SB: How do you contrast yourself with other filmmakers at your level of success dealing with similar subjects– let’s say Michael Moore or Nick– AG: Everybody’s got their own style. Everybody always asks me about Michael. I always say that Michael does his own thing. There’s no illusion when you go see a Michael Moore film. You know it’s a Michael Moore film and you’re getting what you get. The only people that piss me off are the one that try to hide stuff, pretend to be doing one thing and doing something else. SB: Like who? AG: Well, um… Trying to think now… There was, a number of years ago, somebody doing a film about the civil rights movement and they actually faked some archival footage of the movement. They did a re-creation but they intercut it freely with actual footage from the events. SB: Whaa? Fox News? AG: No, no. It was on HBO. And there was a big hue and cry over it because it wasn’t like a re-creation where you know the filmmakers shot this with actors. That I have a real problem with. SB: Well, I was a little uncertain at some points in Gonzo. Actually, I’m pretty sure that when we were listening to audio tape of Thompson and his attorney on the road to Vegas that what I was seeing was a re-enactment. AG: Right. SB: But it was pretty slick. AB: It was. Two things I’ll say about that. First of all, we’re trying to do some fun stuff like Hunter did, like claiming Muskey’s high on this drug called Ebogaine. This kind of tall tale telling. But at the beginning of the film, you see this photograph of Hunter with a gun pointed at a typewriter. Zoom into his hand, where it hard-cuts to a real hand firing the gun. I think its a clue to the audience, you know, “Buyer beware, there’s gonna be some wild stuff.” We’re going to be playing around. Even with that [road trip] sequence, which I love… We shot it with actors who look a lot like Hunter and Oscar. We had the audio tape and we’d go out and shoot Super 8, kind of a home movie. But the deeper into that home movie you get, suddenly you start to see the action from three or four different angles, and you gota be thinking, “This is not a home movie.” SB: Sort of mirroring Hunter’s techniques, sliding in and out of reality. AG: That’s right. SB: Drawing out the people who are really reading closely. AG: Right. There’s a moment where it’s ambiguous. That’s okay, as long as you resolve that moment at the end. SB: It kind of reminds me of a documentary I saw a few years back, How to Draw a Bunny, about the artist Ray Johnson. AG: Oh, I heard about that one. Was that a good film? SB: It’s a good film, and in style it’s playful and kind of a series of stunts in the way that Johnson’s work was. [A moment of giddy Netflix chitchat ensues, and then:] SB: What would Hunter Thompson have to say about these times we’re living in now, or can you speak for him? AG: I don’t know if I can, but he got very depressed when Bush won in ‘04 and not long after that he committed suicide. I think it’s too much to say that that’s what drove him to suicide. There are lots of other factors that are not so pretty. But I think he would say that we’re seeing the triumph of fear and loathing over that other part of the American character, this sense of idealism. Bush represented to him that aspect of the United States that goes back to its inception. At the same time, he was a big Bobby Kennedy fan and big McGovern fan. I think he’d be an Obama guy now. He would say, “Here’s somebody who understands the need for a prime actor in the theater of American politics. A “together Hunter”–as his wife says– not the drug-addled drunk. The other Hunter would have something to say about it. SB: Would you be with him on that Obama support? AG: I am. I like Obama and I think he does speak to a better possibility. My only concern is, will he end up being… Will he make too many compromises once he’s in power? But you know he’s been through the rough and tumble of Illinois politics, so I’m sure he knows better than I how to navigate that stuff. He stirs peple’s idealism in a way that few people have done in the last 30 years. SB: That’s what ties you to Hunter in my eyes. I view it with a little bit of awe, this kind of idealism underneath it all. Far from cynicism, it’s an idealism that’s been abused– a real sense of connection to America as a concept, American values. AG: At least that possibility. Not always the reality, but at least the dream. He was always obsessed with the American Dream. I share with Hunter the love of that novel The Great Gatsby. The green light at the end of the dock. It’s destructive because there’s the illusion of mobility and possibility that can be very damaging. That’s why [Thompson] set the death of the American Dream in a casino, where it seems like you can roll the dice and win the big one and then you’re the rich man who gets the penthouse, when in fact you’re always playing against the house and the house always wins. At the same time, that green light at the end of the dock is also a sense of real possibility. There are moments when America makes good on that myth. You can get angry when people abuse that myth and only pretend that it’s so, but you can also celebrate that, from time to time, it’s for real. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/3/2/25787.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 3/2/2008 5:00:48 PM
Body: True/False co-director David Wilson presented recent Oscar winner Alex Gibney with the festival???s True Vision Award on Saturday, before a screening of Gibney???s latest opus, Gonzo. The film takes a comprehensive look at the zeitgeist-defining glory years and post-middle-age decline of journalist Hunter S. Thompson, whose commitment to truth through fictionalization inspired Wilson to brand him ???a man who could well be the patron saint of True/False.??? In introducing Gibney, Wilson noted that the festival was proud to host the director on his first stop after last week???s Oscar ceremony. When he reached the mic, Gibney corrected the record. ???This is not my first stop after that event in Hollywood,??? the filmmaker said. ???I looked at that as a warm-up to True/False.??? The True Vision Award is designed to honor mid-career filmmakers who, in the words of Wilson, ???are pushing the non-fiction form forward.??? It???s a bit of a disappointment, then, that formally, Gonzo swings wildly between stylistic experimentation and rote talking-head traditionalism. Shooting on high def video to appease producers Todd Wagner and Mark Cuban, who will release the film theatrically under the auspices of Magnolia before broadcasting Gonzo on their HD Net TV, Gibney seems to struggle to transcend the standard visual tropes of the medium. The bulk of the film consists of sit-down interviews with expert witnesses, including Thompson’s son and two ex-wives, Jann Wenner and Pat Buchanan; much of the rest of the footage is culled from fiction films about Thompson and previous documentaries. When Gibney does take chances??????such as when he casts actors in a home-video style reenactment set to an actual audio recording of Thompson’s visit to a Nevada taco stand, the transcription of which formed a chapter of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas??????the end result is not dissimilar to something one might see on basic cable. There are inspired ideas here, but with its sometimes awkward video effects and general made-for-TV patina, the whole thing looks a little downmarket for a filmmaker of Gibney’s caliber. Which is not to say that Gonzo doesn???t offer valuable insight into Thompson???s life, work, and, especially, the power of his celebrity. (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » karina
]]>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 22:00:48 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog3/2/2008 5:00:48 PM True/False co-director David Wilson presented recent Oscar winner Alex Gibney with the festival???s True Vision Award on Saturday, before a screening of Gibney???s latest opus, Gonzo. The film takes a comprehensive look at the zeitgeist-defining glory years and post-middle-age decline of journalist Hunter S. Thompson, whose commitment to truth through fictionalization inspired Wilson to brand him ???a man who could well be the patron saint of True/False.??? In introducing Gibney, Wilson noted that the festival was proud to host the director on his first stop after last week???s Oscar ceremony. When he reached the mic, Gibney corrected the record. ???This is not my first stop after that event in Hollywood,??? the filmmaker said. ???I looked at that as a warm-up to True/False.??? The True Vision Award is designed to honor mid-career filmmakers who, in the words of Wilson, ???are pushing the non-fiction form forward.??? It???s a bit of a disappointment, then, that formally, Gonzo swings wildly between stylistic experimentation and rote talking-head traditionalism. Shooting on high def video to appease producers Todd Wagner and Mark Cuban, who will release the film theatrically under the auspices of Magnolia before broadcasting Gonzo on their HD Net TV, Gibney seems to struggle to transcend the standard visual tropes of the medium. The bulk of the film consists of sit-down interviews with expert witnesses, including Thompson’s son and two ex-wives, Jann Wenner and Pat Buchanan; much of the rest of the footage is culled from fiction films about Thompson and previous documentaries. When Gibney does take chances??????such as when he casts actors in a home-video style reenactment set to an actual audio recording of Thompson’s visit to a Nevada taco stand, the transcription of which formed a chapter of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas??????the end result is not dissimilar to something one might see on basic cable. There are inspired ideas here, but with its sometimes awkward video effects and general made-for-TV patina, the whole thing looks a little downmarket for a filmmaker of Gibney’s caliber. Which is not to say that Gonzo doesn???t offer valuable insight into Thompson???s life, work, and, especially, the power of his celebrity. (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » karina http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/3/2/25786.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/2/2008 5:00:39 PM
Body: True/False co-director David Wilson presented recent Oscar winner Alex Gibney with the festival???s True Vision Award on Saturday, before a screening of Gibney???s latest opus, Gonzo. The film takes a comprehensive look at the zeitgeist-defining glory years and post-middle-age decline of journalist Hunter S. Thompson, whose commitment to truth through fictionalization inspired Wilson to brand him ???a man who could well be the patron saint of True/False.??? In introducing Gibney, Wilson noted that the festival was proud to host the director on his first stop after last week???s Oscar ceremony. When he reached the mic, Gibney corrected the record. ???This is not my first stop after that event in Hollywood,??? the filmmaker said. ???I looked at that as a warm-up to True/False.??? The True Vision Award is designed to honor mid-career filmmakers who, in the words of Wilson, ???are pushing the non-fiction form forward.??? It???s a bit of a disappointment, then, that formally, Gonzo swings wildly between stylistic experimentation and rote talking-head traditionalism. Shooting on high def video to appease producers Todd Wagner and Mark Cuban, who will release the film theatrically under the auspices of Magnolia before broadcasting Gonzo on their HD Net TV, Gibney seems to struggle to transcend the standard visual tropes of the medium. The bulk of the film consists of sit-down interviews with expert witnesses, including Thompson’s son and two ex-wives, Jann Wenner and Pat Buchanan; much of the rest of the footage is culled from fiction films about Thompson and previous documentaries. When Gibney does take chances??????such as when he casts actors in a home-video style reenactment set to an actual audio recording of Thompson’s visit to a Nevada taco stand, the transcription of which formed a chapter of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas??????the end result is not dissimilar to something one might see on basic cable. There are inspired ideas here, but with its sometimes awkward video effects and general made-for-TV patina, the whole thing looks a little downmarket for a filmmaker of Gibney’s caliber. Which is not to say that Gonzo doesn???t offer valuable insight into Thompson???s life, work, and, especially, the power of his celebrity. (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 22:00:39 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/2/2008 5:00:39 PM True/False co-director David Wilson presented recent Oscar winner Alex Gibney with the festival???s True Vision Award on Saturday, before a screening of Gibney???s latest opus, Gonzo. The film takes a comprehensive look at the zeitgeist-defining glory years and post-middle-age decline of journalist Hunter S. Thompson, whose commitment to truth through fictionalization inspired Wilson to brand him ???a man who could well be the patron saint of True/False.??? In introducing Gibney, Wilson noted that the festival was proud to host the director on his first stop after last week???s Oscar ceremony. When he reached the mic, Gibney corrected the record. ???This is not my first stop after that event in Hollywood,??? the filmmaker said. ???I looked at that as a warm-up to True/False.??? The True Vision Award is designed to honor mid-career filmmakers who, in the words of Wilson, ???are pushing the non-fiction form forward.??? It???s a bit of a disappointment, then, that formally, Gonzo swings wildly between stylistic experimentation and rote talking-head traditionalism. Shooting on high def video to appease producers Todd Wagner and Mark Cuban, who will release the film theatrically under the auspices of Magnolia before broadcasting Gonzo on their HD Net TV, Gibney seems to struggle to transcend the standard visual tropes of the medium. The bulk of the film consists of sit-down interviews with expert witnesses, including Thompson’s son and two ex-wives, Jann Wenner and Pat Buchanan; much of the rest of the footage is culled from fiction films about Thompson and previous documentaries. When Gibney does take chances??????such as when he casts actors in a home-video style reenactment set to an actual audio recording of Thompson’s visit to a Nevada taco stand, the transcription of which formed a chapter of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas??????the end result is not dissimilar to something one might see on basic cable. There are inspired ideas here, but with its sometimes awkward video effects and general made-for-TV patina, the whole thing looks a little downmarket for a filmmaker of Gibney’s caliber. Which is not to say that Gonzo doesn???t offer valuable insight into Thompson???s life, work, and, especially, the power of his celebrity. (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/69and666/archive/2008/3/2/25784.aspx Post By: 69and666
Post To: 69and666 Blog
Post Date: 3/2/2008 4:28:32 PM
Body: Hunter S. Thompson is a personal hero of mine and, having read his books and having seen his previous films, I truly wish to address my sincerity in believing no movie could truly capture this visionary. Gonzo is a way of life and you either get it or you don't. Check uot this alternative view on Hunter if you are a good person and are also interested in the impact of a true American journalist.
]]>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 21:28:32 GMT69and66669and666 Blog3/2/2008 4:28:32 PMHunter S. Thompson is a personal hero of mine and, having read his books and having seen his previous films, I truly wish to address my sincerity in believing no movie could truly capture this visionary. Gonzo is a way of life and you either get it or you don&#39;t. Check uot this alternative view on Hunter if you are a good person and are also interested in the impact of a true American journalist. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/1/18/24016.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/18/2008 9:00:54 AM
Body: As you may well know, the Spout team is knee-deep in Sundance, that juggernaut of American film festivals. For this episode of FilmCouch we present a conversation between the regulars (Paul, Kevin, Karina) and Filmspotting’s Adam Kempenaar about what we’re up to at the festival this year. Adam is looking forward to a pair of docs about legendary artists, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired and Gonzo: The Life and Work of Hunter S. Thompson. Among the many film’s on Karina’s to-see list are two movies by pairs of brothers: the Zellner brothers’ Goliath and the Duplass brothers’ Baghead. Kevin is hoping the Mexican near-future dystopian sci-fi film Sleep Dealer can live up to the expectations set by Cuar??n’s Children of Men. FilmCouch 53 Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:00:54 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/18/2008 9:00:54 AM As you may well know, the Spout team is knee-deep in Sundance, that juggernaut of American film festivals. For this episode of FilmCouch we present a conversation between the regulars (Paul, Kevin, Karina) and Filmspotting’s Adam Kempenaar about what we’re up to at the festival this year. Adam is looking forward to a pair of docs about legendary artists, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired and Gonzo: The Life and Work of Hunter S. Thompson. Among the many film’s on Karina’s to-see list are two movies by pairs of brothers: the Zellner brothers’ Goliath and the Duplass brothers’ Baghead. Kevin is hoping the Mexican near-future dystopian sci-fi film Sleep Dealer can live up to the expectations set by Cuar??n’s Children of Men. FilmCouch 53 Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6288

Number of people who tagged: 226

Number of times used: 1138

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:21 GMT62882261138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/drugs/MemberTagFilms.aspxdrugs
Number of films tagged: 1643

Number of people who tagged: 130

Number of times used: 488

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:36:00 GMT1643130488Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/documentary/MemberTagFilms.aspxdocumentary
Number of films tagged: 402

Number of people who tagged: 127

Number of times used: 496

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:11:06 GMT402127496Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sex/MemberTagFilms.aspxsex
Number of films tagged: 2414

Number of people who tagged: 126

Number of times used: 548

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:42 GMT2414126548Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/suicide/MemberTagFilms.aspxsuicide
Number of films tagged: 1828

Number of people who tagged: 80

Number of times used: 185

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:40:50 GMT182880185Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/marriage/MemberTagFilms.aspxmarriage
Number of films tagged: 3471

Number of people who tagged: 67

Number of times used: 267

]]>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:39:11 GMT347167267Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/politics/MemberTagFilms.aspxpolitics
Number of films tagged: 698

Number of people who tagged: 54

Number of times used: 194

]]>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:07:45 GMT69854194Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/rape/MemberTagFilms.aspxrape
Number of films tagged: 1050

Number of people who tagged: 54

Number of times used: 124

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:36:01 GMT105054124Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/father/MemberTagFilms.aspxfather
Number of films tagged: 3580

Number of people who tagged: 51

Number of times used: 213

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT358051213Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/divorce/MemberTagFilms.aspxdivorce
Number of films tagged: 1042

Number of people who tagged: 45

Number of times used: 121

]]>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:35:44 GMT104245121Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/guns/MemberTagFilms.aspxguns
Number of films tagged: 103

Number of people who tagged: 42

Number of times used: 125

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 04:32:56 GMT10342125Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/journalism/MemberTagFilms.aspxjournalism
Number of films tagged: 1146

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 65

]]>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:03:15 GMT11464165Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/writer/MemberTagFilms.aspxwriter
Number of films tagged: 869

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 89

]]>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:37:08 GMT8694189Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/artist/MemberTagFilms.aspxartist
Number of films tagged: 2120

Number of people who tagged: 38

Number of times used: 75

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:40 GMT21203875Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friends/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriends
Number of films tagged: 157

Number of people who tagged: 36

Number of times used: 181

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:40 GMT15736181Tag