New Year’s Eve Pop Quiz!

Today, three actors are celebrating their birthdays: Anthony Hopkins, Ben Kingsley, and Tim Matheson.

What politically-related thing do these three have in common?

Planes, Trains and Turkey

So there really aren’t many films that can count as “Thanksgiving Movies.”  There are certainly some flicks that take place on or around Thanksgiving (ranging from the Woody Allen classic Hannah and Her Sisters to the Christmastime staple Miracle on 34th Street), but none of these really seem to have the feeling of Thanksgiving . . . except for one.

In the Hawley House, my sister and I grew up watching John Candy movies.  The Great Outdoors, Uncle Buck, Summer Rental, and Cool Runnings were common sources of entertainment, and I can still remember the sad day in 1994 when my mom told me that Mr. Candy had passed away.  Few of his films can be considered particularly great (with the notable exception of JFK, where Candy turns in a surprisingly dramatic performance).  We just watched them because they were funny.  So I was very surprised when I discovered that the venerable Roger Ebert includes another treasure in the Candy canon, Planes, Trains and Automobiles, on his list of Great Films.  But after reading Ebert’s thoughts, I reevaluated the movie, and realized that it is indeed quality cinema that captures the true spirit of Thanksgiving.

I won’t spend too much time going over the plot.  In short: two travelers, the upbeat, gregarious lug Del (Candy) and the uptight, often cold Neal (Steve Martin, playing it straight) are forced to spend several frustrating days traveling together as they try to get home to Chicago before Thanksgiving dinner.  What elevates Planes, Trains and Automobiles above just another road movie is the incredible heart that it possesses.  Early on, there is a scene in which Neal brutally attacks Del’s annoying and long-winded personality.  It’s painful to watch, and just plain mean.  But Del’s heartfelt response is incredibly powerful (I wanted to include the scene itself, but Paramount thoughtfully removed it from YouTube, so you’ll have to use your imaginations):

“You wanna hurt me? Go right ahead if it makes you feel any better. I’m an easy target. Yeah, you’re right – I talk too much. I also listen too much. I could be a cold-hearted cynic like you, but I don't like to hurt people’s feelings. Well, you think what you want about me; I’m not changing. I like... I like me. My wife likes me. My customers like me. ‘Cause I’m the real article. What you see is what you get.”   

Cue some emotional ‘80s synthesizers, and you have a very memorable movie moment.  As the two wayward travelers continue their fraught journey, Neal’s cold exterior slowly melts away.  By the end of the film, well, here, watch for yourselves:

I challenge anyone not to get misty-eyed by that ending!

Now as I said, I feel that, as unlikely as it seems, this 1980s comedy from the guy who made Weird Science and Sixteen Candles captures the true spirit of Thanksgiving.  This holiday has got to be about more than just being thankful.  It must also be about friendship and kindness.  About being with the people you love, whoever they might be.  Planes, Trains and Automobiles reminds us of this fact: that while we can be thankful for what we have, it’s who we have that makes it all worth it.

Now that I’m done with the whole Linus-in-A-Charlie-Brown-Christmas routine, let me just wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.  Don’t forget to watch some good movies after the football!

Walter Matthau’s Supreme Court Movie

OK, I know what you’re all thinking.  Walter Matthau is probably the last person on Earth that you’d cast as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.  To our generation, when people think of the late Mr. Matthau (that is, when they actually think about him at all), their minds probably wander to thoughts of The Odd Couple or Grumpy Old Men.  But what people don’t realize is that Matthau actually had some pretty serious acting chops, and though he rarely shed that humorous look and his sarcastic grumblings, he still showed his talent in a variety of films, from the Cold War thriller Fail-Safe to the intimate family drama Kotch to the fun and sly action flick The Taking of Pelham One Two Three.  And there was also the time Walter Matthau played a Justice in a 1981 gem called First Monday in October.

In the film, Matthau plays Justice Dan Snow, an aging liberal (based in many ways on William O. Douglas) who, along with his fellow all-male brethren, must confront a new appointment to the Court – a conservative Westerner who all happens to be a woman.  (In a case of life imitating art, the film was already in production when Ronald Reagan announced Sandra Day O’Connor’s nomination, and it was rushed into theaters early to play off the nation’s excitement.)  The new Justice, played by Jill Clayburgh, aggressively spars with Snow, and despite their judicial opposition, the two develop a tender and endearing friendship.

Here's a great scene:

First Monday in October, directed by Ronald Neame (who also made the similarly-plotted The Poseidon Adventure), benefits from a wonderful script by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee, the playwrights behind Inherit the Wind and The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail.  In addition to Snow’s endlessly amusing wisecracks, the characters eloquently debate issues such as free speech, obscenity, and corporate power.  The film also allows viewers to watch customs of the Court not normally seen, such as the traditional robe ceremony and the screening of a pornographic movie as evidence (that scene is particularly funny and discomforting). 

I suppose I have a passion for resurrecting old screen gems and presenting them to the masses.  That’s certainly what I’m doing here.  All of you, right now, should go out and get a copy of First Monday in October.  It’s smart, funny, and dramatic, and features some terrific performances, especially the two leads.  Plus, you get to look at Matthau’s hilariously droopy face for an hour and a half, which is always fun. 

We sadly live in a world where injustice is rampant and Walter Matthau would never be appointed to the Supreme Court.  But hey, that’s what the movies are for, right?

Nixon Now!

So I was looking at old political ads just now (that's what everyone does in their spare time, right?), and I stumbled across this clusterfuck from 1972:

I honestly cannot think of any words to describe it.

Lyndon Johnson’s Birthday Party

Today is Lyndon Johnson’s 100th birthday.

I was hoping they might make mention of this at the Convention, but I suppose it’s not surprising that they didn’t.  But I think today we should all think about Lyndon Johnson and what he did for our country. 

It’s true that he did some things of which many of us aren’t proud.  The lasting image people probably have in their minds of our 37th president is this, a man crushed beneath the weight of his own misjudgment and the regret of what might have been if not for a small corner of Southeast Asia:

But there’s another image I prefer to think of when remembering President Johnson.  It’s this:

This is a photograph of Lyndon showing off his surgical scar.  It doesn't demonstrate his ideology or his penchant for political shenanigans.  It's just plain funny.  Honestly, they don't make 'em like that anymore.

But on a more serious note, Lyndon Johnson was a classic New Dealer, an outspoken advocate of Franklin Roosevelt’s policies, firmly committed to social programs and economic justice.  When he became President of the United States, he didn’t want to be FDR.  He wanted to outdo him.   

And in some ways he did.  We mustn’t forget Johnson’s enormous contributions to our country.  From Medicare to the Civil and Voting Rights Acts to fair housing, the boisterous Texan worked tirelessly to create a Great Society.  In the end, it was not to be.

Johnson died in 1973 at the age of 64, before his Great Society was completed.  Indeed, it never has been.  Johnson must take some of the blame for this, as do the leaders that followed that lost sight, lost interest, or lost faith in Johnson’s dream of a better America.

But watching this Convention, and seeing our Democratic leaders, from Ted Kennedy to Barack Obama, I can’t help but feel some hope.  This election, when combined with the enthusiasm and strength of an invigorated electorate, gives new possibility to the Great Society.  I can only imagine what will be possible if we dare to dream once again.

I’m going to finish with this stylized clip from Johnson’s speech to Congress about the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  It’s the way I think LBJ should be remembered.  Far from the battlefield of Vietnam, this was Johnson at his best: larger-than-life, a dreamer, whose Great Society lives on in this new generation.   

Cinema Politico

Hooray!  As if W. hasn’t made this year’s movie lineup exciting enough, we can also look forward to December’s Frost/Nixon.  Its recently released trailer looks quite promising:

Directed by Ron Howard and adapted by Peter Morgan from his play, Frost/Nixon is a behind-the-scenes look at the legendary 1977 television interviews between British talk show host David Frost and Richard Nixon.  The film retains the two very talented stars from the London and Broadway stage productions, Frank Langella (who won a Tony for his performance as Tricky Dick) and Michael Sheen (a favorite of Morgan’s who played Tony Blair in the writer’s The Deal and The Queen).  Early buzz is positive, with special attention being paid to the leads.

One of my favorite aspects of the play is that rather than portraying the former president as some sort of demented sociopath, Nixon is a sympathetic and often very likeable character.  He’s a poor, disgraced bastard who’s wasting away on the beach at San Clemente until he’s given the chance to salvage his legacy.  Intriguing stuff!

Hopefully, Frost/Nixon and W. will increase the public’s appetite for presidential pictures so we can finally get that Gerald Ford biopic we’ve all been waiting for.

I’m thinking Ford/Stairs.

(Note: Those with sharp eyes may notice the presence of diminutive British actor Toby Jones, perhaps best known for voicing Dobby in the Harry Potter movies and for being the other guy who played Truman Capote, in both Frost/Nixon and W.  Here, he appears bald as famed Hollywood talent agent Swifty Lazar.  In W., he’s Karl Rove.)

The Great Pop Culture Showdown

Last week’s issue of Entertainment Weekly contained an article entitled “The Other Presidential Debate.”  It’s basically a pair of interviews with Senators Obama and McCain regarding their pop culture proclivities.  Given the recent discussion about the candidates’ musical tastes here on the blog and on Dems-Talk, I figure I’d provide some analysis regarding their favorite films and TV shows, and decide which senator wins this showdown.  Let’s have a gander!

Favorite movie or TV president.  This is probably my favorite question, as it’s one I’ve mulled over many a time (is it Josiah Bartlet or Andrew Shepherd?  Hmmm . . .).  John McCain selected Dennis Haysbert’s David Palmer from the TV series 24.  Since I’ve never watched the show, and because the plots seem too often to veer into the ridiculous, he loses points.  Obama, on the other hand, provided an absolutely fantastic selection:

“You know who was a great movie president?  Jeff Bridges in The Contender.  That was a great movie president.  He was charming and essentially an honorable person, but there was a rogue about him.  The way he would order sandwiches – he was good at that.”

Terrific answer!  Bridges’s Oscar-nominated President Jackson Evans in the underrated political drama is a great performance and a wonderful character.  Just watch this clip:

Obama clearly wins this round.

 Best movie about the Vietnam War.  This query was posed only to McCain.  His answer?  We Were Soldiers.  Wrong.  While the Senator from Arizona acknowledged the existence of Full Metal Jacket, Coming Home, Born on the Fourth of July, and Apocalypse Now, all of which were critically-acclaimed, he stuck with the okay Mel Gibson picture as the best.  Since Obama wasn’t asked this question, we won’t hold it against McCain.  But still, not the best choice by a long shot.

Last movie seen in theaters.  McCain, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.  Obama, Shrek 3 (he has kids; what can you do).  McCain wins.

Favorite movie.  McCain scores some major points here not only for his unique response, but also for giving some good cinematic history.  Director Elia Kazan worked with Marlon Brando on three films.  Rather than choosing either of the two more famous collaborations, A Streetcar Named Desire or On the Waterfront, he goes with the lesser-known Viva Zapata!, a chronicle of the Mexican revolutionary co-written by John Steinbeck.  Obama wasn’t asked this question in this particular interview, but his Facebook lists five films as his favorites: the first four, Casablanca, The Godfather Part I and II, and Lawrence of Arabia are all great films, but are a bit overdone on favorite films lists.  He gets a few extra marks for his fifth choice, the edgier One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, but I think McCain’s interesting response earns him a win here.

First film seen as a kid.  The older McCain picked an older film: Bambi, released in 1942, sixteen days before the candidate’s sixth birthday.  Obama recalled the lion cub-themed tearjerker Born Free (released in 1966 when Obama was also five).  Obama wins the round because while Born Free’s ecological message may have inspired Obama’s pro-environment stance, the tragic murder of Bambi’s mom clearly has not impacted McCain’s views on gun control.

Favorite TV show.  OK folks, this is it.  Obama and McCain are virtually tied going into this last category.  McCain scored a huge initial blow by declaring that he “really likes” Curb Your Enthusiasm.  Senator Obama, do you have a response?  The Gentleman from Illinois did not disappoint: he countered with M*A*S*H.  By the rules of the Hawley Guide to Pop Culture, anything with Alan Alda automatically gives the contestant one million bonus points.  Not even McCain’s Seinfeld, Dexter, and The Wire come close to touching Obama’s Aldaholic lead (he further pulls ahead by saying that one of his kids’ favorites, SpongeBob SquarePants is “pretty funny” because, let’s face it, it is).

And the winner is . . .  Thanks to some help from Hawkeye Pierce, the award for Best Overall Taste goes to Senator Barack Obama.  But due to McCain’s strong performance (hopefully a fluke), I have to say that even without any mention of The West Wing, the two candidates both demonstrated some genuine pop culture acumen.

I’m Jonathan Hawley, and I Approve This Blog Post

As the campaign season begins in earnest, I’m sure we’ll start seeing many more TV advertisements, stretching the aesthetic gamut from the candidate standing in front of a flag to a black and white picture of the candidate staring at something in the distance to the candidate speaking at a rally in shirtsleeves.  (Nothing says commander-in-chief like bucking convention by not wearing a suit jacket.  That’s how Lincoln beat Douglas, Breckenridge, and Bell.)

Here’s John Kerry doing it:

I won’t bother looking for other examples of such ads because a) I’m lazy, and b) they’re boring.  Sometimes they’re just plain lame.  And, as the Spears/Hilton/Obama ad proves, they’re getting downright pathetic.

The other day, I was watching my Mad Men DVDs (which, on a side note, is an incredible show that everyone should be watching) when I was reminded of one of my personal favorite campaign ads of all time.  In one episode, the ad men at the show’s Sterling Cooper agency are working for the Nixon campaign in 1960, and watch the following Kennedy advertisement with a degree of envy.  Here, for your viewing pleasure, is the full ad in all its contagious, seizure-inducing splendor:

It’s catchy.  It’s funny.  And yes, it’s kind of stupid.  But you got to hand it to ‘em – they manage to compose a catchy jingle AND remind you that you shouldn’t vote against Kennedy just because he’s a Catholic!  Whatever happened to ads like this?  These silly, creative messes that are actually entertaining and memorable?

Watching other ads from America’s past, I’ve realized just how much better they were.  No cliché, no self-indulgence.  Just impact.  Here are some others.

It’s probably obligatory when talking about past campaigns to use the Daisy Ad, so here you go:

Misleading?  Unfair?  Maybe.  But so damn fun!  (Well, if nuclear holocaust can be considered fun.)  With only one airing, this ad helped convinced people that old Barry was crazy as a pack of monkeys.  (In the Johnson’s campaign’s defense, Goldwater did plenty to demonstrate this on his own.  Then he actually sued to prove he wasn’t nuts.)

1968 had a number of great ads.  Here’s another classic: simple, hilarious, and, honestly, not at all an exaggeration:

I like this next one mostly because it’s a reminder of how awesome Hubert Humphrey is.  It may not be particularly innovative, but at least it’s not riddled with hyper-patriotic clichés like gratuitous shots of bald eagles.  It also shows that straight facts are often the most persuasive way to promote a candidate:

The last ad I’ve chosen is probably one of the most effective celebrity endorsements I’ve seen.  It features the late, great E.G. Marshall (12 Angry Men, Nixon) speaking on behalf of Humphrey.  It’s long and wordy, but kind of moving, especially the honesty with which he talks about George Wallace.  You can find it here; it’s the last Humphrey ad in the column.  Incidentally, this wonderful website, courtesy of the Museum of the Moving Image, features a bundle of ads from the past fifty years.  You can see some classics, and watch how they become more and more uninteresting.

I end now with a plea to all candidates: television spots are very expensive, so don’t waste your money on bland, forgettable ads.  Be creative.  Throw caution to the wind.  Use the facts without unnecessary (or untrue) exaggeration.  Be funny!  And remember what Steve Jobs once said: “Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower.”  In short, remember the lesson that everyone learns in kindergarten: use your imagination.

Bush Goes Hollywood

For your consideration, the teaser trailer for Oliver Stone's upcoming biopic W.

Let's just hope it's a touch more Nixon than Alexander.

On that note, here's the trailer for Nixon, which is exceptional.

HHH on POTUS

Have you become so overwhelmed by the presidential contest that you’ve forgotten why democracy is a great thing (and why Democrats are so awesome)?

Well, then it’s your lucky day!  Here to remind us . . .

HUBERT HUMPHREY!!!!!!!!!

WE LOVE YOU HUBERT!!!!

The Hollywood Reporter

Tonight, I watched a wonderful film from 1987 called Broadcast News.  Directed by James L. Brooks (best known for his Oscar-winning Terms of Endearment and for being one of the creators of The Simpsons), it tells the story of three very different people working together at the Washington bureau of a major network news program.  The trio quickly forms a love triangle that interacts with the trials and tribulations of reporting, including frantic deadlines and massive layoffs.  I find the movie outstanding for two principal reasons which, being a good friend, I’ll share (with clips!).

The first is simply that it’s a great romantic comedy that somehow feels the most realistic of any I’ve seen.  The characters are believable and heartwarming, and the ending forgoes the usual happily-ever-after in favor of something much more real (and, as a result, probably more moving).

The second reason is that though it was made two decades ago, Broadcast News is just as timely today.  Like its predecessor by ten years, Network, it touches on problems in our media that still trouble pundits and laymen alike.  Issues like the battle between real news and infotainment, the sacrificing of quality journalism in favor of ratings, and the struggle between bare facts and creative interpretation dominate the plot.  The conclusions Broadcast News reaches are far from comforting, leaving viewers smiling at the characters while shaking their heads in sobering resignation.

Here now . . . some great scenes!

This segment shows the excitement of live broadcasting as we see our three principals: eager anchor Tom Grunick (Oscar winner William Hurt), a good-looking and nice guy who’s a bit dumb; high-strung producer Jane Craig (Oscar winner Holly Hunter), a talented neurotic who’s a bit anxious; and slighted correspondent Aaron Altman (Oscar nominee Albert Brooks), a brilliant yet prickly reporter who’s a bit drunk:

Here's an amazing scene between Aaron and Jane:

Warnings of Alleged Liberal Leanings - Erroneous (or, WALL-E)

In a summer that is mostly bereft of good films (for that, we’ll have to wait for the winter: Frost/Nixon, Doubt, Milk, Revolutionary Road), I was pleased with and mesmerized by a film that has almost no dialogue and few human characters.  It instead found its power through heart, expression, and a celebration of the talents of some exceptional filmmakers.  I am referring to the magic and wonder of Disney/Pixar’s WALL-E.

 I’ll begin right away by saying that I was blown away by the movie.  I, like millions of Americans, fell in love with the titular robot, a delightful blend of R2-D2 and Charlie Chaplin whose binocular eyes and nervous twitters express more emotion than most of the human actors in summer entertainment.  That, combined with a terrific story and the best use of Hello Dolly! since Leonid Brezhnev’s stoned styling in Dick, has helped make WALL-E the finest film of the summer, likely one of the greatest of the year, and maybe even the best that those wunderkinds in Emeryville have produced.  If you haven’t experienced it yet, please do.  You won’t regret it.

It’s because of the charm and timeless magic of WALL-E that I feel compelled to provide some commentary on the politicization of out little mechanical friend.  Given the overall setting of the film – a dystopian earth that suffers due to the neglect of mankind – it’s pretty inevitable that people would see the parallels between it and the conservation movement.  But Andrew Stanton, the creator of this film and Finding Nemo, conceived of WALL-E even before Pixar’s first major hit, 1995’s Toy Story, long before global warming permeated the public consciousness as it does today.  Stanton basically told CNN that the ecological underpinnings of the film were unintentional:

“Yeah, frankly the love one is really all I was pushing. Everything else I was using elements that I knew matched those scenarios of environment and society and things, but I was just trying to go with things that [were] ... true aspects of us that amplified the big point of the story, which was this love story and what is the point of living? What is the real point of living? There's a lot of different ways people can fill their time, but there's really only one reason we're here and it's relationships and loving one another. That's all I was pushing. Everything else was a benefactor of that.”

 In following with this mentality, I find that I most agree with the conclusions of Variety film critic Todd McCarthy: “Stanton, his co-story hatcher Pete Docter, co-scenarist Jim Reardon and the entire Pixar team operate on the principle that entertainment values come first, and they have applied [the environmental message] throughout to sprightly effect.”  In other words, with regards to the ecological call-to-action, take it or leave it!  It’s perfectly fine (and maybe even recommended, considering that love is the real theme of the flick) to watch WALL-E free of any political statement.   

 That’s why I’m confused with comments like those of National Review’s Shannen Coffin, who claims that only liberal Inconvenient Truth-types will enjoy a film that left her kids “bombarded with leftist propaganda about the evils of mankind.”  Um . . . what?  (In National Review’s defense (did I just say that?), their film critic gave WALL-E a glowing endorsement.)  As if this already wasn’t inappropriate and misguided enough, Patrick J. Ford over at The American Conservative argues that Coffin is off-base.  Not because it’s stupid to apply politics to a fantasy endeavor whose creator stated that the environmental message is incidental, but because WALL-E – who knew! – espouses proper conservative doctrine:

“The real tragedy of these callous conservative critics (say that three times fast) is that they are missing the real lessons of the movie, ones I found immediately attractive to a traditional conservative. In the film, it becomes clear that mass consumerism is not just the product of big business, but of big business wedded with big government. In fact, the two are indistinguishable in WALL-E’s future. The government unilaterally provided it’s citizens with everything they needed, and this lack of variety led to Earth’s downfall.” 

Well, of course!  That’s the whole point of the film!  Who needs love when you have Barry Goldwater’s ghost pissing all over everything?  (For more conservative viewpoints, go here).

Maybe it could be expected that some conservatives would find fault with WALL-E.  After all, Chaplin himself was investigated by HUAC.  But even some on the left complained . . . because WALL-E isn’t liberal enough.  At The Huffington Post, Jessica Jensen (who overall really liked the movie) wrote, “Why didn't Pixar put up a simple screen with ‘ten recommendations for loving planet Earth’ at the end of the film -- or a link to a site with educational information? It pains me that MILLIONS of people will see this movie and learn nothing about what they can do to save the planet!”  Now, naturally I agree that we have lots to do to save the earth, and that people should be educated about how to do it.  But do we need to criticize WALL-E when, as I keep pointing out, the ecological-minded message was never meant to dominate the movie? 

What I’m trying to say here (and bless everyone who’s kept reading this far; in that time you probably could have gone out and watched the film) is that we as a people don’t need to apply politics to movies where it’s just not called for.  WALL-E is wonderful without being burdened with a liberal or conservative ideology.  After all, shouldn’t escapist fare be just that – escapist?  I’m a guy who loves political movies, whether that be through plot (everything from Nixon to The American President) or message (The China Syndrome or Angels in America).  But let’s leave politics to those films with political intent, and enjoy WALL-E for what it truly is: a classic love story . . . with robots. 

Awwwwwwwwwwwwww.

My Friends

Funny . . . when I see this:

 I can't help but think of a little Sondheim tune I know (this recording is from the 1982 PBS production of Sweeney Todd with George Hearn and Angela Lansbury):

I'll let everyone draw their own conclusions.

My Memory of Ted

     In May of 1995, when I was all of seven, my family took a trip to Washington.  Being a huge nerd, this was probably the most exciting trip I had ever taken.  I don’t remember all of the things we did, but I do recall our trip to the Capitol, when we had the opportunity to watch the Senate in session.  And I can honestly say that the senator I remember most vividly from that experience is Ted Kennedy, mostly I think because of his thick white hair.  I can still picture him in my mind, and my mom telling me as we watched that he was a great man.

     Watching CNN today, the word that everyone keeps using to describe the Good Senator from Massachusetts is “fighter.”  I couldn’t agree more.  Ted Kennedy has experienced the best and worst of the American character in his life, from triumph to tragedy, and through it all he has kept fighting for those principles and values that we cherish.  In his decades of service, nothing has stopped him from working to make this a truly Great Society.

     While we all hope and pray that Senator Kennedy recovers from his illness, I believe we should also remember his courage, dedication, and sacrifice.  If public service is the noblest of man’s endeavors, then surely Ted Kennedy stands as the most inspiring of American leaders, a Liberal Lion who deserves our deepest respect and inspires all of us to keep fighting.    

Happy Presidents' Day!