Doc Watch: The Greatest Night in Pop (2024)

Watched:  02/14/2024

Format:  Netflix

Viewing:  First

Director:  Bao Nguyen

Selection:  Jamie

I was 9 years old (about to be 10) when "We Are the World" hit the airwaves.  And then played non-stop for what seemed to be about 6 months to a year.  I can't say when I first heard the song or saw the video, but I do remember unloading the car when my mom came home from shopping (that was one of our chores) and a copy of the vinyl record being in the back of the van.  

I also recall either that year or the next school year being brought into the cafetorium at Spicewood Elementary where we were shown a "making of" doc about the song and the famine in Ethiopia and nearby countries.  (This was the 1980's, VCRs were newish, and teachers were always finding some reason to show a film).  

We're almost 40 years out from the release of the record, so a lot has changed in that time.  And a lot of people have passed.*  And it's hard for me to imagine what this would look like now.  Do musicians even still do benefit work like this, or has streaming killed the potential for raising money?

But the doc, The Greatest Night in Pop (2024) - now on Netflix - is a neat exploration of what happened and why, how it came together and the bumps along the way.  

The film relies on first-hand accounts, pulling in top-tier talent that participated, from Bruce Sprinsteen to one of the masterminds, Lionel Richie.  And, because it was so star-studded, it also features a treasury of video shot from the event of the recording.  

Unfortunately, some of the key players either weren't available for a sit-down (Quincy Jones) or were very not available for a sit-down (Michael Jackson).  But you do get a very good picture of what it must have been like for the people who walked into the room, using interviews with Cindy Lauper, Smokey Robinson, Sheila E., to the camera crew and engineer.

Sometimes you watch a doc and they talk about the situation and the huge impact it had, and you know they're kind of playing it up.  After all, no one wants to watch a doc and at the end they're like "well, it didn't really work out that great."  But USA for Africa, at worst, raised awareness for how people could take action and not just be told that people were starving, and wasn't that too bad.  At best, it did get nutrional support to the people affected by the famine, as well as medicine and other aid.

From the point of view of the doc and the unique event that was USA for Africa, it's absolutely worth watching just to see all of these people in the same room, minus their support staffs and all the trappings of top-tier rock stardom in the 1980's.  It's not like "We Are the World" is still played on the radio, and it's been a minute since I didn't just say "oh, that's the song" and then mentally tune out again.  I'd forgotten you have Bob Dylan in the room, for example.  

But it's human without getting weird, and you're reminded - much as with the Beatles doc - these are people.  And in the 1980's, the media machine really wanted us to forget that pop stars were just good singers in funny clothes.  

When you're a kid, rock stars seem like a permanent fixture.  I didn't think of Huey Lewis as a *new* thing or that he might be star struck being in the room with these people.  But, really, aside from seeing each other at awards shows where they don't *really* interact all that much, when would this many people get together?  When do you get Ray Charles and Kenny Rogers sharing air? Or Dionne Warwick and Willie Nelson sharing a verse?

The doc has it's truly shining moments, and I won't spoil them.  It never does explain why Dan Aykroyd was there - and that someone specifically tried to get him is all the more baffling.  It also doesn't dwell on who wasn't there - beyond Prince.  But for every huge celeb, we're missing a Madonna.  But I also appreciate that they didn't talk about why people were left out.

Anyway, it's a fun one to watch.  

But, seriously, it's weird this didn't become an annual sort of thing. 

*we miss you, Tina  

Nuke Watch: Oppenheimer (2023)

Watched:  02/03/2024

Format:  Amazon

Viewing:  First

Director:  Nolan

Selection:  Jamie

I'd wanted to see Oppenheimer (2023) in the theater, but these days, finding the 4.5 hours it would take to see a three hour movie is not as easy as I'd like (once you add in travel time and previews).   That mission has now been safely accomplished via streaming services.

SPOILERS

When it comes to the historical figure of J. Robert Oppenheimer, I haven't done much more than the occasional Google-dive over the years.  I'd learned his name and some about his late-career in the early 90's (if he was discussed in my presence in the 1980's, I was not paying attention or didn't grasp what people were talking about).  

Meanwhile, an armchair interest in "wait, what?" about quantum physics in college had me do a shallow dive into the name-players of 20th Century physics, which I think has a bit in common with other early-days scenes, from comics creation to rock and roll when it comes to a clutch of personalities really kicking things off and influencing everything that came after.  

And, so, yeah, I was aware of how the work from Einstein and Bohr led indirectly and directly to the Manhattan Project via their acolytes and the threat of Germany having access to their own herd of physicists.  And, I knew that Oppenheimer's career took a turn for the worse in the post-war McCarthy-era we're in such a rush to return to.

I mostly had not read anything about the film, and attempted to avoid conversation about the movie - three hours is a long time to be considering other people's opinions instead of just watching a thing.  I am also aware any movie by Nolan will have detractors who don't dig his subject matter or his evolving style - and that's a tough place to start from if you let it get in your head.  

U.S. G-Watch: Godzilla (1998)

the actual dick joke on the poster was probably the tell this movie was going to be straight garbage

Watched:  02/10/2024

Format:  Max

Viewing:  Fourth?

Director:  Roland Emerich

Selection:  I have only myself to blame

Back in 1998, I saw Godzilla opening day with Jamie.  I'd been pretty excited about what a US studio could do with the concept.   We were five years out from Jurassic Park, so CG was a thing.  And seeing some actors we liked (who were not Raymond Burr) getting involved with the big guy seemed like a neat idea. 

I'd argue that at the time of the film's release, it had been since the mid-80's that a Toho movie really landed in the US, so there was some context for Godzilla for your average US movie-goer, but not a lot.  Mostly spoofs and lightly racist parodies.  Everyone knew Godzilla, but it was like... everyone knew Superman had comic books, but no one had read an issue since elementary school.  You knew the general look and some details, but... that was about it.

Looking at the box office, it's crucial to recall the movie had an absolutely gigantic marketing campaign.  This was back when movies didn't just advertise, they did a half-dozen corporate tie-in's, so Godzilla was going to be inescapable no matter what.  Heck, I very much remember the omnipresent Taco Bell chihuahua selling Big G.  

Tri-Star was going to make sure you were going to see this movie whether it was good or not.

Television Watch: Fargo Season 5

In the long, long ago, I went to film school and had the rough idea of the kinds of stories I was drawn to, and in the most auteurish version of the world, what sort of thing I'd want to make.  When I watch the television series Fargo, it is with the knowledge that this is the kind of stuff that lives in my wheelhouse, but done light years better than - even in my most self-congratulatory fever dreams - I could imagine delivering.

It's noir, in its way.  And allegorical, most certainly.  Characters have rich inner lives from which they call and respond to one another, and watching each season is mapping and reconciling the arc of each character, understanding how they fit into a larger tapestry as Hawley weaves a picture of the point he's trying to make this time.

Initially, the show seemed like a fool's errand.  The 1996 film upon which the show is based is a bonafide modern-ish classic (I am not taking comment or questions on this statement).  Trying to work in the world of the Coens, aping their style and worldview seemed breathlessly arrogant.  I was part of the audience from the 1980's and 1990's, who - thanks to Joel and Ethan Coen - came to see movies could maybe be a bit more than what I thought.  The Coens provided a fresh take and a clear perspective all their own when it came to style, substance and density of narrative, as much auteurs as you were likely to see in the US film industry, and ushering in the 1990's indie-film era.   

G Watch: Godzilla vs. Megalon (1973)

Watched:  02/02/2024

Format:  Max

Viewing:  Second*

Director:  

Selection:  joint - me and Jamie

I don't have much new to really add to what I said back in 2020 about this movie.  But I do suspect that this is the Godzilla movie I have a firm memory of watching on TV as a kid, mostly because of the multiple kaiju and that the fight happens in an open field.  

I didn't say much about the human story in my prior write up - but it does feel like it's trying to set up a TV show or series of movies about two dudes and a child of vague relation, and their robot.  Read onto these people whatever you want - are they pals, brothers, a couple and their adopted child?  They do not say.  Nor do they do much to infuse anyone with a personality, story or anything to make them characters, but they do spend a lot of time showing them doing things.

Btw - the reason Megalon is attacking is that the surface humans set off an underground nuclear test killing - according to the dialog - a full third of the population of Seatopia, the nation of people living under the ground.  Y'all, the Seatopians are right to try to kill all of us.  But so wrong about trusting that guy and his bad mustache to run Seatopia.

But this is a kids movie, and I'm not going to complain too much.  The kaiju battling, robot stuff and bases for the movie is (chef's kiss).

Ida Noir Watch: Woman in Hiding (1950)

Watched:  02/03/2024

Format:  TCM Noir Alley

Viewing:  Second

Director:  Michael Gordon

Selection:  Me.  

This one popped up on TCM's Noir Alley, and my memory was enjoying the film, so I gave it a spin.  Also, it had been a minute since I'd watched anything with Ida Lupino in it, and that seemed wrong.  

Anyway, I stand by the review from three years ago.  And my assertion that Ida Lupino is a good idea.

Carl Weathers Merges With The Infinite

Here's what I think about when I think about Carl Weathers:

Sometimes you just like someone's vibe.  And then literally everything you learn about that person over a lifetime just reinforces or surpasses your early first impression.

I didn't see a Rocky movie til Rocky IV, and my introduction to Carl Weathers was seeing the great Apollo Creed fall in the ring.  He was, in my opinion, more likable and charming than our protagonist, enough so that seeing him die on screen in the first act was jarring.  Mission accomplished, movie.  You motivated Rocky and you got us to care, relying on Weathers' performance - and that was before I saw the other three Rocky movies, in which he's clearly, absolutely the star boxer the movies need.  

But of course Carl Weathers was also in action movies and generally around.  A few years later I was enjoying him in Predator and other movies.  I missed Action Jackson at the time, but caught it in recent years (it's not great, but he is).  

And then someone realized: you can put this guy in comedy.  People love this guy, and he's got a sense of humor.  And, so he started showing up in Happy Gilmore and Arrested Development.  I also was surprised to see him pop up in Friday Foster (I, too, enjoy a Pam Grier actioner).

What I'd missed was the whole Carl Weathers backstory of New Orleans kid who got a sports scholarship in high school and then college, and went pro as a football player - quitting to get into the movies.  And successfully doing so.  

But he was also behind the camera - and directed some of my favorite episodes of what I think is already a well-made show, The Mandalorian, in which he also starred in what may be my favorite role of his - Greef Karga, the shady businessman who finds a calling as a local leader (and has a vain streak you can't help but like).  I own at least two Greef Karga action figures, I admit.

Through that work was how I learned that Weathers had been busy behind the camera for a while, directing some TV, including some action programs.  Which - totally made sense.  I could see him dipping in and wanting to expand what he was doing and trying.

On a personal note, back when I was on twitter, I exchanged a tweet or two with Weathers, and the fact I'm still giddy about it should tell you where he ranked with me.  

I'm absolutely rattled at the sudden news of his passing, and wish his loved ones well.  I hope my impression of the man was correct, because he seemed like one of the good ones.    

Minus Color Watch: Godzilla Minus One Minus Color (2023/ 2024)

Watched:  02/01/2024

Format:  Alamo

Viewing:  Third

Director: Takashi Yamazaki  

Selection:  Joint - Jamie & me

So, yes.  Third time is the charm for a re-watch of Godzilla Minus One (2023), which we wrote about when we saw it the first time and the second time, and then as part of my end of the year review.  

The version I saw was black and white (or, color desaturated to a monochrome, with plenty of tricks to make sure it works) in theaters for just a week, capping off the end of what was a surprisingly successful run.  On a reported $15 million budget, the movie has made over $105 million, and that's before digital and home video sales (will I buy some ridiculous deluxe version?  Why, most certainly).

After seeing it in Imax and in standard format, I figured: let's do this.  Plus, I saw one of the first shows in Austin, and now one of the last as I saw it both opening and closing night.

Is the "minus color" a goofy stunt?  Does it make sense to release a movie in black and white that was shot for color?  I don't know.  But based on the period setting, that Minus One feels like a 2023 echo to the 1954 original, and as a reflection of the 70 year history of Big G, I was willing to give it a whirl.  

G Watch: Godzilla v. Biollante (1989)

Watched:  01/30/2024

Format:  DVD

Viewing:  First

Director:  Kazuki Ōmori

Selection:  Me

For the most part, it's not that hard in our modern era to get your hands on most Godzilla movies.  In fact, you can find most of the Showa Era on Max and I've noted the Millennium era movies might be popping up on Hulu.  Plus, there's now that streaming Godzilla Channel on Pluto.  I have a pretty good run of the movies on disc on various formats, so I am good as long as those discs don't let their electrons scramble or something.  And, I've seen almost all of the Godzilla movies (one day I'll finish All Monsters Attack).

But Godzilla vs. Biollante (1989), in any format, eluded me for a long time.  It was out there on disc, but not through standard retailers.  You more or less had to go through eBay if you wanted to get a copy, and even those were pretty expensive as it hasn't been re-released in a decade.  And it never seems to show up on cable or streaming outlets.  It seems the distribution rights are weird on this one film for reasons I don't quite get, but it was originally put out by Miramax in the US, which is probably part of the problem.  

But, yeah, I found a disc cheap as I could, but still more than I wanted to pay, and finally just pulled the trigger.

Classic Comedy Watch: Operation Petticoat (1959)

Watched:  01/27/2024

Format: Prime

Viewing:  First

Director:  Blake Edwards

Selection:  Me, by rec

So, a colleague had recommended this one, and forewarned me that it is a product of it's time, and I could not agree more.  

This is a movie with an odd framing device - a US Navy Admiral returning to the submarine he skippered during the war on the morning the boat is set to head to the boneyard.  He sits down and reads his Captain's log from cover to cover in his former bunk.

By 1959 two things were apparently true:  

1) the US was ready to do light, sexy comedies about the war, including starting out with making Pearl Harbor a wacky incident that happened

2) the role of women in film - especially light comedies - had changed a lot, with the "can do" spirit of women in the war or even noir

There is not room in this post to discuss the rapid swing of women in pictures of the 1950's from tough-women-on-the-homefront to "don't let those daffy women near machinery.  That's for MEN." that I assume reflects the culture of the time.  But it's kind of a thing, and for as fast as it happened, it took a lot longer to eke our way back out.  

This movie is the Admiral's (Cary Grant) recollections of the submarine crew's post Pearl Harbor response, lifting the boat and getting it semi-seaworthy again thanks to shenanigans on the part of a new Lieutenant (Tony Curtis), a streetwise fast talker who has joined the navy for the uniform and social ladder climbing opportunities.

It's got a hint of Sgt. Bilko (which pre-dates the film) as some of the best gags are about Tony Curtis finding the materials needed.  Good stuff. 

But the main feature of the film is when the sub stops off at an island and finds they have to evacuate 6 female nurses.  Who are, of course, mostly stacked.  And then it's a lot of "boys will be boys" and "women don't belong on a boat!" humor that you either are going to have to get settled in with or you're going to want to choke a boat load of US servicemen.  

The humor is a brand of post-screwball wackiness that would continue to expand into the 1960's and be killed off by 1970s film while being embraced by 1970's TV, in its way.  And some bits are really good.  I did want to tell the editor to please leave Cary Grant alone and let him have his moments after something wacky happened, because that's where you get the laugh doubled down (see Grant in Bringing Up Baby).  There's not even exactly double-entendres but in an era that was sanitizing comedy, this must have felt pretty racy (you see a girdle and a bra!).  

Fun bit of casting - look for Marion "Mrs. Cunningham" Ross as one of the nurses.  And, fun fact:  there was a 1977 TV show that basically remade the movie starring John Astin in the Cary Grant role and had a very young Jamie Lee Curtis as one of the nurses.  I have absolutely no idea how this premise was carried off for two seasons of network TV.  

Anyway, it's a fascinating time capsule talking to the generation who was in the war now that they bought suburban houses as much as it's a comedy you can still put on and get most of the jokes.