Spoiler Alert: This Post Is About Spoiler Etiquette

Not long ago, I was hanging with friends, and I mentioned that I been catching up with a new show on HBO (I’m not going to say which one) in the midst of a conversation about shows that everybody had been watching lately. I said to one of my friends that I wished he hadn’t, at a previous meeting, dropped a Spoiler from the third episode of the series – it was actually just one word that he said when he remarked about how nothing was really happening in the show’s first few episodes, and then - the one word. Now, it was a loaded word – think a major plot point that can be summed up with one or just a few words like murder, or car accident, or divorce. So I was miffed that I had heard that word before I had gotten to that point on my own. 

I had only seen one episode, which was largely set-up, and was still trying to feel out the tone of the show. When that word was spoken by father, my brain noted it, and it greatly affected how I watched the show from then on. Since my friend knew that I had only seen one episode, I would think he’d keep mum, so I told him that when I got to the point where the event happened that he so sloppily spoiled, and that his careless blurting out of the word diluted the impact of the scene.

 

His reaction floored me - he laughed like what I said was ridiculous, and invalid. Nobody else laughed at this, mainly because nothing funny was said at all – just somebody offering their opinion on something that they found important – the experience of viewing a program or movie with somebody who has already seen it obnoxiously spoiling a key moment.

 

Which brings us to the Urban Dictionary’s definition of Spoiler:

The thing that maybe bothered me most is that my friend reacted as if this was the first time anyone had ever voiced this opinion. Now, I’ve been a big fan of film since I was a kid, and the idea of not ruining people’s experience is one that has been big in the pop culture conversation that I’ve been in for over four decades. I’ve worked in video stores, and movie theaters where I’ve had thousands of conversations with co-workers, and customers, about keeping important plot points to yourself unless you know that the person you are talking to is caught up with whatever TV show, movie, or book you may be discussing. I seriously, but stupidly thought this was something that everybody knew - in fact, I hesitated even blogging about this because these points feel so redundant, so obvious, and so universally relatable.

 

But instead of being reasonable, and respectful to a world that he knows his son has passion for and has written about for decades, my friend just said, “I don’t care about Spoilers.” In all of those previous conversations, and the many many many that I’ve had or read online, I’ve never heard or read or seen that statement. That’s because it’s a bullshit thing to say. Everyone I’ve ever known or talked to about this cares about not having their experiences spoiled, and I know there are shows that it would’ve highly annoyed him if, say, someone spouted out who was the murderer in in a show he had invested a number of hours viewing. 

I mean, that’s why we watch these things in the first f-in’ place! We want the real storytellers to reveal this stuff to us, not somebody who says that they don’t care about other’s experience. This is major common courtesy stuff! I comfort myself in thinking he just said that in the defensive. Some people just can’t concede a point in the moment, you know. Even one as rock solid as my argument.

 

It was also sad to me because in the 18 years of maintaining this blog, I’ve referred to Spoilers hundreds and hundreds of times (Google it). I’ve started many reviews with Spoiler warnings, and I’ve highlighted the word Spoiler in red so that readers will be aware that they might be coming. So I guess I learned that my friend doesn’t read my blog although they've often said they did. I’ve long suspected that they just skimmed it, and now I know for sure what’s up.

 

Fun fact: The phrase “Spoiler Alert” has existed long before the internet - it has been traced back to a review of STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN in 1982.

 

I received an invite to the latest Marvel movie, DOCTOR STRANGE: THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS (love that title), and it had this request for critics:

 

I mentioned this to another friend – sent them the screen capture above – and they replied, “Hmm. You’d think that would go without saying.” Well, apparently not. I mean, again, I hesitated to write this post because I would think that everybody reading a movie blog would know this drill. But, yeah, apparently not.

 

So millions and millions of people care about spoilers. Movie studios spend a lot of money and time trying to hide the things that DOCTOR STRANGE request specified so that audiences can have a fresh experience going in. Iconic film critic Gene Siskel (of Siskel & Ebert fame) notably would wait in the lobby while trailers for other movies were playing because he didn’t want to see anything from upcoming movies before seeing them himself. Siskel passed away in 1999, so I wonder how if he had lived, he would maneuvered during the internet age when a glance at any social media platform can reveal something from some current film without any warning. I bet he would and just not go on the internet, just like he didn’t enter the theater until after the coming attractions.

 

Here ends my rant. Good Gawd, that felt good to get out of my system!!!! I guess I was triggered by the shocking event of somebody being so clueless to something that’s so embedded in our pop culture experiences. Revealing spoilers to somebody, especially without asking or acknowledging where they are in viewing said show or movie, is a definitive cultural taboo. The rule of respecting other’s experiences by not spouting out spoilers is something I’m very glad exists for the people that do care. You know, everybody, but my so called friend.

More later...

Julianne Moore Takes On Sarah Palin in GAME CHANGE Out Today On Blu Ray/DVD

GAME CHANGE
(Dir. Jay Roach, 2012)

Former Governor of Alaska turned Fox News pundit Sarah Palin has said that she wouldn’t watch this HBO telefilm, releasing today on Blu ray and DVD, but if she ever changes her mind I’m sure she’ll have an extremely surreal experience. Especially when watching scenes that show Julianne Moore’s pitch perfect Palin reacting negatively to seeing Tina Fey parody her on SNL. 

GAME CHANGE, based on the 2010 book by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, focuses on the 2008 presidential campaign from the point of view of John McCain’s (Ed Harris) staff, particularly the involvement of Woody Harrelson as Republican Party campaign strategist Steve Schmidt. The film begins with Schmidt being asked by Anderson Cooper after the fact, appearing via flawlessly inserted original interview footage, “If you had to do it over again, would you have her on the ticket?”

As the respectfully depicted McCain, Harris makes no attempt to mimic the candidate’s cadences (somewhat reminiscent of James Cromwell’s George Bush Sr. in Oliver Stone’s W), and that’s wise – two heavily accented impressions would be a bit much for this movie.

Intended as a behind the scenes look at the plotting, worrying, and tense talks that the McCain crew went through as a result of picking Palin for the pivotal Vice Presidential running mate position that, as history tells us, was not a successful decision. Palin’s greatest hits in the public arena are well depicted too: her disastrous Katie Couric interview (more expertly inserted video), her surprising performance in the debate with Joe Biden (some good humor here about her trying not to say O’Biden in the rehearsals), her accusing Obama with “palling around with a terrorist,” and the well documented incident of her being blocked from giving a concession speech on election night.

Its director Jay Roach and writer Danny Strong’s sharp almost satirical take on the material, which was also present in their previous 2005 HBO telefilm RECOUNT (about the 2000 Bush/Gore race), that made Roach’s 2012 Will Ferrell/Zach Galifianakis political spoof THE CAMPAIGN disappointing. Goes to show that the truth is often much more comical and absurd than what comedy writers can come up with.*

That said, GAME CHANGE largely plays Palin’s story straight. Harrelson and Harris don’t act like they’re in a farce; they both give believable grounded performances. Moore can’t help but pile on the ridiculousness in her portrayal, because, you know, the real Palin could be pretty damn ridiculous. Also accurately silly, are the sound-bites that come from her proto Tea Party supporters like one lady who says: “There’s something about her, she’s talking to me, and nobody talks to me!”

A real stand-out in the cast is Sarah Paulson as McCain/Palin campaign senior adviser Nicolle Wallace, who is on to Palin’s airheaded inexperience early on, and has a great comeback to Palin’s whining about understanding what Hillary (Clinton) meant by finding her own voice: Wallace: “Yeah, because you’re just like Hillary!”

Well made, well written, and very well acted, GAME CHANGE entertainingly captures one of the craziest and most memorable campaigns ever, reminding us of how weird it all was. I’m happy with the outcome of that strange race, which, it must be admitted, was an extremely surreal experience for everybody.

Special Features: A couple of watchable though hardly essential featurettes, “Creating a Candidate,” and “Game Change: The Phenomenon.” These extras are mainly good for footage of the real Palin that should show you how dead-on Moore’s portrayal is. 

* THE CAMPAIGN was written by a couple of guys associated with the HBO show Eastbound & Down - Chris Henchy and Shawn Harwell.
More later…

Read Bush Sr.’s Lips In New HBO Bio-Doc

41 (Dir. Jeffrey Roth, 2012) 

Our 41st President, George Herbert Walker Bush, tells his story in this HBO produced bio doc releasing today on DVD. In the film, which premiered on the premium cable channel last June, Bush Sr. guides us around his peaceful beachfront property in Kennebunkport, Maine, and sits down with director Jeffrey Roth’s to muse over the highs and lows of his life in and out of the political spotlight.

Although I’m not a fan of the man, watching the film helped put Bush Sr.’s life in better perspective for me. The one-termer is mainly remembered in the world of pop culture via appearances on The Simpsons (voiced by Harry Shearer), THE BIG LEBOWSKI’s appropriation by the Dude of his “this aggression will not stand” statement, and Dana Carvey’s exaggerated impression on SNL reruns, so he’s greatly humanized here.

In tons of sepia-tinted photographs we learn how Bush was highly competitive in his youth - he was a soccer captain, a football quarterback, and a basketball player. In one of his most affecting anecdotes, Bush speaks of his time in the Navy in World War II. Some of the most fascinating footage the film has to offer is of his rescue at sea on September 2nd, 1944 after his plane was shot down.

From there, prompted by the occasional soft-spoken (and often soft-ball) question by Roth, Bush touches on his marriage, his college years at Yale, his oil company career, his senate runs, C.I.A. Director duties, loyalty to Nixon (he sadly says he believed Nixon was innocent as long as he could), and eight years of going to funerals as Reagan’s Vice President in the ‘80s.

This gives us over an hour of material before we get to Bush’s four years in the White House. It’s funny that his V.P. Dan Quayle is never mentioned (we see his name on campaign signs in pictures and footage, and there’s maybe a fleeting shot or two of him but his name is never said). As Quayle was possibly the most ridiculed Vice President in history maybe this is a good idea, and it should be noted along the same lines that Bush talks more about every breed of dog he’s owned than he does of any of his six children.

May hot button topics are glossed over - his son’s much criticized presidency is only mentioned in passing, the Japan vomiting incident never comes up, and the stern elder refuses to talk about Ross Perot, etc. – so this is as respectful a portrait as you’d expect, one that could play on a loop during the visiting hours at the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum. Bush does express regret for that “Read my lips, no new taxes” promise that he didn't keep, but that doesn't stain the glorified puff-piece portrait Roth and HBO are painting here.

However, Roth’s bio-doc isn’t boring as one might reasonably expect it to be.

The well edited 100 minutes goes by swiftly, with a wealth of perfectly chosen images and video (footage of Bush, having just lost the election for a second term, greeting Clinton in the Oval Office is particularly moving), so perhaps it’s a stocking stuffer gift idea for that Republican relative who reveres the former president. Those people exist, right?

The 88-year old Bush Sr. right now is recovering in a Texas Hospital for a lingering cough, so even though it’s sanitized for his protection, 41 is an apt look back at the man’s none-too-shabby legacy.

More later...

Blu Ray/DVD Reviews: We Can Be Heroes & Angry Boys

Up until very recently I had not been familiar with the comedy stylings of Australian comedian Chris Lilley. 

Lilley is very popular in his home country with a few TV shows, which are now out new to DVD and Blu ray (Lilley's second program Summer Heights High was released on DVD in 2009) all of which utilize the mockumentary approach much like the various versions of The Office, Modern Family, et al, and feature Lilley playing all the main characters, despite gender or race.

While Lilley is certainly talented, with a good grasp on accents, personality tics, and timing, he comes off more as an Australian Jamie Kennedy, than a one-man Monty Python. Speaking of Monty Python, I was reminded of a BBC executive that John Cleese once played on the classic Flying Circus series that said of the program: “Frankly I don't fully understand it myself, the kids seem to like it.”

That was definitely the case with Lilley’s 2005 series We Can Be Heroes: Finding The Australian Of The Year, out now in the U.S. on DVD. The show follows five minor celebrities, who have been nominated by friends and family for the Australian of the Year award. Lilley portrays all five of the characters - six actually as the cast includes a pair of identical twins.

The candidates include former policeman Phil Olivetti (semi-famous for saving nine children from a bouncy castle tragedy), Chinese physics student and aspiring actor Ricky Wong, suburban housewife turned odd athlete Pat Mullins, popular private school-girl Ja'mie, and Daniel Sims, who was nominated for donating one of his eardrums to his near-deaf brother, Nathan.

Over the course of six half hour episodes director Matt Saville cuts back and forth between this loony lot as they prepare for the state finals. A fitting example of the level of humor is when the scrappy teenage Daniel Sims shows us scores of photographs with his brother Nathan giving the camera the finger in each one. If that sounds like hilarious material then this may be the show for you.

But apart from the occasional amusing line, and some likable comic energy present, there wasn’t a lot of solid comedy to chew on. Lilley is a likable chap, and there’s plenty of palpable comic energy present, but many of the situations (including housewife Pat’s sport of rolling to get from place to place) are really forced with none of the organic-feeling funniness of the best of Christopher Guest’s ensemble work – to name a master mockumentarian.

Fans of Lilley will be happy with this set though, as it contains over two hours of deleted scenes, and outtakes, a behind-the-scenes documentary, extended episodes, and Ricky Wong’s (the wrongest character here by far) performance of “Indigeroo” at the The Logies (whatever the Hell that is).

Lilley reprises the Sims’ indentical twins in his globe-trotting 2011 series Angry Boys, which unlike We Can Be Heroes is now available on Blu ray as well as DVD. It’s another mockumentary series, this time exploring the lives of a batch of troubled boys (of course all played by Lilley), so, yep, it’s more of the same.

But hold on, this has Lilley in blackface! That’s right as African-American rapper S. Mouse, Lilley colors his skin to play yet another hip hop artist who didn’t actually come from a life on the streets; he had a fluent rich family including a father who didn’t do drugs and abuse him.

It’s really not that it’s so offensive that a white Australian man is playing a black character, it’s more that it’s disappointing that it’s such a dated comic stereotype that’s been done to death.

Lilley also portrays Jen Okazaki, a manipulative Japanese mother of a skateboard champion son who is being marketed as being gay when he’s not – this is one of the funnier storylines, but that’s not saying a lot.

The remaining characters are a champion surfer Blake Oakfield, and Ruth “Gran” Sims (Daniel and Nathan's 65 year-old grandmother), a guard at a juvenile detention facility with questionable methods of dealing with the inmates.

Lilley, who co-directed along with Stuart McDonald, and Jeffrey Walker, keeps the show rolling watchably along, but the plot-lines don’t go anywhere interesting. The conflicts the characters face can be seen coming, as well as the jokes, way before they arrive, and the nature of each scenario being about taking these people down a few notches from their perceived stations in life reeks of overdone obviousness.

It also doesn’t help that the humor gets much cruder in Angry Boys, and even pretty disgusting (Blake loses his testicles in a gang fight which results in a close-up I wish they’d cut). This would have been fine, if, you know, laughs accompanied this attempt to be edgier.

There’s an un-ambitious nature to the writing, a laziness to the set-ups that results more in eye-rolls than laughs. At least there’s a higher number of gag attempts which is good because at 12 episodes it’s twice as long as Lilley’s previous series. The set consists of 3 discs with the run of episodes contained on the first 2, with the third disc being six hours (!) of deleted scenes, bloopers, and music videos satires. So again, the kids who seem to like this stuff will be well served.

More later...

New HBO Rolling Stones Doc Celebrates 50th Anniversary But More Their Bad Boy Image

CROSSFIRE HURRICANE (Dir. Brett Morgen, 2012)

To celebrate their 50th anniversary, the Rolling Stones have come out of retirement to release a few new singles (“Doom and Gloom,” and “One More Shot”), perform some surprise club shows leading up to a major tour next year, and have taken part in the new retrospective documentary, CROSSFIRE HURRICANE, which premieres on HBO Thursday night, November 15th.

Directed by Brett Morgen, best known for co-directing the acclaimed 2002 bio-doc THE KID STAYS IN THE PICTURE, about mega-producer Robert Evans, the film covers the early ‘60s to late ‘70s rise of England’s oldest hit-makers, featuring new audio-only interviews of band members Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, Ron Wood, Bill Wyman, and Mick Taylor.

The doc packs a lot into its one hour and forty plus minute running time, including healthy chunks of such classics as “Street Fighting Man,” “Jumping Jack Flash,” “I Can’t Get No (Satisfaction),” “Sympathy For The Devil,” and “Honky Tonk Women,” mostly smoothly mixing an overview of their hits into the band’s layered narrative without overly cluttering it.

In one funny mid ‘60s TV clip, a straight-laced news commentator criticizes the raunchy rock group for their “carefully calculated air of ‘blow you, Jack!” This speaks volumes as the doc itself strongly appears to be a carefully calculated attempt to re-inforce the Stones’ legendary bad boy image right in time for their reunion.

There is much talk about how they were set-up by their shrewd manager/producer Andrew Loog Oldham to be the anti-Beatles, the nasty bad boy antithesis to the fab four’s seemingly squeaky clean image, with a lot of back stage decadence displayed in the footage including many shots of Stones’ members drinking every bit of available liquor there is. 

It’s like the Stones (most of who produced or executive produced this doc) are saying: ‘We know we’re old mainstream geezers now, but back in the day we were quite dangerous. We had tons of sex, drugs and booze along with our kick ass rock ‘n roll, and even spent time behind bars. We just want to remind you of all that.’

CROSSFIRE HURRICANE, which takes its title from a lyric in “Jumping Jack Flash,” only covers up to the Stones’ ‘1978 album “Some Girls,” though there is brief footage from Hal Ashby’s live concert film LET'S SPEND THE NIGHT TOGETHER (shot in 1981, released in ’83), so there’s a lot of story left to be told, but the film does ideally cover the band’s most vital eras. 

Since those eras have been already very well covered, Morgan’s doc often feels like a hodgepodge of clips from the many other Stones documentaries, almost resembling a greatest hits of the best bits from their filmography.

There’s cool black and white footage of Mick and Keith working out “Sitting on a Fence” from the newly restored and released doc CHARLIE IS MY DARLING (shot on their tour of Ireland in 1965), there’s an excerpt of the Stones playing in Hyde Park after the death of Brian Jones from THE STONES IN THE PARK (1969), there’s the great gritty film of the band recording in Keith’s basement at Villa Nellcôte in France that appeared in the 2010 doc STONES IN EXILE, there’s the shocking moment of murder at Altamont captured in the Maysles brothers’ essential GIMME SHELTER (1970), and so on.

Some of the same archival footage has also been used in Martin Scorsese’s SHINE A LIGHT (2008), from which Morgen also borrows a performance of “All Down The Line” for the end credits (the most recent film of the Stones in this doc).

So if you’re a big Stones fan, you are likely to have already seen a large percentage of this stuff, but if you’re a newcomer to this material, it functions as an purposeful primer of their formative years. 

As a longtime fan myself, I learned precious little I didn’t know before, but enjoyed a few fresh insights from the new interviews like when Richards remarks “The essence of Jagger and Richards together, I suppose would be ‘Midnight Rambler.’ Anybody could’ve written any of our songs, but I don’t think anyone could’ve written ‘Midnight Rambler’ other than Mick and Me.”

Or drummer Charlie Watt's assessment that guitarist Ron Wood, who replaced Mick Taylor in the mid '70s, became “the link between the two strong egos (Jagger and Richards), and the two light ones (himself and Wyman).”

Trying to sum up the group’s appeal, the late Brian Jones, looking back on their ‘65 breakthrough just a year later, tells a reporter that they had “the right type of sound, and the right visual image the kids of the world wanted at the time.”

Fifty years may have passed, and the Stones haven’t had that bad boy image for a long-ass time, but when the publicity machine kicks in with this doc, their new ‘best of’ 3 CD compilation (“GRRR!”) dropping this week, and their looming 2013 tour, surely to be one of the biggest grossing tours ever, it will again be inescapable that they are still hugely wanted by the now over-aged kids of the world.

More later...