MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Ranting and Raving

Primary Colors opened last Friday to a lot of analysis comparing John Travolta‘s Jack Stanton to Bill Clinton and not very much box office. America is sick of talking, thinking and, ultimately, wallowing in Clinton’s affairs of state. Life is good and it would be even better if all this sex and scandal talk would just go away. But there are these movies (add Wag the Dog to the mix), throwing all this uncomfortable stuff right back into our faces. And that’s how Primary Colors has become the Rorschach Test of feature films for those of us who have seen it, whether as part of our jobs or by choice. For some, it’s too kind to Bill. For others, it brazenly wallows in the negative side of Bill Clinton. To me, that’s a triumph, not a failing.
This is the gray of reality, folks. It’s not about Bill Clinton. It’s about selective morality. It’s about the politicians that live in our brains. It’s about an America that has become so cynical and jaded that there are no rationalizations too big to work through. It’s about an America that makes up its mind, then changes the rules to fit our desires. It’s about settling. We bit the apple in the political Garden of Eden during Watergate and now we know too much to go back. And boy does that tick us off. When a movie comes along and mocks us for that loss of innocence, well, watch out!
I always remember going to see Hurlyburly on Broadway with a friend many years ago. She was ready to walk out 20 minutes into the show. “I know all those screwed-up people,” she said, “Why do I need to pay $50 a ticket to see them on a stage?” I finally came to understand what she meant. She didn’t hate those people. She hated herself for being a part of their lives for so long. For knowing that they were sick, but not taking the responsibility to walk away. Facing the things we’ve rationalized is unpleasant. And nobody wants to pay $50 for the right to do it or even $7.50 to do it in a movie theater.
That’s why I think Primary Colors (and Wag the Dog for that matter) won’t get their due until the millennium has come and gone. Never before have films that so defined their eras been made in such close proximity to their subjects. In fact, some of Primary Colors‘ director Mike Nichols‘ other films still stand as iconic representations of their time. The Graduate, Carnal Knowledge, Working Girl and Postcards From the Edge all define the distinct and often unpleasant “progress” of American society. From innocence lost to uncontrolled libido to the lost souls of the Reagan era to the self-deception we couldn’t stay one step ahead of anymore. But those were all late in the game. By the time Melanie Griffith was overcoming power-mad Sigourney Weaver, Gordon Gekko had already been shredded in Wall Street. Primary Colors opens the Oval Office door even before the zipper has a chance to be zipped. Who the hell wants to see that? And if you do want to see it, do you want to admit it to your friends?
The Clinton administration defined the era themselves. It’s called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The solution is in avoidance, not in the truth. As Bill Maher likes to scream on “Politically Incorrect,” “Clinton only lied because he was asked a question that he shouldn’t have been asked.” Apparently, Mike Nichols has told the story that shouldn’t be told. But I, for one, am glad he did.
READER OF THE DAY: From Eric J: “Stanley Donen possesses something today’s stars lack — humility. Plus his song and dance was not only appropriate but fun. (Definitely better than any of the other dance numbers.) What a contrast compared to James Cameron (of whom I am a big fan); his ‘I’m king of the world’ and moment of silence were annoying and disappointing. Talk about trite. I thought James had more class than that.”

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon