Poliwood: Frosting Frost/Nixon
In the midst of my Great Jury Adventure, the redoubtable Lionel Chetwynd and I went into the PJTV studios in El Segundo at night to record two Poliwoods back-to-back: one on Frost/Nixon, the other on Milk. Our intention is not to be reviewers a la Roger Ebert. We’re both uncomfortable sitting in chairs we once reviled (most writers and directors despise reviwers, for obvious reasons; they are class enemies). But still we walk a line, trying to find more “significance” in what we do than a mere thumbs up, thumbs down. And yet…. there will always be an element of that viewing a movie (or a play or reading a book or whatever). And the honest artist/artisan must admit he loves to get good reviews (except for Woody Allen who claims not to read them). This is a long way around to say that – whatever our feelings about SeanPenn - we both vastly preferred Milk to Frost/Nixon. Our doubts about Frost/Nixon and some feelings about Richard Nixon in general and , of course, other matters are here (free) in the latest Poliwood. All earlier Poliwoods are here. As usual we welcome your suggestion for future shows. No, we are not planning an all-Antonioni hour. (Milk coming up in a week)
Will the current financial downturn discourage the making of these sort of movies? My guess is that a number of wealthy individuals are seeking some tax loses. But how does that work during a severe recession? I readily remember viewing the half-way decent “Nixon” staring Anthony Hopkins and directed by Oliver Stone—and wondering how a film over three hours long had any chance in hell of even breaking even! No, every movie does not need to be a financial blockbuster. It would be a sad world if that were the case. Still, how often can investors afford to be so reckless with their money?
This is a mystery to me, David, and I have worked in the field for decades. One thing to remember however is that the global box office accrues. Movies made twenty or thirty years ago, as I don’t have to tell you, are still turning up on late night TV. Money is being made.
Over the years, I have become more and more unsatisfied with the “movie experience.” The last movie I saw in a theater was Three Weddings and a Funeral when it came out. As a child I was always in the movie theater. What happened? I don’t even watch much television anymore. After a few minutes,if it’s not interesting, I get bored and drift away. It’s not worth it to spend ten dollars to go sit in a noisy, cramped, faux living room with sticky floors and bad popcorn to watch what something I’ll regret. Books are way better even if more expensive. Do you think that movie producers will ever make movies for people like me?
“…as I don’t have to tell you, are still turning up on late night TV.”
I have never seen the over three hour long “Nixon” on TV. And some of these more recent anti-Bush and anti-Iraq movies are simply too boring and dumb to even be shown on TV at 3:00 AM. Still, your point is well taken. “Frost/Nixon” is probably a low budget project. It’s essentially all talk and no action. There is apparently not even one car chase scene in the entire film. I suspect that it should easily earn a modest profit. As for the “Milk” movie—this might be the big question: How much was Sean Penn paid? Did he demand something like twenty million dollars or was he satisfied with earning a few dollars over the union minimum?
These Poliwood chats with Lionel are among PJTV’s best offerings. However, your pal Lionel was significantly off in his guesstimate of the U.S. troop levels in Viet Nam when Nixon took office in in 1969. The peak was 543,000 in 1969—certainly not over a million. His point is well taken, but that “fact” was way off.
Your wife wrote “Dick”,Roger?That was such a funny movie!