Mailbag time! Smokey, Putin Bond villains, talking to celebs, lack of respect for 'Mass'
You asked and I answered.
The time has come to open the mailbox and see what people have left inside for me to ponder and ruminate on. There’s nothing like getting asked questions. For someone who usually has to ask the questions and hope the answers are good enough for a story, I turn the tables on you this time via social media and here is what I received. Let’s not waste time, because the bacon could already be cooking and the wife wants me to have coffee time in the sunroom.
From Sam Gregory: How underrated was Smokey and the Bandit 3? In my opinion it is one of the best modern day retellings of Don Quixote.
My Take: Sam, I haven’t seen this movie or thought about it in years. I would say Burt Reynolds is forever misunderstood as an actor, but this one sits on Rotten Tomatoes with a 17% rating. Would we really call it the best modern day retelling of DQ, or is it more like the best modern day retelling of Dairy Queen instead?
From Russell Elzinga: The one movie that had Oscars at every turn… Boogie Nights…
I am assuming Paul Thomas Anderson’s riveting porn industry film is Russell’s choice (nice selection), but for me it’s Steven Spielberg’s The Post. Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks, Carrie Coon, Sarah Paulson, Bob Odenkirk, Tracy Letts, Bradley Whitford, Bruce Greenwood. Story of a female rising up and taking control of The Washington Post. Rugged and well-told journalism stories are my jam when done right.
From Bill Motchan: Is Vladimir Putin the embodiment of every Bond movie villian?
No. He’s worse. In the real world, there is no unstoppable, good-looking secret agent who will inconceivably travel across the world without detection and some help, eventually saving the day. In this world, he’s just an anarchist looking to burn down civilizations for the sake of power. I thought we eradicated that shit back in the 1940s, but it just proves that the world’s problems seem to always repeat themselves. Putin is a job for the one and only John Wick.
From Tim Trout, my old Brentwood High pal: How do you write your film reviews? Do you actively take notes or focus on certain scenes? Do you focus on specific elements depending on genre?
GREAT question. I only take notes sometimes, because if you pull your eyes from the screen, something could be lost. I rewind and focus on certain scenes that move me or move the film to a higher place. I do keep in mind the genre contraptions and past abilities, but it’s also great to be surprised by a movie that doesn’t fit into any genre. All I try to do is be honest with what I thought about the movie, and not bullshit the reader. They’re too smart for that nonsense, so I just tell them what I thought. Keep it light on plot, because they can find that shit anywhere. What they came for is your voice and take, nothing else. That’s how I start the process.
Sometimes, it takes an hour. Sometimes, it takes days. Certain movies need more time to marinate than others. I’d like to say there is no one right way to write, and movie review writing definitely fits there.
From Dave Weber, Banshee OG alum: Okay, here's a question I'd like to know... I've seen/heard you talking with some real A listers. Just how do you manage to get in touch with celebs? Obviously they ain't in any regular phone book. Do you call their agents? Do you talk with their production companies? It's not like the rest of us can even find their emails or anything...
That’s mostly through Allied Marketing. They put together the advance screenings in STL and other cities, and also arrange talent interviews. George Clooney, Channing Tatum, Liam Neeson. While getting a mention from The Rock on Twitter is as easy as tagging his name and waiting, the interviews come with a lot of help. Pete Maniscalco, Joe Moskus, and company work with the studios and get me set up with the A-listers. Most of the time, it’s 90 minutes of waiting on a Zoom conference and about 4-5 minutes of actual interviewing.
Outside of that, one can go to IMDB Pro and get publicist and agent contacts.
From Shaun Clements: How do you do you do you?
Me being me is being unfiltered, honest, and passionate when I talk about film or anything. If people know you’re passionate about it, they know time was spent on the subject/topic and the output won’t be of the half-ass variety. Outside of that, my wife generally “does” me.
NOW, FROM TWITTER:
You got me, Ed. No idea. Probably the dark subject matter. People just aren’t ready for, even for something so tastefully and powerfully made. Fran Kranz assembled four terrific actors, a timely subject matter, and made a superbly paced drama that every parent should watch and try to understand. My opinion is there were too many parent voters who just couldn’t take it, and didn’t even see it. And that the idea of understanding the parents of the shooter is again, too much. And that’s sad for Hollywood. The same crowd will pack the theater for Spidey but not this.
Yes and no. I think there would be some concern about bigger teams taking over, but isn’t that already happening? The Dodgers are always there due to their spending. Red Sox and other clubs do the same. They don’t win every year though. So I think the parity in other teams being able to spend more and stay competitive could be harmed, but the overall construction of a roster and how it’s run could still play a big part. However, there’s definitely a concern about the gap in competitive balance. I’d vote to keep the tax threshold in place. BUT… the owners have to come closer to the middle on this or the arbitration money.
See you next time I peek inside the mailbox.