All The President's Men: Feb 21 See Post #34 (1 Viewer)

[Jamie Cole]

I blogged not too long ago about Network and how oddly "right" it turned out to be, but I think it's worth pointing out just how terrifying Arthur Jensen's speech to Beale is in the last third. I don't want to believe all that has come to pass, but I do. Those who want to remain somewhat innocent and view the world optimistically might want to avoid Network; it brings up some questions that will keep you up nights.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Kinda wondering about that myself! The movie offered plenty of discussion of the homosexuality and sex change elements - they weren't "subtext" at all...

 

[Mark Bendiksen]

Uninteresting?!? I realize everyone has their own ideas about good filmmaking, but I've never heard anyone call Dog Day Afternoon "uninteresting". Whomever said that, don't believe him (or her).

 

[Holadem]

Haggai, Colin,

While I remember the robber's sexual orientation, I do not remember the accompanying social commentary, hence my comments. It appears my recollection of the movie is spotty at best.

--
H

 

[Paul.S]

IMO more memorable than any social commentary are some of the hilarious, 'lovers quarrel' exchanges between Sonny and Sal.

 

[Chris PC]

Nathan,

I know what you mean about the "feel" of 70's movies. It goes beyond just an era for me. All sorts of movies have a great feel to them simply because of the environment and conditions of the filming. The sunlight in outdoor shots, the shadows, the clothing people wear, the buildings, the cars and furniture etc etc.

One movie that has a great nostalgic "feel" to it is Taxi Driver. I especially like the time-fade scene where Travis is walking along the street near the beginning of the movie.

 

[Chris PC]

I don't like having duplication. I usually "replace" things when they come out in editions that are better. Like when a movie on dvd is 4:3 widescreen and then is released as anamorphic, or when the newer version has good special features, or is a better transfer etc. If its a directors cut, meaning the film has been altered, then I have to see the new version before deciding.

Is there ANY indication that I should keep my original All The Presidents Men dvd? What about my Dog Day Afternoon dvd? I have not watched the DDA yet, although I have seen ATPM twice, but could easily watch it two more times at least anyhow. I cannot recall having seen Network, but I look forward to it.

As of Feb 18, 2006, nobody has the new 3 movie box set yet, so maybe we can only anticipate, but...

Is there any reason I should keep my original dvds of ATPM and DDA?

thanx

 

[Colin Jacobson]

No. The new one's an improvement in every way.

 

[Roger Rollins]

Great show last night with Woodward and Bernstein on CNN's Larry King Live, which showed clips from the new DVD, and even Carl Bernstein mentioned how much he enjoyed seeing the documentary on the 2nd disc.

I can't wait to pick up this, NETWORK and DOG DAY AFTERNOON when the boxed set comes out next week.

 

[Chris PC]

Fair enough. I saw the tail end of the Larry King show with the guys. I wish I knew ahead of time. I love this movie. This movie is proof that you do not any special effects what-so-ever to create a very high quality movie. Great writing and directing, and of course, great acting. Non-fiction movies are almost cheating on some level, because the fact that the material is real is so captivating, and yet, there is more pressure to make it right and make it well. They did a fantastic job. When I watch other Robert Redford movies hoping for the same impact, like Day of the Jackal or Sneakers (yeah, not quite the same league), I am disappointed in comparison.

 

[Casey C.]

Picked this up Tuesday and have seen the movie and most of the extras, and ... wow. The new material on the second disc is very impressive, with participation by Robert Redford, Dustin Hoffman, Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein, Ben Bradlee, William Goldman, Jane Alexander...

Great job Warner Bros.!

 

[MichaelBA]

Would anybody who owns this please describe the extent of Woodstein's participation in the extras? I am particularly interested if they (and Bradlee et al.) offer very specific little details that relate to the movie directly and not simply general comments.

For example, when Bernstein was in Florida trying to meet with Dardis, did Dardis' receptionist actually keep mispronouncing Bernstein's name?

Or did Woodward actually so bluntly ask Marilyn Berger whether Ken Clawson had claimed to write the Canuck Letter in order to impress her enough to sleep with him?

Neither of these colorful but minor incidents are in the original book, but that doesn't mean they are untrue or perhaps based on fact in some way. Do any of the extras confirm them, or other little details specifically in the film?

Woodstein have always said that the movie is very true to the work they did on the story, but they've never really discussed how accurate their portrayals, their characters were in the film. Do they do that at all in the new DVD?

 

[Casey C.]

Woodward, Bernstein and Bradlee all say they were pleased with how well the film accurately reflected what happened; i.e. the filmmakers didn't "Hollywood it up."

They don't speak to specific plot points as far as I can recall. They do, however, retell the story about how they scrupulously re-created the Post newsroom on the Warner Bros. soundstage, right down to the wastebaskets. That's not new, however; I'd heard that story about the wastebaskets before.

There is a good anecdote from William Goldman, who got a call from John Dean asking about one of Hal Holbrook's lines and whether Deep Throat had used those exact words. No, Goldman said, I wrote that. Dean was disappointed because he thought the line gave him a clue to Deep Throat's identity.

 

[Chris PC]

Is the quality of the audio-video pretty much the same? Better transfers or the same?

 

[Paul McElligott]

I thought the extra feature on W. Mark Felt was a little week. Very little on Felt. It was mostly a defense of the use of anonymous sources.

 

[MichaelBA]

That stinks.

DP is out, so why not discuss him in detail?

As long as the film looks great on the new DVD, then I'll surely rebuy it. But from what I've read, the new extras are all really disappointing. Lots of generic information, nothing special about them.

Boo.:frowning:

 

[Paul McElligott]

The new making of documentary was pretty good, lots of information on how involved Redford was with Woodstein from the beginning. I just thought the Felt doc wasn't up to the same standard.

 

[MichaelBA]

Any detailed insights on the content of the film in particular by Woodstein, Paul? If you can tell me. Thanks!

 

[Paul McElligott]

Just that, originally, Woodstein intended the book just to be an account of the break-in and scandal, not of them breaking the story. Redford, who approached them while they were still covering the story, pushed them to make themselves the focus of the book, probably already seeing the potential for a movie.

 

[Chris PC]

Is the commentary interesting?