Barry Levinson Makes A Statement, But Not A Point, With PoliWood

The Good: Great participation from both sides of the political spectrum, Raises a few good questions.
The Bad: Fails to land on a number of key points, Levinson talks over several of his subjects.
The Basics: Barry Levinson explores some important questions about how Hollywood celebrities influence politics without coming to any real answers in PoliWood.


When it comes to movies, my wife has a pretty simple formula for figuring out how to pick out a film I’d want to watch when we have a night to spend together: she looks up Anne Hathaway’s IMDB page and finds projects Hathaway has been involved in that I have not yet seen and she picks them up for us. That list is getting increasingly short, but my wife managed to find one such movie tonight: PoliWood. Given that my wife and I are politically active, PoliWood seemed like a documentary that we would have quite a bit of interest in and because I have largely enjoyed the works of Barry Levinson, it seemed like a good fit. PoliWood is a documentary or video essay by Levinson and it stars a number of Hollywood celebrities who are active in politics . . .

. . . admitting they are active in politics. While Levinson has some narrative to his video essay, PoliWood rambles with surprisingly little in the way of purpose. In fact, it was not until I sat down to write a review of PoliWood that I realized how little point there was to the movie.

The concept of PoliWood is simple: several actors and actresses who have gained a level of celebrity have publicly made political statements and supported candidates. The assumption has been that most of the most wealthy and outspoken celebrities are liberal and have exerted an undo influence over the American political process. Director and essayist Barry Levinson follows around several members of The Creative Coalition (a group that has largely come together to advocate for government funding of the arts) during the 2008 Presidential election. The documentary follows Anne Hathaway, Richard Schiff, Ellen Burstyn, Rachael Leigh Cook, Tim Daly, Giancarlo Esposito, Susan Sarandon, Matthew Modine and Josh Lucas as they attend political, sporting, and entertainment events.

Levinson follows the group to both the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National Convention and he comments (and documents comment from others) on the process of advocacy the celebrities utilize as they reach out to voters about issues important to each of them.

The problem is that the film does little more than that. PoliWood starts with the premise that Hollywood actors are blurring the lines between politics and entertainment. The film ends in the exact same place with no real growth in between. The subjects of Levinson’s documentary do not sufficiently address the concepts Levinson seems to want to explore with PoliWood. In his opening narration for PoliWood, Barry Levinson laments the role of the television in the American family; he talks about how daily life was changed by the invasive nature of the television and then how politicians were remade into television stars in order to get elected.

After that, Levinson follows his subjects around. PoliWood meanders around with the director asking the question of “Do Hollywood celebrities have too much influence over American politics?” and then shows them advocating for their cause and “common” Americans complaining about how out-of-touch those celebrities are with “middle” America. Perhaps the best moment of PoliWood is when Tim Daly discusses all of the non-actor related jobs he had and how he devotes quite a bit of time to “normal” things like car pools and coaching little league. In a smart, reasonable way, Daly quietly dispels one woman’s utter ignorance about how celebrities are somehow not as human or real as other people are.

But the documentary falls apart outside that. While there are decent moments, like Anne Hathaway admitting she hates talking about political issues she is not adequately informed about and some of the members of the Creative Coalition rejecting the refusal of a couple members to even hear out a successful strategist for Fox News, but largely Levinson asks questions that go unanswered or he asserts his own statements without actually backing them up in any demonstrable way in the film. For example, a number of misconceptions about celebrities are brought up during the film and one of the big ones is that right-of-center actors have a harder time getting work in Hollywood than leftists. It is not pointed out how Jon Voight and Clint Eastwood (for example) have almost constant work, even as they advocate for Republicans. Actor Robert Davi talks about a personal experience where a fan was turned off by his conservative activism, but he did not detail any issues he had with getting acting work as a result of the same activism.

Levinson also neglects to discuss at all how the influence of “Hollywood liberals” is, in part, a response to conservative businessmen advocating against social spending or progressive issues. It’s hard to say that Hollywood actors have more influence than the businesspeople who spend more money against their causes.

As a result, much of the movie swirls around Levinson making his own assertions and spreading his philosophy. He ends the movie where he begins it: articulating his own personal philosophy that television might be a destructive force in substantive political debates. PoliWood fails to back up or present a sophisticated view of its own premises (Levinson, for example, comments on how Al Gore drew attention to the global warming crisis through An Inconvenient Truth - reviewed here! – by essentially becoming a Hollywood celebrity while completely ignoring that the documentary only became a phenomenon because of Gore’s political celebrity and that if he had not been Vice President, he never would have managed to get the documentary produced) and the result is a lackluster documentary that only serves to reiterate the idea that the political process in the United States is damaged.

For other documentaries, please check out my reviews of:
Craigslist Joe
Jedi Junkies
Trek Nation

4/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2014 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

The Quick Devolution Of An Album With Much Potential For The Future

The Good: Excellent sound, Surprisingly diverse sound, Mostly decent lyrics, Generally good balance between members
The Bad: Surrenders to the marketing stereotypes of rap music
The Basics: With fifteen tracks, The Black Eyed Peas album Monkey Business is a diverse listening experience that is mostly very enjoyable.


There is a significant gap between the time it took the Bee-Gees and Michael Jackson to create albums that were able to chart four or more singles in the U.S. In the UK, the trend was continued with Oasis's Definitely Maybe (reviewed here!), but in the U.S., it's a near-impossibility to score four singles of an album and have them get decent airplay or chart position. Britney Spears's debut is a soft example (the fourth single did not do great, though it kept her in the public imagination until "Oops I Did It Again" was released), Matchbox 20 (and Matchbox Twenty) and Destiny's Child are pretty much the only two that come to mind that were successful with four singles off an album in the mainstream pop-rock charts. Then came The Black Eyes Peas who nailed the charts with "Where's The Love" and when their album Monkey Business was released, they managed to chart "Pump It," "Don't Phunk With My Heart," "Don't Lie," and "My Hump" on the top 40. It was a respectable outing and there was enough in those four singles to encourage me to give the album a spin.

Monkey Business defied my immediate expectations when I popped the album in. My thought was that it was likely to be a rap or hip-hop album. In all honesty, this album is a very pleasant surprise in that regard. The Black Eyed Peas have a diverse sound that does from dance and club to flat out pop to rap to hip-hop to moments of soul and even a song that has a folk quality to it. The Black Eyed Peas, with their social conscience and musical diversity (though definitely slanted toward the dance/hip-hop spectrum), have more in common with Deee-Lite than Outkast. In that regard, the album was quite a surprise.

This makes me want to rush to the negative aspect of the album. I have been looking for a decent rap album for some time (Outkast's The Love Below/Speakerboxxx, reviewed here, represented the best chance in a long time) but have never found one that does not at some point simply disappoint by presenting views that are either sexist, racist, or just plain dumb and self-promotional. Have you ever noticed how largely what rap artists sing about is themselves (listen to the first single Eminem has put off any of his albums, they are all about Eminem rapping!)? Within moments of putting Monkey Business in, I had removed it from any classification of "rap album." It's not. It's so much more pop-funk than rap. Thus, it was a tremendous disappointment when the devolves into flat out rap on "Disco Club" and "Ba Bump." And rap is not inherently bad (hence my desire to find a perfect rap album) but the Black Eyed Peas continue the worst embodiments of rap with the tracks including "n*gga" and ridiculously sexist language: "If the girl's ugly, then get drunk ("Ba Bump")."

That said, the album is otherwise is remarkably well-concieved and considerate. "Don't Phunk With My Heart" asks about the nature of relationships, desperately wondering "If let you take me home, will you still be in love with me?" The narrator wants to know if "love" is a ploy and I think it's a very cool track. "Don't Lie" cries out for honest in relationships and the album closes with "Unity," a Sting-featured track that is a recasting of "Where's The Love," asking for the people of the world to come together. This is generally positive stuff.

I don't know that I'm a fan of Jack Johnson (who sounds suspiciously like John Mayer) but the track "Gone Going," which features sampling (called an interpolation here because it's such a large chunk used for the refrain) of Jack Johnson's "Gone." It's fabulous, a song telling a story and railing against materialism. It's sharp, beautifully presented and I cannot believe it was not released as a single. When the Black Eyed Peas release a Best of album, that's a must have track.

How can an album with such tight lyrics and such desire for love of all humanity devolve into the simple "score with whatever moves" concept of "Disco Club?" I think "My Humps" is a delightful tease, the power of female sexuality, but the flat rap songs on Monkey Business are just disappointing.

One of the aspects of Monkey Business that might come as a surprise to those who are only familiar with the Black Eyed Peas from the radio is how the album is not dominated by Fergie. There is a great balance between the vocals of Fergie, will.i.am, apl.de.ap and Taboo. Just like the diversity of the sound on Monkey Business, there is great diversity of vocals that makes the album a pleasant listening experience that does not get stale over many listenings.

Finally, I would like to say that the Black Eyed Peas are clever in avoiding one rap conceit which is advertising all of their guest vocals. Justin Timberlake, James Brown and Dante Santiago without appearing on the tracklisting. I think that's cool; too often bands try to sell their albums simply using crossover appeal.

Ultimately Monkey Business is a fairly solid album qualitatively. It's a fun listen, with great flow between songs. In fact one of the most hypnotic aspects of Monkey Business is the way songs flow from one into the other. And most of the album is filled with positive lyrics and unobjectionable lyrics. It's music that energizes and occasionally makes one think.

It's close, but not perfect. But it's Definitely worth a listen. The album is front loaded with the four released singles in the first five tracks, but the album continues into other distinct and likable tracks. The best track is "Gone Going" the worst is the simplistic and disappointing "Ba Bump."

For other music reviews, you might enjoy:
Time Capsule: Songs For A Future Generation - The B-52’s
Two Suns (Deluxe) – Bat For Lashes
Cex Cells - Blaqk Audio

8/10

Check out how this album stacks up against other musical works I have reviewed by visiting my Music Review Index Page where the works are organized best to worst.

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

One Song Does Not Make A Self-Promotional Album Great: The Failure Of The Dutchess.

The Good: Moments of vocals, "Big Girls Don't Cry," Some tunes have a decent hook.
The Bad: It's pretty insipid pop, Lyrics, Instrumentals, "Assembled" sound, Most vocals, Overproduced
The Basics: On her debut album, Fergie presents herself as a poor copy of other artists, falling into many of the worst pop music mistakes.


Perennial Star Trek fan favorite George Takei amuses virtually every convention audience he has by at least once per public appearance delivering his trademark, "Oh my" line. It's enough to bring a smile to virtually any geek's face and I'll admit sometimes it's the high point of a convention for me. Takei knows how to entertain. But that sentiment, that truly great "Oh my!" is best reserved for something truly shocking, either in its grandeur or in its horrific revelation. When I first finished listening to The Dutchess (sic) (or Fergie As The Dutchess as the front cover says), I popped the disc out of my player and let out a Takei quality "Oh my!"

The debut album of Fergie, lone female voice of The Black-Eyed Peas, The Dutchess (which I'm not going to continue noting with 'sic,' the misspelling is apparently intentional) is a pretty spectacular pop music disaster. With fourteen tracks clocking in at exactly fifty-eight minutes, this is a classic argument against artists from groups going solo. And perhaps my standards were set too high, but having enjoyed Monkey Business and Fergie's work with the Black-Eyed Peas, I came to The Dutchess expecting to at least enjoy the outing.

I did not.

My first clue ought to have been the insipid first single, "London Bridge." For those who have not heard this less-than-brilliant dance track, the refrain is, "How come every time you come around / My London, London bridge want to go down, like / London, London, London / Want to go down like / London, London, London / Be goin down like . . ." ("London Bridge"). Note to writers Stacy Ferguson (Fergie), J. Jones, S. Garrett, and M. Harnett: When you write an analogy, it helps to compare something to something else, comparing London bridge to itself does not make an analogy. And yes, as someone blissfully ignorant to what a hot young artist's "London Bridge" might be, this song is just plain drecht. And seriously, how many people does it take to write this garbage?!

On the album, the track is concluded by several seconds of people speaking over the lines trying to figure out how they are going to pronounce it. This is mind-blowingly pointless and nowhere near musical.

To continue, The Dutchess is a weird combination of songs that have an overall 1980's feeling to them. Songs like "All That I Got (The Make Up Song)" and " " sound like they could be lost Expose tracks. And while Gwen Stefani's The Sweet Escape effectively managed to recreate a late-'80's pop sound and make it sound fresh, Fergie's songs like "Pedestal" and "Voodoo Doll" merely sound like derivative attempts at recreating Stefani's sound. And, unfortunately for Fergie, "Voodoo Doll" sounds more like Stefani's solo debut which was also riddled with freshman mistakes. "Here I Come" sounds like a pretty generic assemblage of lines, riffs and basslines that come together to mean almost nothing. It's a lot of sound, with little meaning and that track especially has an assembled quality.

But even more than sounding like other artists who have recently gone solo and seeming to attempt to recapture the same musical era - which to be fair is the music of both Fergie and Stefani's childhood - The Dutchess does not represent a serious attempt to go solo. Fergie does not write a single song on her own on this album. Instead, half the songs are co-written with her Black-Eyed Peas bandmate will.i.am (Will Adams). As well, Fergie falls into the annoying trap so many current artists and performers fall into with including a bevy of guest performers on her album. Will.i.am is featured on three songs and Ludacris, John Legend and Rita Marley and The I-Threes join her on one track each. It's hardly an expression of ability, artistry or talent when one cannot hold their own on their own debut solo album. But with six of the fourteen tracks being supported by others, the album has the feeling that it needs others to prop it up, making Fergie's solo career seem desperate from the outset.

And it's a shame that she chose to go the road most commonly traveled. Tracks like "Velvet" indicate that she has a singing voice that is worthy of being heard. The mellow, bluesy track is almost enough to forgive her for the nasal, screeching vocals on "Losing My Ground." The point here is that Fergie clearly has some talent, though she seems determined to mortgage it for the trappings of popularity. And on the longer notes of "Losing My Ground," Fergie sounds like she is straining within her natural register, as if someone pulled her leg out from under her while she was singing and she just grabbed onto the microphone and tried to continue. Producers Rob Boldt and Ron Fair should be fired for letting that one get on the album.

The standout song on the album is "Big Girls Don't Cry" and it's pretty clear why the song is doing so well on the charts. With its use of guitars, bass, keyboards and drums it is pretty much the archetypal pop song as far as sound goes. It sounds like it should be a big hit, like the type track Madonna used to put out. It expresses something with its heartfelt refrain of "I hope you know / That this has nothing to do with you / It's personal / Myself and I / We got some straightening out to do" ("Big Girls Don't Cry"). And on it, Fergie reveals she can sing.

But it's one track (two that illustrate she has a decent voice) among twelve others. The song comes late in the album, long after the listener is sickened by the overproduction - where her voice is obscured or altered by production elements - and lame lyrics. And the self-promotion. Not since Eminem burst onto the scene making hit songs about what it was like to be Eminem, can I recall an artist singing so much about themselves. Fergie's first track on The Dutchess is "Fergalicious" which seems to suggest that she is something to be consumed and the opening to "London Bridge" reintroduces her as someone who should be treated better than you, the listener to her music. And in "Glamorous," she sends the mixed message of how she's "keepin' it real," by going to Taco Bell, but that if you don't have money, you should go on home. She acknowledges that her fans got her her wealth, but then spends the song bragging about flying first class, drinking champagne and no longer having to drive a crappy car. In short, outside selling herself as a product, she does not seem to have anything genuine to say.

What's worse is that when she's not singing about herself, she sings about . . . her shoes. On "Mary Jane Shoes," she simply repeats "Whoa my Mary Janes" over and over again as a refrain and it is tired and pretty lame. Some people may be able to pull off a song about their shoes, but Fergie doesn't do it here.

Added to the pretty dull lyrics, the music is almost universally bad. When the Casio keyboard style sound opened up the second single, "Clumsy," my thoughts went immediately to the Bloodhound Gang's song "The Lapdance Is Always Better When The Stripper Is Crying" (from their album Hooray For Boobies). But where Bloodhound Gang effectively creates a hilarious and gross satire, Fergie seems to present the track as a serious musical endeavor. That just leaves the listener sad.

And beyond that, the album is populated with heavy keyboards and basslines with the clear intent being to get the listener to move. This is a dance-pop album and it falls into many of the worst trappings of that, not genuinely creating anything musically original. Usually, I criticize artists for not performing any instruments on albums they write, but on The Dutchess, it's not like Fergie has many opportunities. Most of the songs are programmed as opposed to performed on instruments.

This is pure pop and it's mostly drivel.

The best track is easily "Big Girls Don't Cry," there are no others that are genuinely worth your time, but the worst is probably "Here I Come" which could have been made by a monkey with a sampling machine. Then again, "Clumsy" is pretty bad too.

For other female artists, be sure to check out my reviews of:
I Want You (single) - Sophie B. Hawkins
Icon - Imogen Heap and Frou Frou
Everybody - Ingrid Michaelson

2.5/10

For other music reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

A Predictable And Droll Family Comedy, Marmaduke Underwhelms.

The Good: Not many: one or two jokes.
The Bad: Predictable plot, Awkward CG effects, Uninspired acting, Obvious character directions.
The Basics: Despite one or two laughs, Marmaduke is a big-screen flop which is a waste of time for anyone truly looking to be entertained.


There comes a moment in the horror-comedy Zombieland (click here for my review!) where Bill Murray admits that if there were anything he could take back in life it would be doing the Garfield movies. Even though it was an obvious joke in the film, it ought to have given pause to makers of other films involving animals. Unfortunately for Marmaduke, the next in line of comic strips turned films, the movie suffers for many of the same reasons as the Garfield movies and because it comes so closely on the heels of the recent animal movie flop Furry Vengeance.

Marmaduke, truth be told, is a movie I had little interest in seeing after my partner and I saw the previews. However, my wife is a big fan of animals and she loves Great Danes, which the title character is, so when we went to the movies last weekend, that is what I ended up watching with her. I want my money back. And, in perhaps the biggest, best critique against the film, so does my wife. My wife has a love of comedies and of animals and this movie was so bad that even she was disappointed.

Phil and Debbie Winslow live in Kansas with their Great Dane Marmaduke and cat Carlos when Phil is offered a promotion at Bark Organic Pet Food that comes with moving to California. In Orange County, Phil meets with his boss at the dog park and Marmaduke meets the other dogs. Marmaduke quickly develops a crush on Jezebel and befriends Mazie, Guiseppe, and Raison. However, Marmaduke's attraction for Jezebel quickly earns him the ire of the bully dogs, Bosco, Lightning and Thunder and when Marmaduke gets into conflicts with them, Phil's job is threatened.

Through a series of inane plot developments - including a canine surfing contest and Marmaduke and Phil becoming separated - Marmaduke wins the more considerate girl, comes through for Phil and creates a movie that is so terrible I am stretching to find things to write about it.

The plot is utterly predictable and is far more fractured than flowing. As one might expect from a movie based upon a comic strip, the film is almost entirely devoid of character development. Indeed, writers Vince Di Meglio and Tim Rasmussen take a character that is essentially a one-panel joke machine and make him into the moving incarnation of the same with no real growth or development. In other words, the viewer does not so much care about Marmaduke as they suffer through watching him make jokes like widening his eyes at cute girls (in this case female dogs) and poop references without actually building a likable character. Instead, the movie is slapstick and schtick and the most insulting aspect is that it is nothing viewers have not seen before in far too many other, vastly better, family films.

The film seems more like a desperate attempt to make a film than actually having a good story to tell. Phil is likable only in a bland, "hey this is a good guy we're watching" way. William H. Macy's talents are utterly wasted as Mr. Twombly, though it is nice to see Macy in a comedy again. Macy has great range, but in Marmaduke, he is used as a slapstick prop and it is unfortunate to watch. Phil's character seems mostly based upon the casting for him as Phil is played by Lee Pace, who is a good actor in many things, but seems to fit the cartoonish smooth-faced, bug-eyed delivery that the casting department for this film was looking for.

This brings us to Own Wilson Wilson provides the voice of Marmaduke as part of a cast of actors - George Lopez, Fergie, Emma Stone, Kiefer Sutherland, Sam Elliot - who are distinguished and whom director Tom Dey must have especially explicit pictures of the worst kind of. Seriously, that is the only reason I can believe as to how so many quality actors were bamboozled into participating in this lame-joke festival. The voice actors do fine with their deliveries, but the jokes are essentially one-liners and a collection of one-liners hardly makes a film.

Moreover, the voice acting is supposed to be trumped by the computer effects work which animate the lips of the characters and put the animals in situations animals clearly are not. Those CG-effects are tiresome and they fail to sell the unreality of some of the fights, contests and (sigh) dance numbers. The lip synchs do not always match and ultimately, the film is over long before it reaches its end because the viewer does not care about it.

Easily going to be one of the worst films of the year, Marmaduke has only one true redeeming feature I can think of: at least it beat the Cats And Dogs sequel to market.

For other comedies, please check out my reviews of:
Year One
Valentine’s Day
The Incredibles

1/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2010 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |