Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Sex and Nudity!


Sepiatone
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Now that I got your attention, I'd like to turn it to the recent showing of *All The President's Men* , mentioned by someone else recently in another thread.

 

 

My 13 year old nephew told me Saturday that his history teacher showed the movie(in two parts) in class recently. He said the whole class was dumbfounded that:

 

 

1. Any American president would be any way involved in such a thing, and...

 

 

2. Woodward and Bernstein would be able to accomplish what they did without cell phones and the internet.

 

 

Forget how you feel about it politically, It was one of the most compelling stories of intrigue and political dealings I've ever both read and saw. If Watergate never happened, and someone came up with this story as fiction, there would be some who would find it hard to believe. Oh, they'd make the movie all right. But still...

 

 

Discovering that if Woodward had gotten to the courtroom five minutes later, the whole thing would have gone unnoticed was one thing. The harrowing circumstances they both went through to get the story out was bad enough. That they both claimed over the years that in reality it was even MORE harrowing puts the viewer even more on the edge of their seats.

 

 

An excellent screenplay made from a book that was masterfully handled by all involved. It was onee of the few movies made about real history that didn't take uneeded license with the facts.

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I don't have my head stuck in a hole like an ostrich so I know for fact the average teenager is exposed to profanity and sex more than we think. The movie don't use sex and nudity to sell itself, concentrating on the scandal itself

 

Interesting website about this subject.

 

http://www.commonsensemedia.org/movie-reviews/all-presidents-men-0

 

By the way I don't watch anything concerning Watergate because I've gotten *bored to death* of that scandal when I was young!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Sepiatone wrote:}{quote}

>

> My 13 year old nephew told me Saturday that his history teacher showed the movie(in two parts) in class recently. He said the whole class was dumbfounded that:

>

>

> 1. Any American president would be any way involved in such a thing, and...

>

>

> 2. Woodward and Bernstein would be able to accomplish what they did without cell phones and the internet.

>

>

 

Someone should tell him about the Iran-Contra scandal, when Reagan had his minions selling weapons to our enemies who were behind the bombing of the Beirut Marine base, (killing 243 marines,) and the CIA transporting cocaine, all to earn money to finance his private army, against the expressed wished of Congress. This private army, aka the "Contras" main business was slaughtering poor farmers, destroying their equipment, homes schools, and medical clinics. All that went pretty much unpunished. I'm dumbfounded by that one too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love, love, LOVE ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN. Here's some interesting trivia: William Goldman (the screenwriter who won an Oscar for PRESIDENT'S MEN) & Redford had a falling out after this movie. Goldman is who wrote BUTCH CASSIDY & lobbied for Redford to be in it (the studio didn't want him because at the time he wasn't a star).

 

They were friends in New York back in the 60's & socialized together (Goldman bringing his family for weekend getaways to Sundance when it was still only a few acres). Goldman was infuriated when Redford (who was the producer on ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN) suggested that he (Goldman) read Carl Bernstein's script that Bernstein (along with his girlfriend at the time Nora Ephron) had written unsolicited. Goldman felt Redford should have told Bernstein thank you, but we've already got a script. Anyway, Goldman walked out of the meeting and has never spoken one word to Redford since. It's all in Goldman's book called ADVENTURES IN THE SCREEN TRADE (which is a great read that I highly recommend).

 

Redford claimed (in the DVD commentary) that the script Goldman submitted was not the script they filmed. Only one scene of Goldman's original script made it into the film (according to Redford): the last scene of the movie in front of Ben Bradlee's house. Goldman claimed (in his book) that EVERY scene in the movie he wrote except one: the scene where Dustin Hoffman tricks the secretary to get into Ned Beatty's office.

 

Who knows which version is the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMDB gives the writing credits for the movie this way:

 

Carl Bernstein (book) &

Bob Woodward (book)

William Goldman (screenplay)

 

I saw the movie then later I read the book. It's pretty much like the movie.

 

However, the movie, of course, would have to be organized into specific scenes. Much of the book text could be used in the movie script, but much of the book text would have to be left out, since books are usually longer than screenplays. For example, most average people could not read the entire book in 2 hours and 18 minutes, which is the length of the movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm running the film next month and I have an amazing short to go with it - it is a promotional film about the Committee To Re-Elect The President. It stars Clark McGregor. You would think that HE is running for President! It's a fascinating time capsule piece and gives an insider look into the workings of the Committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=casablancalover2 wrote:}{quote}Yup. That's a way it can work when there is a writer on board already. Re-writes are not the career-starter you might think. You are better off doing minimal and get a nod to another script with credit down the way.

>

> Great way to meet the power in town, though.

Yeah, I can see your point, Casablanca. But I can also see how Redford was stuck between a rock & a hard place. How was he gonna tell Carl Bernstein (who co-wrote the novel & was half the team that brought down a president) "Thank you but we've already got a script"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:

> }{quote}However, the movie, of course, would have to be organized into specific scenes. Much of the book text could be used in the movie script, but much of the book text would have to be left out, since books are usually longer than screenplays. For example, most average people could not read the entire book in 2 hours and 18 minutes, which is the length of the movie.

You're right, Fred. A huge amount of a book has to be cut out when adapting it to a movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One way to cut book text out in a movie script is to SHOW what might take several pages to describe in a book, such as the way the big Washington Post newsroom looked. I was in that big newsroom in the late 1960s, around '68, and the movie got it just right, on a sound stage I assume, or maybe in some L.A. office building.

 

Also, the quiet walk to the meetings in the dark garage. This might take a page or two to describe each walk, to tell the readers what it looked like and felt like, but in a movie it can be shown in 30 seconds to a minute, with no words, just visuals.

 

A screenwriter needs to understand the timing of this stuff in terms of film making, so I will go with the report that William Goldman wrote most of the movie script or screenplay. Of course, he probably did quote the book whenever the Woodward and Bernstein characters speak in the movie, so we could say that Woodward and Bernstein wrote that part of the movie script, i.e. much of the dialogue. But, still, it takes a movie man to put it all together into a movie screenplay and to say what dialogue to use, and what not to use, and where to put it, and how to stage it and shoot it.

 

They jumped around quite a lot in the movie, which was ok because we saw the two reporters going around to different people's houses and apartments, but in the book that would require some lengthy description of the neighborhoods, areas, room descriptions, character descriptions, etc. But a movie screenwriter would know how to write that into a script and work with the director for the staging. I would imagine the director probably had the screenplay in one hand and the book in his other hand. I get the feeling that the movie conforms very much to the book, but I still say it takes a movie screenwriter to write the script that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I agree, Fred. And Goldman would have been a good choice. As Goldman himself also wrote novels of some length (Boys and Girls Together), his experience with both novels and screenplays would have been very useful. I have no idea of Berstein's knowledge of screenwriting, or Ephron's level of experience at the time to make a determination of his script's usefulness.

 

 

And since all those kids in the history class are 13 years old, I wouldn't call them morons, just tragically naive.

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Sepiatone wrote:}{quote}

> And since all those kids in the history class are 13 years old, I wouldn't call them morons, just tragically naive.

 

Reminds me of this exchange in THE GODFATHER:

 

Michael: My father is no different than any powerful man, any man with power, like a president or senator.

Kay Adams: Do you know how naive you sound, Michael? Presidents and senators don't have men killed.

Michael: Oh. Who's being naive, Kay?

 

 

 

 

 

A lot of people in the 70s couldn't imagine that a president would go to such extremes. It's the way that we were brought up - our leaders were always the good guys in the history books, it's only other countries that have tyrannical leaders.

 

I imagine any generation is going to gauge another by present standards of conveniences in technology. I'm sure that in the roaring 20s, young ones wondered how anything was done prior to the invention of the telephone or the automobile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe great power has always included some measure of bloodshed.

 

The Pirate King in Gilbert and Sullivan's The Pirates of Penzance sings: "Oh, better far to live and die" which includes the lines:

 

"I sink a few more ships, it's true,

Than a well-bred monarch ought to do;

But many a king on a first-class throne,

If he wants to call his crown his own,

Must manage somehow to get through

More dirty work than ever +I+ do"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>My 13 year old nephew told me Saturday that his history teacher showed the movie(in two parts) in class recently. He said the whole class was dumbfounded

 

I just remembered that when I was 12, in junior high school, our Civics teacher taught us about the Teapot Dome scandal of 1922-23, involving President Warren G. Harding.

 

http://media.web.britannica.com/eb-media/26/125926-004-F7B8E7B5.jpg

 

Harding died suddenly in 1923, and the press speculated that he either committed suicide or was poisoned to keep him from talking.

 

And then, of course, there was the Henry Wallace affair when he went from the Roosevelt Administration to being a Soviet Communist supporter in the late 1940s. :)

 

http://images.quickblogcast.com/35238-32833/cartoon.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...