These are not just two-hour documentaries, they’re four to eight hour series.
The big question is: Do they need to be that long and extensive?
I gave up on Playboy and Cosby because it was very clear that I wasn’t going to learn anything new. Cos and Hef were sleaze bags of epic proportions and all I needed was one or two examples and not seventeen. Cosby promoted education and consoled a grieving mother who had just lost a young child by drugging and having his way with her. I need more examples than that?
Hef had cameras in every room in the Mansion and used the footage to blackmail the girls into sexual servitude. He also promoted diversity on his TV show. Are we supposed to give him some latitude because of that? Fuck no! The man was a predator who ruined lives. I need to see eight hours of that?
The Tommy and Pamela docuseries I’m not even going to begin. The only thing I would want to see is the tape itself and that’s the only thing they won’t show.
Likewise the Woody Allen expose a few years ago. I needed a shower just watching the trailer.
The granddaddy of them all was the Michael Jackson takedown. But there was so much bonkers weirdness there it kept my attention. Especially living walking distance to his Westwood condo where mondo bizarre shit was happening as I was getting in my 10,000 steps.
But did it do any good? There's a Michael Jackson musical opening on Broadway ignoring everything but the moonwalk. So... no.
Look, they make these shows because they get ratings. But I wonder how many people really get off on them and stay till the end and how many, like me, reach a point early on where they say, “Why the hell am I watching this dreck?” I guess we’ll know in the next round of sleaze exposes. Will Harvey Weinstein’s and Matt Lauer’s be three hour docuseries or fifteen? Stay tuned.
50 comments :
We still watch CHEERS even though Ted Danson decided to don blackface and Kirstie Alley is a Scientologist...
Yeah! -
Enough with the tawdry sensationalism!
Bring back those real multi hour documentaries that NBC used to air on on how to hire an Apprentice manager for a hugely successful New York company.
Ken, the Pam and Tommy series isn't a documentary, it's a drama and so far it's very good. Lily James steals the show as Anderson. Her performance is phenomenal. On the downside, there's Seth Rogen.
And there's no shortage of nudity.
I thought this angle from Lily James was a bold move.
https://www.nme.com/en_au/news/tv/lily-james-says-were-all-complicit-in-pamela-anderson-mistreatment-3153471
She says "we're all complicit" in the treatment of Pamela Anderson. Whilst I don't disagree with the sentiment, taking money to perform in a multi-hour biopic about one of the most sensationalist periods of PA's life is surely putting the boot in.
The BBC already did a very good documentary on Weinstein. It's called Untouchable and is just 90 minutes.
Sex sells!
Well, have to say I was surprised when Tommy Lee's dick talked.
N. Zakharenko,
Wow, you really did your best to shoehorn that Trump comment into Ken's post discussion. I'm impressed.
Not suggesting a return to blackface humor, but while the routine was certainly well past the boundaries of good taste (the routine was published in Spy Magazine) and one person (including myself) should not be deemed a spokesperson for one's ethnicity...
1. It was done at the Friar's Club event, which is known for raunchy humor.
2. Danson was dating Whoopi Goldberg at the time and she CO-WROTE the material, in a (probably poorly-thought out) response to the uproar about an interracial romance.
https://isitfunnyoroffensive.com/the-roast-of-whoopi-goldberg-a-look-back-at-ted-dansons-blackface-performance/
Neither Danson's nor Alley's endeavors have resulted directly in court cases regarding sexual abuse.
These documentaries are like spam e-mails. Many folks dislike them, but people respond.
Sigh.
I gave up on Playboy and Cosby because it was very clear that I wasn’t going to learn anything new
I feel the same way, and I think that's pretty much where we collectively are as a culture. At a certain point, there just isn't anything new to say or think about in media.
Entertainment can be enlightening, for sure, but a lot of what passes for journalism is just the same damn story every time, and doesn't bother to go any deeper out of sheer laziness and complacency.
We're stuck in a rut right now. I hope there is something new on the horizon.
“I gave up on Playboy and Cosby because it was very clear that I wasn’t going to learn anything new”
Totally agree and that’s how I feel about almost any made for TV movie.
I already know what happened.
Why would I watch a cheap remake of what I already know happened?
Ere I Saw Elba,
'journalism doesn't bother to go any deeper out of sheer laziness and complacency."
Or because they've done the due dillegence and have all the facts. I doubt 10 hours of any subject is done by being lazy and complacent. In his own post Mr. Levine said one or two examples is enough.
J.W. Booth:
I have never doubted that journalists do their due diligence, or know the facts. What I am saying is that the reporting tends not to come to any real conclusions, which is a disservice to the public.
It's easy to expound on all the obvious things that are wrong in politics and society, it is another matter to get to some progressive ideas of how to change these problems.
Well, I guess we should be relieved no producer is doing the same to a certain former president (who could possibly be re-elected in the near future)...
The best documentaries are interesting, entertaining, and enlightening, but not browbeating. Oh, and it helps if "at the end of the day" isn't uttered by each and every interview subject, if not multiple times by the same person. That's what made WWE's documentary on Triple H such a let down, but I digress.
Back when Jason Whitlock was at Outkick and my Netflix subscription was active, he recommended a documentary called The Social Dilemma. I quit with about half an hour left. I get it: social media is inherently evil, everything we post is used by evil people to advance evil causes, and it tears us apart politically. I could have stomached that alone, but it didn't need the wraparound dramatization. Now, Bathtubs Over Broadway, there's a documentary I can get behind. And I'm not just saying that to plug the latest episode of Hollywood & Levine. Steve Young's doc got me through one Thursday afternoon a few years ago.
Capt. Obvious brought up Kirstie Alley's belief in Scientology. As long as a believer of anything doesn't browbeat or proselytize, I have no problem with them. So, I'm able to enjoy the work of Jim Meskimen (son of Marion Ross), Nancy Cartwright, and Chick Corea even though they're Scientologists. I just haven't had the courage to buy Chick's Elektric Band album To the Stars, having been inspired by L. Ron Hubbard's book of the same name.
Mike Chimeri:
The same applies to the lovely Jenna Elfman, whom Ken has always spoken well of.
Ken and anyone else who wants to answer...
What's going on with Bruce Willis? In the last few years, he's done about two dozen cheap shit straight to dvd movies where his face and name is plastered all over the poster but he only appears in a few scenes. I made the mistake of watching one of them and it was garbage.
The guy isn't exactly short of dough, so why is he doing all these crappy movies? I've just read the Razzie nominations and they've created a category just for him for the worst Bruce Willis performance of 2021. These are the movies he churned out last year:
American Siege
Apex
Cosmic Sin
Deadlock
Fortress
Midnight in the Switchgrass
Out of Death
Survive the Game
He's joined the ranks of Steven Seagal, but Willis is actually a good actor when he makes the effort. Why is he degrading himself by doing all this junk? They're low budget, so it's not even like he's collecting a fat paycheck.
He's gone from being a legit movie star to appearing in cheap ass crap with Megan Fox.
I forgot she was a Scientologist, too. Thanks for reminding me, Vincent. Incidentally, I was a regular viewer of the A&E series Scientology and the Aftermath, hosted by ex-members Leah Remini and Mike Rinder, but grew tired of it after a while.
@BrianPhillips - A poorly thought out response from Whoopi Goldberg on race? What are the odds?
To Mike Chimeri: If you're hesitant to buy Chick Corea's music inspired by L. Ron Hubbard, I assume you've also steered clear of "Mission Earth," the Edgar Winter album that's based on a series of his books and supposedly has lyrics and brilliant musical input by Hubbard himself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Earth_(album)
The vlogger Todd In The Shadows did an amusing analysis of it on YouTube.
Also, I haven't seen any of these "documentaries," but I've heard the Woody Allen one was an extremely one-sided hatchet job.
(BTW, somehow when writing about Scientology, I feel that I haven't done enough to prove I'm not really a robot.)
Sebastian Stan seems to have become the de facto casting choice for “trashy boyfriend of tabloid 90s female”.
As for the length of these things, I am reminded of when I got my first cholesterol test. The doctor had never seen a total in the four digits before. But seriously, folks, the HMO said I should sign up for a six-hour series of classes on how to improve my cholesterol level. I thought, I'm going to listen to them repeat for six hours, "Exercise and eat salad"?
By the way, it's almost completely genetic. I take a pill. My levels are normal. I didn't waste six hours. And I exercise and eat salad more than I used to.
I knew what happened to the Titanic, but watched the movie anyway. It's not the destination, but the journey....
but if the journey is through mud, muck, garbage, no need. Buy the postcard
I didn't even know about that, Pat, but I will steer clear of it. I'm partial to instrumental music, anyway, so the only Edgar Winter song that interests me is "Frankenstein," which I have been meaning to play on my WCWP radio show, Instrumental Invasion, but haven't yet.
I started Tommy and Pamela mostly because I worked with Sebastian Stan -who is a nice guy- and I wanted to see him. Boy did I see HIM. I didn't even get thru half of the first episode. Who needs to know that stuff?
@Mike Chimeri - You might like this. It is instrumental.
https://youtu.be/dPWutEsFF54
As a showbiz "outsider" and a Gen-Xer that grew up on Cosby, I found the Showtime 4-parter mesmerizing. It was like a deconstruction of one of my childhood heroes. I can see some disliking the program's length, but I think it will stand as THE definitive account of who he was in our eyes and what he became.
Ere I Saw Elba,
What are your conclusions and progressive ideas?
Darwin's Ghost,
You know your question is really good. I can't answer it but I often wondered what it would be like to sit at a table reading for something like Gilligan's Island where you know its shit and you know everybody else knows its crap. Does anybody say anything? When you get to the part in the script where a guy in a really bad ape costume is dropping coconuts on the Skipper's head, what is Alan Hale Jr. thinking? I going to guess that maybe the actors and writers just thought the show was for 12 year olds and so it didn't have to be Shakespere.
That was nice, Max. Thank you. Jazz fusion is my favorite.
If you want to watch a good documentary, watch the One and Only. It is about Dick Gregory. You might need the Showtime ap or Showtime any Time to watch on your lap top. The movie came out in July. I had it on my DVR since then and finally watched this weekend. It was very good.
To play devil's advocate, I've heard of Playboy models saying that Hefner never laid a hand on them and never mistreated them, and think that the documentary was from someone who held a grudge. Was the A&E documentary like their old "Biography" series, or was it closer to the old "E! True Hollywood Story" sensationalism?
I won't see the Cosby one as I don't get Showtime, but I would love to see something on the legal reasons why he got out of jail. How the heck did the prosecution screw that up?
As for documentaries, "The Civil War" set the bar way too high. I'm a lot more discriminating on documentary movies or series, and I absolutely hate true crime.
There have been other far more hackneyed sitcoms than Gilligan's Island, which I found hilarious back in '66. No need to sully the good name of Alan Hale, Jr. He was a damned good actor.
The big question is: Do they need to be that long and extensive?
I feel this every time my fiancee watches a murder mystery on 20/20 or Dateline. Look...I'm not stupid, I know it's all about ratings. I also know Friday nights are a wasteland for TV. But it really shouldn't take two hours to tell me how some attractive college student met her unfortunate demise. She disappeared without a trace, you pinged her phone, the boyfriend got caught in his own lie and confessed. The end.
A few years ago, ABC had a show called In An Instant, where they reenacted real-life disasters interspersed with actual victim commentary. The title was very ironic when you realized it took forever to tell the damn story.
For some reason, networks think we as viewers are idiots and need everything spelled out for us in great detail.
Hey, now, I still stand with Michael Jackson. I don't really trust a person who keeps changing their story every five seconds. Let's face it that mess of a documentary back in 2019 was just an opportunistic endeavor and that's why there was a lot of backlash from most of Michael's fans, especially us in the Black community. There was no proof of anything just more hearsay from the original trial that proved Mike innocent. Until there is actual, definitive proof of anything I still fucks with Mike.
I half-watched Pam and Tommy. There is clearly a place in my life for trashy tv. It had a more horrible ending than The RIcardos. It just stopped! it was like, we are out of time, money and material - the End.
Maxderyn,
How old were you back in '66? Please come back and tell how, exactly, I sullied Alan Hale Jr.? I didn't say he was a bad actor. And if he was a great actor, like you said, he would have known he was in a bad sitcom.
J.W. Booth:
In the interest of not taking up more of Ken's space in his blog comments, I'll simply leave it at that I don't know the answers that journalists should be getting to right now, only that it's frustratingly unsatisfying.
To Liggie: I have to write about the news for a living, so I was forced to follow the Cosby trial. The reason Cosby got out was prosecutorial misconduct. He agreed to give up his Fifth Amendment protections to testify in a civil suit against him in exchange for a deal with the DA that he would not face prosecution for what he said (and I'm not sure, but I believe that it would also be kept confidential.) He testified that he did share drugs (Quaaludes) with his accuser before sex, but claimed the drugs and sex were consensual.
A new DA came along and used that testimony to prosecute Cosby. Many people claimed he confessed to the drugging and rape charge, which wasn't accurate (he might be guilty, but he didn't confess to that.) The appeals court ruled that his immunity deal couldn't be negated just because a new DA took over. The office was bound to abide by all prior agreements. If I recall correctly, the prosecutor had made nailing Cosby a major political issue and the statute of limitations left only that case to do it with, so he had to prosecute him for that or forget the whole thing.
I know it seems unfair to Cosby's accusers, but the court was correct: if you let DA's trample people's Fifth Amendment rights by making immunity deals in exchange for testifying and then use their testimony to prosecute them anyway, nobody would ever cooperate again.
not to mention the Rudy Guiliani debacle.
JS
You do realize that was the first of eight episodes?
Kendall Rivers
Luckily, Michael Jackson can no longer fucks with boys.
I never paid attention to the Tommy Lee and Pamela "scandal." I couldn't care less about them, and I have no interest in this series. However, I'm disappointed that Lily James is involved. She's the only person who parlayed "Downton Abbey" into any sort of notable acting career, and has shown herself to be a talented, versatile actress in a variety of roles. I realize actors often take on unusual roles just for the challenge, but trash like this is beneath her in my humble opinion. Just my $.02.
Hey Joe - I was six years old in 1966. I apologize for my unfortunate use of the word "sully" in my post. Have a nice day.
@Darwin's Ghost
Ooh, nice bait to troll me but i'm not biting. Sorry :)
Kendall
I wasn't trying to bait you. You're entitled to your opinion. What I said is just a simple fact.
Here's some interesting trivia. Some years back, Home Alone director Chris Colombus revealed that Michael Jackson tried to get in touch with Daniel Radcliffe when they were shooting the first Harry Potter film but Colombus blocked him from making contact. Colombus was diplomatic, saying he wanted Radcliffe to focus on the film. But we all know why he blocked Jackson.
Isn't that interesting? Michael Jackson, then aged 42, wanted to make contact with an 11 year old boy he didn't know. Yeah, that's totally not creepy and inappropriate.
As Leaving Neverland showed, Jackson had a habit of befriending young boys, abusing them for a few years and discarding them once they were too old for him. It's quite clear that Radcliffe was his new target for grooming. Colombus basically saved him from becoming Jackson's next victim.
You're of course free to believe there's nothing suspicious about a grown man sleeping with other people's kids and paying out over $30 million in settlements.
Hee hee.
QUESTION: Ken, did you watch the Tina Turner documentary on HBO? It (and she) are groundbreaking (and not sleazy, it does tell a portrait of strength, power, and true talent - all through and from adversity. I would love to hear your thoughts!
Actually, I'm finding the Hefner series fascinating. As for telling us what we did not know, I had no idea that Don Cornelius was a monster who kidnapped two Playboy bunnies, kept them prisoner, tied up in separate rooms for a few days while he sodomized them with wooden objects. Made me feel a lot better about his suicide.
Like many gay men who were never captured by Hefner's Disneyland-For-Straight-Men fantasy in the first place, it's allowing me to point fingers at straight guys and say, "THEY dared to call US 'Perverts'?"
Because it's mostly all new to me. I'm not intimately familiar with Hefner's life. More than half the scandals it has described so far are about people I never heard of before. So-and-so's suicide may have made headlines, but not ones I read at the time.
What's truly appalling to me is a friend of mine, who often comments here, who is calling it a "Hatchet job" and claiming it's all lies, which it clearly is not. He's taking the position that, as he was at the Mansion many times, and he never saw any crimes (Or what read as crimes to him. Making women dye their hair, and have plastic surgery to more closely correspond to one rich pervert's fantasy appalls me, but not, it appears, him), and so therefore, none of it ever happened. He thinks the face Hef showed him was Hef's only face. He never glanced in Hef's nightstand drug drawer, so for him, it didn't exist. He's taking the usual party line, "Oh Holly [insert name of whichever bunny is telling the truth at the moment] needs some money, so she's making these lies up." Victim-blaming is inevitable when your own sexual fantasies are wrapped up in Hef's sick dream. If you're defending the bad guy you have no choice but to throw mud at the victims.
Watching the episode on the bunnies at the clubs, I was taken by the fact that the girls were weighed daily and punished if they were even a couple ounces over the weight limit. How many times did the customers complain "I can't get drinks from this fat cow. She four ounces overweight!"? More likely the complaints were, "She won't let me slap her ass while she serves our drinks, the bitch!"
I happened to rewatch Hitchcock's Vertigo last week, after seeing the first three episodes of Secrets of Playboy, and suddenly, the movie's third act became about Hefner. Jimmy Stewart, unable to appreciate Kim Novak in his arms when she had brown hair, saying, "About your hair..." instead of "I love you." The obsessive regrooming of Kim's character, the clothes, the shoes, the hair, the walk, the voice, the everything, it was all Hefner, creating his fantasy of entering rooms with six women, three for each arm, all with identical faces, hair, clothes, figures (to the inch!). The only reason Jimmy Stewart skips the plastic surgery is because Kim already had Kim's face and figure.
When Kim's character in essence pleads and pleads, "If I let you change me, will you love me?", she is all those runaways with daddy issues (Kim's character turns out to be a runaway, moving across the country to get away from step-daddy's roaming fingers) who came west and were found by predators who can sniff out insecure girls with Daddy Issues. The hotter ones went to Hef, the crazier ones went to Manson. The Manson-Hefner parallels are amazing, and that Hef became obsessed by Manson is hardly surprising. (Kim Novak's character essentially says, "If I let you turn me into someone else, then will you love ME?" She does not see that that is doomed from the start.)
Hey Darwin's Ghost - you are right. There are more Pam and Tommy episodes to come! Well, of course I'm watching.
I disagree re Cosby. I was a big Cosby fan (although we later learned that his behavior was certainly deplorable) and I knew a lot about Cosby. Yet, there were still many things I learned about him in watching the Kamau Bell docu-series. It's interesting, and I would recommend it.
Post a Comment