Conference bookie::movies

  The advertising for this film as "America's first loss of innocence" 
  is  also starting to annoy me. Maybe it was the first loss for us 
  "boomers" who were in grade school in the  mid-50's, maybe it was OUR 
  first loss, maye. But, what about "Black Sox" scandal;  Teapot Dome; 
  numerous others that occured in every generatio

  That said, I am looking forward to seeing the film.

  - John

    An excellent film with many parallels with "All the President's Men."
    Robert Redford was involved with both. Enright was played by David
    Paymer who did an excellent job in "Mr. Saturday Night" as Billy
    Crystal's brother. Paul Scofield as Mark Van Doren was wonderful...
    may get him his second Academy Award.
    
    Steve H.

    Well, fear not, Beth, I went to see "Quiz Show" not to witness the loss
    of America's Innocence, but because I, too, have a "thing" for Ralph
    Fiennes.  I have even more of a fondness for him now, but aside from
    all that girly-stuff, "Quiz Show" was a very, very good movie.
    
    I seem to get more verbose in my "reviews" (if you can call what I
    write a review) when I hate a movie, and quite frankly, I really can't
    say much more than Beth did in .0.   "Quiz Show" definitely falls into
    the Drama category of films -- it move at a much slower pace than
    95% of recent movies tend to and there's no sex or violence to keep our
    attention focused on the screen.  There's just drama, and I was pretty
    sucked in, even when Charles Van Doren (Fiennes) wasn't on the screen. 
    
    I don't see "Quiz Show" as the movie that's about "America's Loss of
    Innocence", although I understand the marketing reasons why it seems to
    be pushed as that.  Rather, I saw "Quiz Show" as being about America's
    disillusionment about telelvision ("You mean they fake things?"), but
    only in an indirect sense.  The most intriguing story thread was about
    the son of a famous man trying to do something, and become known for
    it, under his own name, by his own hand, rather than being forever
    known as the son of a famous man and the price of that fame.  That whole 
    thing is summed up when Dick Goodwin's wife says, in the movie, "Well, 
    he's not going to get on time by being Mark Van Doren's son."
    
    It was a great movie.  All the parts were very well cast and acted out. 
    I really liked John Tutorro as the twitchy, revenge-minded Herbie
    Stemple, and natch, I was very much impressed by Ralph Fiennes Charles
    Van Doren.  "Things" aside, Fiennes is a fantastic actor.  I think,
    unless he gets tired of acting or something, he has a long career ahead
    of him.  The weakest point in the acting, and the only part of the
    movie with which I had any complaints was with Rob Morrow's character,
    the attorney Richard Goodwin.  His attempt at a Boston accent sounded
    like somebody pretending to have a Boston accent and the bushy eyebrows
    he adorned for the film what somewhat distracting to me.  But these are
    very minor nits.   Maybe that and sometimes you couldn't quite make out
    what people were saying (i.e., the scene where Dick Goodwin is in his
    office in Washington D.C. --he's on the phone threating to supeona
    somebody and his collegues are making comments about him while he's
    talking.)
    
    I would be very surprised to not see any Oscar nominations/awards come
    out this movie.  It was that good.  Of course, if drama isn't your cup
    of tea, and you don't like slower paced movies (I didn't find "Quiz
    Show" slow paced, but some might), this probably isn't for you, but
    otherwise, try to take it in.  
    
    ***.75 out of ****
    
    kim
    

    RE; 658.2
    
    > Paul Scofield as Mark Van Doren was wonderful...
    > may get him his second Academy Award.
    
    I agree completely.  He lights up the screen every time he's
    in a scene.  (For those of you who haven't seen "A Man for
    All Seasons", that was his Best Actor award;  also Best Picture
    in 1966.)
    
    RE: 658.3
    
    > The weakest point in the acting, and the only part of the
    > movie with which I had any complaints was with Rob Morrow's
    > character, the attorney Richard Goodwin.  His attempt at a Boston
    > accent sounded like somebody pretending to have a Boston accent
    > and the bushy eyebrows he adorned for the film what somewhat
    > distracting to me.  But these are very minor nits.   
    
    Certainly Rob Morrow's acting was the weakest (he was in TOUGH
    company), but the accent and bushy eyebrows were required elements.
    If you meet Richard Goodwin today, you'll see that the eyebrows
    in the movie are quite understated.  Perhaps they were that short
    back in the '50s?
    
    				dick
    

    No, the problem with the accent isn't that a Boston accent is required;
    it's that Morrow (and many, many non-New-Englanders) seems to believe
    that a Kennedy affectation *is* *the* (one and only) Boston accent.
    
    Will see the flick despite this nit,
    Leslie

    At the end there was a summary of what happened to all the main 
    characters later in life. There was a bit about "Jack Barry" and
    someone else going on to create the megahit "The Joker's Wild." Was
    Jack Barry the Geritol kingpin, or the louse who coached the players?
    (or was he the one who went on to work at Penthouse?)

Jack Barry was the host of the show - the one who asked the questions - of both
21 and Tic-Tac-Doe

    RE: .7
    ..and the host of The Joker's Wild. 
    
    Linda

    
    	Joker, Joker, Joker!!
    

    I saw Quiz Show last week in the balcony at the El Capitan in
    Hollywood.  I enjoyed the balcony much more then I did the flick. 
    Certainly there were many wonderful moments/actors/cameos, etc. but it
    d-r-a-g-g-e-d and I really didn't care about the outcome because
    there's no one to route for!  Turturro was famously annoying and I
    loved watching him, but who cared!  Fiennes was beautiful (way too much
    blush) and charming, but who cared!  He completley defused the
    midnight-snack-chocolate-cake-with-my-old-man scene because I didn't
    care!  (Have I said that enough now?  Yes. ;^)  )  I think the movie is
    worth seeing but Morrow is _WAY_ out of his league and, I too noticed
    the accent (or lack of).  There's one scene in his kitchen with his wife 
    and some unexplained male character where he _WAS_ Dr. Fleischman for a
    good two minutes.
    
    But, I'm glad I saw it if only because I love to go on and on about
    these nits 'o mine.
    
    MJ
                    

First seriously good dramatic film I can remember 
seeing this year (unless we count "Red Rock West", 
which is a different sort of film).  It's been a 
pretty light year, so far.

Excellent performances and screenplay, with a few
small exceptions (the aforementioned kitchen scene
didn't work or drive the story foreward).

I thought Rob Morrow was pretty good for his first time
out.  I cared about his character and his dilemma.  I
especially cared about Charlie Van Doren, who made 
this stupid mistake, contrary to every instinct, in 
order to get out of his family's shadow.  And ruined
his life as a result.

Two sparkling performances were Paul Scofield as
Mark Van Doren and the cameo of The Sponsor. 
Scofield is a superb stage actor and has always 
transferred well to the screen.  But he doesn't get 
(or take) nearly enough good film jobs.

The Sponsor.  I recognized him immediately (I won't
spoil the cameo for those who haven't seen the film), 
and was stunned at how very good he was.  In particular,
the scene at the hearing (the last time we see this 
character), and the look he gives Goodwin, was VERY 
subtle, simply brilliant. If he were to give up the 
day job, he could probably earn a decent living as 
an actor.  He has all the right connections :-).

Had to run to a bookstore (too late for the library)
to find the lyrics of "The Ballad of Mac the Knife",
and the tune rattled around in my head for the rest
of the weekend.

dcl 

    I have a question about this movie, probably don't need a 
    SPOILER WARNING:
    
    ...but there it is anyway.
    
    OK, there's this dude from Washington who suspects it's all rigged
    and is watching a film of one of the shows. At the key point of the
    film within the film, a contestant answers "Emily Dickinson" and the
    show's host says "I'm sorry, that's wr-- ...wait a minute! Did you say 
    "Emily Dickinson?" (guy nods). "That's right!!!"
    
    DFW keeps backing up the film and playing it over and over again.
    What did he see? The host doing a double-take? Big deal! What kind
    of evidence is that?
    
      John

    
    Well, presumably, if the host hadn't been explicitly expecting a
    wrong answer, he wouldn't have double-taked.  As it was, it wasn't
    in an of itself a piece of evidence so much as a clue in the puzzle.
    
    Joe

This is a film that I respect more than love. Comparing it to, say, _Forrest
Gump_ it's objectivly a better film. It's much better written, as a whole much
better acted (although Tom Hanks' and Gary Sinise's performances stand up),
and better directed. Despite all this I enjoy seeing _Forrest Gump_ more and
will see it many more times. The difference is that it's much more emotionally
engaging than _Quiz Show_. I cared more about the characters. One of the most
important things in a film for me is how it affects me emotionally. My feelings
for _Quiz Show_ were mostly those of admiration for a job well done. I never
really cared much for any of the films characters.


Randy