Levinson vs. Stanley

I'll state my prejudices up front: Alessandra Stanley, columnist for the New York Times is one of the dimmest and most pretentious culture vultures of our time. That she is usually wrong is not the issue--it's that she often ASTONISHINGLY wrong.

Recently she drubbed director Barry Levinson for his film Poliwood, an indictment of the intersection of politics and entertainment. Just about everybody with eyes, ears and common sense applauded the film. Not Stanley, of course.

Levinson responded to her yesterday in The Huffington Post.

"It may be true that I am overly sensitive to her critical writings ever since reading a review she wrote some time ago about a Walter Cronkite documentary that was part of PBS's American Masters series. I had nothing to do with that project other than to see it and to read her review, which began, "There will never be an anchorman like Walter Cronkite. And thank heaven for that." It was a shocking opening line -- an assessment that I would certainly disagree with -- but nevertheless, she is allowed to express her own opinion. However, the line that really caught my ire for its blatant inaccuracy was what she said about Cronkite informing the nation about the assassination of President John Kennedy: "He informed and consoled the nation with stoic grace. But it's hard to imagine that anyone in that chair at that moment, wouldn't have been just as memorable, simply because he was there."

Anyone in that chair! Anyone? The impression you get from Ms. Stanley is that there was only one network and one person reporting this event back then. Is she suggesting that Walter Cronkite was the only reporter informing us about this assassination? The reality is there were three networks and they were all reporting the event, and Walter Cronkite is the only one we remember. Why do we remember Cronkite as he took off his glasses on that tragic day and reported that the young president had just been assassinated? According to Ms. Stanley, it had nothing to do with Cronkite's unique ability as a newsman or his special ability to connect with an audience. It was because he was the only one there, reporting. To defend her thesis she had to carefully eliminate two networks from history -- and two chairs. Yet this is what Ms. Stanley does: she alters reality to fit her thesis. It is blatantly inaccurate and deceitful. It is a bogus sentence, illogical, and fraudulent. That is not valid criticism, and should have no place in such a respected paper as the New York Times. But it was written, and it was printed."

Ed here: That was Stanley at her snottiest and worst.

Levinson: Now I come back to Poliwood.

Ms. Stanley states, "In politics, the only thing worse than no access, is too much access." She goes on to say, "At its core the film is a screed about everything that was wrong with politics and media during the 2004 election, carried over and misapplied to the 2008 campaign."

For the record, the film essay has nothing to do with the 2008 campaign. That's why there is no footage of the candidates leading up to the conventions, and no footage of them campaigning on the road, leading up to the election. There is also no footage of the candidates stating political positions. No footage of strategy sessions. No discussions with the political operatives of either side. No footage of the fears or anxieties, the second-guessing, and the tiresome campaign trail. I only cover the two conventions and the inauguration merely as the backdrop for the intersection of politics, media, and entertainment as the cameras followed the journey of the Creative Coalition through these events."

Ed here: How Stanley got her job is just as mysterious as how she's managed to keep it.

Joseph Losey; Lester Dent

I've mentioned The Film Noir Foundation before. The estimable Eddie Muller founded it and continues to present noir in all its aspects around the world--and present it in the most intelligent and compelling ways possible. By sending a contribution to the Foundation you'll receive The Noir City Sentinel when it appears. This magazine is the finest ongoing history of noir I've ever seen. Here's how to contact the Foundation. http://www.filmnoirfoundation.org/ (By the way I want to thank Vince Keenan for introducing me to the Foundation.)

Here's the contents page of this issue:

Noir City Sentinel Nov / Dec 2009

IN THIS ISSUE
SPECIALFEATURES
The Energizing Enigma of Joseph Losey
AConversation with Foster Hirsch 4
Don Malcolm
Losey on Losey in Hollywood
Quotes from the Exiled Director 5
ARemake That Works:
The Rarity of Losey’sM 7
Carl Steward
Before They Made Him Run:
Joseph Losey’s Hollywood Noirs 8
The Lawless Don Malcolm
The Prowler Anastasia Lin
The Big Night Robert Ottoson
At the Center of the Storm:
He Ran All the Wayand the Blacklist 10
Jake Hinkson
“First is First and Second is Nobody”
The Philip Yordan Story 12
Alan K. Rode
Noir in Iran 22
Ehsan Khoshbakht
Abraham Polonsky
“The Most Dangerous Man in America” 24
Greg De Cuir
REGULARFEATURES
Noir ... Or Not?
King Creole 1
Will Viharo
ABook Versus Film Comparison
The Sound of Fury 16
Jake Hinkson
Noir’s Unsung Heroes
Art Smith 17
Jake Hinkson
Noir’s Not-So-Nice Guys
Luther Adler 18
Eric Beetner
Radio Noir, Part 3:
Silver Tongued Dicks 19
Anne Hockens
Sirens of the Sentinel
Gale Sondergaard 20
Eddie Muller
Noir Couples
Rita Hayworth and Glenn Ford 28
Vince Keenan
DEPARTMENTS
Letter from the Publisher 2
This Dirty Town 3
J. J. Hunsecker Jr.
Noir City 8 Preview 3
Book Review
Blanketing the Blacklist 21
Don Malcolm and Dan Akira Nishimura
Mr. Modern Noir
Dark Country 26
Will “The Thrill” Viharo

Ed here: There is an excellent Foster Hirsch with the late (and blacklisted) director Joseph Losey. Gail Russell's story has always struck me as particularly sad and obviously Losey had the same impression of her.

"Gail Russell, who didn’t want to be an actress, was
picked up by a talent scout when she was a clerk in a
department store in Beverly Hills, came from a lower
middle-class family. She died of alcoholism because she
was so deathly frightened of acting, but she had in her the
makings of a great star. I had a tragic time with her. I think
she had the most beautiful eyes I have ever seen, the most
moving eyes. And she was immensely sensitive.
She didn’t know anything. Paramount had her under
contract—like a horse. She got a big salary then, and I had
absolute instructions from them not to let her have a drink.
The very first time I shot with her I had a long night-track-
ing shot. It was a half-night, we finished at twelve.
She couldn’t
remember a single line
and it was three or four
pages of important dia-
logue. I wasn’t trained
enough then to say “Well,
we’ll shoot it another
way,” and I kept trying to
get it by coaching her in
her lines, and finally I
said “What’s the matter?”
And she grabbed
me, her hands were icy
cold, she was absolutely
rigid, and she said “Look,
I don’t want to be an actress. I’m not an actress. I can’t act.
I never had a director who gave me a scene this long
before. I can’t do it.”
And I said “Oh yes you can. I’m sure you can, and
you are an actress.”
“No, I’m not, I’ve never kidded myself. I’m not an
actress. I hate it, I’m frightened of it. Get me a drink and
I’ll be alright.”
So I said, “You know, I’ve been told not to get you a
drink?” She said. “Get me a drink!”
I got her a drink and she did the scene.
By this point Macdonald Carey couldn’t remember his
lines. She had absolutely destroyed him. It was a very bad
start for me on that quick picture, to spend the whole night
on one set-up. And I just barely got it..…This started her
drinking and she was drunk throughout the rest of the pic-
ture. That isn’t to say she was bad. I think she was very
good often, but sometimes I had to shoot scenes in
ways to disguise the fact she was drunk. "

--------------------Steve Mertz

Writer Steve Mertz wrote me a thoughtful letter about my Lester Dent profile. I'm running it here because Steve can;t conect with my blog for some reason.

Ed,

Forgive me but I seem unable to post this on your blog comments, due solely to my lack of smarts. So since it's to you, well heck, here it is:


Nice piece on Lester Dent, one of my all-time favorites for all the reasons you cite.

Out of courtesy to the man, I’ve always regarded his work as he did. The Docs can be fun in their juvenile exuberance (especially so with some of the later ones like “Let’s Kill Ames,” which are adapted from his unsold crime novels), and his contribution with that series, providing a template for high adventure that exists today, is significant. But posterity should also regard the work he was proudest of and signed his name to, which is his best work and definitely worthy of the current reassessment it’s receiving. Books like Dead at the Takeoff and Cry at Dusk sparkle with qualities and a voice that is Dent’s alone.

Love your image of him sitting at a typewriter in the telegraph office at the start of his career. Here’s one from the opposite end of that career:

It’s 1956 and Dent sits in his den writing Honey in His Mouth at his farm at La Plata. The pulps have died. His hardcover career has sputtered out. Few seem to want his work. But he’s writing this little masterpiece word-by-word, page-by-page, giving it his best while knowing that it will probably never sell in his lifetime. He was right, and 50+ years later, here we are talking enthusiastically about the “new Lester Dent novel."

The thing is, he knew. He knew that someday, somewhere, even if it was long after he was gone, someone—a whole lot of someones--would be reading that book and he owed them the absolute best he had. I find that inspiring.

--Stephen Mertz

Lester, we hardly knew ye

Over on Davey Crockett's Almanac http://davycrockettsalmanack.blogspot.com/ writer Evan Lewis reviews the Lester Dent novel Dead At The Take-Off, which I immediately ordered on Abe.

Dent's always fascinated me. He wrote something like eighty Doc Savage novels and maybe forty Avenger novels plus numerous other pulp stories all the while wanting to be taken more seriously by his peers. He seemed to be on his way with his story Anglefish, which is still frequently reprinted. That was his Black Mask story and he was convinced that editor Joseph "Cap" Shaw was going to teach him how to be a better writer. Then Shaw left Black Mask and Dent's dreams went with him.

I didn't pay much attention to Dent's crime novels until Hardcase published Honey In His Mouth, a book you really have to read. As I mentioned to Charles Ardai "This is the damnedest book I've ever read."And I'm not exaggerating. The protagonist is the worst person in the book, a sociopathic con man who is presented with cunning and real wit. But the book is filled with sociopathic con artists. And the plot, so wild it threatens to careen out of control every few chapters, is resolved with breathtaking skill. Dent was a real writer, a sly, very modern, very intelligent wordsmith.

I always picture him working nights in that little telegraph office in small town Missouri back before he got invited by Street and Smith to come to NYC. Reading all those pulps and knowing he could do a lot better.

BTW I'm sure pulp experts will correct some of my half-facts here.