Documentary HOF Part 2

Well that's nice and all but I don't have the Criterion channel. Now I tried downloading it off Pirate Bay but it's not moving.


So what are we going to do about this.

I checked all the url's I could find by googling the name of the film (copy/pasted to avoid typos) and the domain name in their own quotations. Nothing came up except a bunch of "untitled" links with gibberish in the cache.

I have a link for Place de La Republique (1974). I have a link for an English subtitle file which you'll need unless you speak French. I will message both links to both of you.

FILE? I don't do downloads, even subtitles. I just got this computer and I'm not risking it. Plus, that Archive link is the reason I asked.

Oh well, that's what happens if you're stuck using Windows on a computer, not that Internet Archive is dangerous it's a legit site. But I guess you're own your own. Siddon should be able to use that link, I mean he was willing to use Pirate Bay and I never touch that site.

We should have a rule about looking for movies with English links. No offense to Raul and I thank him for hosting, but this has been an obstacle before: Takoma's original nom in the first Hall of Infamy, albeit the issue was slightly different (we couldn't find the movie at all). But now it boils down to even greater computer risks. Watching a movie on a suspicious website on your phone is one thing since those kinds of viruses rarely affect phones, but downloads are worse and will definitely harm it.

I understand, I was just trying to help...I'm not even a part of this HoF.

It's not your "fault." I just can't take the risks.

If Matt is good with it we can do a replacement nom if it's a hastle.

Tried the CR thing and it didn't work so yeah I think Matt needs to pick something different

Funny how this one is streaming and causing an uproar, when I get annoyed when things aren’t on a streaming service because I hate all the “free” links that have nothing but garbage pop ups. Don’t ever recall anyone switching a nom for me. Anyway, I will hold off on watching that one. On with Mr Death:


This took a left turn I definitely wasn’t expecting. I won’t spoil it for anyone who doesn’t know what to expect. I will say that I already thought Leuchter was off his rocker before the left turn came. He talks about death in a very blasé way. Still, didn’t expect all that. Very interesting doc, and I was pleased to see another Morris flick.

__________________
Letterboxd

This review contains massive spoilers!

Like many of the great documentaries, Capturing the Friedmans was the result of an incredible tale being unearthed while documentarians are pursuing something completely ordinary. Jules Naudet, Gédéon Naudet and James Hanlon were making a film about a novice fireman when 9/11 happened. The Staircase seemed like any other true crime documentary for Jean-Xavier de Lestrade until sensational revelations were unearthed. For Andrew Jarecki, it was a film about children's birthday entertainers which led him to New York clown Silly Billy - David Friedman, who sat down one day and bemoaned the state of his family. He had a brother and father in prison, both having pled guilty to child sexual abuse - but it was the way this all unfolded and the dysfunction on the part of all parties involved which made for one of the most sensational documentaries I've ever seen. Nobody escapes condemnation in Capturing the Friedmans, and Jarecki had the great fortune of happening on a family who were obsessed with video cameras and documenting their lives.

One thing can be easily summed up : Patriarch Arnold Friedman invited disaster upon his family because of his paedophilia, and the fact that he regularly bought pornographic material which depicted underage boys having sex. If he hadn't of been doing that, then none of this would have happened. There are some uncomfortably candid moments in this film. One describes an admission from Arnold that he once had sexual contact with his 8-year-old brother, and that he was exposed to sex from a very young age due to the fact that his mother had to share a bedroom with the kids, and brought guys home at night. He was obviously a very damaged individual, and from what he reveals, along with his wife Elaine, it doesn't seem that he was all that interested in women once he'd grown into a man. Elaine describes sex with Arnold as mechanical, and lacking in passion. Arnold did admit to molesting children in the past, and considering the fact that his paedophilia is very much confirmed it was probably for the best that he was behind bars.

Worryingly, Arnold conducted computer classes which specifically involved children. Once the police had discovered his pornography, their next step was to ascertain whether or not this man had ever abused any of the kids in his care at that time. What happened next was bizarre - incredible revelations from police interviews which confirmed that not only Arnold, but also his son Jesse, then a young man, had sodomized and brutalized multiple children during these classes. Jesse was described as a tormentor and monster, almost animalistic in the way he ranted, shouted, abused and demonically harangued kids. By this stage all of the boys in the computer class would be naked, tortured and brutally sodomized - sometimes forced to participate in strange games and raped. They'd supposedly be bleeding, wounded and mistreated - but it's hard to wrap your head around the fact that by the time their parents would come and pick them up, everything would seem normal. The kids happy and fine. Not only that, but the way Jesse had been described - loud, angry, abusive and abnormal - was nothing like the Jesse that everybody had known all their lives.

For all we know, some of these kids may have been molested by Arnold at these computer lessons - but the facts are long gone, and what we're left with are all of the statements these kids have made. They're not to blame for them - the police squeezed these bizarre allegations from them. It would start when a couple of detectives would inform the parents that their kid had been abused sexually at Arnold's class, before the child involved had even been questioned. The next step was the interview with the child, and the interview wouldn't end until the child had confessed to being abused - and in a torturous way where any child would be desperate to tell the investigator what he or she wanted to hear just to make them go away. These are some of the statements from those who were questioned :

"...someone else put those words in my mouth.”
"The police repeatedly told me that they knew something had happened, and they would not leave until I told them."
"I remember other parents of students who were allegedly abused telling my parents that my brother and I were in denial and pressuring them to give us therapy or hypnosis."
“What I do remember is the detectives putting on me a lot of pressure to speak up. And at some point, I kind of broke down, I started crying. And when I started to tell them things, I was telling myself that it’s not true. Like I was telling myself just say this to them in order to get them off your back.”
"I remember saying that not because it was true, but instead because I thought it would get them off my back.”
"They were operating as if everyone had been molested, abused.”
"...remember the police being aggressive and scary."
“I was very insistent that nothing ever happened to me. And that never seemed to be good enough as a response."

And on and on. Nearly 50 people have testified as to having been forced to invent stories, go along with what the police were telling them, and being pressured into admitting they were abused. To admit to this biased interview technique isn't unquestioningly demanding that we see Jesse and Arnold as innocent, it's only pointing out the fact that the police investigation was so hopelessly flawed as to be completely unreliable. They believed all these kids had been abused, and they believed they were just making them admit it - even if it took time and great effort to do so. They weren't acting in bad faith, but the way they investigated this matter is almost a textbook case as to how not to question children. If something ever did happen in those classrooms, it would be hard to ascertain now. But this wasn't the only thing wrong about the justice system in this case - once matters got to the courts it became even more one-sided and unfair.

Arnold Friedman pled guilty to all the counts of abuse and sodomy against him - true or not. He did so in the hope that it would help his son, who was facing the same charges. When faced with something like this, prosecutors will offer "deals" to the accused. Go along with the deal and you'll get favourable treatment - but plead not guilty and take it to trial, and there's a chance you'll spend the rest of your life in prison. To help convince Jesse to plead guilty as well, those prosecuting piled nearly 100 serious charges up against him, and suggested that if forced to test his innocence, he might well be locked away for the rest of his life. As an alternative, he could plead guilty and be assured of probably being jailed for less than 10 years. These deals, where defendants are often forced to risk it all if they don't give in, are something that has the feel of going against fairness and truth. Once Jesse had pled guilty (to something he still insisted he had never done) he was paraded around as a child rapist, attacked by angry parents and admonished by a judge who sentenced him to six to eighteen years in prison. If he has molested or sodomized children, which he may have, the authorities have done a wonderful job of giving him a claim to innocence.

One of the great things about this feature is the way we get an inside look into how the Friedman family were operating at this time, through home video footage. The fights, and the strange attitude the guys in the family had, to the point of performing - whether it be improvised comedy skits, music, or happy interludes in the midst of this horrible case and the fact two of them were going to prison. Elaine and David Friedman were on bad terms, with the latter constantly calling her out, arguing with her, demanding she give her unquestioning support to Arnold, and always nagging or belittling her. Elaine had found out about her husband's paedophilia, and his magazines - so I think it understandable that her attitude was "who is this man I married?" I'm not sure if she knew earlier, but if she did she may have been in denial. The proclivity the gang had for performing made those prosecuting the case uncomfortable and hostile. For example, the day Jesse was to be sentenced, he stood outside the court dancing around and performing Monty Python sketches - both unusual, and not displaying the remorse expected of him. They are simply a very strange family, and make for an interesting film.

Arnold ended up committing suicide in prison, distraught over what his paedophilia had done to his family. That did mean, however, that Jesse received $250,000 from his life insurance policy - which covered suicide at that time. Jesse ended up serving 13 years in prison, and although he's constantly tried to prove his innocence investigators still insist he was guilty of abusing those children. Elaine remarried, and seems much happier. David still seems to have a chip on his shoulder, but that's understandable. It's all summed up in expert fashion by Andrew Jarecki, who has a certain skill when it comes time to reveal facts, interviews, video footage and what music he adds to the film. It's riveting stuff, with one jaw-dropping revelation after another - but in some quarters his film is judged harshly by those who believe that Arnold and Jesse are guilty of the worst kind of crimes imaginable. Arnold comes out a very dark, damaged figure in the movie, and the family as a clan that's not quite right. The police and the justice system also come out looking quite bad - as does the suburban upper-middle class part of America where the Friedmans existed for so long with their unquestioning peers.

I've seen Capturing the Friedmans three times, and I'm still rocked by what the documentary reveals about the inner secrets at the heart of this family unit, their persecution, and ultimate destruction. I wish Elaine all the best with her life, and she's the only person in the film to whom I can comfortably say that.

__________________

If you haven't seen it yet, I'd suggest watching Capturing the Friedmans before reading the review.

This review contains spoilers

A good documentary really benefits from having a great villain and hero, and one of the funniest aspects of The King of Kong is the fact that Arcade Champion Billy Mitchell didn't realise how well he was fitting the archetype of the nefarious bad guy. Mitchell's claim to fame came from arguably being the best classic arcade video game player around in the 1980s - holding various all-time records on games such as Pac-Man and Donkey Kong. It was the kind of limited fame that went on to define him, considering how young he was when he attained it. Though it's now impossible to tell how much of a narcissist he would have been without being the best at these games, he's now also the champ of self-love. He dresses like the villain in a comedy would, and almost everything he says is laced with self-congratulation and flattery. In the meantime, this documentary sets his challenger, Steve Wiebe, up as a working class, down on his luck, regular Joe - out of work and for some reason playing Donkey Kong all day instead of looking for a job, though the film does show him teaching later in the film, and he's apparently now a maths teacher at Redmond High School, Washington, according to his Wikipedia page.

In The King of Kong we watch as Steve Wiebe becomes obsessed with becoming an expert at playing Donkey Kong, eventually recording himself beating the all-time World Record that had been held for years by Billy Mitchell. Unfortunately for Wiebe, he'd relied on a fellow called Roy Shildt for help getting there, and even though the mechanics of the Donkey Kong circuitry looked okay, Shildt had such an untrustworthy reputation that Wiebe's record run wasn't accepted by Twin Galaxies and self-appointed grand referee in such matters, Walter Day. So, Steve Wiebe was encouraged to come down to a Twin Galaxies tournament in person to see if he could break the record in person, whereupon it would be guaranteed to be accepted. Wiebe did this, and in a friendly spirit of competition he invited Mitchell to come and contest the matter in the flesh. Wiebe travels to Funspot in Laconia, New Hampshire, and breaks the record in person to much fanfare. It's then revealed that Mitchell, who was a conspicuous no-show, has sent a video recording of his own, which appears to show him passing the much whispered about million mark, thereby passing and overshadowing Wiebe's new score - but the video shows signs of not being authentic. In a cruel and ironic twist, Mitchell's video, unlike Wiebe's, is accepted. Throughout the rest of the film, Mitchell will constantly avoid Wiebe as if he has something to hide.

To those who have seen the film but not the special features on the DVD, there's further controversy. There, we get to see Mitchell's video and the little giveaways that prove beyond any doubt that his effort was on an emulator, which is against the rules of competition - and if that isn't enough, photographic evidence of the circuitry he'd been using gives further credence to the fact that he wasn't on the level. It comes as music to our ears that all of Mitchell's high scores were disqualified - and I'd love to have been there when he recieved the news. Wiebe held the record for some time, but in the years since, the record has hopped around from person to person. For comparison's sake, Mitchell's long-held record was 874,300 points which was soon pushed up into the 900,000s by Wiebe and then past the million mark when the Mitchell controversy and other contenders entered the fray. I have an emulation machine set out in arcade configuration, so despite never having played Donkey Kong before I gave it a shot. After 20 minutes or so, I'd managed to set a record for myself of a nice and even 14,000 points. It's a damn hard game, but I'm itching to get back to it to gain some proficiency and push that score up to 6 figures.

I like gaming, so of course a film like The King of Kong is pretty interesting to me. I lived through the revolution which started with Pong, and then the breakthrough that was Space Invaders - a much more complex use of electronics to perform the function of making a game. Then of course the craze got underway with the likes of Donkey Kong, Pac-Man, Frogger, Galaga and all of those classic titles that we'd pay to play - or else watch those who had become more skillful than ourselves to cheer them on. I can't admit to being particularly good at it, despite loving it. My hand-eye coordination and general inability to multi-task and react quickly enough means I'll usually embarrass myself if someone is watching me. I do get addicted fairly easily though, and although I only meant to try playing Donkey Kong a couple of times, I must have had at least a dozen goes before I gave up, satisfied with at least getting past the first couple of stages. I don't really like how the competitors use little glitches - something that's allowable, as anything goes as long as it's the original hardware, but still cheating a little in my eyes.

Overall, a very successful film when it came out and it's lived on as far as documentary filmmaking is concerned - this must be the most well-known one concerning this subject, and I'd like to see more and know more about these people who still play the classic games and compete to be the best. There's no chance I'll ever be one, unless I pick a game nobody else really likes to play as much, and claim that as my stomping ground. There are many out there, so perhaps you'll see a film with me in called The King of Elevator Action one day - that's one I particularly like (and no, you won't see that movie, because even though I love the game I'm no good at it and can't get past the 2nd level.) Anyway, someone is probably so good at Elevator Action that they've got so far into it they've broken the game. I'm destined to simply sit back and watch these people in awe.

Capturing the Friedmans -

This documentary successfully explores the elusiveness of the truth. It's fascinating that director Jarecki had more than the typical documentary filmmaker could dream of while making a movie like this at his disposal: hours of camcorder footage of the Friedmans, police commentary, "victim" commentary, shoeboxes full of photographs, you name it, and even he's not sure what actually happened. I've seen movies both fictional and non-fictional that pit conflicting stories against each other, and there is something special about the way this one does it and not just because of the grisly subject matter. Two that stand out involve Jesse, those being his and his lawyer's conflicting accounts of whether his father, Howard, abused him, and the more light-hearted but no less meaningful one of the cop's reaction to Jesse acting out a Monty Python routine on the courthouse steps. Was he really making light of the case, or is there a possibility that he just wanted to share a joyful moment with his brothers before he was shipped away?

Even if its exploration of truth is not interesting to you - and quite frankly, I don't know how it couldn't be - the movie is equally thought-provoking as a study of how one slip-up can collapse an entire institution. I've often thought about how little it would take for me to lose something vitally important in my life, and while it was a long time coming for the Friedmans, the way it shows how a certain magazine did the deed provides a classic example. I also like how the movie shows how external factors, i.e. ones outside of the family, make such collapses even more devastating. For instance, having lived in a fair share of suburbs in my life, I know how seriously their founders and/or long-term residents value their traditions and reputation, and it's apparent that this doubly applies for ones as posh and tightly knit as Great Neck. In sum, besides sadness, this movie left me with feelings of confusion, frustration and not knowing who or what to believe. I can't be alone in thinking that this not a preferred way to feel after watching something, but in this case, it's an endorsement.

Any word on Matt's replacement?

We are still working through it. I have PM'ed him and we will work out the kinks, whether that be getting something accessible for the current nom or replacing it.

By the Way, Woody Allen is Innocent



I have a few beefs with this. The first being that I can't even log this on letterboxd. Anything I watch should be loggable in my opinion. Putting selfishness aside, I also thought the documentary was pretty poorly constructed. It seemed to just go and bash others rather than try to evade us of what happened with the whole Woody situation. And while I think after watching this I tend to think some of the Farrows are pretty misleading, it's obvious that I can't proof it one way or another. Like the narrator said, I like Woody Allen movies and I like Mia Farrow performances and this didn't do anything to change that. I found the conclusion with all the Polanski stuff to be a bit odd. Are they saying that Polanski has been forgiven but Allens reputation has been severely damaged? If that's the case I quite disagree

The best we get from this is discussion on this whole topic which I can definitely be a part of so I look forward to others thoughts on this. Structurally this was a chore for me but still it was interesting to at least see it. And since I can't log it on letterboxd I will just leave it unrated.

Can't somebody just add this on Letterboxd via Tmdb?

I remember the backlash against Woody Allen's autobiography being published by Hachette, and their backdown after employees staged a walkout. I never quite came to my own conclusion about it, because I had absolutely no idea what it was he was supposed to have done, aside from the unseemly aspect of his relationship with Soon-Yi Previn, whom he had known as the child of Mia Farrow when the two were in a relationship. Unseemly as it is, she was an adult when the two started a relationship with each other, and it appears to be one set to last Allen's life. He hadn't broken the law, but the girl was nearly Allen's stepdaughter at one stage, so it was just a little yucky. I'd assumed that people thought he had more to answer for, and By the Way, Woody Allen is Innocent dismantles what that was in a thorough, court case-like fashion - with facts, evidence, testimony and argument. After it you'll have no doubt whatsoever what has happened here, and have some sympathy for an artist who has attracted the attention of the mob.

The calls for Allen to be canceled, and exiled certainly are alarming considering the fact that nobody is accusing him of being a serial abuser, and that the whole debacle relates to a case from 30 years ago - one that was tested by investigators and many other professionals who concluded that it had absolutely no merit. In fact, there's a sense of the ridiculous when it comes to the child molestation claim shunted through his life by Mia Farrow regarding her adopted daughter Dylan. You can understand Farrow's rage at the time - her ex had just started a serious relationship with a women whom Farrow had raised, and as off-colour as it seems to us, to her it must have seemed like a monstrous betrayal. That she was using Dylan to exact some kind of revenge on Allen is obvious, whether the allegations were true or not - but when all the facts are considered, it becomes obvious that the incident of molestation has been fabricated, and should have been forgotten about once investigators had dropped the case. Unfortunately, Dylan, Mia Farrow and her son Ronan Farrow (who is also Woody Allen's biological son) continue to hound the poor man with the discredited charges to this day - convincing many they're true during the Me Too movement.

By the Way, Woody Allen is Innocent is of a quality similar to a lot of YouTube content put together by industrious and talented people who don't have the resources to make full-fledged films. It's extremely well researched - extraordinarily well for content of this type - and Rick Worley should be commended for his intelligence, narrative poise and editing skills. He should be ready for many horrifying comments from people who have done absolutely 0 research or have been informed on the matter through tweets and memes. He gives a wonderful speech towards the end of his 155-minute video about mob rule, justice and art that will always hold true, and really rings true. Anyone who violently disagrees with him should listen to everything he has to say and weigh the evidence themselves. He quotes sources, and everything he presents is on the record and as such can be taken into account, and not dismissed as rumour or innuendo (which is what makes up the bulk of the Anti-Woody Allen accusers information.) I enjoyed watching his video, and I'm a sucker for content like it.

Worley also makes great use of clips from Woody Allen movies, and screencaps of the various comments he attracts from people who have decided Allen is a paedophile because of their erroneous beliefs that usually come from one-sided journalistic smears and a dislike of the man. The type of people that shout at you when you try to explain the finer points of the case, block their ears and refuse to even consider the facts. I did find myself pausing his video quite often to read the extracts that he puts onscreen for durations that are always a little too short - they were illuminating. How ironic is it that it's more probable that Mia Farrow abused children - but I don't want to be a hypocrite, so lets just say that claims against her are unsubstantiated. Many people have had parents who were hard to please and lost their tempers far too easily. The really sad thing is that Dylan, Mia and Ronan look set to continue their attack on this man for as long as they still have breath and a media spotlight - nothing will stop them. Allen has to live with their accusations. Accusations of a discredited event against a man with no history of child abuse, sexual harassment, sexual abuse or physical abuse. Once you consider the easily verifiable facts, there's no other conclusion you can make. A really interesting and enjoyable YouTube video.