Nov 11

Picture it: The year is 1991. It’s central Minnesota. I’m in my bedroom, face festooned with zits. My favorite bands at the time are Guns N Roses and Metallica, whose recently released Black Album was receiving heavy airplay. Which explains why I’m listening to WHMH, the local rocker, in the hopes that they’ll play Sweet Child O Mine, Patience or Enter Sandman. And I can get my rock on.

Instead, something called Smells Like Teen Spirit happened on the radio. By some band named Nirvana. Who knew Buddhists could scream so sweetly? Instantly, I was hooked. The song rocked. To my 15-year-old virgin brain, life didn’t get any better than this.

Nevermind later became the first CD I ever purchased. It still may be the best.

Nirvana ushered in a new era. I felt connected to them in a way I’d never really connected with any other band. Maybe it was their small-town roots, their punk rock ethics or just how different their sound was from anything that was getting airplay at the time, but in some small way Nirvana spoke to me. In many ways, they were the Beatles of the 90s.

Flash forward three years. It’s an April day in Central Minnesota. My musical horizons have broadened a bit since 1991, but I’m still in love with Nirvana. And I’m still pretty zitty. To this day I don’t remember how I heard of Cobain’s death. Given his recent overdose and suicidal public image, I don’t think it came as a shock. Though, at the time, I remember it being one of the saddest days of my life.

And we’re back to the present. I rarely listen to Nirvana, having overplayed those bursts of energy in my teenage years. I’m old now, the innocent passion of youth replaced by the cold hard logic of middle-age. So when Kurt and Courtney, the 1998 documentary that set out to explore whether Cobain was the victim of his own hand or the victim of murder, entered my house via Blockbuster, I let it languish on the shelf for a while.

When I finally plopped it in, it wasn’t because I’m the passionate Nirvana fan I was as a teenager. I just had some time to kill and it was the first DVD I could find that seemed interesting.

Immediately, I was hooked. My long-forgotten love for Nirvana flooded back as documentarian Nick Broomfield thrust himself into the story, going back to Aberdeen, to Olympia, to Seattle, to Portland, to LA, in a quest to track down rumors of a Courtney Love-ordered whack.

All-in all, it’s a fascinating ride through the seamy underbelly of fame. There are lots of dive motels, lots of people disfigured by years of drug use and more than a few deep, dark looks into the closets of Courtney Love and Kurt Cobain.

And the characters populating the documentary aren’t your everyday normal folks.

1. Love’s own father seems to think his daughter has something to do with Cobain’s death. And has written two books about it, one of which he made sure to display – out of the sunlight’s glare – during his interview. Now we know who Courtney got those media-whoring, money-grubbing genes from.

2. A nanny who quit a week before Cobain’s death says a lot without saying much at all, insinuating that Love dominated Cobain and was really only interested in making sure he didn’t modify his will.

3. The odd El Duce, leader of the “rape rock” band the Mentors and an acquaintance of Love’s for years, claims on camera that Love offered him $50,000 to kill Cobain. He said he didn’t do it, but knew who did. His claims even passed a lie detector test with flying colors. A week after his interview, he was hit by a train behind his house.

4. Courtney’s ex-boyfriend Roz, once a lead singer in a Portland-area band whose star was rising, is relegated to a bizarre anti-Courtney rant in his basement.

5. Courtney herself. Let’s just say this movie doesn’t paint strong picture of Love as a loving wife. But it does paint her as a master manipulator interested only in fame and fortune.

Sadly, even Broomfield himself becomes a part of the story. He claims the movie started as an attempt to determine if Cobain did actually kill himself. After great build-up and telling interviews with the fascinating cast of characters, Broomfield quickly changes course, coming up with a quick answer as to whether Cobain killed himself or not, and then moving on to attack Courtney Love for putting pressure on the financiers of the documentary, who subsequently pulled out.

What follows is a bizarre sequence of events that has Broomfield and some hired celebrity stalkers trespass during Love’s tour rehearsal, trying to ask her embarrassing questions. Their camera battery dies, so they decide to hit up Love at an ACLU award. Broomfield asks a few questions of Love, then, after her speech, rushes the podium and insults the ACLU for having Love on because she once threatened the life of a reporter.

What started as a promising look at the life and death of Kurt Cobain became the egotistical director’s personal vendetta against Courtney Love. All because she pressured MTV to pull out of funding his film.

Which explains why, in the end, this film left a bitter taste in my mouth. Like so many people before and after Cobain’s death, Broomfield was trying to ring the register on the Cobain cash cow rather than mimic Cobain and make art for art’s sake. Which, in the end, is why Cobain was successful and Broomfield is not.


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
Apr 11

We all want to be famous. It’s why I write a blog that no one reads. It’s why Butters sang a song about his butt. It’s why thousands of America’s Home Video fans took staged shots to the nuts.

Confessions of a Superhero examines this phenomenon in detail, following and interviewing 4 aspiring Hollywood actors who, unable to get real gigs, panhandle on Hollywood Boulevard while dressed as their favorite superheros.

It’s a character study of people who pretend to be other characters. There’s the black Hulk, who lived on the streets of Hollywood for a few years. The southern girl who plays Wonder Woman who married her husband in Vegas after knowing him for two weeks. The guy who feels he’s not getting real roles because he looks like George Clooney and instead dresses up like Batman. And the king of them all, Superman.

To call Superman (Christopher Dennis) obsessed may be an understatement. An avid collector of all things Superman, Dennis’ apartment is more shrine than living quarters. Even odder, Dennis swears he’s the son of deceased actress Sandy Dennis, though her family knows nothing of Dennis ever having a child.

Hollywood is full of delusional folks like Dennis. Batman (Maxwell Allen) claims to be the last person standing in a Texas mob war. And he’s left behind quite a body count, by his reckoning.

But the movie balances these two delusional characters with the other side of Hollywood. Jennifer Gehrt (Wonder Woman) is an aspiring actress from a seemingly well-adjusted middle-class southern family. She’s popular, pretty and a decent actress by all accounts. Unfortunately, according to her agent, her voluptuousness may be holding her back.

The final character examined in the story is another likeable guy – Joe McQueen – who wears a Hulk costume around Hollywood. McQueen seems affable and worth rooting for to make it, something he does by the end of the movie by landing a supporting role in a B movie. Hey, you take all the roles you can get in Hollywood.

As the we watch Superman go to Metropolis, Wonder Woman struggle in her new marriage, Hulk black out in 100 degree heat and Batman fumble his way through martial arts classes, we see the toll the chase for fame and fortune can take on people.

Confessions of a Superhero is beautifully shot documentary that is at once funny, moving and thoroughly entertaining. These aspiring thespians give the performances of their lives playing the roles they know best: themselves.

Rating: 93 out of 100.


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
Apr 4

I’m a Catholic. Not a great one, as all the dead animals I’ve eaten on Fridays during Lent will attest to. But I’m still a Catholic. I was baptized, catechized and confirmed in the Catholic Church. I attended college at a school with one of the largest seminaries in the U.S., so I’ve been exposed to a lot of priests, monks, nuns and other church dignitaries.

And never been molested, sexually touched or even had any sexual innuendo thrown my way by one of them.

If I’m to believe Deliver Us From Evil, the 2006 Academy Award nominated documentary by Amy Berg, I’m one of the lucky ones. Deliver Us From Evil tells the tale of Oliver O’Grady, a Catholic priest who methodically molested dozens of children in California from the early 1970s until he was jailed in the 90s.

O’Grady is obviously a pyschopathic pedophile. That’s not particularly scary as pedophiles come in all shapes and sizes and perform all types of occupations. What is scary is the manner in which the church moved O’Grady from parish to parish once people began to accuse him of molestation. A church that presents itself as the organizational embodiment of Jesus’ message did all they could to keep a pedophile wearing the robes, knowing full well what he had done and what he was capable of doing. Why? They didn’t want the bad PR.

And, as the movie relates, the coverup reaches to the highest reaches of the church. That’s right, Pope Benedict the XVI is accused of participating in the coverup, a charge that cannot be prosecuted because of the immunity granted to him by President Bush.

But it gets worse. In O’Grady’s case, he was ready to testify at his court hearing and possibly admit his crimes and acknowledge the church’s complicity. The night before his testimony, the church’s high-paid lawyers arrived and the next day O’Grady decided not the testify. Why? The church didn’t offer to do us all a favor and off O’Grady if he testified. Instead, they offered him a pension that would keep him comfortable for the rest of his days if he didn’t implicate them.

But Deliver Us From Evil does more than highlight O’Grady and the church’s criminal acts. It interviews O’Grady’s victims, including a family that thought O’Grady was their friend, who defended him when allegations of misconduct first arose. They found out later that their daughter was a victim. The father has renounced Catholicism and won’t step foot in a church.

If Jesus hadn’t risen from the dead, he’d be rolling in his grave.

Verdict: 91 out of 100


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Mar 28

We’re all fascinated by child prodigies. Mozart, Bobby Fischer, Freddy Adu, Traci Lords – all youngsters who fascinated the population because of their professional prowess at such a young age.

Marla Olmstead was no different. She started painting abstract art before she could even piss on a toilet, selling her first pieces by the age of 2. By the time she was four, her elaborate paintings were fetching as much as $15,000 each, she was exhibiting in New York and Los Angeles and was a media star.

And as quickly as she burst onto the scene, her fame and fortune vanished. 60 Minutes, with her parents cooperation, placed a hidden camera in the house to capture her painting her next masterpiece. Only problem was, it turned out not to be a masterpiece. And according to a child psychologist, her painting technique was no different than any other 4 year-old, except for one thing: her father coached her on how to paint.

My Kid Could Paint That follows the Olmsteads, first through the giddy high that came with national stardom, and subsequently through the anguish that followed the 60 Minutes expose.

As the hate mail flows in following the 60 Minutes piece, we watch Marla’s parents try to keep their cash cow alive. Like corporate PR geniuses, they videotape Marla’s next painting, which they and the gallery owner responsible for selling the painting, hail as a work of a genius. But the documentary’s director, whom the Olmstead’s now see as their best chance at reversing the backlash that followed the questioning 60 Minutes piece, as well as the couple that ultimately buys the painting, have their doubts.

What at first appears to be a movie about a child genius instead turns into a documentary about art, media, parenthood and ultimately the bias inherent to any form of art. It asks more questions than it answers, leaving the audience to decide on the ultimate truth: Was Marla’s father responsible for putting the finishing touches on her paintings?

Much like Marla’s paintings, the movie is multifaceted, painting a broad, moving story. From Marla’s mother, to her father, to the gallery owner – a photo-realistic painter whose paintings can take up to a year of painstaking work to finish – everyone plays a vital role in what is ultimately an impressive, intelligent, thought-provoking movie that doesn’t definitively answer its own questions. Instead, mirroring Marla’s handiwork, the ultimate truth is in the eye of the beholder.

Verdict: 89 out of 100.


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Mar 21

Drumroll please……It’s time to start a weekly feature here on the Sleeping Bear. No more talking about penises, or stolen cell phones or Xubuntu. Nope, it time to talk documentaries.

And no, I haven’t been a big documentary viewer over the years. Sure, I’ve seen the mainstream ones like The Thin Blue Line, the Michael Moore stuff and other assorted documentaries, but I haven’t dug deep into the genre. So I’m far from a documentary buff. But armed with my shiny new Blockbuster Total Access membership, I’ve been watching a few documentaries lately. And now I’m going to review them for none of the world to read.

Up first is a documentary with heart, soul and quite possibly some of the oddest people on the planet.

The King of Kong – A Fistful of Quarters

A documentary about the world’s best Donkey Kong players? (Rolls eyes) Yeah, sounds great.

Don’t let the subject matter fool you. This is one excellent documentary. It follows a former Boeing employee and current high school teacher Steve Wiebe as he tries to beat living legend Billy Mitchell, his beautiful hair, and his throng of adoring, thin haired, bespectacled, game-playing geeks.

Poor Wiebe. He’s the typical lovable loser. The dude tries hard, but he seems destined for second-best. He can’t pitch his team to the state baseball title as a senior and then loses his job at Boeing years later. No problem, he says, I’m going to be the greatest Donkey Kong player of all time. And go back to school to be a teacher. Way to aim high Mr. Wiebe.

But then something special happens. He ignores his kid’s pleas to wipe his ass and breaks the world Donkey Kong record on the machine he has out in his garage. Fame and fortune are soon to follow.

Except the folks at Twin Galaxies responsible for certifying the record disagree. Since the board in his garage came from a guy embroiled in a feud with Billy Mitchell, the current record-holder and hot sauce maven, Twin Galaxies refuses to accept the record.

So Wiebe travels cross-country to challenge Mitchell for the record head-to-head. And sets the record live, in front of gaming geekdom, minus Mitchell, who’d chickened out. Only problem? Mitchell submits a videotape the same day that shows him setting a new, even higher mark.

More shenanigans ensue as Wiebe pursues the record.

In the end, the King of Kong is as pleasing a spectacle as any Oscar-nominated blockbuster. You’ve got a lovable loser (Wiebe), a pompous ass (Mitchell), shamefully shady oversight (Twin Galaxies), wacky characters (damn near everyone), and a story that moves along at a frolicking good pace.

I laughed, I felt outraged, I empathized and in the end I was thoroughly entertained by The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters.

Verdict: 91 out of 100.


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 4.50 out of 5)
Loading...