Reports of Skip’s death have been somewhat exaggerated

View image: Enzo is still with us.

It was widely reported that Moose, the 15-year-old Jack Russell Terrier who played the title role in “My Dog Skip,” and who played Eddie on the long-running TV sitcom “Frazier,” passed away at the ripe old age of 105 in dog years. (He would have been 16 — or 112 — December 24, according to IMDb.) While we mourn the passing of Moose, we should point out that he played Old Skip in the movie, while his son Enzo played Skip for most of the film. (Actually, there were reportedly six dogs who performed as Skip in various capacities.)

Likewise, Enzo replaced Moose on “Frazier” after eight years on the show, which ran from 1993 to 2004. But while dogs may be good enough actors to play the same role (like, say, Dick York and Dick Sargent), we should remember that they are not interchangeable. They are individuals. I know this. I live with two of them, and Frances and Edith are very distinct personalities.

I used to live in Los Angeles and work in and around the movie industry, where I encountered hundreds of celebrities in situations ranging from the casual (say, at the drugstore) to the professional (on a set, in a meeting, or for an interview). But my favorite movie star sighting ever came at the Overlooked Film Festival in 2004, where a man and his dog exited an elevator in the Illini Student Union Building — and I immediately recognized the dog as Skip. (It was Enzo — a surprise guest at a matinee screening of “My Dog Skip.”) Of course, I took a picture.

Moose is dead. Long live Enzo.

December 14, 2012

Be the first on your block to bust the latest blockbuster

Hey, remember the year they released “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”? Where were you when the movie of “Sex and the City” came out? Remember when Entertainment Weekly did a 63-page spread about the former HBO show the week before the feature film came out? Oh, and what about the big “Chronicles of Narnia” sequel? It was such a hot property they made everybody go through security — with metal detectors and everything. What if someone had made a shaky-cam bootleg of it 36 hours before it opened to the masses? Whoa!

Then, just a couple weeks ago, people lined up for days to catch the first midnight showings of “The Dark Knight.” Oh, maybe that was last week. Once upon a time these things seemed like kind of a big deal, and now they all seem so three months ago.

December 14, 2012

Charles Has a Licking Problem

Frances and Edith have idiosyncratic licking problems, too. (Frances obsessively licks a hot spot on her foot and Edith obsessively licks Frances’s face.) DISCLAIMER FROM DREWTOOTHPASTE (author of video): “The licking is not a serious medical problem. Charles is under regular veterinary care, and was not harmed during the making of the video. He is just a weird dog.” In other words, Charles does not do this all the time. Evidently he is stimulated by the sight of something (tasty treats?) outside the frame.

December 14, 2012

Chloe loves Los Angeles

Los Angeles. It’s not just a very spread-out geographical area in lower California. It’s not merely an attitude or an array of styles. It is a language with words and names for things.

(tip: Dan Ireland)

December 14, 2012

Dreamgirls and Soul Man

Eddie Murphy and back-up singers in a soul revue from “Dreamgirls.”

Atlantic, Stax/Volt, Motown… Those are three (four?) of my favorite record labels — and two of ’em are in the news now. Of course, Bill Condon’s film of the 1981 musical “Dreamgirls” is loosely based on a slice of Motown history involving Diana Ross and the Supremes. (The slick diva lead singer is named Deena. Subtle.) “Dreamgirls” is playing roadshow engagements in LA, NY and SF — and opens around the rest of the country on Christmas.

But on a far more significantly note: Last week, music mogul Ahmet Ertegun, founder of the great soul/jazz/pop/rock label Atlantic, died at age 83. Ertegun, along with several others whose names on LP jackets I came to associate with great music (his brother Neshui, Jerry Wexler, Tom Dowd, Arif Mardin…), made Atlantic into one of the greatest recording imprimaturs in American history. (In no small part thanks to its partnership with Memphis-based Stax and Volt.)

Today, the Atlantic/Stax/Volt legacy is in the hands of the brilliant archival label, Rhino, which recently released a terrific box set: “What It Is! Funky Soul and Rare Grooves (1967-77)” from the vaults of Atlantic, Atco and Warner Bros. Records (which includes stuff from Curtom, Cotillion, Reprise… — labels are as fascinating to me as movie studios, and some have equally distinctive house styles). An earlier indispensable Rhino collection — “Beg, Scream & Shout! The Big Ol’ Box of ’60s Soul” — has a lot of the Stax/Volt material, and comes in a replica carrying case for 7″ 45 rpm singles. And I’m thrilled and relieved to see that the 203-track, 8-disc “Atlantic Rhythm and Blues 1947-1974” (which I originally had on LP, then repurchased on CD in the 1980s) is still in print — along with many of the original albums.

The best appreciation of Ertegun and Atlantic that I’ve read is from That Little Round-Headed Boy, who even includes a convenient 45 adapter for use on 33 1/3 rpm long-playing turntables! (Bur remember: For best results observe the R.I.A.A. high frequency roll-off characteristic with a 500 cycle crossover.) Not only that, TLRHB adds his own list of favorite Atlantic sides. (And, yes, I’ve always had a soft spot for Clarence Carter’s “Patches,” too… and I fervently believe that Aretha Frankin’s “Until You Come Back to Me” is to Atlantic what the Temptations’ “My Girl” and Stevie Wonder’s “Signed, Sealed, Delivered” are to Motown/Tamla — single-slices of heaven on Earth.)

This is a mono posting and may be played on stereo equipment.

December 14, 2012

No God for Anton Chigurh?

Is this man a nonbeliever?

Here’s an angle I hadn’t thought of. This e-mail actually came to Scanners, but with the writer’s permission I also published it at RogerEbert.com. First the letter, then my response:

From Brad Smissen, Murrieta, CA:

Re: “No Country for Old Men”: I’m a bit surprised that nobody has really touched on Chigurh’s theology or lack thereof. In the book McCarthy makes clear that Chigurh is a non-believer. This is huge. I believe it’s McCarthy’s intention to say that Chigurh’s atheism carved him into a Darwinian creature with a powerful survivalist function. That’s the thing, Chigurh isn’t meant as some reaper figure at all. He’s an atheist/survivalist, plain and simple. It’s not an accident that Chigurh is able to give himself first rate medical care after his leg gets shot up. Nor is McCarthy alluding to some military/medical background. Chigurh has equipped himself to live, he means to live above everything else.

December 14, 2012

Corn goes in one end and profit comes out the other

At home, Mark Whitacre (Matt Damon) has a business line and a personal line. You should know that because the FBI does, and so do his bosses at Archer Daniels Midland (“Supermarket To The World”™). Mark is pretty good at compartmentalizing his life, but the lines are about to get crossed a little bit.

Mark lives with his wife and kids in Decatur, IL, but he’s been all over the world with ADM and he’s proud of what they do, especially with corn. They make all kinds of stuff out of plain old corn, from high fructose corn syrup to lysine to ethanol — all of which, you might say, are fuel additives, designed to juice up production of… whatever.

Celebrating ADM’s miraculous line of alchemical products, Mark excitedly notes: “Corn goes in one end and profit comes out the other!” Vivid image, that. Kind of suggests Mark’s chronic logorrhoea, the stream of partially digested thoughts that swirls around inside his head and occasionally gushes from his mouth. When he gets going his internal monologue (in voiceover) actually talks right over his lips and his tongue. He doesn’t interrupt himself; his mouth and his brain just keep spilling over each other. I wouldn’t be surprised if Damon’s Mark Whitacre had a cousin named Jerry Lundegaard in Fargo.

December 14, 2012

Mad Men (and Mad Women) from Twin Peaks

The first time I remember seeing Lesli Linka Glatter’s name was in a directing credit on “Twin Peaks.” She directed four episodes of David Lynch’s television masterpiece, 13 installments of “E.R.,” eight of “The West Wing,” five of “Gilmore Girls” and segments of other series, including “Freaks and Geeks,” “House, M.D.,” “Law and Order: SVU,” “Numb3rs,” “Weeds,” “The Mentalist,” “The Unit” and “True Blood.” She’s worked a lot. “The Crysanthemum and the Sword” is her sixth episode of “Mad Men” — and the one that reminded me the most of “Twin Peaks,” mostly in little visual touches.

(Although, come to think of it, she also directed the episode with the riding lawnmower accident, which could be seen as a Lynchian in-joke about “The Straight Story”…)

A few images, and then a few thoughts about other possible “Twin Peaks” connections:

December 14, 2012

“No Country for Old Men” towers over 2007

View image A shadow in the light from a doorway.

It wasn’t even close. In the MSN Movies 2007 Top 10 Poll, Joel and Ethan Coen’s “No Country for Old Men” scored 106 points out of a possible 120 — the only film to rank on all ten of the contributing critics’ best-of-the-year lists. It was #1 or #2 on nine of the ten, and #4 on the other one.

Some of you may have gotten the impression that I think rather highly of “No Country for Old Men,” so I was pleased to be asked by editor Dave McCoy to write a little blurb about it summarizing my appreciation. It goes like this:

Shot by shot, cut by cut, sequence by sequence, no movie this year (or any other year) was more grippingly, cinematically exhilarating than “No Country for Old Men.” Joel and Ethan Coen’s first literary adaptation (from Cormac McCarthy’s novel), crackles with an intensity that sharpens and stimulates your senses and reminds you of how little most other films do with the essential expressive properties of the medium: light, color, sound, movement, language. Movies are as much about the orchestration as the composition, and the Coens have orchestrated and composed a masterpiece — one that embodies what most movies only describe.

A Western, a crime picture, a chase thriller, a ghost story (though not in the supernatural sense), “No Country” is the story of Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin), a man chasing a dream ($2 million in drug money he’s found in a satchel); Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem), a messenger of death who’s tracking down Moss for the money; and Sheriff Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), who’s trailing both of them. Tension builds as the film progresses, even as the violence recedes. This isn’t a movie about murder; it’s about the awareness of inevitable death that stalks us all.

Check out our individual lists here. My Scanners list (with blurbs on all my favorites) will be somewhat different…

December 14, 2012

Fasten your seatbelts, it’s gonna be a bumpy Bourne!

Hippy-hippy shake: Camera and actor on the move in “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

The invention in the early 1970s of the camera stabilizer popularly known as the Steadicam (actually a brand name, like Kleenex or TiVo) was a milestone in the technology and aesthetics of film. The freedom and fluidity with which the camera could “float” through a scene was astounding. It was first used in films such as “Bound for Glory” and “Rocky” — but try to imagine “Halloween” or “The Shining” without it. (On the other hand, the “Shaky-cam” created by Sam Raimi and crew for “The Evil Dead” — which involved bolting a 16 mm camera to a two-by-four carried by two grips running through the woods — had a lesser historical impact, but was comparably effective for its purposes.)

Woody Allen and cinematographer Carlo Di Palma used old-fashioned hand-held camerawork for “Husbands and Wives” (1992) — most noticeably in the opening scene, which became notorious because it made some moviegoers dizzy or nauseous. Theaters posted signs at their box office windows warning people that the movie could induce motion sickness.

Roger Ebert has received a lot of Answer Man mail about all the jittery camerawork in Paul Greengrass’s “The Bourne Ultimatum” (see “Shake, rattle, and Bourne!”). And now David Bordwell, in a characteristically well-researched and fun-to-read post on his and Kristin Thompson’s blog (“Unsteadicam chronicles”), says: “A spectre is haunting contemporary cinema: the shaky shot.”

… Some viewers and critics think the jarring quality of [“The Bourne Ultimatum”] proceeds from rapid editing. The cutting in “Bourne Ultimatum” is indeed very fast; there are about 3200 shots in 105 minutes, yielding an average of about 2 seconds per shot. But there are other fast-cut films that don’t yield the same dizzy effects, such as “Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow” (1.6 seconds average), “Batman Begins” (1.9 seconds), “Idiocracy” (1.9 seconds), and the “Transporter” movies (less than 2 seconds). […]To put this in perspective, check out the Cinemetrics database (to which, of course, Bordwell is a contributor), and you’ll find the average shot length of the late Michelangelo Antonioni’s “L’Avventura” is 18 seconds, while that whiz-bang “L’Eclisse” has a zippy 11.9-second average. (See Bordwell’s article at Cinemetrics here.)

But as Bordwell explains, when it comes to the disorienting effect of some shots, it ain’t the meter, it’s the motion:

December 14, 2012

Three minor notions: 3. Punching the vocals in “TSN”

For many years, record producers and engineers have spliced together the best takes of pop vocals and orchestral performances to create the version that is finally released to the public on disc or download. I don’t know why it never occurred to me that sound editors for movies wouldn’t do the same thing with dialog, but I hadn’t thought about it until I watched the extras DVD for “The Social Network” the other night.

Obviously, various takes of performances are cut together in editing, and the dialog is often looped in post-production for any number of reasons — to smooth over the differences between takes, to change line readings, or simply to compensate for inadequate sound quality from the original recording. But the David Fincher editing team of Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall (recent Oscar-winners) and sound designer Ren Klyce (my new movie hero, alongside Skip Lievsay).

First of all, the editors get a lot of material to work with. But let’s clear up the whole “99 takes” thing. It’s not what it may sound like. Fincher did 99 takes during the shooting of the opening scene, for example — but he didn’t simply make the actors do the same thing 99 times in a row. As Wall and Baxter told Vanity Fair:

December 14, 2012

Why don’t critics, Oscars & audience agree?

Why don’t the critics, the Oscars and the box-office audience ever seem to agree on the best movies of the year? This question really bugs some people, but I’ve never understood it, because criticism, intra-industry acclaim and ticket-sales revenue represent such separate and distinct ways of looking at movies. If they all redundantly reinforced the same choices, what would be the point? (Only the money is necessary to the movie business, which regards reviews and awards as simply part of the promotional campaign.) The way I see it, asking why critics, Academy voters and audiences don’t agree is like asking why Democrats and Republicans don’t choose the same candidates for president (although I once knew a woman who seriously proposed that Ronald Reagan and Geraldine Ferraro would make a great ticket). The obvious reason is: different constituencies want different things.

Audiences want to be entertained, maybe a little inspired. Critics want to be entertained too, of course, but some also seek the greater pleasures of art. For some of us, the hackneyed phrase “mindless entertainment” is a contradiction in terms: how can something be entertaining unless it engages your attention on more than an autonomic level? Oscar voters… well, who the hell knows what they want? But we all want to feel better about ourselves, don’t we? Movies, good and bad, can help with that.

Andrew O’Hehir at Salon (“And the Oscar goes to… ‘Twilight’!”) makes a modest proposal: “What if the Oscars — an imaginary Oscars, a thought-experiment Oscars, the Oscars of an alternate universe — honored movies that people actually liked?” His alt.hollywood version would be “an unholy blend of the MTV Movie Awards and the Indiewire critics’ poll” in which “Melancholia,” “A Separation” and “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy” would go up against “Harry Potter,” “Twilight” and “Mission: Impossible.”

December 14, 2012

The White Explication

I know, we shouldn’t give him any more attention, but the elusiveness of his language (it’s not quite English, but what is it?) is fascinating. Try to pin down meaning, or responsibility, and they just slip away…

Armond White, review of “Mr. Jealousy,” June 3, 1998:

I won’t comment on [Noah] Baumbach’s deliberate, onscreen references to his former film-reviewer mother except to note how her colleagues now shamelessly bestow reviews as belated nursery presents. To others, “Mr. Jealousy” might suggest retroactive abortion.

Armond White, referring to the comment above in a non-review of “Greenberg,” March 17, 2010:

The last line is not Oscar Wilde but it’s also not a death warrant; its impact is in your inference. It clearly points out the clubhouse aspect of Baumbach’s raves, then contrasts natal congratulations with their demurral. No more than that. The abortion quip is easily understood unless your goal is to besmirch another critic and wage a personal attack.

December 14, 2012

Avatar and Oscar again raise thequestion: What is cinematography? (Part 2)

In Part 1 of this post, I provided a clip from Martin Scorsese’s 1995 documentary, “A Personal Journey… Through American Film,” in which George Lucas and Francis Ford Coppola talked about the contribution computers were making to filmmaking as it evolved from a photographic medium into a painterly one.

In the clip above, from the “making of” promotional documentary, “Avatar: Creating the World of Pandora,” director/camera operator James Cameron, producer Jon Landau and many CGI effects artists and technicians show how “Avatar” was created — not so much in the camera as in the computer. None of these people is Mauro Fiore, who recently won an Oscar for Best Cinematography for his work on “Avatar.” What was his role on the film? This has been the subject of much debate — much of it in the forum at cinematography.com, where professionals have been discussing the question: “What is “Cinematography,” now that an 80% CG Movie Has Won Its Highest Honor”?

December 14, 2012

Mad Men: The Other Woman & the Long Walk

Here’s my latest “Mad Men” video, inspired by “The Other Woman” (Season 5, Episode 11). It’s my favorite kind of video analysis/criticism: no narration, no inter-tiles, just interwoven images, dialog and music.

NOTE: Don’t even think of reading this if you haven’t seen “The Other Woman,” yet.

“The Other Women,” the 11th installment in “Mad Men” Season 5, has one of those great titles (like “Shut the Door. Have a Seat,” “The Rejected,” “Tomorrowland,” “Far Away Places”) that keeps resonating as you think back on the episode itself. It begins in a meeting of creative executives in the Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce conference room, as Stan tosses out the primary theme — of the episode and the Jaguar account pitch: “Jaguar: The mistress who will do things your wife won’t.” And that’s the usual definition of “the other woman” — the rival for the heterosexual breadwinner’s affections, the spicy dish on the side. As Megan phrases it, the Jaguar is the mistress and the wife is the Buick at home in the garage. But that’s only the beginning.

All three of the show’s central female characters have been “other women” under certain circumstances, with various men. Joan has long been Roger Sterling’s “other woman” — not just his extra-marital go-to girl, but his office wife… and (unbeknownst to everyone else) the mother of his child. Peggy slept with Pete on the eve of his wedding to Trudy, got pregnant, and gave up the kid for adoption. She’s never slept with Don (though a lot of the people in the SCDP office think that’s how she attained her position), but don’t underestimate how much her personal and professional second-bananaship has contributed to Don’s fortunes as well as her own. It was clear early on how much he preferred her company at work to Betty Draper’s at home.

And then Megan came along — first as an employee (Joan: “He’ll probably make her a copy writer; he’s not going to want to be married to his secretary”) and then as Don’s wife — the “other woman” who, in the eyes of Peggy and the rest of the firm, distracts him from the advertising job to which he was formerly “married.” Don is so smitten with her that the company practically has to sue for alienation of affection. (“You’ve been on love leave,” Cooper chastises Don at the end of “Far Away Places.” “It’s amazing things are going as well as they are with as little as you are doing.”)

It all culminates in the line finessed by Michael Ginsberg (the word “mistress” can’t be in the ad) and delivered by Don in SCDP’s pitch: “Jaguar: At last a thing of beauty you can truly own.” That last word deserves some explication. Yes, in the presentation, Don likens the temperamental beauty of the Jaguar to a woman, but the whole point of the proposal is that, as everyone knows, a woman can’t be “owned.” A car can. I only mention this because I’ve seen a few commentators claim that “The Other Woman” is an episode about “men trying to own women,” and I think that’s a bit simplistic. OK, men might wish they could “own” women on some level, but not even Don Draper or Roger Sterling — not even Pete Campbell, fer chrissakes — really believes that is possible in 1967.¹

December 14, 2012

Big buttocks & curry killers: Worst of Bollywood 2010

With the perspective of history, the ’90s SNL brats’ “The Big Chill,” known as “Grown Ups,” may well retain its reputation for being the lowest the movies sunk in 2010. Who knows? It’s hard to beat with that cast. But the Hindustan Times offers us another perspective — and some hilarious capsule descriptions — in an article on “The best of the worst of 2010.” In other words, a list of abominable Bollywood films that may be worth not avoiding: “You unfortunately stay away from them, not realising they can offer you pleasures just as really great films can. If nothing else, they make your own lives seem less bizarre.” A few samples:

6. Mahesh Nair’s “Accident On Hill Road”: It’s been over 24 hours. A man’s bum has been stuck to the windshield of a parked car. A girl had crashed this car on to the old man’s bum the night before. She wakes up in the morning, and instead of helping him out, beats the hell out of him with a cricket bat. Her boyfriend fishes out a gun to kill him. The old man, still stuck, recounts conversations with his daughter in his head. Eh? The bum belongs to the great Farooque Sheikh. What more to say. Except, I’m serious. […]

3. Mani Shankar’s “Knock Out”: The film’s entirely a knock-off (Phone Booth). Except, here’s what the hero (Sanjay Dutt) instructs the villain (Irrfan Khan, a political henchman) to do as he’s forcibly stuck to a phone booth. He asks him to transfer public funds siphoned off into Swiss banks by his political bosses. The villain fits a Reliance data card to his crummy laptop, gets into the Swiss account, transfers black money into Reserve Bank treasury. Crowds gather outside the phone booth. Click after click, money in Rs 500 crore installments keep getting deposited to the Government of India. Everyone cheers. What an idea. It’s so simple, CBI. Why take that long investigating CWG, 2G…

1. Gurinder Chadha’s “It’s A Wonderful Afterlife”: Chatty Mrs Sethi (Shabana Azmi), a sweet caring mom, doubles up as a sickened “curry killer”, who can see dead people. Her serial murders make tabloid headlines. Dead bodies are found with “chili content way off human tolerance levels”, crazy kitchen implements like the seekh of the seekh kabab, inserted into body parts. Now that’s a concept, I tell you. But the scene that completely takes the cake: The only non-brown character in a movie set in the western world’s called Linda. It’s her engagement party, and everyone’s happily high on “ganja pakodas” (what should’ve been ‘bhaang pakodas’). Linda turns into the character of the same name from “Exorcist,” scarily screams and levitates, her entire body dripping in red chutney, curries fly off serving tables, so do plates and other assortments…. You think this world’s goin’ mental? Calm down, watch this film, feel better.

(tip: Corey Creekmur)

December 14, 2012

The Magnificent Ambersons: What’s Past is Prologue

I’ve always felt Orson Welles’ second feature, the memory-movie masterpiece “The Magnificent Ambersons,” got a bad rap because: 1) it isn’t “Citizen Kane”; and 2) it isn’t the perfect creation Welles intended it to be because, as we all know, RKO re-cut and re-shot parts of it, including the last two scenes (which are so not Welles they don’t really affect you much; they’re like background noise that wakes you out of a deep sleep). Well, OK, “Ambersons” isn’t “Kane” — it’s not as much fun as “Kane” (few movies are), but it’s every bit as accomplished and it goes deeper into its characters and its evocation of the past. And, yes, I’d give my (fill in portion of anatomy here) to see the lost footage restored (although you can read the cutting continuity of the unfinished 132-minute version Welles left behind when he went to Brazil in March, 1942, and see stills of the missing scenes — so you can imagine the finished movie, even if you can’t actually see it).

All of this is to say that AltScreen has published a long piece I just wrote about this, one of my favorite movies. It begins with a more-or-less shot-by-shot analysis of the nine-minute prologue, and how it sets up everything else in the movie. You can read it here: “The Magnificent Ambersons: The Past is Prologue.” The film has only recently been made available on Region 1 DVD (and even then as an Amazon-only bonus with the new Blu-ray of “Kane,” though it shows up on TCM occasionally). A few excerpts, to give you a taste:

December 14, 2012

Product placement: The lives of ‘The Sopranos’

An extended family moment: Blanca, Hector, AJ.

Never send a business reporter to do a critic’s job.

I’m sometimes amused by the naïveté of my critical and academic colleagues when it comes to the business realities of how movies are made, and why they turn out the way they do. They tend to view movies as a purely creative medium, and dismiss the influences of marketing and commerce on the “end product.” But, on the other hand, whenever I read reports about “the biz,” I’m equally amazed at how they approach movies as if they were factory-tooled widgets, nothing more than the products of corporate and marketing deals and decisions. The truth is, of course, that most movies are creative compromises, the results of a vast and complex set of inter-related artistic, commercial and economic judgments.

You’d never know that from Jon Fine’s series of posts at his Business Week Fine On Media blog about so-called “product placement” in this season’s episodes of “The Sopranos.” Fine thinks the proliferating brand-name mentions are “suck-uppy” and rates them on a “one-to-ten scale of egregiousness” — although, he reports, “‘The Sopranos,’ a show I like very much, does not do product placement in the fee-for-sense. Nor does HBO, although at times they’ve played footsie with the idea.”

Fine doesn’t acknowledge that there may be a number of creative reasons why real products and brand names are used on the show — aside from the usual deals that allow nearly all movies and TV shows to keep their budgets down by gaining access to free consumer goods, from cars to soft drinks, that are used on screen. “The Sopranos” happens to be about people for whom bling means just about everything, despite all their talk about maintaining old-fashioned “family values” (you know, like omerta). It’s a show about people in a strictly hierarchical social structure (organized crime, the mob, La Cosa Nostra)who pursue crass, vulgar, conspicuous consumption as a signal to others that they’re advancing their station in life. Their lives are all about “product placement.”

December 14, 2012
subscribe icon

The best movie reviews, in your inbox