DID YOU READ

Alex Gibney Speaks Up for “Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer”

Alex Gibney Speaks Up for “Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer” (photo)

Posted by on

“This year was kind of a fluke and a freak,” Alex Gibney said of 2010, the first 11 months of which have seen the release of three of his documentaries — “Casino Jack and the United States of Money,” “My Trip to Al-Qaeda” and his portion of “Freakonomics” — and will usher in another this week with “Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer,” an investigation into the New York governor whose triumphs as a public official were quickly erased by his private indiscretions. If that description of Gibney’s latest sounds vague when nearly every American could recount some of the most sordid details of Spitzer’s sex life by heart, it’s because “Client 9” unfurls a narrative that barely resembles the one laid out by the mass media in their rush to make a star out of prostitute Ashley Dupré and a goat out of the man some predicted would become “the first Jewish president” after building his reputation as a dogged attorney general who took on the powers on Wall Street.

It took considerably longer for Gibney to get Spitzer’s shocked allies, giddy enemies and the former governor himself to speak on the record, but as the Oscar-winning director of “Taxi to the Dark Side” admits, the two years Gibney spent after the scandal broke was in the best interest of the final product, allowing for the discovery of the real relationships Spitzer had with prostitutes (hint: it wasn’t necessarily with Dupré) and the time to piece together how financial titans such as AIG’s Hank Greenberg and Home Depot founder Ken Langone engineered Spitzer’s disgraceful ouster from government. (My full review of the film from the Toronto Film Fest is here.) Recently, Gibney sat down with me to discuss taking the side of the defense for a change, how “Client 9” reminds him of “The Big Sleep” and his friendly competition with “Inside Job” director [and “No End in Sight” collaborator] Charles Ferguson.

What originally got you interested in this?

This was one that was offered to me, ironically by my producers who had been approached by some hedge fund guys and I think they felt it was fun to do something about Spitzer’s downfall. My deal was after thinking about it for a week, it just seemed to be about a lot of things, but there wasn’t any particular theme. It seemed like such a rich story and a story that had a mystery at its heart, so I dug in and then to the hedge fund people, I said, “Look, I don’t want to be beholden to anybody on this story, so put the money in an account, give me total editorial control and I’ll do it.”

11042010_AlexGibney.jpgLike “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room,” this film is based on a book by Peter Elkind (“Rough Justice”). Do you and he have a collaborative relationship?

It was on this one. It was on “Enron” too, but they had written their book [already], so they helped me, they advised me – he and Bethany [McLean, the co-author], but on this one, I knew Peter had gone to school with Spitzer and I knew he had done some big profiles of him for Fortune magazine, so it seemed like if we had teamed up that we might get something done together. The deal was each one of us — and we had enjoyed working together on “Enron” — would do whatever we wanted to do in terms of the final result. He’d write his book the way he wanted. I’d do my film the way I wanted, but along the way, we’d help each other. Maybe we’d dig out different pieces of the puzzle. And that’s what ended up happening. Also for me, it was key because Peter was a key entrée into Spitzer himself.

This film appears to sympathize with Spitzer to some degree when many of your other films have been takedowns, like “Enron” or “Casino Jack.” Was it different approaching a film from the defense rather than the prosecution?

That’s a good way of putting it. In a funny way, I think I’m a little bit of both in this movie, but yeah, I am sympathetic to Spitzer. Generally speaking, the film is sympathetic to Spitzer. At the same time, I hope I was tough and one of the things that we did was to find out some uncomfortable things that he may have wished we hadn’t found out about the escort world and his role in it.

So it was a little bit of both, but it’s funny in this one. I think this one was a little different for a number of reasons and the key reason I think is I didn’t approach it like a prosecutor would approach. It wasn’t kind of a legal brief like “Taxi to the Dark Side” was. It was a story and I tried to understand the parameters of the story and in telling the story learn some things that I might not have heard otherwise. But it was all about telling the story.

11042010_AshleyDupre.jpgThere’s a lot of misdirection in the film, which I imagine might’ve reflected your own struggles to get at the truth. How much did being misled personally enter the actual structure of the film?

It’s a very perceptive question because I think the structure is all about that. It’s all about setting up the audience for one expectation and then undermining it. Or really, not trying to trick them, but basically saying this is what we think we know, because that’s very much the situation I was in as I approached the story. I would come across stuff and say, “oh, I think I know this – Ashley Dupre’s the person.” Turns out it wasn’t Ashley Dupré. When we first showed that guy Hubert Waldrop, the painter, you think well, what’s this painter doing? And then it’s revealed slowly but surely that he’s not a painter really…he’s a booker for one of the escort agencies.

Same thing – you think well, it’s obvious Spitzer just did something that was terrible, so what more is there to know? But in fact, there was a lot more to know, particularly in terms of how he was taken down. And Spitzer himself says, “I took myself down,” which is true, but he has to say that. From the standpoint of us as citizens, we have to wonder what other abuses of power were involved in the way he was taken down, which in my view, was utterly inappropriate. I thought about “The Big Sleep” a lot when I was making the movie. The deeper you get into the movie, the more at sea you are until you come to the end. And at the end of the day, it’s not so important who killed the chauffeur as the kind of mood and character of the people in the story.

Watch More
FrankAndLamar_100-Trailer_MPX-1920×1080

Bro and Tell

BFFs And Night Court For Sports

Bromance and Comeuppance On Two New Comedy Crib Series

Posted by on

“Silicon Valley meets Girls meets black male educators with lots of unrealized potential.”

That’s how Carl Foreman Jr. and Anthony Gaskins categorize their new series Frank and Lamar which joins Joe Schiappa’s Sport Court in the latest wave of new series available now on IFC’s Comedy Crib. To better acquaint you with the newbies, we went right to the creators for their candid POVs. And they did not disappoint. Here are snippets of their interviews:

Frank and Lamar

via GIPHY

IFC: How would you describe Frank and Lamar to a fancy network executive you met in an elevator?
Carl: Best bros from college live and work together teaching at a fancy Manhattan private school, valiantly trying to transition into a more mature phase of personal and professional life while clinging to their boyish ways.

IFC: And to a friend of a friend you met in a bar?
Carl: The same way, slightly less coherent.

Anthony: I’d probably speak about it with much louder volume, due to the bar which would probably be playing the new Kendrick Lamar album. I might also include additional jokes about Carl, or unrelated political tangents.

Carl: He really delights in randomly slandering me for no reason. I get him back though. Our rapport on the page, screen, and in real life, comes out of a lot of that back and forth.

IFC: In what way is Frank and Lamar a poignant series for this moment in time?
Carl: It tells a story I feel most people aren’t familiar with, having young black males teach in a very affluent white world, while never making it expressly about that either. Then in tackling their personal lives, we see these three-dimensional guys navigate a pivotal moment in time from a perspective I feel mainstream audiences tend not to see portrayed.

Anthony: I feel like Frank and Lamar continues to push the envelope within the genre by presenting interesting and non stereotypical content about people of color. The fact that this show brought together so many talented creative people, from the cast and crew to the producers, who believe in the project, makes the work that much more intentional and truthful. I also think it’s pretty incredible that we got to employ many of our friends!

Sport Court

Sport Court gavel

IFC: How would you describe Sport Court to a fancy network executive you met in an elevator?
Joe: SPORT COURT follows Judge David Linda, a circuit court judge assigned to handle an ad hoc courtroom put together to prosecute rowdy fan behavior in the basement of the Hartford Ultradome. Think an updated Night Court.

IFC: How would you describe Sport Court to drunk friend of a friend you met in a bar?
Joe: Remember when you put those firecrackers down that guy’s pants at the baseball game? It’s about a judge who works in a court in the stadium that puts you in jail right then and there. I know, you actually did spend the night in jail, but imagine you went to court right that second and didn’t have to get your brother to take off work from GameStop to take you to your hearing.

IFC: Is there a method to your madness when coming up with sports fan faux pas?
Joe: I just think of the worst things that would ruin a sporting event for everyone. Peeing in the slushy machine in open view of a crowd seemed like a good one.

IFC: Honestly now, how many of the fan transgressions are things you’ve done or thought about doing?
Joe: I’ve thought about ripping out a whole row of chairs at a theater or stadium, so I would have my own private space. I like to think of that really whenever I have to sit crammed next to lots of people. Imagine the leg room!

Check out the full seasons of Frank and Lamar and Sport Court now on IFC’s Comedy Crib.

Watch More
Brockmire-103-banner-4

Millennial Wisdom

Charles Speaks For Us All

Get to know Charles, the social media whiz of Brockmire.

Posted by on

He may be an unlikely radio producer Brockmire, but Charles is #1 when it comes to delivering quips that tie a nice little bow on the absurdity of any given situation.

Charles also perfectly captures the jaded outlook of Millennials. Or at least Millennials as mythologized by marketers and news idiots. You know who you are.

Played superbly by Tyrel Jackson Williams, Charles’s quippy nuggets target just about any subject matter, from entry-level jobs in social media (“I plan on getting some experience here, then moving to New York to finally start my life.”) to the ramifications of fictional celebrity hookups (“Drake and Taylor Swift are dating! Albums y’all!”). But where he really nails the whole Millennial POV thing is when he comments on America’s second favorite past-time after type II diabetes: baseball.

Here are a few pearls.

On Baseball’s Lasting Cultural Relevance

“Baseball’s one of those old-timey things you don’t need anymore. Like cursive. Or email.”

On The Dramatic Value Of Double-Headers

“The only thing dumber than playing two boring-ass baseball games in one day is putting a two-hour delay between the boring-ass games.”

On Sartorial Tradition

“Is dressing badly just a thing for baseball, because that would explain his jacket.”

On Baseball, In A Nutshell

“Baseball is a f-cked up sport, and I want you to know it.”


Learn more about Charles in the behind-the-scenes video below.

And if you were born before the late ’80s and want to know what the kids think about Baseball, watch Brockmire Wednesdays at 10P on IFC.

Watch More
Brockmire_101_tout_2

Crown Jules

Amanda Peet FTW on Brockmire

Amanda Peet brings it on Brockmire Wednesday at 10P on IFC.

Posted by on
GIFS via Giphy

On Brockmire, Jules is the unexpected yin to Jim Brockmire’s yang. Which is saying a lot, because Brockmire’s yang is way out there. Played by Amanda Peet, Jules is hard-drinking, truth-spewing, baseball-loving…everything Brockmire is, and perhaps what he never expected to encounter in another human.

“We’re the same level of functional alcoholic.”


But Jules takes that commonality and transforms it into something special: a new beginning. A new beginning for failing minor league baseball team “The Frackers”, who suddenly about-face into a winning streak; and a new beginning for Brockmire, whose life gets a jumpstart when Jules lures him back to baseball. As for herself, her unexpected connection with Brockmire gives her own life a surprising and much needed goose.

“You’re a Goddamn Disaster and you’re starting To look good to me.”

This palpable dynamic adds depth and complexity to the narrative and pushes the series far beyond expected comedy. See for yourself in this behind-the-scenes video (and brace yourself for a unforgettable description of Brockmire’s genitals)…

Want more about Amanda Peet? She’s all over the place, and has even penned a recent self-reflective piece in the New York Times.

And of course you can watch the Jim-Jules relationship hysterically unfold in new episodes of Brockmire, every Wednesday at 10PM on IFC.

Watch More
Powered by ZergNet