Mad As Hell: the Making of Network and the Fateful Vision of the Angriest Man in Movies / David Itzkoff

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Mad As Hell: the Making of Network and the Fateful Vision of the Angriest Man in Movies / David Itzkoff The author and publisher have provided this e-book to you for your personal use only. You may not make this e-book publicly available in any way. Copyright infringement is against the law. If you believe the copy of this e-book you are reading infringes on the author’s copyright, please notify the publisher at: us.macmillanusa.com/piracy. For Amy, who makes me happy as hell Contents Title Page Copyright Notice Dedication Epigraph Prologue 1 The Imposter 2 Strangelove-y as Hell 3 A Great Deal of Bullshit 4 The Daily Parade of Lunacies 5 A Storm of Humanity 6 Primal Forces and Phantasmagoria 7 Corrupt and Lunatic Energies 8 It’s All Going to Happen Notes Index Photos Acknowledgments Also by Dave Itzkoff About the Author Copyright Slowly, the world we’re living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, “Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my teevee and my steel-belted radials and I won’t say anything. Just leave us alone.” Well, I’m not going to leave you alone. I want you to get mad. —HOWARD BEALE, Network PROLOGUE He was at his best when he was angry. It wasn’t simply that so many things bothered him, or that when they did, they irritated him to the fullest possible degree. But where others avoided conflict, he cultivated it and embraced it. His fury nourished him, making him intense and unpredictable, but also keeping him focused and productive. He was not generally the sort of person who felt the need to clench his fists in violence or submerge his sorrows in drink. But he knew what it was like to have desires and see them denied; he knew how it felt to cry out and not be heard. His outrage simmered in his spleen and surged through his veins, collecting in his fingertips until it pushed his pen across paper and punched the keys of his typewriter. He wrestled his rancor into words and sentences and speeches. When Paddy Chayefsky’s characters spoke, they spoke with his aggravated, articulate voice, and yet they seemed to speak for everyone. While his career was in ascendance, he was hailed as the dramatist of the common man, whose ear for the language of the underclass was so uncanny that it was said he must have transcribed it from a tape recorder. His best-known characters were thwarted people who feared nothing so much as unfulfillment, whose most emphatic and memorable dialogue poured out of them in aggressive bursts, arriving in explosive climaxes after scene upon scene of unvoiced frustration and unresolved conflict. Whether he was imagining the inner life of a lowly, lovelorn butcher or the impotent chief of medicine at a major metropolitan hospital, Chayefsky could relate to these men. Their struggle for even a minimal amount of autonomy mirrored their creator’s refusal to cede any amount of control in his life and especially in his work. He had all the accumulated resentments of a man of his time and place, who had lived through the Great Depression and fought in World War II, and who strived to fulfill the dreams of his immigrant parents and outpace anyone he regarded as a rival or a colleague. He was a short, stocky Bronx-born Jew, a son of the Grand Concourse with narrow eyes framed by large, owlish glasses, and a head of unkempt brown and white hair, with an impish goatee to match. He had no regard for fashion or convention and possessed a mischievous, cantankerous personality. A sincere compliment directed his way could trigger his venomous invective as easily as a well-deployed insult or dirty joke could earn his respect. Chayefsky was the rare writer whose reputation earned him absolute authority on his projects—supremacy above even the directors and producers he worked with—and he sought only projects where he was allowed this authority. But what defined his writing now, in 1974, was that none of it was working. Back in the 1950s it had taken only a few years of toiling in that newly created format of television for him to cast it aside in favor of a more respectable and lucrative career in motion pictures; and only a few more years of disappointment there to leave film for the theater, where he was certain he would retain total control over the material he created; and only a few more years of total discouragement in that field to abandon the stage and return to the movies. At the age of fifty-one, he could get his film scripts commissioned but not produced; he could get his television pilots shot but couldn’t get them on the air; and it would require the collective disappearance of every other form of dramatic art before he ever wrote another play for Broadway. The Academy Award he had won for his screenwriting two years earlier seemed less like an affirmation of his talents than a solemn, faceless bookend to the Oscar he had received back in 1956: one statue to signify where the journey of a once-promising screenwriter started and the other to mark its termination. It was not only the repeatedly obstructed ambition to have his work seen by audiences again that was bothering Chayefsky, although that was a concern. The mission that consumed him with unusual urgency was to say something universal and definitive, to make the lasting statement that the compass of his career had always pointed to and that would make him worthy of the attention he had commanded at his peak. Every rung he climbed on his way up had given Chayefsky a higher perch to see the world more clearly, and all he saw were problems he could not solve. At his Central Park West apartment awaited a wife who almost never ventured outside, as she suffered from a mysterious malady neither he nor any doctor could help with, and a self-destructive teenage son he could not understand. He feared constantly for his livelihood and was struggling with tax problems, while he watched with resigned astonishment as the city he called home and the country he loved appeared to be unraveling. Revolutions were springing up everywhere—politically, socially, artistically, cinematically— and he wanted no part of them. Then there was television, a blossoming medium he had helped to define and popularize, with the potential for connecting every person on the planet in an instant. But in two quick decades it had become hopelessly, irrevocably corrupt, devaluing truth and alienating viewers from one another. With so many threats stirring, it seemed irresponsible to Chayefsky for him to ignore them in his writing. Was he the only one who felt a growing risk of terrorist attacks by suicidal militants? Who saw a rising tide of anti-Semitism and hostility against Israel? Who felt the creeping influence of foreign powers— Arab powers—in the American economy? Yet the more frantically he sought to clarify the message he believed was being transmitted to him from a hundred different sources, the more certain he felt it was eluding him. Take, for example, the screenplay that he had started researching a few months earlier. Having cast his gaze on the television business that had provided the springboard for his career, he had drawn up a roster of characters to populate the world of a fictional broadcasting company: producers, executives, underlings, corporate tycoons, political radicals, and a mentally unstable news anchor named Howard Beale. But Chayefsky could not determine how they fit together. Were they allegorical figures in a larger narrative about power and decadence, or were they just a bunch of grotesque caricatures? What did any of them have to do with the love story he was trying to thread through his script, and was that too conventional even to belong there? Across the top of a piece of paper he had torn from a notebook, Chayefsky wrote in jagged capital letters nearly impaled by an aggressive underline: THE SHOW LACKS A POINT OF VIEW. Then, in a gentler, pleading cursive handwriting, he filled both sides of that page with his unflinching self-analysis of the project, which he believed was drifting into chaos. “I guess what bothers me is that the picture seems to have no ultimate statement beyond the idea that a network would kill for ratings,” he wrote. Most crucially, he wondered, what was he even trying to say in this screenplay? Were there identifiable sides to this argument, and whose side was he on? Because if he couldn’t answer that, what was he creating, if not more fuel for his pyre of curtailed efforts and unsatisfied aspirations? “We are making some kind of statement about American society,” he wrote, “and its lack of clarity is what’s bothering me—Even more, I’m not taking a stand—I’m not for anything or anyone—If we give Howard a speech at the end of the show, what would he say?” Sometime later, on a piece of the blank yellow paper he more commonly used for his writing, Chayefsky started to answer this question by sketching out a few handwritten phrases: “I want you people to get mad—You don’t have to organize or vote for reformers—You just have to get mad.” Within months, Chayefsky would harness his boundless capacity for anger and channel it into his script for a motion picture called Network, investing it with all the angst, anxiety, and paranoia he had ever felt.
Recommended publications
  • Before the Forties
    Before The Forties director title genre year major cast USA Browning, Tod Freaks HORROR 1932 Wallace Ford Capra, Frank Lady for a day DRAMA 1933 May Robson, Warren William Capra, Frank Mr. Smith Goes to Washington DRAMA 1939 James Stewart Chaplin, Charlie Modern Times (the tramp) COMEDY 1936 Charlie Chaplin Chaplin, Charlie City Lights (the tramp) DRAMA 1931 Charlie Chaplin Chaplin, Charlie Gold Rush( the tramp ) COMEDY 1925 Charlie Chaplin Dwann, Alan Heidi FAMILY 1937 Shirley Temple Fleming, Victor The Wizard of Oz MUSICAL 1939 Judy Garland Fleming, Victor Gone With the Wind EPIC 1939 Clark Gable, Vivien Leigh Ford, John Stagecoach WESTERN 1939 John Wayne Griffith, D.W. Intolerance DRAMA 1916 Mae Marsh Griffith, D.W. Birth of a Nation DRAMA 1915 Lillian Gish Hathaway, Henry Peter Ibbetson DRAMA 1935 Gary Cooper Hawks, Howard Bringing Up Baby COMEDY 1938 Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant Lloyd, Frank Mutiny on the Bounty ADVENTURE 1935 Charles Laughton, Clark Gable Lubitsch, Ernst Ninotchka COMEDY 1935 Greta Garbo, Melvin Douglas Mamoulian, Rouben Queen Christina HISTORICAL DRAMA 1933 Greta Garbo, John Gilbert McCarey, Leo Duck Soup COMEDY 1939 Marx Brothers Newmeyer, Fred Safety Last COMEDY 1923 Buster Keaton Shoedsack, Ernest The Most Dangerous Game ADVENTURE 1933 Leslie Banks, Fay Wray Shoedsack, Ernest King Kong ADVENTURE 1933 Fay Wray Stahl, John M. Imitation of Life DRAMA 1933 Claudette Colbert, Warren Williams Van Dyke, W.S. Tarzan, the Ape Man ADVENTURE 1923 Johnny Weissmuller, Maureen O'Sullivan Wood, Sam A Night at the Opera COMEDY
    [Show full text]
  • BOSTON Is More Than a Running Film. It Is a Timeless Story About Triumph Over Adversity for Runner and Non-Runner Alike. Film Sy
    BOSTON is more than a running film. It is a timeless story about triumph over adversity for runner and non-runner alike. Film Synopsis BOSTON is the first ever feature-length documentary film about the world’s most legendary run- ning race – the Boston Marathon. The film chronicles the story of the iconic race from its humble origins with only 15 runners to the present day. In addition to highlighting the event as the oldest annually contested marathon in the world, the film showcases many of the most important moments in more than a century of the race’s history. from a working man’s challenge welcoming foreign athletes and eventually women bec me the stage for manyThe Bostonfirsts and Marathon in no small evolved part the event that paved the way for the modern into a m world-classarathon and event, mass participatory sports. Following the tragic events of. The 2013, Boston BOSTON Marathon a the preparations and eventual running of the, 118th Boston Marathon one year later when runners and community gather once again for what will be the most meaningful raceshowcases of all. for , together The production was granted exclusive documentary rights from the Boston Athletic Association to produce the film and to use the Association’s extensive archive of video, photos and memorabilia. Production Credits: Boston is presented by John Hancock Financial, in association with the Kennedy/Marshall Com- pany. The film is directed by award winning filmmaker Jon Dunham, well known for his Spirit of the Marathon films, and produced by Academy Award-nominee Megan Williams and Eleanor Bingham Miller.
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Or Fiction: Hollywood Looks at the News
    FACT OR FICTION: HOLLYWOOD LOOKS AT THE NEWS Loren Ghiglione Dean, Medill School of Journalism, Northwestern University Joe Saltzman Director of the IJPC, associate dean, and professor of journalism USC Annenberg School for Communication Curators “Hollywood Looks at the News: the Image of the Journalist in Film and Television” exhibit Newseum, Washington D.C. 2005 “Listen to me. Print that story, you’re a dead man.” “It’s not just me anymore. You’d have to stop every newspaper in the country now and you’re not big enough for that job. People like you have tried it before with bullets, prison, censorship. As long as even one newspaper will print the truth, you’re finished.” “Hey, Hutcheson, that noise, what’s that racket?” “That’s the press, baby. The press. And there’s nothing you can do about it. Nothing.” Mobster threatening Hutcheson, managing editor of the Day and the editor’s response in Deadline U.S.A. (1952) “You left the camera and you went to help him…why didn’t you take the camera if you were going to be so humane?” “…because I can’t hold a camera and help somebody at the same time. “Yes, and by not having your camera, you lost footage that nobody else would have had. You see, you have to make a decision whether you are going to be part of the story or whether you’re going to be there to record the story.” Max Brackett, veteran television reporter, to neophyte producer-technician Laurie in Mad City (1997) An editor risks his life to expose crime and print the truth.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthology Drama: the Case of CBS Les Séries Anthologiques Durant L’Âge D’Or De La Télévision Américaine : Le Style Visuel De La CBS Jonah Horwitz
    Document generated on 09/26/2021 8:52 a.m. Cinémas Revue d'études cinématographiques Journal of Film Studies Visual Style in the “Golden Age” Anthology Drama: The Case of CBS Les séries anthologiques durant l’âge d’or de la télévision américaine : le style visuel de la CBS Jonah Horwitz Fictions télévisuelles : approches esthétiques Article abstract Volume 23, Number 2-3, Spring 2013 Despite the centrality of a “Golden Age” of live anthology drama to most histories of American television, the aesthetics of this format are widely URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1015184ar misunderstood. The anthology drama has been assumed by scholars to be DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1015184ar consonant with a critical discourse that valued realism, intimacy and an unremarkable, self-effacing, functional style—or perhaps even an “anti-style.” See table of contents A close analysis of non-canonical episodes of anthology drama, however, reveals a distinctive style based on long takes, mobile framing and staging in depth. One variation of this style, associated with the CBS network, flaunted a virtuosic use of ensemble staging, moving camera and attention-grabbing Publisher(s) pictorial effects. The author examines several episodes in detail, demonstrating Cinémas how the techniques associated with the CBS style can serve expressive and decorative functions. The sources of this style include the technological limitations of live-television production, networks’ broader aesthetic goals, the ISSN seminal producer Worthington Miner and contemporaneous American 1181-6945 (print) cinematic styles. 1705-6500 (digital) Explore this journal Cite this article Horwitz, J. (2013). Visual Style in the “Golden Age” Anthology Drama: The Case of CBS.
    [Show full text]
  • Buck Henry, Who Helped Create ʻget Smartʼ and Adapt ʻthe Graduate,ʼ Dies at 89 an Unassuming Screenwriter and Actor, Mr
    1/11/2020 Buck Henry, Who Helped Create ‘Get Smart’ and Adapt ‘The Graduate,’ Dies at 89 - The New York Times https://nyti.ms/2N7atsQ Buck Henry, Who Helped Create ʻGet Smartʼ and Adapt ʻThe Graduate,ʼ Dies at 89 An unassuming screenwriter and actor, Mr. Henry thought up quirky characters with Mel Brooks and inhabited many more on “Saturday Night Live.” By Bruce Weber Published Jan. 9, 2020 Updated Jan. 10, 2020 Buck Henry, a writer and actor who exerted an often overlooked but potent influence on television and movie comedy — creating the loopy prime-time spy spoof “Get Smart” with Mel Brooks, writing the script for Mike Nichols’s landmark social satire “The Graduate” and teaming up with John Belushi in the famous samurai sketches on “Saturday Night Live” — died on Wednesday in Los Angeles. He was 89. His wife, Irene Ramp, said his death, at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, was caused by a heart attack. John Belushi, left, and Mr. Henry in the 1978 “Saturday Night Live” sketch “Samurai Optometrist.” Fred Hermansky/NBCUniversal via Getty Images As a personality and a performer, Mr. Henry had a mild and unassuming aspect that was usually in contrast with the pungently satirical or broadly slapstick material he appeared in — and often wrote. Others in the room always seemed to make more noise. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/movies/buck-henry-dead.html 1/6 1/11/2020 Buck Henry, Who Helped Create ‘Get Smart’ and Adapt ‘The Graduate,’ Dies at 89 - The New York Times Indeed, for almost 50 years he was a Zelig-like figure in American comedy, a ubiquitous if underrecognized presence not only in grand successes but also in grand failures.
    [Show full text]
  • BAM/PFA Program Guide Were Initiated by Bampfa.Berkeley.Edu/Signup
    2011 SEP / OCT BAM/PFA UC BERKELEY ART MUSEum & PacIFIC FILM ARCHIVE PROGRAM GUIDE SILKE OTTO-KNAPp RICHARD MISRACh DESIRÉE HOLMAn KURT SCHWITTERs cREATe hIMALAYAN PILGRIMAGe DZIGA VERTOV RAINER WERNER FASSBINDER UCLA FESTIVAL OF PRESERVATIOn PAUL SHARITs yILMAZ GÜNEy nEW HOLLYWOOD CINEMA IN THE SEVENTIEs TERRY RILEY rOBIN COX ENSEMBLE 01 BAM/PFA EXHIBITIONS & FILM SERIES SILKE OTTO-KNAPP / MATRIX 239 P. 7 1991: THE OAKLAND-BERKELEY FIRE AfTErmATH PHOTOGRAPHS BY RICHARD MIsrACh P. 5 RICHARD MIsrACH: PHOTOGRAPHS from THE COLLECTIOn P. 6 DESIRÉE HoLMAN: HETEroTOPIAS / MATRIX 238 P. 9 CREATE P. 8 ROME, NAPLES, VENICE: MASTERWORKS from THE BAM/PFA COLLECTIOn P. 9 KURT SCHWITTErs: COLor AND COLLAGe P. 8 HIMALAYAN PILGRIMAGE: JOURNEY TO THE LAND of SNOWS P. 9 THom FAULDErs: BAMscAPE UCLA FESTIVAL of PrESErvATIOn P. 15 THE OUTSIDErs: NEW HoLLYWooD CINEMA IN THE SEVENTIES P. 12 SOUNDING Off: PorTRAITS of UNUSUAL MUSIC P. 18 ALTERNATIVE VISIONS P. 22 ANATOLIAN OUTLAW: YILMAZ GÜNEy P. 20 KINO-EYE: THE REvoLUTIONARY CINEMA of DZIGA VERTov P. 24 A THEATER NEAR You P. 19 PAUL SHARITS: AN OPEN CINEMa P. 23 HomE MovIE DAy P. 17 RAINER WERNER FAssbINDER: TWO GrEAT EPIcs P. 26 GET MORE Listen to artist Desirée Holman in conversation with curatorial assistant Dena Beard, bampfa.berkeley.edu/podcasts. Cover Dziga Vertov: Imitation of the "Leap from the Grotto" (PE 5), c. 1935; from the Vertov Collection, Austrian Film Museum, Vienna. Listen to the June 23 Create roundtable discussion, bampfa.berkeley.edu/podcasts. 01. Peter Bissegger: Reconstruction of Kurt Schwitters’s Merzbau, 1981-83 (original ca. 1930–37, destroyed 1943); 154 3/4 × 228 3/8 × 181 in.; Sprengel Museum Hannover; Photo: Michael Herling/ Learn more about L@TE artists and programmers at bampfa.berkeley.edu/late.
    [Show full text]
  • Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll Generation Saved Hollywood Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    EASY RIDERS, RAGING BULLS: HOW THE SEX, DRUGS AND ROCK AND ROLL GENERATION SAVED HOLLYWOOD PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Peter Biskind | 512 pages | 26 Apr 1999 | SIMON & SCHUSTER | 9780684857084 | English | New York, United States Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll Generation Saved Hollywood PDF Book My impression of this documentary wasn't so great due to the fact of already seeing and knowing a similar themed work a few years ago called "A Decade Under the Influence" , directed by Ted Demme and Richard LaGravenese, which was a better project for numerous reasons. Why do people go see them? The book is hefty with gossip of all kinds, which is too bad because he's talking about the revolution in films in the 60's to early 80's. It is chock full of interviews and choice information about the time period 60's's in American cinema that changed everything, for a lot better and some for not. Beatty likes to fuck alot. Biskind's book disappointed me tremendously. Return to the Books Home Page. Assassinations, cultural domination, drugging, spying, provocation: Talk about taking the fight to your opponents—the American people—and crippling them for generations! But in the kind of popularized pseudohistory ''Easy Riders, Raging Bulls'' exemplifies, anecdotes are valued above all else, bitchy gossip is privileged, dysfunction is automatically more fascinating than artistic success, aggrieved former friends and former lovers are granted the license to settle scores sometimes anonymously , documentation is disdained and historical analysis must be squeezed into the narrative quickly, so as not to disrupt the dishing.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cherry Orchard
    9 Brooklyn Academy of Music presents The Cherry Orchard Xt. Of P BROOKLYN ACADEMY OF MUSIC Harvey Lichtenstein, President and Executive Producer presents The Cherry Orchard by ANTON CHEKHOV English Translation by ELISAVETA LAVROVA with (in alphabetical order) ROBERTS BLOSSOM BRIAN DENNEHY HOWARD HENSEL LINDA HUNT ZELJKO IVANEK ERLAND JOSEPHSON KATE MAILER CHRIS MCNALLY REBECCA MILLER MIKE NUSSBAUM NATASHA PARRY DAVID PIERCE STEPHANIE ROTH JAN TRISKA Set and Costumes Designed by CHLOE OBOLENSKY Lighting Designed by Incidental Music Composed by JEAN KALMAN MARIUS CONSTANT Production Stage Manager Casting by ROBERT BENNETT RISA BRAMON and BILLY HOPKINS LISA PETERSON MARIE-HELENE ESTIENNE Directed by PETER BROOK Joseph V. Melillo, Associate Producer Michael O'Rand, General Manager Paul E. King, Production Manager BAM Majestic Theater This program has been sponsored by grants from eon & © New York Telephone INCORPORATED A NYNEX Company glib. CHASE 0 1; GRENADIER REALTY CORP. of STARRETT CITY IMP , I . managing agent Arts. Additional funds have been provided by the National Endowment for the Arts and the New York State Council on the The BAM facility is owned by the City of New York and its operation is supported, in part, with public funds provided through the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs. The principal capital funding for the BAM Majestic Theater with the was provided by the City of New York through the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs special assistance of the Brooklyn Borough President's Office and the Office
    [Show full text]
  • THE PHILOSOPHY of STEVEN SODERBERGH the Philosophy of Popular Culture
    THE PHILOSOPHY OF STEVEN SODERBERGH The Philosophy of Popular Culture Th e books published in the Philosophy of Popular Culture series will illuminate and explore philosophical themes and ideas that occur in popular culture. Th e goal of this series is to demonstrate how philosophical inquiry has been reinvigorated by increased scholarly interest in the intersection of popular culture and philosophy, as well as to explore through philosophical analysis beloved modes of entertainment, such as movies, TV shows, and music. Philosophical concepts will be made accessible to the general reader through examples in popular culture. Th is series seeks to publish both established and emerging scholars who will engage a major area of popular culture for philosophical interpretation and examine the philosophical underpinnings of its themes. Eschewing ephemeral trends of philosophical and cultural theory, authors will establish and elaborate on connections between traditional philosophical ideas from important thinkers and the ever-expanding world of popular culture. Series Editor Mark T. Conard, Marymount Manhattan College, NY Books in the Series Th e Philosophy of Stanley Kubrick, edited by Jerold J. Abrams Football and Philosophy, edited by Michael W. Austin Tennis and Philosophy, edited by David Baggett Th e Philosophy of the Coen Brothers, edited by Mark T. Conard Th e Philosophy of Film Noir, edited by Mark T. Conard Th e Philosophy of Martin Scorsese, edited by Mark T. Conard Th e Philosophy of Neo-Noir, edited by Mark T. Conard Th e Philosophy of Horror, edited by Th omas Fahy Th e Philosophy of Th e X-Files, edited by Dean A.
    [Show full text]
  • Paddy Chayefsky on the Craft of Writing (Excerpts), 8 John Joseph Brady
    Audience Guide Written and Compiled by Jack Marshall September 17 – October 16, 2010 Gunston TheatreTwo About The American Century Theater The American Century Theater was founded in 1994. We are a professional company dedicated to presenting great, important, and neglected American plays of the Twentieth Century… what Henry Luce called “the American Century.” The company‘s mission is one of rediscovery, enlightenment, and perspective, not nostalgia or preservation. Americans must not lose the extraordinary vision and wisdom of past playwrights, nor can we afford to surrender our moorings to our shared cultural heritage. Our mission is also driven by a conviction that communities need theater, and theater needs audiences. To those ends, this company is committed to producing plays that challenge and move all Americans, of all ages, origins and points of view. In particular, we strive to create theatrical experiences that entire families can watch, enjoy, and discuss long afterward. These study guides are part of our effort to enhance the appreciation of these works, so rich in history, content, and grist for debate. The American Century Theater is a 501(c)(3) professional nonprofit theater company dedicated to producing significant 20th Century American plays and musicals at risk of being forgotten. TACT is funded in part by the Arlington County Cultural Affairs Division of the Department of Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Resources and the Arlington Commission for the Arts. This arts event is made possible in part by the Virginia Commission for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Arts, as well as by many generous donors.
    [Show full text]
  • Human' Jaspects of Aaonsí F*Oshv ÍK\ Tke Pilrns Ana /Movéis ÍK\ É^ of the 1980S and 1990S
    DOCTORAL Sara MarHn .Alegre -Human than "Human' jAspects of AAonsí F*osHv ÍK\ tke Pilrns ana /Movéis ÍK\ é^ of the 1980s and 1990s Dirigida per: Dr. Departement de Pilologia jA^glesa i de oermanisfica/ T-acwIfat de Uetres/ AUTÓNOMA D^ BARCELONA/ Bellaterra, 1990. - Aldiss, Brian. BilBon Year Spree. London: Corgi, 1973. - Aldridge, Alexandra. 77» Scientific World View in Dystopia. Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Research Press, 1978 (1984). - Alexander, Garth. "Hollywood Dream Turns to Nightmare for Sony", in 77» Sunday Times, 20 November 1994, section 2 Business: 7. - Amis, Martin. 77» Moronic Inferno (1986). HarmorKlsworth: Penguin, 1987. - Andrews, Nigel. "Nightmares and Nasties" in Martin Barker (ed.), 77» Video Nasties: Freedom and Censorship in the MecBa. London and Sydney: Ruto Press, 1984:39 - 47. - Ashley, Bob. 77» Study of Popidar Fiction: A Source Book. London: Pinter Publishers, 1989. - Attebery, Brian. Strategies of Fantasy. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1992. - Bahar, Saba. "Monstrosity, Historicity and Frankenstein" in 77» European English Messenger, vol. IV, no. 2, Autumn 1995:12 -15. - Baldick, Chris. In Frankenstein's Shadow: Myth, Monstrosity, and Nineteenth-Century Writing. Oxford: Oxford Clarendon Press, 1987. - Baring, Anne and Cashford, Jutes. 77» Myth of the Goddess: Evolution of an Image (1991). Harmondsworth: Penguin - Arkana, 1993. - Barker, Martin. 'Introduction" to Martin Barker (ed.), 77» Video Nasties: Freedom and Censorship in the Media. London and Sydney: Ruto Press, 1984(a): 1-6. "Nasties': Problems of Identification" in Martin Barker (ed.), 77» Video Nasties: Freedom and Censorship in the MecBa. London and Sydney. Ruto Press, 1984(b): 104 - 118. »Nasty Politics or Video Nasties?' in Martin Barker (ed.), 77» Video Nasties: Freedom and Censorship in the Medß.
    [Show full text]
  • 20 Films on Politics and the Media | Thecommentary.Ca Page 1 of 5
    20 films on politics and the media | thecommentary.ca Page 1 of 5 thecommentary.ca » • Home • About • Biography • Links Search... Home » The Commentary 20 films on politics and the media 29 December 2009 | Email This Post | Print This Post BY JOSEPH PLANTA VANCOUVER – A few weeks ago, Sean Holman, the talented and prodigious editor of Public Eye Online was on the program to discuss the year that was and the year to come in provincial politics. We got to talking movies, when I’d asked him if he’d seen State of Play, the fine American film based on the British miniseries of the same name. He suggested two other films: The Candidate and Shattered Glass. This got me thinking about what films had the best depictions of politics, media, journalism and the writing process. I came up with a few, and limited myself to twenty which seemed a workable number. Twenty favourites, as it were. Of course the list is subjective, and is in no particular order. I suspect if I ever get to watching Dr. Strangelove, or The Front Page, or Bob Roberts, or Silver City, they might be added to the list, perhaps even bumping off something already here. There’s nothing on this list that was made for television, otherwise the House of Cards trilogy would be here, as well as the original British miniseries State of Play, The Thick of It, The West Wing, and of course, the Yes, Minister/Yes, Prime Minister tandem. Perhaps Mr. Holman or others would like to add to or debate my choices.
    [Show full text]