NekoHomey Purely Joyful Movie!
Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.
2hotFeature one of my absolute favorites!
Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.
gavin6942 A TV news cameraman in Chicago find himself becoming personally involved in the violence that erupts around the 1968 Democratic National Convention.Roger Ebert credited Haskell Wexler with masterfully combining multiple levels of filmmaking to create a film that is "important and absorbing". That is an understatement. This film is great on its own (without the real world footage), but Wexler really lucked out on his choice of subject matter. He was in the right place at the right time to get these kind of shots.What results is not only a film of the highest caliber, but a piece of American history presented in a way that might even be called entertaining. And heck, it has a young Peter Boyle, so you cannot beat that.
Jack Kierski I often like to watch films more than once and I recently did that with Medium Cool, which was originally released on August 27, 1969.The film was directed, written, and cinematography recorded by Haskell Wexler. He invented and used an unforgettable cinema vérité-style documentary filmmaking technique, as well as combining fictional and non-fictional content.Medium Cool was actor Robert Forster's first film in a lead role. Medium Cool is one of those films that shows cinematic footage of a nonfictional event in the movie - the 1968 Democratic National Convention protest activity. At that convention the protesters and the Chicago Police Department fought in the streets of Chicago while the US Democratic Party met during the convention in the International Amphitheater.John Cassellis (played by Forster) is a Chicago television news reporter and cameraman. Cassellis and sound man Gus (played by Peter Bonerz) are reporting about the violence and racial tensions in the ghetto. One of people that interviewed is an African American taxi driver who lives in the ghetto. Cassellis later discovers that his network had helped the FBI by providing some of his video footage from the protests in order to aid the FBI in their search for suspects. When Cassellis protests, he is fired at which time he then decides to go to the convention to record more footage.Cassellis ends up befriending Eileen (played by Vena Bloom), a welfare recipient who'd moved from her West Virginia home when her husband was sent to Vietnam. Eileen has a 13 year old son named Harold (Harold Blankenship).Ruth (Marianna Hill) is an attractive nurse, who has a relationship with Cassellis.Medium Cool is an extraordinary piece of cinematic art of the cinema verite-film style by Haskell Wexler. The way that the film combines a fiction and non-fiction story was very well explained and detailed due to Wexler's filmmaking style. The cinema verite genre combines well with a dramatic genre. One example: the argument scenes in the film that involve John Cassellis.Haskell Wexler did an amazing job with the cinematography. The way that he recorded the 111 minutes of the movie was very well accomplished. I especially found his cinematography style of the film to be influential. Wexler's amazing style of the film could influence other filmmakers. The reason why it could influence filmmakers because the cinema verite style that used was very revolutionized for its time and young filmmakers has never laid eyes on this type of film style before. Wexler's film style mostly influenced documentary film makers.The plot of the film was excellent and enhanced by the realism of the footage containing political protests of the late 1960s. I loved how the plot well captured and symbolized America in the 1960s and its political protests. One particularly interesting moment to me in the film is showed people setting up for the convention. Then, the black screen appears with the sentence: "America is wonderful". After that, John and Eileen are dancing in a psychedelic rock concert. This matters to me because this moment of the movie could bring back memories for people, who experienced late 1960s political conventions and psychedelic rock music concerts.Here's my advice: The movie is a definite must see for all generations. I give the film an strong 4 out of 4 stars.
Gethin Van Haanrath Movies have a way of capturing the moment better than recreating it. I can only dread what a recreated 1968 in Chicago would look like from a Hollywood perspective. It would probably resemble something out of Forrest Gump. But Medium Cool happened to capture some brutal fight scenes with police in Chicago as well as scenes from the black ghettos. You can't recreate this stuff. This isn't a documentary but cinema verité and combines fiction and non-fictional elements. It's all shot with Chicago of 68 in the background. A landmark and infamous year for the US with the assassinations of RFK and MLK as well as the 1968 Democratic National Convention which was met with severe state repression. The state wasn't negotiating at this time, it was brutally sending men off to war and attacking those at home with the hired goons of the police force.It's a great movie which manages to combine fiction and non-fiction and shows us what the sixties were really like. It wasn't all love beads and LSD, although there is an amusing psychedelic sequence which takes place in a club.I think what I liked most was that even people who were non-political were being dragged into the politics of the time. Events were that serious at the time and people had to begin picking sides, the pleasant, white, middle-class interior of the Chicago DNC or outside fighting and raging against the police.
nicjaytee Absorbing, thought provoking and, above all, a unique record of an important "place & time", why "Medium Cool" still fails to gain the attention it deserves remains one of life's great mysteries.First off, it's a pretty good if somewhat disted story
two "world-wise" middle class news reporters are sent to film the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago and become unwittingly involved in its political demonstrations, the inner city problems that have precipitated them, and the lives of a single mother and her young son in this harsh, confusing and seriously under-privileged world. Its acting, in particular from Robert Forster as the lead reporter and the 13 year old Harold Blankenship as the son, is excellent and at times so effective that it's difficult to you're watching a rigidly sequenced film rather than a social documentary. And, it's overlaid with some quite stunning cinema-photography from director Haskell Wexler, one of America's very best exponents of the art, backed up by a perfectly pitched late 60's soundtrack.Good enough so far, but that's just the start. Add-in its extensive live footage from the streets of Chicago as the riots develop, taken by the film's camera crew as they themselves are caught-up in a very "real" political drama, its ominous sequencing of the build up of events from a fun "day in the park" for the hippies/yippies to serious "police state" level violence, its equally chilling images of what was going on inside the Convention Hall while all of this was taking place, and the clever and disturbing scenes of the mother's desperate search for her lost son as Wexler films her within the increasingly anarchic crowds of demonstrators & troops actually on the streets at the time, and you've got
something very special.Part film and part documentary, not all of what you think is "real" in "Medium Cool" is, and the lines between live and acted scenes are sometimes confusingly and frustratingly blurred, as in the famous call from one of the camera crew of "look out Haskell this is real" as a tear gas canister lands in front of them, which was in fact over-dubbed afterwards. But that's the whole point of the film as the final, almost startling scenes reveal. How far is the media in control? Is what you're seeing real, distorted or contrived? Wexler's brilliance is to take this underlying theme and to mould it into a fascinating exploration of inner city life, American society in a period of huge change, and the power/needs of the media in a TV dominated world, while, in parallel, producing a gripping record of what it's like to be in the centre of a demonstration that's spiralling out of control. Juxtaposing the impersonality of reporting with the very personal situations that are involved, it raises a whole series of questions on the way without falling into the trap of most films of the era in trying to ram home too many answers. And, as a result, it remains as relevant today as it did then.Quite rightly regarded as one of the best "counter culture" films of the late 60's and much richer and more thought provoking than this classification usually implies, it remains one of the most under-rated films out there.