Rating: 
Summary: The first absolutely multi-purpose film.
Review: "Medium Cool" is one of those magnificent wonders that creeps up on the film world, either in passing conversation or in revivals. But it still has yet to receive it's pure due, in spite of it being made over 30 years ago.It's an accidental masterpiece. Director Haskell Wexler's original intentions were to (via filmic terms) view the various sides of the media as relating to Marshall McLuhan's famous "hot medium/cool medium" essay. In this case, he corraled a bunch of actors (some of whom were associated with the Chicago improvisational scene), gave a loose story line and filmed it around the unfolding events at the 1968 Chicago Democratic Convention (with a few accidental stops in Los Angeles & Washington). Wexler attempted to put the actors into the roles of television men & everyday people and, basically, leave them with their own improvisational devices. Tus, this is where "Medium Cool" develops. Maybe upon first viewing it in 1969, the performances didn't hold up, but more than thrity years later, everyone involved (even right down to the smallest part) has to be commended. This film is more than an experiment, or even a time capsule, but a true countercultural event. This is a film that not only teaches a thing or two about the times (1968), but also serves as a great study on media and it's truths & manipulations. It's also a great acting lesson of what improvisational acting truly should be...risk-taking with a high degree of failure (and NOT the cutesy-poo clever laugh inducing theatre that it's been reduced to...more later). You want a true example of play actors facing a REAL reality situation? Well, look no further... Robert Forster's role may seem a little wooden at first, but as the movie (and years) pass on, he did an extraordinary effort of a man who's caught between compassion for his job, the manipulation that seems so tempting and the overall wear & tear that comes with the territory. Peter Bonerz puts an an excellent improvisational performance, years before "Bob Newhart" and fresh out of Chicago improv. One scene, with the two reporters in Washington after Robert Kennedy's assassination (in a taxi) speaks pages. But two performances really stand out: Verna Bloom & Harold Blankenship. Verna Bloom has the least obvious role as a lower-class single mother who, with very open and impressionable eyes, takes in everything around her via Forster's world. In what seems like an innocent (and touching) supporting role turns into one of the most ballsy & daring improvisational performances ever attempted, with the mother (looking for her son) stumbles upon a growing riot in a park. Only, the riot is very much real life. Masterful performance. Harold Blakneship as the son provides what is the most pure performance by a child actor. He doesn't mug nor try to act cute, but there's something in his soul that looks like it lived many lifetimes. It's a soulful & haunting performance that doesn't seem to be self-conscious of the camera. Despite Paramount allowing him to film it with a very strict budget, this is truly an independent film. Risks were taken. Lives were most definitely at stake. Comments had to be made. But it's one of the finest cinematic risks ever taken and a true multi-purpose film. This DVD not only carries a fine widescreen transfer, but contains great commentary from Wexler, Paul Golding & Marianna Hill, plus a cool theatrical trailer (with the original 'X' certificate at the end for historical purposes). Fan of this film will not be disappointed. In late 1999, I was in a class with a Chicago-based improvisational company (which shal remain nameless). When I mentioned this film in conversation, the teacher (who was also the manager of the L.A. branch) asked what we were talking about, I told him "Medium Cool". When he had never heard of it, I was shocked and told him that any improvisational actor, from Chicago or otherwise, should make this a mandatory film for studying any kind of on-the-spot acting. I lent it to him, but when I asked for his impressions, he just found it "interesting". I guess he wanted to make people laugh.
Rating:
Summary: The first absolutely multi-purpose film.
Review: "Medium Cool" is one of those magnificent wonders that creeps up on the film world, either in passing conversation or in revivals. But it still has yet to receive it's pure due, in spite of it being made over 30 years ago. It's an accidental masterpiece. Director Haskell Wexler's original intentions were to (via filmic terms) view the various sides of the media as relating to Marshall McLuhan's famous "hot medium/cool medium" essay. In this case, he corraled a bunch of actors (some of whom were associated with the Chicago improvisational scene), gave a loose story line and filmed it around the unfolding events at the 1968 Chicago Democratic Convention (with a few accidental stops in Los Angeles & Washington). Wexler attempted to put the actors into the roles of television men & everyday people and, basically, leave them with their own improvisational devices. Tus, this is where "Medium Cool" develops. Maybe upon first viewing it in 1969, the performances didn't hold up, but more than thrity years later, everyone involved (even right down to the smallest part) has to be commended. This film is more than an experiment, or even a time capsule, but a true countercultural event. This is a film that not only teaches a thing or two about the times (1968), but also serves as a great study on media and it's truths & manipulations. It's also a great acting lesson of what improvisational acting truly should be...risk-taking with a high degree of failure (and NOT the cutesy-poo clever laugh inducing theatre that it's been reduced to...more later). You want a true example of play actors facing a REAL reality situation? Well, look no further... Robert Forster's role may seem a little wooden at first, but as the movie (and years) pass on, he did an extraordinary effort of a man who's caught between compassion for his job, the manipulation that seems so tempting and the overall wear & tear that comes with the territory. Peter Bonerz puts an an excellent improvisational performance, years before "Bob Newhart" and fresh out of Chicago improv. One scene, with the two reporters in Washington after Robert Kennedy's assassination (in a taxi) speaks pages. But two performances really stand out: Verna Bloom & Harold Blankenship. Verna Bloom has the least obvious role as a lower-class single mother who, with very open and impressionable eyes, takes in everything around her via Forster's world. In what seems like an innocent (and touching) supporting role turns into one of the most ballsy & daring improvisational performances ever attempted, with the mother (looking for her son) stumbles upon a growing riot in a park. Only, the riot is very much real life. Masterful performance. Harold Blakneship as the son provides what is the most pure performance by a child actor. He doesn't mug nor try to act cute, but there's something in his soul that looks like it lived many lifetimes. It's a soulful & haunting performance that doesn't seem to be self-conscious of the camera. Despite Paramount allowing him to film it with a very strict budget, this is truly an independent film. Risks were taken. Lives were most definitely at stake. Comments had to be made. But it's one of the finest cinematic risks ever taken and a true multi-purpose film. This DVD not only carries a fine widescreen transfer, but contains great commentary from Wexler, Paul Golding & Marianna Hill, plus a cool theatrical trailer (with the original 'X' certificate at the end for historical purposes). Fan of this film will not be disappointed. In late 1999, I was in a class with a Chicago-based improvisational company (which shal remain nameless). When I mentioned this film in conversation, the teacher (who was also the manager of the L.A. branch) asked what we were talking about, I told him "Medium Cool". When he had never heard of it, I was shocked and told him that any improvisational actor, from Chicago or otherwise, should make this a mandatory film for studying any kind of on-the-spot acting. I lent it to him, but when I asked for his impressions, he just found it "interesting". I guess he wanted to make people laugh.
Rating:
Summary: An unsung masterpiece
Review: Actually, I have not seen the video. But I have seen the film perhaps a dozen times in theaters and again last year on Bravo. Wexler brilliantly created a filmic mobious strip. An arrogant TV news cameraman, who views life as just a "story" for which he supplies the footage but always from a distance, is pulled deeper into the messy reality beyond the image. Wexler had the foresight to set most of the action in the days leading up to and including the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, a watershed event in our media-driven culture. (As if by cue, the protestors shout, "the whole world is watching." Moreover, Wexler and his crew had shot some of the Illinois State Guard troops in training a few months before the convention. When the rioting starts in Chicago, Wexler and some of the guardsmen recognize one another. If you listen closely, you can hear one of the crew members yell, "Look out Haskell. This is for real.")There are some wonderful little homages to various filmmakers Wexler admires, but above all to Godard. "Contempt" is specifically referred to on the voice track (the unlikely pretense being that it was the late movie on TV--that'll be the day!) and the final sequence is a direct reference ("Medium Cool" is to "Contempt" what the latter film is to Rossolini's "Voyage to Italy": one filmmaker's brilliant salute to another). "Medium Cool" was the subject of much debate and discussion in various circles (film and radical politics, among others) when it was released. If memory serves, Andrew Sarris' review essay was a cover story of the late "Saturday Review." But Paramount failed to promote the film in any way that would gain it a mainstream audience. Whether that was a sin of omission or comission was also subject to much debate. But if you care about the history of film, you owe it to yourself to see this picture.
Rating:
Summary: Beyond the age of innocence
Review: Hollywood just didn't get it in the Sixties and the best they could do was turn out stuff like "Wild in the Streets." But there were two films that did capture what was going on in those days and 'Medium Cool' was one of them. The other was 'Easy Rider,' and both of them were made in spite of Hollywood and not with the help of Hollywood. One picture dealt with the political upheaval in the streets and the other dealt with the cultural revolution. I saw 'Medium Cool' the week it opened and I probably wasn't the only one who considered it a revolution in film making and figured it would be the first of many such films that tied documentary and narrative film together, but sadly there were no more 'Medium Cool's' to follow, or no more 'Easy Rider's' either. The Amazon review is totally uninformed in describing what happened in Chicago. The only 'riot' that happened were the police riots that repeatedly attacked the protesters and anyone else who happened to be in their way. And very few of us considered ourselves to be hippies by that time. I know because I was there and that's me on the cover of the DVD carrying a red flag. Interestingly Haskell -- who I became friends with many years later -- is still at it. I was marching down Hollywood Boulevard in an antiwar protest at the beginning of the Iraq war and looked up just in time to see Haskell in the crowd pointing his DVD camera at me. There was no tear gas this time, no rioting cops, and no machine guns set up on the streets. I wasn't carrying a red flag and my hair has long since turned to gray, but some some basic things never change. This picture tells it like it was as only the world's greatest cinematographer could have done it. Amazon calls it a 'curiosity' and maybe it is, but it's also an authentic historical document executed with artistry and passion and is every bit as watchable as it was back then. I recommend it especially for this wonderful and brave new generation who are carrying on the great American tradition of dissent in these troubled times.
Rating:
Summary: Beyond the age of innocence
Review: Hollywood just didn't get it in the Sixties and the best they could do was turn out stuff like "Wild in the Streets." But there were two films that did capture what was going on in those days and 'Medium Cool' was one of them. The other was 'Easy Rider,' and both of them were made in spite of Hollywood and not with the help of Hollywood. One picture dealt with the political upheaval in the streets and the other dealt with the cultural revolution. I saw 'Medium Cool' the week it opened and I probably wasn't the only one who considered it a revolution in film making and figured it would be the first of many such films that tied documentary and narrative film together, but sadly there were no more 'Medium Cool's' to follow, or no more 'Easy Rider's' either. The Amazon review is totally uninformed in describing what happened in Chicago. The only 'riot' that happened were the police riots that repeatedly attacked the protesters and anyone else who happened to be in their way. And very few of us considered ourselves to be hippies by that time. I know because I was there and that's me on the cover of the DVD carrying a red flag. Interestingly Haskell -- who I became friends with many years later -- is still at it. I was marching down Hollywood Boulevard in an antiwar protest at the beginning of the Iraq war and looked up just in time to see Haskell in the crowd pointing his DVD camera at me. There was no tear gas this time, no rioting cops, and no machine guns set up on the streets. I wasn't carrying a red flag and my hair has long since turned to gray, but some some basic things never change. This picture tells it like it was as only the world's greatest cinematographer could have done it. Amazon calls it a 'curiosity' and maybe it is, but it's also an authentic historical document executed with artistry and passion and is every bit as watchable as it was back then. I recommend it especially for this wonderful and brave new generation who are carrying on the great American tradition of dissent in these troubled times.
Rating: 
Summary: "Medium Cool" Doesn't Bring Enough Heat
Review: I first time I became aware of this movie was when I read Roger Ebert named it one of the ten best films of 1969, though the film was not available on vhs or dvd. "Medium Cool" is a werid hybrid. It has moments that work and other that don't seem as polished. This may be due to the improvised atmosphere the film creates. When "Medium Cool" works it captures the feeling and the spirit of the 60s. It belongs in a class of movies such as "Blow-Up" , "Weekend", & "Z". Even if you were not born in those times, and I wasn't, the film manages to lets us know what it was like back then. The opening moments of the film are my favorite. It has a documentary feeling. It seems intense, and maybe because I'm a journalist major I enjoyed the scene where the journalist talk about the choices they make in what they show on TV. But ultimately "Medium Cool" is a political movie that has a political and social message. We hear characters speak about the Kennedy assassination, the war, and Dr. Martin Luther King. And while these issues are 40 years old many of the arguments being presented in the film can be argued today. For instance there is a scene with protesters and one shouts out "We have a war we do not want!" All of this is bein told while the 1968 Democratic Nation Convention is about to come to Chicago. And it works, but the movie at this point loses its focus. Now we have a love story emerging between John (Robert Forster) the star of the movie and Eileen (Verna Bloom). Their story sometimes drags the movie down. Eileen doesn't really do anything for the movie. Maybe if she were part of the protest against the war she would have fit in better or even if she was for the war that could create a another conflict the film could have used. But no this never happens. The movie also was improvised and this hurts it also. The dialogue is terrible. I've yet to see a movie that has improvised dialogue that I enjoyed. It sounds like very bad 40s "B" picture talk. The kind of dialogue that you laugh at even though you know it's suppose to be taken seriously. The movie was directed by Haskell Wexler, he also gets writing credit, producer and cinematography credit. And most people probably know him just as a cinematography. He filmmed "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest", "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?", and "The Thomas Crown Affair (68 version)". Even though I didn't find the directing to be impressive he did receive a Directors Guild nomination for this film. While the movie does have its problems, bad dialogue, werid hybrid story-line and an ending I personally found unsatisfying, even though I guess you could say the movie ends the way it begins. It is still a movie I'm glad I saw. And I hope many others see it for a first or second viewing. *** 1\2 out of ***** Bottom-line: Entertaining if sometimes disappointing look at life in the 60s. Still works in today's world as many of the problems are still being fought. Worthwhile overall.
Rating:
Summary: I had to see it twice!
Review: I saw "Medium Cool" shortly after I had been drafted in 1969 - in San Antonio where I was going through basic training for conscientious objectors. I was so blown away by this film I sat through it a second time (you could do that in those days) to try to take it all in. The mixture of documentary style direction with actors playing characters was a new idea, but to put them into an explosive (& eventually exploding) situation was a stroke of cinematic genius by Wexler. The movie also received an "X" rating for a scene you could probably show during family viewing hours on TV these days.
The thing that still stands out in my mind after all these years is Robert Forster's characterization of the news cameraman. Working in this "cool" medium, he stays detached from the people he films almost to the point of inhumanity. In the opening scene, Forster and sound man Peter Bonerz come upon a crash on an expressway, the car against a wall with its horn blowing continuously and a bleeding woman lying on the ground next to the open passenger's door. They procede to start filming the scene, but Bonerz compains that the horn is wiping out all other sound he might get. Forster goes to the open (from the crash) hood of the car & yanks out the horn wires. They then continue filming the scene without ever considering calling for help for the injured woman on the ground until they're finished. You begin to wonder who are these guys who callously put getting the story, which they would have gotten anyway, ahead of helping someone who's been injured.
Two other scenes come to mind which give insight into Forster's character. In one scene with girlfriend Marianna Hill, she challenges him by asking him about a scene from the movie "Mondo Cane". This scene involved tortoises on a Pacific island whose sense of direction had been affected by atomic bomb tests to the point where they no longer knew how to find the ocean. She asks Forster if, after they were done filming, the cameramen might have turned the tortoises around and pointed them toward the ocean. She really wants to know what he would have done. Forster replies, "How do I know? Those were French cameramen."
The second scene occurs when Forster is watching the mourning for the death of Martin Luther King on TV at Verna Bloom's house. His reaction to the outpouring of grief & emotion on the screen is to say, "Jesus, I love to shoot film."
Forster (& the others I've mentioned) are great in this film. And among the other points he makes with this film, Wexler reminds us that to the TV camera, our lives, joys, accomplishments and especially our sufferings are reduced to being just frames of film which may occasionally be newsworthy.
Rating: 
Summary: An INDIE if there ever was one.
Review: Interesting approach to revealing the world of photojournalism, news journalism, and political activism, conceived and directed by award -winning cinematographer Haskell Wexler. Fictional narrative features a Chicago TV news crew intertwined with actual news footage in and around the Democratic Convention of 1968. There is a good balance between the fiction and non-fiction elements in as much as Wexler attempts to make his point. The fictional story line (a love story) is real enough to keep us watching and deflective enough to make the harsh realities of the non-fiction elements palatable. Attention to detail defines Medium Cool as a very personal film for Wexler. There definitely is a political perspective. Second and third viewings will call attention to painstaking perfectionism in construction of shots, timing, and pace--the subject matter and cinematic approach (low budget, hand-held, docu-style) may suggest a "student film" so don't be confused. This is an extremely well-crafted highly professional product. Nice interjects of great era-defining music compliment the visuals. Inventive, some say ground-breaking, certainly well worth watching.
Rating:
Summary: Incredible, Fantastic, Superb, Phenomenal, Ultrarealistic
Review: Medium Cool is a film directed by Haskel Wexler who won an Academy Award for cinematography on the superb "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf". This film is a totally unique documentary style 1st class drama set during the actual 1968 Democratic Convention. As the film begins we see a car wreck and a cameraman who stops to film it, but doesn't help the victim. This is one central character. The other is an attractive West Virginian woman (Verna Bloom). Now into the film we hear RFKs final speech, and soon are in the midst of the now historic rioting in Chicago '68. The title came from Marshall McCluen's books. TV is the medium and cool its detachment from reality, but reality gets right in your face and those of the characters. This was THE confrontation the '60s had built up to and you had to choose sides: Peace and Love or Pigs and War. Needless to say, Wexler's vision was not shared by the masses (who elected Nixon). The McCluen based concept for the film is on an intellectual level many won't get, but what is easily accessible is the whole '60s feel in all the scenes, off the cuff newsmen discussions, a hippy psychodelic party, and '60s street scenes. In short all elements come together spontaneously to create an important, thought provoking, memorable vision of the '60s.
Rating:
Summary: Incredible, Fantastic, Superb, Phenomenal, Ultrarealistic
Review: Medium Cool is a film directed by Haskel Wexler who won an Academy Award for cinematography on the superb "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf". This film is a totally unique documentary style 1st class drama set during the actual 1968 Democratic Convention. As the film begins we see a car wreck and a cameraman who stops to film it, but doesn't help the victim. This is one central character. The other is an attractive West Virginian woman (Verna Bloom). Now into the film we hear RFKs final speech, and soon are in the midst of the now historic rioting in Chicago '68. The title came from Marshall McCluen's books. TV is the medium and cool its detachment from reality, but reality gets right in your face and those of the characters. This was THE confrontation the '60s had built up to and you had to choose sides: Peace and Love or Pigs and War. Needless to say, Wexler's vision was not shared by the masses (who elected Nixon). The McCluen based concept for the film is on an intellectual level many won't get, but what is easily accessible is the whole '60s feel in all the scenes, off the cuff newsmen discussions, a hippy psychodelic party, and '60s street scenes. In short all elements come together spontaneously to create an important, thought provoking, memorable vision of the '60s.
| 
