HBO Documentary on Frazier-Ali Fight

[SF-TX]

The following is a review of a documentary appearing on HBO about the boxing match between Frazier and Ali in Manilla.

Thrilla in Manilla By: David Forsmark
FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, May 06, 2009

Thrilla in Manilla
A film by John Dower
Narrated by Liev Schreiber

On issues ranging from Hurricane Katrina and Iraq to Election 2000, HBO's documentaries aren't exactly known for toeing anything resembling a conservative line. But the cable network’s latest offering, a film by British director John Dower, Thrilla in Manila, strikes a knockout blow to the graven image of the Left’s greatest sports icon, Muhammed Ali.

How thoroughly does Thrilla in Manila take Ali down? How about this line: "Ali was the mouthpiece for a religious group that had the same beliefs as the white supremacist Klu Klux Klan..."

...But while everyone seems to describe him with the word "bitter," Frazier comes across as anything but. Joe seems completely at peace with his justified contempt for Ali as a man. In that way, Frazier is a throwback to a pre-therapeutic age of manliness when everyone didn’t have to have a group hug in order to be content with the order of things.

That’s appropriate, since Joe Frazier was also a throwback as a champion — a gracious, good sport who respected his sport and his opponent -- and who was unprepared for an age where heroes were
created by a media agenda instead of by an individual’s actions.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArti...px?ARTID=34721

[Sigaba]

Mr. Forsmark seems so eager to grind his axe that he neglected to remember that Ali and Frazier patched up their relationship several years ago.

Source is here.

Frazier (on his recent reconciliation with Ali): “We had some rugged years. But it’s all over, it’s done and gone. Now, I hope the best for him.”

[SF-TX]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Mr. Forsmark seems so eager to grind his axe that he neglected to remember that Ali and Frazier patched up their relationship several years ago.

Source is here.

So, setting the record straight on how Frazier was unfairly characterized by Ali and the media is axe-grinding? The fact that Frazier 'reconciled' with Ali is a testament to Frazier's character.

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

So, setting the record straight on how Frazier was unfairly characterized by Ali and the media is axe-grinding? The fact that Frazier 'reconciled' with Ali is a testament to Frazier's character.

SF-TX--

With respect, Mr. Forsmark's decision not to review the HBO special with anything resembling disinterest deprives his readers the opportunity to know if the documentary offers any new insights on the Ali-Frazier rivalry, the fight itself, or America in the 1970s.

Moreover, the review suggests that Mr. Forsmark believes that race is debated within the African-American community the same as its is in American society in general. Or is that his summary of how the special presents this issue?

Ultimately, the piece answers the questions: What does Mr. Forsmark think of Mr. Frazier, Mr. Ali, the news media, the American Left, and Bryant Gumbel. The piece does not answer the question: should viewers watch the HBO special on the Thrilla in Manilla?

[SF-TX]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

SF-TX--

With respect, Mr. Forsmark's decision not to review the HBO special with anything resembling disinterest deprives his readers the opportunity to know if the documentary offers any new insights on the Ali-Frazier rivalry, the fight itself, or America in the 1970s.

Moreover, the review suggests that Mr. Forsmark believes that race is debated within the African-American community the same as its is in American society in general. Or is that his summary of how the special presents this issue?

Ultimately, the piece answers the questions: What does Mr. Forsmark think of Mr. Frazier, Mr. Ali, the news media, the American Left, and Bryant Gumbel. The piece does not answer the question: should viewers watch the HBO special on the Thrilla in Manilla?

Damn! I was hoping that a man (David Forsmark) I was previously unaware of would tell me whether or not I should watch the documentary Thrilla in Manilla. I suppose I will have to wait for a ‘disinterested’ reviewer to let me know.

[SF-TX]

The following reviews have not been analyzed to determine the reviewers level of disinterest in Thrilla in Manilla:

http://www.fangsbites.com/2009/04/re...in-manila.html

http://festival.sundance.org/2009/fi...ller_in_manila

[SF-TX]

One more review, from an admitted Ali fan:

http://boxoffice.com/reviews/2009/01...-in-manila.php

...To a life-long Ali fan, like myself, who knew next to nothing about Joe Frazier, this informative doc introduced me to a socio/cultural event that is now considered the greatest boxing match in history...

...It’s heartbreaking to think that in Philadelphia the greatest tribute to a prize-fighter (a statue at the foot of the art museum steps) belongs to the fictional boxer, Rocky Balboa. In fact, it was Frazier who worked in a Philly slaughterhouse, pounding huge sides of beef as practice, and trained by running up the museum steps. Perhaps Thriller in Manila will set the record straight. The 63-year-old Frazier still owns a training gym there and, like the Morgan Freeman character in Million Dollar Baby, lives in a single room upstairs. Asked about his current feelings toward Ali, Frazier responded: “Whatever you do as a young man comes back to bite you in the butt when you’re old.” To him, Ali’s suffering from Parkinson’s disease is plain and simple justice. Another interviewee speaks of the blood feud in mythic proportions: “Both men were Ahab and each was the black whale, but neither could catch the other.”

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

Damn! I was hoping that a man (David Forsmark) I was previously unaware ....

With respect, I understand that you're being sarcastic. My point simply is that I don't think Mr. Forsmark is a very good reviewer. I think his grasp of American mass popular culture needs strengthening. I think he uses his reviews as part of a broader plan of self-promotion common among new media journalists of all stripes. A few examples follow.

Earlier this year, Mr. Forsmark wrote:

The show is not only one of the greatest sitcoms ever — it made Time magazine’s 100 Greatest TV Shows list — but also the most meaningfully conservative television show of its generation.

The show in question? Fox's King of the Hill (link). (IIRC, there was a show called Seventh Heaven.)

While Mr. Forsmark is attempting to make a name for himself as a cultural critic and scourge of the American left, his list of favorite films includes.

Favorites: In no particular order:High Noon, Casablanca,The Searchers,The Seven Samurai, The Godfather I & II,Saving Private Ryan, The Lord of the Rings, Dirty Harry, Bringing Up Baby, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, The Big Sleep, Night of the Hunter, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Patton, Psycho, Rear Window, Strangers on a Train, North by Northwest, O Brother Where Art Thou, Fargo, The Manchurian Candidate, Double Indemnity, The Apartment, Great Expectations, Oliver Twist, On the Waterfront, Heat, The Great Escape, The Bridge on the River Kwai, The Guns of Navarone, Rio Bravo, Red River, Lonestar, The Apostle, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, Dr. Strangelove, The Music Man, Three Kings, Tin Men, Tootsie, Spartacus, The Silence of the Lambs, Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail, Rashomon, Yojimbo, The Right Stuff, Rob Roy, Searching for Bobby Fischer, Blackhawk Down, We Were Soldiers, Jaws, The Sixth Sense, Life is Beautiful, My Darling Clementine, Friendly Persuasion, The Good the Bad and the Ugly, The Matrix, October Sky, Hoosiers.

While I'm especially fond of Lone Star, Three Kings, and Spartacus, that trio of films and especially Spartacus--the script was ghost written by Dalton Trumbo--hardly have much good to say about the American right. The other two are outright hostile.

As a film reviewer, Mr. Forsmark frequently offers odd observations. In 2001, while reviewing Traffic, he compared Steven Soderbergh to Howard Hawks and Hitchcock while discounting the importance of artistry in story telling. (This dismissal of artistry, by the way, is in accord with contemporary cultural criticism that is broadly--and, arguably, inelegantly--described as Leftist.) For Mr. Forsmark to suggest that Soderbergh's treatment of America's war on drugs does not have an overtly hostile political message makes me wonder if he actually watched the movie or if he fell asleep (as many theater goers did the two times I saw it). <<LINK>>

Then there's Mr. Forsmark's review of Michael Mann's The Insider (1999) <<LINK>>. In this review, Forsmark falls over his grindstone to go after the MSM at the expense of developing a fuller understanding of the issues he's attempting to discuss. In this case, he over looks the fact that Lowell Bergman is the embodiment of the Leftist values that Forsmark believes undermine America. It was Mr. Bergman who, in an article for Rolling Stone, argued that Ronald Reagan was nothing more than a pawn for monied interests in his home state of California.

Finally, take his review of Bowfinger (1999) <<LINK>>. Arguably, his efforts to present himself as a person who knows how Hollywood works and someone who "gets" all the jokes would have worked better had he showed any awareness that the character of Daisy (Heather Graham) was Steve Martin's revenge on an ex-girlfriend (the lovely Anne Heche).

[SF-TX]

Sigaba,

You are obviously more familiar with Mr. Forsmark's work than I. Personally, I don't give much credence to any movie reviews and their critics. In fact, I have noticed an inverse relationship between the amount of praise a film receives and how much I like the film.

The last film I saw solely based on the rave reviews it received was About Schmidt, with Jack Nicholson. Horrible movie, though you would have never known it by the reviews. It was even nominated for two Oscars. The entire movie was spent denigrating middle-America. The underlying message of the movie is that if you work hard and plan on enjoying your retirement you are a sucker. I was the sucker for wasting 3 hours of my life and the price of admission.

[ZonieDiver]

The underlying message of the movie is that if you work hard and plan on enjoying your retirement you are a sucker.

Maybe "About Schmidt" was prescient, in that a lot of us are probably going to soon discover that the imminent retirement we worked hard to attain and planned to enjoy will actually result in us being a "sucker"!

[Sigaba]

SF-TX--

My About Schmidt moment occurred when I went to see Chaplin (1992). With all the critics buzzing about the film receiving mulitple Oscar nominations, no one took the time to point out that John Barry did the score. Worse, no one did the courtesy of pointing out that the film had a tell tale kiss of big time suckery: the writing credit had three different groups of names separated by both the word "and" as well as an ampersand.

To his credit, Anthony Lane hit it out of the park in 2005 with his review of Episode III, here.

FWIW, "review the reviewer" is a tool I stumbled upon at the University of Texas. In my experience, reading multiple reviews by the same person can help one quickly figure out what that reviewer is bringing to the table. (Unfortunately, "photocopy books / articles / and reviews starting from the last page" was a tool that had to be pointed out to me.)

[Roguish Lawyer]

I saw the documentary and thought it was incredibly good. I couldn't care less about the review.

[SgtDan]

I clicked on this thread because I am a huge Joe Frazier fan. I laughed out loud when some dufus know it all "academic" tried to discredit this excellent review by saying Joe and Ali had made up years ago. I nearly busted a gut when the guy who made this statement any boxing fan would know is hilarious tried to say the reviewer couldn't be trusted because he doesn't know tabloid trivia about Steve Martin and Anne Heche!

It seems Mr. Forsmark has a stalker, though he probably hasn't noticed. Going back to Bowfinger, The Insider, and asserting a minority opinion about Traffic is bizarre.

Guerrilla says the reviewer must be "disinterested," though all the reviews I saw are from OPINON magazines or sites. Then he illogically turns around and says Forsmark should not include any movies Guerrilla considers liberal or have liberal roots. Wouldn't it be bad if he didn't like them? I'm more rightwing than that guy, and I love the movies you highlight. As for the Hawks and Hitchcock references, they seem to be more specific than you imply out of context. Soderburg did display an amazing versatility in his early career, and if he'd made a western would have almost spanned Hawks's range. The fact that he has spend the last several years sucking isn't relelvant. That was reviewing not fortune telling. Besides, G, you must have LOVED Che.

King of the Hill (the Fox show) is one of my favorites, and it skewers PC regularly, and 7th Heaven was harmless pap, moral, I guess, but not political. Why is it weird to say the show is "meaningfully conservative?" 7th Heaven was neither influencial or as long-running. Thanks for directing me to that column, btw, at least you made me aware of a new writer for me to watch for.

How long have you been stalking this guy? This is a strange rant, but I have to go back to the basics, as I was taught in Basic. You started with the premise that Joe and Ali are buds. So, look in the mirror for "odd observations."

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by SgtDan

I clicked on this thread because I am a huge Joe Frazier fan. I laughed out loud when some dufus know it all "academic" tried to discredit this excellent review by saying Joe and Ali had made up years ago. I nearly busted a gut when the guy who made this statement any boxing fan would know is hilarious tried to say the reviewer couldn't be trusted because he doesn't know tabloid trivia about Steve Martin and Anne Heche!

It seems Mr. Forsmark has a stalker, though he probably hasn't noticed. Going back to Bowfinger, The Insider, and asserting a minority opinion about Traffic is bizarre.

Guerrilla says the reviewer must be "disinterested," though all the reviews I saw are from OPINON magazines or sites. Then he illogically turns around and says Forsmark should not include any movies Guerrilla considers liberal or have liberal roots. Wouldn't it be bad if he didn't like them? I'm more rightwing than that guy, and I love the movies you highlight. As for the Hawks and Hitchcock references, they seem to be more specific than you imply out of context. Soderburg did display an amazing versatility in his early career, and if he'd made a western would have almost spanned Hawks's range. The fact that he has spend the last several years sucking isn't relelvant. That was reviewing not fortune telling. Besides, G, you must have LOVED Che.

King of the Hill (the Fox show) is one of my favorites, and it skewers PC regularly, and 7th Heaven was harmless pap, moral, I guess, but not political. Why is it weird to say the show is "meaningfully conservative?" 7th Heaven was neither influencial or as long-running. Thanks for directing me to that column, btw, at least you made me aware of a new writer for me to watch for.

How long have you been stalking this guy? This is a strange rant, but I have to go back to the basics, as I was taught in Basic. You started with the premise that Joe and Ali are buds. So, look in the mirror for "odd observations."

Dan:

Please review the board rules and stickies for where your first post should be and fill in your profile before posting again.

TR

[greenberetTFS]

Agreed, Sgt Dan has to get his act together regarding our rules and regs, but he makes a few good points which I'm in total agreement with.................. Not all, but most...........

GB TFS