Jerry Seinfeld In Hot Water With Documentary Filmmaker

---"Sinno's got a point: If ever there were ever opportunity to educate and elucidate a large audience as to the importance of documentary films, it would be during the annual Oscar broadcast. Yet Seinfeld took the stage and basically reinforced all the lamest stereotypes out there."---

First of all, I watch plenty of documentaries. To say they're anything more that entertainment is ludicrous. They're lies at 24 fps, just like a standard film. Just like a standard film the director, editor, cameraman, foley guy, etc all play a part in CREATING a theme, feeling and tone. It's all manufactured.

As for Sinno - he needs to have a pop tart and chill the f^ck out. He makes moving pictures - nothing important about entertainment.

"And by labeling the documentaries "incredibly depressing," he indirectly told millions of viewers not to bother seeing them because they're nothing but downers. He wasted a wonderful opportunity to excite viewers about the nominated films and about the documentary genre in general."

Excite them about what? more movies. The whole night is dedicated to extolling how great movies are and how they're so special. Nobody is allowed to mock any of the uptight "artists" at the Academy Awards. please, they make little stories on film - docu or straight fiction it's still manufactured entertainment.

"To have a presenter introduce a category with such disrespect for the nominees and their work is counter to the principles the Academy was founded upon."

Yeah, how dare he mock entertainers. After all, the dancing monkeys might get upset!

"...while giving an advantage to films distributed by large studios. Fewer controversial films will qualify for Academy consideration, and my film Iraq in Fragments would have been disqualified this year. "

Welcome to big business, bro. You wanted to be in pictures, this is the Wal-mart world in which we live.

"On a final note, I would like to point out that there was no mention of the Iraq War during the Oscar telecast, though it was on the minds of many in the theatre and of millions of viewers."

Oh right, the telecast is a pulpit too. Not only are we not allowed to mock the dancing monkeys, we have to listen to their didactic speeches about topical issues. Please, just dance for us monkeys, dance and stop the twaddle.

"As filmmakers, it is the greatest professional crime we can commit not to speak out with the truth. We owe it to the public."

The truth? Truth is subjective. Many, including myself, don't want to hear Al gore's point of view on the environment, let alone listen to Susan Sarandon prattle on about the war - a war I opposed from the start and still think foolhardy. Babble about the war if you must, but really your point of view holds no more sway than the lies and propaganda of Fox News whores or the raving bum on the street corner.

"I hope what I have said is taken to heart. It comes from my concern for the cinematic art and its crucial role in the times we're living in."

Here's the crucial role = it's entertainment. That's all.

Sincerely,

BGDC - a guy who watches about 70 films a year at the theater and another 150+ on DVD every year. Love the movies but never forget they're JUST entertainment. From The Departed to Fast, Cheap and Out of Control, it's just entertainment.

Lighten up and have a pop tart, mumenchanz.

Reply

Scott, thank you for extending the reach of this powerful and important revelation regarding the academy, mr. seinfeld and Mr. Sinno. I am one of the few that did not watch the Academy Awards, except flashing through it on tivo. The Academy has a strong responsibility to the public and considering the monies involved they should be more thoughtful and less arrogant in their choices and presentations. It is reminiscent of the damage critics can rage on films, considering the limited time and resources we have in making our viewing selections. As it is, my daughter and I opted out of viewing dream girls due to a review my niece shared with us. mr. seinfeld, definitely is guilty of recycling others material, as he did in 'seinlanguage' offering humor that was recycling before he was born. If you have had the opportunity of seeing the documentaries that were offered, please share your reviews of them. I would be most interested in your thoughts. I can only hope that the works of Mr. Sinno garner the attention that they rightly deserve. Thanks

Reply

I was going to say something but it looks like bgdc covered it with Sinno - he needs to have a pop tart and chill the f^ck out. This is Hollywood. It's the Oscars not the Nobel Prize.

Reply

I guess Sinno wishs the awards were 8 hours long without any slight bit of entertainment. I'm surprised there wasn't an uproar for Will Farrell and his sexual harassment problem with Helen Mirren.

Reply

I'm a bit confused by bgdc's comments. So movies aren't allowed to be anything other than fluff? Their lone intention is to entertain? There are no merits for a documentary that wishes to educate? Or are titles like "Common Threads" and "Hearts and Minds" just ass-whoopin' popcorn flicks?

And does that standard extend to television? After all, "Nova" and "My Name Is Earl" are both TV shows. Surely "Nova" is just silly entertainment, nothing more.

Even if, as you say, the truth gets all distorted and manufactured and smothered in lies, to dismiss films that strive to be something else is a ridiculous, short-sighted view.

As for the letter itself: I'm reminded of the minor uproar that occured when Johnny Carson cracked a few jokes about sound editors. At least Carson's rips were funny. Seinfeld wound up just being a jackass. ("Yeah, I make messes in movie theaters. I'm a millionaire. Suck it!")

Reply

Truth of it is, most of the documentaries WERE about depressing topics, so the joke is a valid one.

Child molestation, end of the world slide show, War in Iraq pieces, and a look at an evangelical christian camp (which from what I saw of the trailers was not a positive look at it)? These could all be seen as depressing subjects quite easily.

The thing is, documentaries are not meant to be entertaining or depressing specifically. I disagree that a documentary is nothing but entertaintment, but I DO agree that documentaries are essentially lies on film: that is, they are the truths the director wants us to see. By nature, that's what cinema verite and direct cinema techniques of documentary produce. Half truths.


I think Sinno needs to sit down and relax for a bit, and focus on something more important than Seinfeld, and prhaps what *really* bothers him: the atrocity that a slide show like "An Inconvenient Truth" beat our these other well crafted movies. That is worth writing a letter about.

Reply

While it is true that a documentary film, or photographic essay, or book for that matter may represent a director's, photographer's or author's perspective on an important issue, to relegate the genre of documentary film to entertainment is fairly simplistic and worse – ignorant-- and disregards the motives and intentions most documentarians have in the pursuit of their project: to investigate, enlighten, inform, explore, advocate, etc... -- in any an all combinations of the above. To take it one step further, the independent documentary filmmaker (unlike filmmakers who are backed by a studio or major corporation), may risk substantial personal financial resources, not to mention their own physical and/or emotional well-being in pursuit of their subject. Successful documentaries make a positive difference in people's lives as well as in the health of the physical and social environments in which we all live. To have a presenter at the Academy Awards use humor or make jokes as part of their presentation is not in bad taste by itself, but to denigrate the work of others through banal, tiresome, narcissistic jokes is more of a reflection of the presenter than the films being honored. Unfortunately for the Documentary nominees, an opportunity to really celebrate their accomplishments and the value of the genre to the fullest extent, was diminished if not sabotaged by Seinfeld's bad taste. Seinfeld really made his presentation more about himself than about the films and filmmakers who were very honored by the Academy's nomination, and whose nomination was a validation of their efforts to make us all more aware of issues that the mainstream media typically glosses over. I suggest that before critics of concerns John Sinno raises dismiss him as simply an "entertainer", they should first spend a little time themselves on the front lines of the subject so they really know what they are talking about. Maybe then we could grant their dismissals some credibility.

Bob Parker

Reply

Oh come on, lighten up! It was a joke! Remember, the Oscars are an entertainment show. That means, they should be entertaining! And as for me, Seinfeld's bit was one of the few entertaining moments. If the show gets any more boring then fewer people will watch it and thus fewer people will hear about Mr. Sisto's film. He should be happy that he was nominated at all. The Oscars are never about art, they are about business and popularity - the latter of which Mr. Sisto has not exactly gained in with his ignorant reaction.

Reply

DAVID wrote: "I'm a bit confused by bgdc's comments. So movies aren't allowed to be anything other than fluff?"

Allowed to be? That's all they are. There is nothing more to film than entertainment.

"Their lone intention is to entertain? There are no merits for a documentary that wishes to educate? "

They may wish to do those things but in the end it's still entertainment. To call a film important or educational is to assign a personalized value to it. In the end it's just an entertainment medium.

"And does that standard extend to television? After all, "Nova" and "My Name Is Earl" are both TV shows. Surely "Nova" is just silly entertainment, nothing more."

True. Both accounts. TV, like music and film are entertainment media. As is TV news.

"Even if, as you say, the truth gets all distorted and manufactured and smothered in lies, to dismiss films that strive to be something else is a ridiculous, short-sighted view."

I didn't dismiss the film; i dismissed the filmmaker's holier-than-thou belief that film is somehow more important than entertainment. It's 1.5-3 hours of a viewer's life, nothing more. The director may intend many things but in the end his film succeeds or fails unless it entertains (affects them, forces them to laugh, cry, emote, think, etc) on some level. He's putting on a show. If a few in the audience are moved by his show, then he has succeeded in entertaining them.

Reply

bob parker - "...to relegate the genre of documentary film to entertainment is fairly simplistic and worse – ignorant-- and disregards the motives and intentions most documentarians have in the pursuit of their project: to investigate, enlighten, inform, explore, advocate, etc..."

Their goal is to tell you a story and entertain you. Entertainment doesn't have to be rolling on the floor laughing. essentially, the documentarian, like all filmmakers wants to tell you a story and make you care about his point of view. That's the crux. She's using purported truth to tell the story but in the end it's ALL about getting the audience to care (ie be entertained) by the themes/elements.

"To take it one step further, the independent documentary filmmaker (unlike filmmakers who are backed by a studio or major corporation), may risk substantial personal financial resources, not to mention their own physical and/or emotional well-being in pursuit of their subject."

Ditto a an indy fiction filmmaker. Both take chances, both can reap rewards from their risk. Risk-reward is synonymous with all filmmaking because in the end it's still a business. You want to make something that entertains (impacts the audience) to a level word will get out and people will want to watch your film.

" Successful documentaries make a positive difference in people's lives as well as in the health of the physical and social environments in which we all live."

Bull. They're movies. The only film I've EVER heard of that changed a life: The Thin Blue Line - save a man's life literally.

" Seinfeld really made his presentation more about himself than about the films and filmmakers who were very honored by the Academy's nomination,"

Yeah, he took the chance to grab the spotlight on a show that is banal, tiresome and without merit. He made headlines and got noticed. Same can't be said for the other people who came on stage that night.

you're trying impart some level of respectability to documentaries that simply doesn't exist. They're films - just like War of the worlds - and just like Spielberg's film, their only purpose is to attract an audience to the director's views.

Reply

I think Mr. Sinno did overreact to Seinfeld's attempt at humor, but I can understand why he'd be upset. As for bgdc's comments, well... something certainly qualifies as bull, but it's not bob parker's opinion about the effect that documentaries can have. I myself believe that docs like An Inconvenient Truth can have a positive impact if they inspire people to action. Plus, someone has to bring light to these problems and those in power have shown no interest in doing so. BTW, bgdc, if you don't want to hear Al's views on the environment or anyone else's views, here's an idea: CHANGE THE CHANNEL. Don't infringe on someone else's freedom of speech.

Reply

John Sinnp, take a happy pill, for Christ sake! Do you think people watching Jerry Seinfeld thought he was serious. He is a comedian! I think people can laugh about the docos being depressing because they are. So what? They can still be great films even if they are depressing.

And since when do the Oscars HAVE to mention the Iraq. Where have you been tne last five years? They have mentioned it every year except this year, thank God. All we need is more multi-millionaire entertainers telling us their insightful thoughts on world politics. I don't care what Hollywood stars think about the Iraq war. They are quick to criticise their own troops trying to instil democracy among savages but their silence is deafening when Muslim extremist terrorist attacks kill innocent people in the western world and Israel.

Instead, this year we get multi-millionaire Hollywod stars telling us about global warming and how we must all help to reduce it while these stars travel in limousines and carbon-emitting airplanes everywhere they go. Their way to help the environment is by driving a Toyota Prius, for Christ sake. So everfyone, stop driving those Hummers and exchange it for a Prius, OK!

Reply

elessar - "I myself believe that docs like An Inconvenient Truth can have a positive impact if they inspire people to action. Plus, someone has to bring light to THESE PROBLEMS and those in power have shown no interest in doing so"

Right there you're determining there's a problem and that what is in the film is somehow important - I believe global warming a is a problem, a film will not shape that view or influence it though because it's just a movie made by people with a one-sided agenda (as is the case with all people and their works). The filmmakers of Inconvenient decided the story they had to tell was "important" but they had to entertain (intrigue, fascinate, push) enough members of the audience to get attention.

"BTW, bgdc, if you don't want to hear Al's views on the environment or anyone else's views, here's an idea: CHANGE THE CHANNEL. Don't infringe on someone else's freedom of speech."

I fully agree. I'm not saying people should be banned from saying things they believe. What I find amusing is the notion that people would CARE about the views of Martin Sheen or Al Gore or Rush Limbaugh. They're just entertainers...nothing more.

Reply

I pretty much agree with bgdc.

The director of a documentary is trying to inform us of his point of view. That's it. Director's of other genres often try to do the same. They usually aim for entertainment in order to capture the audience rather than bore them to tears. The craft is well executed or it isn't. Either way, there's no point venerating a genre of film just because the fiction happens to be behind the camera.

I also dissapprove of the Iraq War and I agree that Global Warming is a serious issue. I just don't want to be lectured at an entertainment show. Seinfled made some jokes, that was appropriate, that fit the evening. It is Al Gore and his gang who were out of step. Mercifully, it ended there. Last year we had to endure lectures on piracy, the preferable manner to watch movies, Iraq, global warming, and on and on. Perhaps lessons were learned.

Reply

You think Seinfeld wrote that joke? Every word uttered on the Academy Awards, save the acceptance speeches, is written by Bruce Vilanch. The presenters just read what's on the TelePrompTer. This "open letter" is misguided.

Reply

tim, I think someone like Seinfeld would have at the very least collaborated with Bruce Vilanch. Seinfeld would not do other people's material. Most of the stuff sounded Seinfeldish to me but I think Bruce Vilanch may have been responsible for the "incredibly depressing" remark as I doubt Seinfeld would have even heard any of the docos let alone seen them.

Reply

wow...what a uptight baby. This guy makes films...thats it! YOU ARE NOT IMPORTANT! get over yourself you clown


http://www.tigerdroppings.com/movieTV

Reply

When you have clowns like Algore or Michael Moore making so-called "documentaries", then you have clowns like Seinfeld giving the awards. Why dignify garbage?

Reply

I agree that documentaries can have an impact outside the world of film, perhaps even beyond the impact of other entertainment mediums. They are a way to shed light on what the director thinks is important, but they can also bring to light a problem that we all would agree is an issue but that no other mainstream format had tackled. Having said that, Jerry Seinfeld is a comedian and the Oscars are PURE entertainment. To be offended that he did not bow down to your chosen genre of film is arrogant and misinformed. Furthermore, to believe that Seinfelds speech did much to affect the documentary field ascribes far too much importance to his influence. The people that knew nothing about these documentaries knew nothing because they simply do not care and would not even had Seinfeld praised their artistic merits. People who are going to see these movies are going to see them because of the "Oscar Nominated" tag that will be slapped onto the DVD box, and those same people will not be turned away by the "Made Fun of by Jerry Seinfeld" tag that Sinno seems so terrified by.

Reply