The Trial Journalist
In a piece today for the Los Angeles Times, Harriet Ryan, a journalist who covered both Phil Spectortrials blasts the movie. While Ryan explains that HBO does include a disclaimer, claiming that the movie is an act of interpretation rather than recreation, she argues that in its looseness with the facts it contradicts itself:
The LA Times plays hard and fast games with innocent people's lives and does a grave disservice to both its readers and the taxpayer. Well, Harriet Ryan has to stand behind her stories now. Maybe the LA Times is actually worried about a slander lawsuit.
The LA Times plays hard and fast games with innocent people's lives and does a grave disservice to both its readers and the taxpayer. Well, Harriet Ryan has to stand behind her stories now. Maybe the LA Times is actually worried about a slander lawsuit.
What's especially galling is that the film commits the very crime it condemns. "Phil Spector" argues that a famous eccentric can't get a fair trial because the bloodthirsty, ignorant public is willfully blind to the facts. But the movie supports its thesis by ignoring, misrepresenting and soft-pedaling the evidence.What? Did the movie commit suicide like Lana Clarkson did at Phil Spector's house after, according to his former assistant, telling him "This is what I can do to your cock?" The LA Times concealed the evidence and sold its readers slander, gossip, defamation, and other daily offerings.
She argues that the movie disregards that fact that Spector did have blood on his jacket, dismisses the women who testified that Spector had pulled guns on them, and chooses to gloss over his actually happy marriage during the trial. The movie, she says, tries to be about the "nature of celebrity" but:
The great forensic scientist, Ryan, weighs in. I would dismiss them. They don't really know Phil Spector and women who do - Janice Zavala Spector, Rachelle Spector, Paulette Brandt, Kelley Lynch, and others without motive -- haven't seen him with a gun. Of course, they also didn't sell their stories to National Enquirer; weren't caught going through his drawers and stealing from him; etc. The LA Times glorified the drug culture in Hollywood and gold diggers who are targeting men like The Scientist, Duck of Eek A Mouse, and many others.
The great forensic scientist, Ryan, weighs in. I would dismiss them. They don't really know Phil Spector and women who do - Janice Zavala Spector, Rachelle Spector, Paulette Brandt, Kelley Lynch, and others without motive -- haven't seen him with a gun. Of course, they also didn't sell their stories to National Enquirer; weren't caught going through his drawers and stealing from him; etc. The LA Times glorified the drug culture in Hollywood and gold diggers who are targeting men like The Scientist, Duck of Eek A Mouse, and many others.
In shoving Spector's case into an ill-fitting argument, so much of what made his case fascinating is lost. The movie depicts Spector as a music industry Miss Havisham, shambling through his mansion's endless rooms of musty memorabilia and muttering about John (Lennon) and Lenny (Bruce).
I'll watch the movie since I don't trust a word that comes out of Harriet Ryan's mouth about Phil Spector and she now has motive to protect her shabby journalism. Hailey can stick with Leonard Cohen and his carefully crafted insane comments about what he does or doesn't fear while attempting to blame his wrongdoing and tax fraud on others.
Ultimately, she says she wishes Mamet has just written fiction: "Distorting the Spector case serves only to undermine the public's faith in the jury system."
Who cares what she wishes? She's not the center of the universe and the film has nothing to do with her. The public does not have faith or confidence in the jury system. The mere notion is laughable as is this idealized view of an enlightened jury who knows what the concealed and exculpatory evidence is. Harriet Ryan remains faithful to LA Confidential. That says all we need to know about Harriet Ryan and the LA Times on Phil Spector.
Ultimately, she says she wishes Mamet has just written fiction: "Distorting the Spector case serves only to undermine the public's faith in the jury system."
Who cares what she wishes? She's not the center of the universe and the film has nothing to do with her. The public does not have faith or confidence in the jury system. The mere notion is laughable as is this idealized view of an enlightened jury who knows what the concealed and exculpatory evidence is. Harriet Ryan remains faithful to LA Confidential. That says all we need to know about Harriet Ryan and the LA Times on Phil Spector.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/03/guide-whos-pissed-about-hbos-phil-spector-movie/63393/
