Film review: The Undefeated

posted at 8:45 am on June 6, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

The Undefeated gives audiences a lengthy look at the case for Sarah Palin as a substantive reformer in politics.  The film introduces itself as “inspired by” Palin’s memoir Going Rogue, and it clearly follows the narrative of the book to walk audiences from Palin’s working-class roots as a young mother to her rise to the political major leagues.  The substantive message of The Undefeated succeeds in demonstrating that Palin is no “Caribou Barbie,” as filmmaker Stephen Bannon told the Daily Caller, but that she is a serious reformer and tough, accomplished politician.  Unfortunately, the message gets somewhat buried by Bannon’s chaotic and distracting soundtrack, and a visual style much more suited to campaign ads than longer-form filmmaking.

On substance, the material is both compelling and detailed.  Bannon spends the first 90 minutes of the film on Palin’s accomplishments in Alaska, especially focusing on energy policy and government reform — which in Alaska are necessarily linked to each other.  For those unfamiliar with the specifics of Palin’s records as Wasilla’s mayor and Alaska’s governor, The Undefeated provides the background context for fights against the political establishment and oil-industry lobbyists that funded it.  In some ways, the early part of the film makes a case for Palin the moderate, as a pragmatist less interested in ideology than in results.

The remainder of the film briefly addresses Palin’s 2008 vice-presidential campaign, but mainly focuses on her post-campaign career.  The film argues, effectively, that political opponents implemented a strategy against Palin to bankrupt her with legal bills from defending herself from frivolous ethics complaints, and explains her decision to resign.  If Palin chooses to run for higher office now or in the future, she has to make the case that resignation was her only option, both personally and politically, and the film takes enough time to demonstrate the trap in which Palin found herself in 2009.

Finally, the film addresses the rise of the Tea Party as an organic movement, inspired by a rant from Rick Santelli, and Palin’s ascendency in it.  The film’s first 90 minutes provide the necessary context to understand how natural a fit Palin was for that role.  She started her career as an ordinary citizen motivated to reform government and make it work for taxpayers rather than entrenched elites.  Her success in inspiring voters to turn out Democrats in Washington proved her power in 2010, and the “coda” to the film — titled “Children of the Revolution” — compares her explicitly to Ronald Reagan as a transformative political figure.

Clearly, the film is not intended as an arms-length documentary, and shouldn’t be evaluated in that sense.  Bannon obviously wants to make an impassioned argument in The Undefeated for Palin as a serious candidate, and the substance of the film makes a good case.  It doesn’t do so through Michael Moore-like editing traps of interviews, but through a building an argument on the merits of Palin’s record, primarily in the first 90 minutes.

Unfortunately, much about the film distracts from Bannon’s argument.  It’s a terribly flawed film, especially in its sound editing.  The soundtrack music frequently battles the narration and interviews, much too loud throughout almost all of the film.  Most of the music itself is simply unpleasant, a cacophonous blend of bad orchestration in some areas, annoying techno in others, and operatic arias mixing with military music towards the end.  It’s almost impossible to get focused on the substance when the music repeatedly intrudes on interviews and narration to the point where the viewer has to consciously try to ignore it. At some points, the person talking in the film can’t be heard.

The visual presentation is almost as bad, although I’ll admit I’m no fan of quick-edit style anyway; those who do like it will not be as bothered as I was by it.  The visual style is more suited to one-minute, quick-cut campaign spots than a film that lasts for more than two hours.  People who appear in the film as commentators, like Mark Levin, Andrew Breitbart, Tammy Bruce, and Meghan Stapleton, have their images jumping around on screen constantly, changing from straightforward color to overexposed monochrome and back again, against harsh white backgrounds.  The clip choices were strange, especially for a documentary, regardless of editing style.  Interesting archive footage featuring Palin alternates with stock nature footage, acted vignettes such as sand being shoveled onto someone’s face on a beach, artistic representations of cigar-chomping politicians in back rooms, lions taking down a zebra and munching on it for dinner, and so on.  I’d guess the average shot length has to be somewhere around three or four seconds.  It reminded me of the cable-TV series Dream On, and not in a good way. Like the soundtrack, the overall effect is decidedly unpleasant.

Much has been made of the film’s length.  If the other technical issues didn’t distract from the message, the running time might not be much of a problem, but as it is, only those who already passionately support Palin are likely to stick around for the whole movie — most of whom already know the background from Going Rogue.  Those who work past the distractions will get a good sense of Palin’s track record, accomplishments, and political sense, but the very people Bannon might want to reach with The Undefeated will probably not give it a chance to make its case.

Matt Lewis gave The Undefeated a good review yesterday for the Daily Caller and Jim Geraghty did likewise for National Review, while the New York Post’s Kyle Smith ripped it to shreds.  Put me in the middle; I’m with Matt and Jim on the substance, and with Smith on the presentation.  The message and the argument are well-made, but the film itself is too frustrating to focus on either.  In better hands, The Undefeated might have been a powerful force to reconnect Palin skeptics to the gutsy suburban mom turned fearless reformer we met in 2008, and it’s an opportunity missed.

Update: I’ve been asked by a couple of people on e-mail and in the comments whether this was a rough cut or the final edition.  This was a rough cut, but it’s also the cut they’ve sent to screeners and critics, so it can’t be far off from what they intend.  Maybe they will re-edit this, or at least the soundtrack, before its theatrical release.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Matt Lewis gave The Undefeated a good review yesterday for the Daily Caller and Jim Geraghty did likewise for National Review, while the New York Post’s Kyle Smith ripped it to shreds. Put me in the middle; I’m with Matt and Jim on the substance, and with Smith on the presentation

This with the entire conservative movement. We have a terrific message and horrible means of passing that message on in a coherent matter.

We try and save medicare and we are killing old people. We try and save Social Security and we are stealing money from the elderly. We try and get the poor off welfare and we are uncompassionate heartless conservatives.

We either find a better way to get our message out or get use to failure.

I see no changes yet in the GOP or with conservatives. The left has its media jugernault and it sill is unchallenged.

William Amos on June 6, 2011 at 8:51 AM

Everyone’s a critic….

idesign on June 6, 2011 at 8:52 AM

As Sarah would say “Ya get what ya pay for”!

Thanks for the review, Ed. I think I’ll pass on the film and wait for actual campaign speeches, if any, to make up my mind about her.

Limerick on June 6, 2011 at 8:52 AM

I don’t know of anyone in the history of modern media who has been attacked as savagely & unfairly as Palin, yet she keeps taking on the media beast…with a smile. Most of us would whither up & die under the scrutiny, the criticism she & her family have endured, yet she keeps plugging away. However, she continues to produce gaffes, & the media are faithful to highlight them in a way that they refuse to with other gaffe-mongers like the President or Vice President. This is why I think she’ll never win a national election. Too many people are convinced that she’s stupid. She’s certainly not, but she hasn’t committed herself to study the nuances of history & foreign policy that a presidential contender ought to know. Especially a contender with a target on her back.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 8:56 AM

We’ll see.

the_nile on June 6, 2011 at 8:56 AM

Thanks for the review, Ed. I think I’ll pass on the film and wait for actual campaign speeches, if any, to make up my mind about her.

Limerick on June 6, 2011 at 8:52 AM

In other words you don’t have any interest in learning anything.

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 8:57 AM

Maybe it will make some nice 1 minute ad material in key states (if she runs).

Maybe this is why the White House is so impressed with TPaw and Mitt and Huntsman, they actually KNOW how to run a campaign and she doesn’t appear too.

PappyD61 on June 6, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Limerick, something happened to the last part of my post. I added that speeches shouldn’t be the basis for deciding on who to vote for. Obama proved that. Since the media has made it a point to ignore her background, this doc gives someone who wants to know about her, the opportunity to do so.

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 9:00 AM

Here’s a report from the Gov’s meeting with Roger Ailes (h/t Josh Painter) by Howard Kurtz of Newsweek:

“Ailes told me he met with Palin in his Manhattan office, serving chicken sandwiches and giving her parents and daughter Piper a tour of the Fox studios. Palin told him she’ll decide on a White House bid this summer.”
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/0

idesign on June 6, 2011 at 9:00 AM

I think the real use of this documentary is as documentation of things the mainstream media have refused to cover. It may be a little tl:dr for most of the folks on the fence, but I bet it can have various points in it condensed if something needs…refudiating.

Sekhmet on June 6, 2011 at 9:01 AM

The soundtrack music frequently battles the narration and interviews, much too loud throughout almost all of the film.

Hmmm…I saw another pro-Palin flick a few months ago that had the same problem. (Not sure who made it.) What’s up with that?

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 9:02 AM

However, she continues to produce gaffes……. but she hasn’t committed herself to study the nuances of history & foreign policy that a presidential contender ought to know. Especially a contender with a target on her back.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 8:56 AM

Got any facts to back up all those assertions? Is that you, SourKraut?

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 9:02 AM

In other words you don’t have any interest in learning anything.

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 8:57 AM

Well those are other words I guess. I’ve followed Sarah since before her pick as VP. I admire the lady, think she’d do well as POTUS. I don’t need the word of cheerleaders and pep rallys to make up my mind about the prospects of the team I’m watching.

Limerick on June 6, 2011 at 9:04 AM

A shame. Not that it would have been given a chance by the MSM or Washington insiders, no matter how well the film was made.

alecj on June 6, 2011 at 9:05 AM

I’d take a chopped up film on Palin over the fakeness of Teleprompter Obama anyday.

PappyD61 on June 6, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Maybe this is why the White House is so impressed with TPaw and Mitt and Huntsman, they actually KNOW how to run a campaign and she doesn’t appear too.

PappyD61 on June 6, 2011 at 8:58 AM

Ask yourself what’s the purpose of a campaign, ponder that she’s got the same leading numbers as Mitt in some Polls.
And she hasn’t started her official campaign yet while both T-Paw and Mitt has.
We’ll see who will be standing in the end and appear as the winner.

the_nile on June 6, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Got any facts to back up all those assertions? Is that you, SourKraut?

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 9:02 AM

Do an internet search of Palin gaffes. You’ll find plenty of material. Much of it unfair, which was my point.
No.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Everyone needs to remember that Palin was not the driver behind this doc. Rebecca Mansour contacted Bannon on behalf of Palin to ask him to produce a couple of YouTube videos. Bannon wasn’t interested. He later came to them and said he wanted to produce this doc and asked for help to get to the people who knew the facts of Palin’s career.

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 9:07 AM

The Undefeated

Why is it called that?

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 9:10 AM

Do an internet search of Palin gaffes. You’ll find plenty of material. Much of it unfair, which was my point.
No.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Do a search on Obama gaffes and you get the same thing.

Your point is weak…

idesign on June 6, 2011 at 9:10 AM

she continues to produce gaffes…

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 8:56 AM

Name three.

pseudoforce on June 6, 2011 at 9:12 AM

I will see the film, and encourage as many as possible to see and learn the truth about this woman: she IS a great American, intelligent person, and EXACTLY what this country needs…versus what’s currently infests the White House.

Justrand on June 6, 2011 at 9:13 AM

Ed was that the rough cut or final edition?

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 9:13 AM

Do an internet search of Palin gaffes. You’ll find plenty of material. Much of it unfair, which was my point.
No.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 9:05 AM

You mean gaffes like the un-gaffe about Revere? Or the un-gaffe of “Party like it’s 1773″? Or the actual mis-speak in saying North instead of South when in the previous sentence she had already spoken clearly about North and South Korea, and had actually sent a letter to Obama about her concerns about North Korea?

No one’s words are scrutinized as heavily as Palin’s. The only way that she can ever be totally free of small mistakes that everyone makes, is to remain silent. That’s what her detractors want.

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 9:15 AM

She’s certainly not, but she hasn’t committed herself to study the nuances of history & foreign policy that a presidential contender ought to know. Especially a contender with a target on her back.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 8:56 AM

Pretty sure she knows how many states are in the Union and that Austrian isn’t a language. That puts her ahead of Obama.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 9:15 AM

Why is it called that?

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 9:10 AM

The title is not about Palin, but about the “an individual can make a difference” story that exemplifies the spirit of the TP movement.

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 9:18 AM

the message gets somewhat buried by Bannon’s chaotic and distracting soundtrack, and a visual style much more suited to campaign ads than longer-form filmmaking

Perhaps the film is a longer-form campaign ad?

aengus on June 6, 2011 at 9:18 AM

Someone doing a movie on Sarah Palin’s behalf is the only way she will ever get the truth out there. She’ll get no help from the Goebbelsesque mouthpieces of the left – cheerleaders extraordinaire for Obama.

Sarah Palin has been constantly beaten down by the Lame Stream Media by making false statements, innuendo, emotionally filled tirades consisting of name calling, distortions and denigration.

They fail to give examples or their reasons for calling her stupid and uninformed – just their deep seated emotions. Journalism its not.

When a politician like Obama or Biden make asinine statements, nothing but silence comes from the LSM which easily leads one to see their bias and hatred.

The foul, vitriolic, hate-filled venom that spews from their mouths betrays what is actually within their hearts.

I pray that the public will not continue to be fooled and duped by these hatemongers and their businesses will die a slow, agonizing death by people not renewing subscriptions and turning the channels.

iamsaved on June 6, 2011 at 9:18 AM

I pray that the public will not continue to be fooled and duped by these hatemongers and their businesses will die a slow, agonizing death by people not renewing subscriptions and turning the channels.

iamsaved on June 6, 2011 at 9:18 AM

I agree although I’d sooner settle for a quick death.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 9:20 AM

I certainly dont base my veiws on a politican based on either campaign releases or gaffes. Ronald reagan had several gaffes in his lifetime. Everyone misspeaks at times.

Its political positions that matter. And I know the difference between a true conservative and a poser. Look at their beleifs and not media’s veiwpoint.

William Amos on June 6, 2011 at 9:22 AM

For someone deemed so inconsequential by all of the”smart people” (just ask them), she sure is generating a lot of attention, huh?

kingsjester on June 6, 2011 at 9:23 AM

From EconomicPolicyJournal.com
Sarah Palin: The Movie
“Political campaign books are so yesterday…”

idesign on June 6, 2011 at 9:24 AM

Do a search on Obama gaffes and you get the same thing.

So? The commenter you replied to said that the media will highlight Palin’s gaffes, which they will. Obama doesn’t have that problem.

aengus on June 6, 2011 at 9:25 AM

NRO: Palin the Undefeated
“By far, the most eye-opening part of the film — and no doubt, most useful to the presidential hopes of Palin — is the second act, detailing Palin’s time as Alaska’s governor. Oil companies are the relentless villain of Alaskan politics; in retrospect it seems bizarre that the woman most hated by modern liberals spent so much of her career fighting tooth and nail with oil-company executives. During this whole stretch, there isn’t a partisan note. Alaskan politics is painted as a rigged game benefiting the politically powerful and influential with the citizenry getting the short end of the stick, time and again — until Palin appears on the scene.”

idesign on June 6, 2011 at 9:26 AM

Ed, I doubt that political pundits were expected to give reviews about artistic merit. I think the purpose of showing it to pundits was to judge it on its political values.

On the former, you obviously didn’t like it. On the latter, it seems to have pleased you. While you think that the sound track was a distraction, the average person that will pay to see it aren’t going to watch it for the quality of the soundtrack.

I’ve probably read at least ten reviews of the doc so far, and your’s is the only one who felt the need to pan the quality or the volume of the soundtrack.

Of course, your review may be entirely accurate and who knows, you may be an Ebert in the making.

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 9:27 AM

So we have about 20 great reviews one so-so review and one bad review.

Hmmmmm….if this was rotten tomatoes the film would be ranked around 85% pro

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 9:27 AM

“The remainder of the film briefly addresses Palin’s 2008 vice-presidential campaign, but mainly focuses on her post-campaign career. ”

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

SHHHH LET’S JUST SWEEP MY AS*KICKING IN ’08 UNDER THE RUG AND HOPE THAT NOBODY WILL NOTICE

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Last I looked McCain got his butt kicked…

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM

I haven’t seen it, but with all due respect I have my doubts that she has mouthed much more than populist platitudes. I have yet to see her say one thing about actual fiscal and monetary policy or how are constitutional and democratic institutions are become held hostage by the banking elite.

Will our democratic process even remain relevant?

http://theeveningchronicle.blogspot.com/

LCT688 on June 6, 2011 at 9:32 AM

Ed,

I am surprised that you did not compare this movie to the Academy Award winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth, or the Golden Palm winner, Fahrenheit 9/11.

Do you expect this movie to garner the same awards?

faraway on June 6, 2011 at 9:39 AM

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Last I looked McCain got his butt kicked…

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM
——–

You need to educate yourself about your country’s election process so you don’t look so stupid in front of the world.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:44 AM

If you are going to make a propaganda film, getting the editing right is everything. And a film designed to promote and advocate an individual, or an idea, is a propaganda film. So the whole thing was a waste.

We associate propaganda films with liberals in the last 30 years. And once again, we see a liberal has produced one (See Sarah Palin take on Big Oil and Win!). Sure would be nice to see a right-wing propaganda film for a change, made by an actual right-wing character.

keep the change on June 6, 2011 at 9:51 AM

@LCT688: She waded right into the debate over QE2. People who refuse to take her seriously in the first place naturally don’t see what they don’t want to see.

Regarding this movie, I’m not surprised that comparative amateurs dominate the pro-Palin effort. That’s the Palin M.O.

Recall though that Christine O’Donnell hired a highly -regarded professional, whose “I am not a witch” brainchild was savagely skewered. There’s no pleasing some folks.

Seth Halpern on June 6, 2011 at 9:58 AM

You need to educate yourself about your country’s election process so you don’t look so stupid in front of the world.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:44 AM

ROFL…..Obama beat McCain. Palin wasn’t at the top of the ticket, she had no control of her message, her appearances, her policies she had to defend, her media interivews, nor her attacks on Obama.

with every statement you show your lack of knowledge.

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Mark Levin:

“I saw the documentary for the first time yesterday. I will have more to say later, but it was a superb exposition of Palin’s life and career. And yes, I am in the film.”

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

It sounds like it has the same kind of visuals and audio that a T-Paw commercial has — which are terribly distracting to the message. Maybe that’s just media advertising today — very fast-moving and terribly over-stimulating. I don’t get it. I guess I’m just an old fart who wants his information served up without a parade and a marching band.

Paul-Cincy on June 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Wait, “the first 90 minutes”……? Is this thing LOTR length?!

And Alexandra Petri wins for the best quip on the film: “Nothing says “a movie Sarah Palin would love” more than “a movie about Sarah Palin….made for free by a conservative filmmaker…that includes footage of a lion killing a zebra.”

Vyce on June 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM

ROFL…..Obama beat McCain. Palin wasn’t at the top of the ticket, she had no control of her message, her appearances, her policies she had to defend, her media interivews, nor her attacks on Obama.

with every statement you show your lack of knowledge.

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 9:59 AM
——–
The VP candidate is of no consequence whatsoever to the outcome of an election?

I guess that’s why the media was falling over itself saying the choice of Palin could put McCain over the top.

Thanks for the laugh.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

ed,

not saying it did but I would like to know if your support for Timmy played into your like/dislike of the movie. Your review sounds a lot like those that finding nothing they can disagree with Palin on instead focus on the sound of her voice or the clothes she wears.

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

The VP candidate is of no consequence whatsoever to the outcome of an election?

I guess that’s why the media was falling over itself saying the choice of Palin could put McCain over the top.

Thanks for the laugh.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

the historical consequence of a VP pick is about <1% of the final outcome.

The VP is submissive to the POTUS candidate's campaign. Palin gave McCain an intial boost. The McCain campaign took that boost and destroyed it.

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Thanks for the review, Ed. I think I’ll pass on the film and wait for actual campaign speeches, if any, to make up my mind about her.

Limerick on June 6, 2011 at 8:52 AM

Seriously…..you’d rather judge a candidate on a campaign speech?
What a scary world we live in.

“I will not insult you by pretending that you actually believe what you just said.”…..W.F.Buckley

tencole on June 6, 2011 at 10:09 AM

Do an internet search of Palin gaffes. You’ll find plenty of material. Much of it unfair, which was my point.
No.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Do a search on Obama gaffes and you get the same thing.

Your point is weak…

idesign on June 6, 2011 at 9:10 AM

You’ve managed to miss my very clear point. Obama & Biden make more gaffes, but the media won’t cover theirs.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM

Unfortunately, much about the film distracts from Bannon’s argument. It’s a terribly flawed film, especially in its sound editing. The soundtrack music frequently battles the narration and interviews, much too loud throughout almost all of the film. Most of the music itself is simply unpleasant, a cacophonous blend of bad orchestration in some areas, annoying techno in others, and operatic arias mixing with military music towards the end. It’s almost impossible to get focused on the substance when the music repeatedly intrudes on interviews and narration to the point where the viewer has to consciously try to ignore it. At some points, the person talking in the film can’t be heard.

As the mom of an aspiring film composer, this makes me sad! Music can make or break any film. Why do so many otherwise competent filmmakers blow it with the music?

rockmom on June 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM

Try to humor Rywall today. He’s a Leftist trying to justify a collapsing economy and a failing socialist regime to an increasingly hostile public.

Remember what Sozhenytsin wrote in Gulag Archipelago: the True Believing Communists were always the most enthusiastic inmates in Stalin’s labor camps. Rywall is just another member of the Obama Personality Cult who can’t let go of his devotion to his Fuhrer.

For people like Dave Rywall, it’s not about Palin or anyone else, it’s about the Torchlight Parade past the Fuhrer’s Balcony. That’s all liberals have left. In reality, that’s all the 2008 Campaign really was. Democrats were just successful in fooling most of the people some of the time, is all.

And now, their Fuhrer is out of magic tricks, and there’s no one left for people like Dave Rywall and his friends to lie to.

Sorry Dave, the jig is up. We could run a ticket of The Undead Jackie Gleason and one of the retired June Taylor Dancers and kick Obama’s a$$ in 2012.

victor82 on June 6, 2011 at 10:15 AM

Maybe this is why the White House is so impressed with TPaw and Mitt and Huntsman, they actually KNOW how to run a campaign and she doesn’t appear too.

PappyD61 on June 6, 2011 at 8:58 AM</

IF THE WH IS "IMPRESSED" IT'S BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY CAN BEAT TPAW, MITT AND HUNTSMAN AND HOPE ONE OF THEM WILL BE NOMINATED. THEY WILL NEVER BE IMPRESSED BY PALIN.

SARAH, YOU BETCHA!!

EL on June 6, 2011 at 10:16 AM

As the mom of an aspiring film composer, this makes me sad! Music can make or break any film. Why do so many otherwise competent filmmakers blow it with the music?

rockmom on June 6, 2011 at 10:13 AM

Since none of the other reviews I read panned the music, perhaps it’s not as bad as Ed says it is.

NoNails on June 6, 2011 at 10:16 AM

I don’t know of anyone in the history of modern media who has been attacked as savagely & unfairly as Palin

Ollie North

Nancy Reagan

George Bush Sr

George Bush Jr

Jerry Fallwell

Richard Nixon

Henry Kissinger

Ronald Reagan

Jessie Helms

EricPWJohnson on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

I’ve probably read at least ten reviews of the doc so far, and your’s is the only one who felt the need to pan the quality or the volume of the soundtrack.

Clearly, Ed, you’re a no-good RINO for not giving the film a glowing review, even though your criticism was based entirely upon its technical aspects, rather than its substance.

Vyce on June 6, 2011 at 10:20 AM

You’ve managed to miss my very clear point. Obama & Biden make more gaffes, but the media won’t cover theirs.

itsnotaboutme on June 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM

So, that makes it right?….if not, then you’d better start standing up against it, otherwise this is how all our candidates will be picked for us.

tencole on June 6, 2011 at 10:23 AM

Thanks for the review Ed. I trust you more than most for a fair analysis. Soundtracks are a pet peeve of mine. So many movies misuse music in such an annoying way, it drives me crazy. A lot of films would be better off cutting much of the music all together.

And trying to hard with effects is tedious too. Still, I’ll have to see this for myself to judge it, and I definitely want to see it.

As far as Michael Moore is concerned, the effectiveness of his films are based almost entirely on lies and trickery. More legitimate documentaries rely on compelling content, or some kind of artistic angle.

Dongemaharu on June 6, 2011 at 10:23 AM

EricPWJohnson on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

Now add Sarah to your list and rank them 1-10.

tencole on June 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM

@Seth Halpern

Its a lot deeper than just QE2 that we need be concerned with. The whole monetary system has been corrupted by the banks and the politicians do nothing but kiss their butts. Its not just here but a global problem. DEbt service before liberty, debt service before sovereignty, debt service before human dignity. In other words slavery uber alles!

LCT688 on June 6, 2011 at 10:25 AM

I don’t know of anyone in the history of modern media who has been attacked as savagely & unfairly as Palin

Ollie North

Nancy Reagan

George Bush Sr

George Bush Jr

Jerry Fallwell

Richard Nixon

Henry Kissinger

Ronald Reagan

Jessie Helms

EricPWJohnson on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM
——
Nice party blinders, fool.

And Kissinger is especially hilarious. Why don’t you tell us how he singlehandedly scuttled peace in Viet Nam and extended the war for many more years.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 10:29 AM

EricPWJohnson on June 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM

while all of those have faced their own battles. I don’t think any of them have faced as sustained and intense attack as Palin.

Of all of them I would say reagan and bush came the closest yet they were at least granted some type of respect. Bush less than Reagan.

In fact one can make a timeline and notice the increase in attacks and the disrespect of those attacks as time goes by and the left fine tunes their “2 minute hate” for each successive figure. The left as learned hate works an as simply increased those attacks in a straight forward way.

If Palin is forced out of the national discussion giving the left the win. I hate to see what the next conservative politican is in store for.

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 10:30 AM

not saying it did but I would like to know if your support for Timmy played into your like/dislike of the movie. Your review sounds a lot like those that finding nothing they can disagree with Palin on instead focus on the sound of her voice or the clothes she wears.
unseen on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

Oops, sorry, Ed. I should have said, “you’re a no good RINO for not giving the film a glowing review, and you disliked it only because you’re a biased shill for T-Paw, who we all know isn’t a conservative.”

Vyce on June 6, 2011 at 10:31 AM

@LCT688: She’s opposed raising the debt ceiling too.

Seth Halpern on June 6, 2011 at 10:33 AM

Ahhh… The sweet smell of liberal desperation with a dash of RINO consternation…. I LOVE IT!!!

Roy Rogers on June 6, 2011 at 10:40 AM

@Seth Halperin

All well and good but until the power of the banks to create money out of thin air and call it our debt and their asset is smashed nothing will change. Hence I buy gold and silver, it has no counterparty risk, i.e. my asset is not someone elses’ debt. It’s liquid, divisible and in short supply.

LCT688 on June 6, 2011 at 10:52 AM

Dave

All of these people were attacked viciously and those alive are still are today.

Nixon worst of all, Ollie North Jesse Helms and Falwell still (even though some are dead) are attacked all the time.

EricPWJohnson on June 6, 2011 at 10:53 AM

Is this playing at theaters or do you watch it online?

Cindy Munford on June 6, 2011 at 11:03 AM

No other personality could stand up to the criticism Sarah has and still smile and screw the press around the way she has. Rubbing their nose in it and laughing all the way to the bank. Everyone in the nation follows her and what is written or videoed about her. Man is she dumb——–like a fox.
I love her and she has my support and that’s the name of that tune……….GO SARAH!

Herb on June 6, 2011 at 11:06 AM

And Dave – to minimize and forget the sacrifices of all those who stood for conservative, family values for the sake of Palin, who is also being highly compensated for her sacrifices unlike others, is not a winning argument and doesnt do justice to her if you are a supporter

EricPWJohnson on June 6, 2011 at 11:07 AM

ed,

not saying it did but I would like to know if your support for Timmy played into your like/dislike of the movie. Your review sounds a lot like those that finding nothing they can disagree with Palin on instead focus on the sound of her voice or the clothes she wears.

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

Looks like ‘unseen’ has his panties in a wad.
Sensitive chick isn’t he?

rickyricardo on June 6, 2011 at 11:10 AM

I don’t know of anyone in the history of modern media who has been attacked as savagely & unfairly as Palin

The only two I can think of are: Ronald Reagan and Clarence Thomas.

stenwin77 on June 6, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Maybe they will re-edit this, or at least the soundtrack, before its theatrical release.

We can hope. Criticism can be constructive.

alwaysfiredup on June 6, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Try to humor Rywall today.

victor82 on June 6, 2011 at 10:15 AM

Why?

Cylor on June 6, 2011 at 11:24 AM

For someone deemed so inconsequential by all of the”smart people” (just ask them), she sure is generating a lot of attention, huh?

kingsjester on June 6, 2011 at 9:23 AM

Exactly what I was thinking.

capejasmine on June 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Looks like ‘unseen’ has his panties in a wad.
Sensitive chick isn’t he?
rickyricardo on June 6, 2011 at 11:10 AM

And the Palinistas think we’re just deranged ‘haters’ when we point out that some of their brethren cannot tolerate any criticism about Palin.

Where do you guys think we get that from? Oh, from examples like unseen here. Ed writes a review that has a positive response to the substance of the film, but critical of the technical aspect of the filmmaking, and for that it’s insinuated that his opinion isn’t really genuine, he’s just being biased in favor of a another Republican.

Keep making friends, ‘nistas. You can’t even help yourselves when presented with someone who actually AGREES with your message when that person offers constructive criticism.

Vyce on June 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

rickyricardo on June 6, 2011 at 11:10 AM

That comment really says a lot about you, and the kind of person you are.

capejasmine on June 6, 2011 at 11:30 AM

I can hardly wait to hear Krauthammer go apes#!t on this or O’Reilly sanctimoniously lecture about how Palin has a duty to get in or out NOW, blah, blah. I’m not a Palinista, but I love watching Sarah punk the elitists. Go ‘Cuda!

PS: If you run and are the nominee, you will get my vote.

JimP on June 6, 2011 at 11:47 AM

rickyricardo on June 6, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Vyce on June 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Seems the ones not able to handle constructive critcism are the plainhaters. My question is an honest question. Of course you two are too stupid to understand that. Ed is the only reviewer that has highlighted the music and editing. Which could mean he simply doesn’t like that type of format or that he was predisposed to not like the film and was simply looking for something to focus that predisposition on. Much like those that harp about Palin’s voice who also tend to support another candidate.

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 11:51 AM

You can’t even help yourselves when presented with someone who actually AGREES with your message when that person offers constructive criticism.

Vyce on June 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Ahem.

Maybe they will re-edit this, or at least the soundtrack, before its theatrical release.

We can hope. Criticism can be constructive.

alwaysfiredup on June 6, 2011 at 11:23 AM

Take your blanket insults elsewhere.

alwaysfiredup on June 6, 2011 at 12:03 PM

SHHHH LET’S JUST SWEEP MY AS*KICKING IN ’08 UNDER THE RUG AND HOPE THAT NOBODY WILL NOTICE

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 9:29 AM

Bush gets 51% of the vote in 2004 = “Bitterly Divided America”

O’bama gets 1% more of the vote in 2008 = “AS*KICKING”.

Isn’t there a Hockey Puck calling your name someplace?

Del Dolemonte on June 6, 2011 at 12:12 PM

The VP candidate is of no consequence whatsoever to the outcome of an election?

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

So people were voting for 5 time draft dodger Joe Biden?

Thanks for the laugh, Uncle Red.

Del Dolemonte on June 6, 2011 at 12:13 PM

And the Palinistas think we’re just deranged ‘haters’ when we point out that some of their brethren cannot tolerate any criticism about Palin.

Vyce on June 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Honestly do you ever post anything other than ‘poor me’ victimology?

You’ve pushed this canard for so long that you’re starting to believe it.

fossten on June 6, 2011 at 12:25 PM

So we have about 20 great reviews one so-so review and one bad review.

Hmmmmm….if this was rotten tomatoes the film would be ranked around 85% pro

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 9:27 AM

How many of those “20 great reviews” are from Conservatives4Palin, Matt Lewis, and others on the payroll?

Here’s a decidedly not-so-positive review from the Anchorage Daily News:

http://www.adn.com/2011/06/05/v-printer/1900741/new-palin-movie-called-a-two-hour.html

Dreadnought on June 6, 2011 at 12:56 PM

The only two I can think of are: Ronald Reagan and Clarence Thomas.

stenwin77 on June 6, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Richard Nixon.

Dan Quayle.

Dreadnought on June 6, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Del Dolemonte on June 6, 2011 at 12:12 PM

I think Drywall is about 19 or 20. The cerebral cortex is still congealing.

Now 2010? That was a shellacking.

John the Libertarian on June 6, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Here’s a decidedly not-so-positive review from the Anchorage Daily News:

http://www.adn.com/2011/06/05/v-printer/1900741/new-palin-movie-called-a-two-hour.html

Dreadnought on June 6, 2011 at 12:56 PM

Er….the ADN was/is hugely anti-Palin. Did you expect a positive or even even-handed review? Might as well read mudflats.

alwaysfiredup on June 6, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Bush gets 51% of the vote in 2004 = “Bitterly Divided America”

O’bama gets 1% more of the vote in 2008 = “AS*KICKING”.

Isn’t there a Hockey Puck calling your name someplace?

Del Dolemonte on June 6, 2011 at 12:12 PM
—–
Bush 286 -251 wins by 35

Obama 365 – 173 wins by 192

Most people who aren’t stupid would call that an as*kicking.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Dreadnought on June 6, 2011 at 12:56 PM

So you are going to complain about biased review sources and then link to a review by the ADN? That’s rich. I lived in Alaska for 16 years and ADN hates Palin more than C4P loves her. Of course you know this. Which makes it even more dishonest.

Kataklysmic on June 6, 2011 at 1:32 PM

The only two I can think of are: Ronald Reagan and Clarence Thomas.

stenwin77 on June 6, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Richard Nixon.

Dan Quayle.

Dreadnought on June 6, 2011 at 12:58 PM
——-

AMAZING party blinders

AMAZING

AMAZING

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Ed, regarding the sound levels and editing, it was a rough cut you saw was it not? Perhaps therein lies the reasoning for that.

NY Conservative on June 6, 2011 at 1:58 PM

The VP candidate is of no consequence whatsoever to the outcome of an election?

I guess that’s why the media was falling over itself saying the choice of Palin could put McCain over the top.

Thanks for the laugh.

Dave Rywall on June 6, 2011 at 10:03 AM

The media falls all over itself every election explaining that VP picks do not win or lose elections.

Unique to the 2008 election, however, was the MSM’s post-election focus on the former GOP VP candidate. She. Must. Be. Destroyed.

You and your friends in the MSM have spent an amazing amount of energy and expense, for 3 solid years 24/7, on the “reason McCain lost the election”.

You can pretend it’s a laugh, but it’s clear to everyone else that you’re choking on something.

Saltysam on June 6, 2011 at 2:06 PM

rickyricardo on June 6, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Vyce on June 6, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Seems the ones not able to handle constructive critcism are the plainhaters. My question is an honest question. Of course you two are too stupid to understand that. Ed is the only reviewer that has highlighted the music and editing. Which could mean he simply doesn’t like that type of format or that he was predisposed to not like the film and was simply looking for something to focus that predisposition on. Much like those that harp about Palin’s voice who also tend to support another candidate.

unseen on June 6, 2011 at 11:51 AM
Isn’t this film still a rough cut? Is that what he saw?

Amjean on June 6, 2011 at 2:55 PM

I read somewhere that The Undefeated will open in Iowa in June.

Does anybody know when we can see this movie in the rest of the country?

Sounds like a fun movie night for Tea Party groups!

wren on June 6, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Silly me, 49% approve of Romney, who left his state for 220 days and jeer Palin, who quit so not to cost her state. Romney had a 1 1/2 billion deficit and Palin 12 billion asset and 49% approve of Romney. Sounds like watching this movie for those 49% of Romney supporters would be a waste of time, but I can certainly see why they feel this way!

mistert1950 on June 6, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Dreadnought on June 6, 2011 at 12:56 PM

So you are going to complain about biased review sources and then link to a review by the ADN? That’s rich. I lived in Alaska for 16 years and ADN hates Palin more than C4P loves her. Of course you know this. Which makes it even more dishonest.

Kataklysmic on June 6, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Uh, no I wasn’t aware that the ADN is biased against Palin, though considering some Palin fan’s definition of biased, I would take that assessment with a grain of salt.

Are you going to tell me that a fan-boy site like “conservatives4Palin, and the author of a puff book like “Quotable Rogue” are going to have any kind of objectivity?

Dreadnought on June 6, 2011 at 5:30 PM

How many of those “20 great reviews” are from Conservatives4Palin, Matt Lewis, and others on the payroll?

Here’s a decidedly not-so-positive review from the Anchorage Daily News:

http://www.adn.com/2011/06/05/v-printer/1900741/new-palin-movie-called-a-two-hour.html

Dreadnought on June 6, 2011 at 12:56 PM

I take it you have some evidence that they are “on the payroll” then?

cs89 on June 6, 2011 at 5:57 PM

You could read the Book Of Genesis in less time than this.

I hope the film editors are listening, Ed.

Cut it to 30 minutes, tops, dial back the music, and concentrate on the future, since the past is only prologue, in politics.

Even Citizen Kane comes in at a minute short of 2 hours.

And has great music and is at the apex of cinemtography.

Palin’s documentarians need to rein in their excesses.

Or alienate when they intend to ingratiate.

profitsbeard on June 6, 2011 at 7:48 PM

Comment pages: 1 2