Medium Cool (1969) User Reviews

MEDIUM COOL (Haskell Wexler, 1969) ***1/2

[Bunuel1976 · 8/10 · 23 August 2006]

A brilliant film and a seminal one - a product by a major Hollywood studio handled in cinema-verite' style; besides, the various issues it raises - social, political and media-related - have scarcely been treated with such directness and power. The lack of star names in the cast (Peter Boyle, who appears briefly, was not yet established and, even if he had debuted in John Huston's REFLECTIONS IN A GOLDEN EYE [1967], lead Robert Forster's role was originally intended for John Cassavetes) certainly helps sell its inherent documentary feel.

Though, understandably, most meaningful to people who witnessed these turbulent times first-hand, and Americans in particular, despite its specific time-setting - Chicago 1968 (partly shot at the actual Democrats convention site, the film proved prophetic because the script involved riots breaking out...which is what actually happened!) - many of its concerns are still very much with us!! Fascinating therefore if slightly overlong - the subplot involving Verna Bloom and Harold Blankenship feels a bit like padding at first (and was actually what remained of a proposed film, with animal interest, about a poor country boy's adjustment to city life!)...but, ultimately, its point is made during the film's latter stages when Bloom goes to look for her missing son - creating an indelible image of a perplexed figure (incongruously dressed in a bright yellow outfit) getting embroiled in all the commotion hitting the streets at that same moment. This, however, results in a goof involving the unexplained presence very early on of Bloom (already wearing the yellow dress but whose introduction proper in the film takes place quite a bit later!) at a cocktail party for members of the press - a sequence intended to immediately precede the riots but which was then pushed forward during editing, so as to deal straight off with the film's major theme of media responsibility! The tragic yet ironic ending - presented as matter-of-factly as any of the news items covered by dispassionate TV cameraman Forster - is very effective.

This is certainly renowned cinematographer Wexler's most significant directorial effort; his camera-work (some of it hand-held) is simply incredible, as is Paul Golding's editing (which must have been quite a headache and, in fact, he mentions in the Audio Commentary that several scenes remained on the cutting-room floor; pity they weren't available for inclusion on the Paramount DVD - nor, apparently, were the rights to the 2001 documentary about the film, LOOK OUT HASKELL, IT'S REAL: THE MAKING OF 'MEDIUM COOL'!). Also essential to the unique texture of the film is the fantastic soundtrack (mostly by Mike Bloomfield but also featuring songs by Frank Zappa, among others).

A groundbreaker

[meebly · 7/10 · 20 January 1999]

Haskell Wexler, a cinematographer by trade, practically invented the technique invented we know today as "cinema verite" with this striking drama that plays so much like a documentary, you'd never guess it was fiction without being told. It's less a story and more a voyeuristic look into the lives of ordinary people thrust into extraordinary circumstances, in this case reporters who are covering a political convention and other Chicago locals who are just minding their own business when the legendary riots break out at the 1968 Democratic National Convention.

Even more groundbreaking is the approach Wexler takes in framing the film's final scenes. He had ample warning that there would potentially be some unrest at the convention, so he decided to thrust his cast right into the thick of it, sending them to the foyer and front entrance of the Chicago Convention Center and the crew right along to film the events. No one knew exactly what would happen, making this perhaps the most creative and timely piece of "improvised" drama in the history of filmmaking up to this point.

Every documentary filmmaker who chooses to make his/her film about actions and events rather than simply a bunch of talking heads owes a debt to Wexler and his creative team on "Medium Cool".

A time capsule

[TheTwistedLiver · 8/10 · 25 June 2008]

This film is better upon the second viewing, the first time I saw this I thought it was somewhat dated or boring, I couldn't have been more wrong. Initially I watched this film because it was directed by Haskell Wexler whose work I admire, and I'm from Chicago and had heard it shows much of the city and the riots of 68. I enjoyed seeing the city forty years ago to see what was the same and what had changed, much has changed yet much remains the same from what I have seen of the people, places, buildings etc. It was great to see the Kinetic Playground on there, Chicago's electric ballroom, and other area's such as Lincoln Park. On the second viewing, I realized that this is a very important film in that it adroitly captures a moment in time, a moment we can never have again that is lost forever, that one second in our history that pivoted us as a nation between innocence and awareness and possibly that crucial moment which has brought us to the point we are at today. This movie is very important as a document of history, not to mention how well it's shot. The angles, the color, the way he goes in and out of focus make this a true gem that gets better the more you see it. Great soundtrack as well, Zappa, Mike Bloomfield and others.

An Indie if there ever was one.

[Doctor_Bombay · 15 April 1999]

Interesting approach to revealing the world of photo-journalism, 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.

Little has changed since 1968

[jakob13 · 7/10 · 17 January 2016]

The Criterion Collection has brought out a remastered, stunning 'Medium Cool'. America's answer to 'Cinema Verite'. Haskell Wexler's film could have been made yesterday, given the conditions in the US today. Although the technology of filming has changed drastically. In fact, given the success of 'Tangerine', it is easy to envision 'Medium Cool' shot exclusively on a Smartphone. Gone are the 40 pound cameras, the heavy television cameras set up at conventions, the one way voice boxes and the like. As Marshall McCluhan, the high priest and theorist of communication, posited: 'the medium is the message'. And Wexler took this guru's words to heart. We're in Chicago on the eve and during the infamous 1968 Democratic Convention. The story is half fiction half cinema truth, of a fun loving news photographer whose passion is the story and getting it right. Through his camera, we travel through the racial, economic and political stress and high drama of the times. (For good reporting, see Norman Mailer's 'Miami and the Siege of Chicago'). The 'hero' John Cassellis is shocked that his footage has been handed over by his employer to the FBI. So what else is new today? In scenes with blacks militants he is accused of being an undercover FBI agent, and they knew what they were talking about, for until then he was clueless. The world of the poor whites from the coal mines of West Virginia, the banter in the newsroom about the role of journalism. The spirit of the turbulent 60s has run out of steam but in some eddies here and there of on the fringe reporters, social media and streamed dailies or weeklies. And yet, documentaries are making a comeback, and showing the grim side of life and some moments of good works. Episodic as the film is, it is worth seeing, to see how everything old is new again

Something very special...

[nicjaytee · 9/10 · 22 July 2005]

Absorbing, thought provoking and, above all, a unique record of an important "place & time", why "Medium Cool" still fails to gain the attention it deserves remains one of life's great mysteries.

First off, it's a pretty good if somewhat disjointed story… two "world-wise" middle class news reporters are sent to film the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago and become unwittingly involved in its political demonstrations, the inner city problems that have precipitated them, and the lives of a single mother and her young son in this harsh, confusing and seriously under-privileged world. Its acting, in particular from Robert Forster as the lead reporter and the 13 year old Harold Blankenship as the son, is excellent and at times so effective that it's difficult to remember you're watching a rigidly sequenced film rather than a social documentary. And, it's overlaid with some quite stunning cinema-photography from director Haskell Wexler, one of America's very best exponents of the art, backed up by a perfectly pitched late 60's soundtrack.

Good enough so far, but that's just the start. Add-in its extensive live footage from the streets of Chicago as the riots develop, taken by the film's camera crew as they themselves are caught-up in a very "real" political drama, its ominous sequencing of the build up of events from a fun "day in the park" for the hippies/yippies to serious "police state" level violence, its equally chilling images of what was going on inside the Convention Hall while all of this was taking place, and the clever and disturbing scenes of the mother's desperate search for her lost son as Wexler films her within the increasingly anarchic crowds of demonstrators & troops actually on the streets at the time, and you've got… something very special.

Part film and part documentary, not all of what you think is "real" in "Medium Cool" is, and the lines between live and acted scenes are sometimes confusingly and frustratingly blurred, as in the famous call from one of the camera crew of "look out Haskell this is real" as a tear gas canister lands in front of them, which was in fact over-dubbed afterwards. But that's the whole point of the film as the final, almost startling scenes reveal. How far is the media in control? Is what you're seeing real, distorted or contrived? Wexler's brilliance is to take this underlying theme and to mould it into a fascinating exploration of inner city life, American society in a period of huge change, and the power/needs of the media in a TV dominated world, while, in parallel, producing a gripping record of what it's like to be in the centre of a demonstration that's spiralling out of control. Juxtaposing the impersonality of reporting with the very personal situations that are involved, it raises a whole series of questions on the way without falling into the trap of most films of the era in trying to ram home too many answers. And, as a result, it remains as relevant today as it did then.

Quite rightly regarded as one of the best "counter culture" films of the late 60's and much richer and more thought provoking than this classification usually implies, it remains one of the most under-rated films out there.

"The whole world is watching! The WHOLE WORLD is watching!"

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 11 May 2011]

Still-relevant and thought-provoking essay on violence--and the voyeurism of violence via television--in America circa 1968. Docudrama-styled film centers on a TV-news cameraman in Chicago (Robert Forster, lean and mean while resembling a young Charles Bronson) and his love/hate relationship with his work, which is constantly being undermined by bureaucratic decision-making from network suits who aren't on the front-lines. Cinematographer Haskell Wexler also produced, directed, and wrote this microcosm of race relations (and its mind-boggling double-talk), youthful protesters of government, and clashes between civilians and the armed forces--all occurring during the 1968 Democratic convention rallies. Despite a tough, cynical veneer, a trace of bitter-tinged humor manages to come through in Wexler's conception, though the picture runs too long and is saddled with a bummer climax determined to make a statement. Forster is charming in a moodily low key, yet his budding romantic relationship with an abandoned mother of one is left a bit unformed. Real convention footage is integrated smoothly within the fictionalized drama, though these overtures (used for atmosphere) do call attention to themselves, as do a few stray acting moments from amateurs behaving too 'naturally'. However, this heatedly emotional and viscerally-charged film is still quite potent and arresting on many levels. **1/2 from ****

a totally original pastiche

[jonathan-577 · 9/10 · 18 March 2009]

A rare directorial outing by all-time great cinematographer Wexler, this is generally acknowledged as the most politically radical film ever produced by a major studio. In freewheeling, semi-improvised, ideologically calculated scene after scene, it depicts an apolitical television cameraman's awakening of consciousness and abandonment of the role of passive observer. The class and race politics are four notches up on any comparable contemporary studio feature, that's for sure - with the surprisingly patient explanation of how 6-o-clock-news ideology oppresses minority communities, leading in to a love affair with a working-class single mother instead of some vanguard hippie, you could even argue that this Americanization of Godard has better ideological legs than the master himself. Sure it meanders a tad, and the stylistics can date, but there's nothing else in any movie ever that compares with the climax, as the actors make their way through actual documentary footage of the 1968 Democratic convention and attendant street battles. I mean, how did such a finely balanced mix of integrated narrative, Euro-tics, American underground film and straight-up documentary even occur to them? And how did they then manage to actually pull it off with honors? Pretty damned impressive.

Interesting but flawed depiction of a tumultuous era.

[Lorenzo H. · 6/10 · 20 February 2000]

MEDIUM COOL is a documentary-like motion picture that contains actual footage of the Democratic National Convention and anti-war demonstrations, which occurred in Chicago in 1968. This gives the film, which is actually a work of fiction, an ultra-realism not usually found in Hollywood movies. Unfortunately, the excessive use of this footage near the film's somewhat extended conclusion helps distance us to the story of the main characters, which up to that point we had been following with great interest. Quite often in real life, major news events and the inevitable sensationalistic media coverage of them, tend to drown out all individuality and humanity. Perhaps this was the director's point. Still, by concentrating 'too' much on surrounding events, he allowed his characters to become only half-realized, and as a result the viewer only half cares what happens to them.

The movie does have its share of positives, from Robert Forsters thought provoking ghetto interviews with African Americans to the quite jarring and ironic ending. In between, we see the very attractive Mariana Hill in her birthday suit, and are treated to some cool guitar music by "The Mother's of Invention". These aside, my overall reaction to the film is "Medium Cool".

Final Verdict: 6 out of 10.

I Wish I Could Make a Documentary Challenging Top Critics to Prove the Greater Imprint of Any Other Film of Its Decade.

[jzappa · 10/10 · 22 June 2010]

One of the most truthful moments I've seen in a film in a long time: We hear MLK speaking on TV, a professional cameraman watching. We hear King's immortal words which have resounded through the decades, and when Forster finally speaks, he says, "God, I love shooting on film." Medium Cool is full of moments like this, where we see or hear something that plugs into what we're truly thinking, disconcertingly enough, at times when what we're thinking seems to obviously be something else. In Medium Cool, we respond to these things and, some forty years later, aren't quite sure what's real and what's not. This most head-on and seemingly makeshift of films was released in 1969 to reaction and surmise. Five years before, it would have been deemed unintelligible to the general movie audience. What happened, I suppose, is that by then we'd become so trained by the quick-cutting, idea suggestion and stream of consciousness of concepts in TV commercials that we process more quickly than feature-length movies can move. We get cinematic fast-sketch. And we like movies that recognize our intelligence.

Traditional film narratives pronounce themselves: We know all the main techniques/content and archetypal characters. Haskell Wexler's Medium Cool is one of several movies of the late 1960s and '70s that's conscious of these things about movie audiences, like Seconds, Easy Rider, Mean Streets, Who's That Knocking At My Door, The Graduate, The French Connection, etc. Of the bunch, Medium Cool is probably the most visceral. That may be since Wexler, for most of his career, has been a cinematographer, and so he's conditioned to see a movie pertaining to what's being shown and not shown on-screen more than its dialogue and story.

Wexler fabricates a fictional story about the TV cameraman, his passion, his profession, his girl and her son. There is also documentary footage about the riots during the Democratic convention. There is a chain of conscious scenarios that supposes reality (women taking marksmanship practice, the TV crew confronting black militants). There are fictitious characters in actual documentary scenes and vice versa. The misstep would be to segregate the real-life elements from the made-up. They're all equally meaningful. The National Guard troops are no more real than the love scene, or the artificial collision that ends the film. All the images have significance due to the way they are connected to each other.

Wexler induces our recollection of the zillions of other movies we've seen to import things about his plot that he never elucidates on screen. The essential account of the romance (young professional falls in love with war-widow, eventually obtains companionship of her resentful son) is surely not innovative. If Wexler had formalized it, it would have been commonplace and dull. Rather, he specializes in the emblematic and important features of this histrionic (the boy likes pigeons, the woman is a teacher, the location is Uptown, the time is the Democratic convention, the woman feels more authentic to the cameraman than the model he's living with). And these are the scenes Wexler shoots. The leftovers of the relationship are implicit and never shown, eschewing the often essentially unnecessary 2 on our way from 1 to 3.

And Medium Cool also sees not images but their purpose: Wexler doesn't see the hippie kids in Grant Park as hippie kids. He doesn't see the clothes or the folkways, and he doesn't hear the words. He distinguishes their purpose; they are there completely owing to the National Guard being there, and the opposite. Both sides have a purpose just when they encounter one another. Without the encounter, all you'd have would be the kids, dispersed all over the country, and the guardsmen, dressed in civilian clothes and spending the week on their daily grinds. That's interesting too, but it's not what they are that's significant in this film; it's what they're doing there.

Medium Cool is ultimately so seminal, and engaging, owing to the way Wexler braids all these components together. He has made a nearly consummate model of the movie of its time. Since we are so conscious this is a movie, it feels more pertinent and authentic than the graceful fictitious artifice of most other films, including better ones. This befits the last scene all by itself, that chance event that occurs for no reason at all. Chance events are invariably chance events, not fate, not God's will, not karma, and they never occur for a greater purpose. When we get it, it hit me that it's the first movie collision I've ever seen that we weren't anticipating for five minutes before.

surreal disjointed experimental counter culture film

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 30 December 2013]

John Cassellis (Robert Forster) is a TV reporter. This follow his work and personal life. It's a scatter shot of his life and Eileen (Verna Bloom) and her son. It's a semi-documentary where the lines of fiction and reality are often blurred. Sometimes, the only way to tell is the presence of a recognizable actor like Peter Boyle.

The film could be very disjointed and experimental. It's diving into the counter culture head first. None of the black activists are willing to discuss anything other than that they don't trust him to do an interview. There is a roller derby match, and a psychedelic Mothers of Invention concert. It is one big jumble.

Then it get surreal with Verna Bloom in her bright yellow dress walking among the protesters of the 68 Democratic convention. The riot police are out in full force, and so is the army. I would suggest anybody who find themselves drifting to stay with it to see final section. It is utterly fascinating.

Superb integration of the political and social aspects inherent in the film medium.

[gazer-3 · 10/10 · 13 August 1999]

Haskell Wexler's film generated much debate on just where American Cinema was headed upon its release in 1969. Its narrative revolves loosely around the relationship of a TV cameraman and a lower-class widow living in Chicago during the summer of 1968. The true focus of the film is on the Democratic National Convention and its devastating effects on that city during the "long hot summer" it was subjected to. With the care of an expert social journalist Wexler films the riot caused by the civil authority in that city with an unfaltering naturalism that Soviet Realists would kill for. His cinematographic gifts are never called into question as he edits the body of the film with patches of documentary and staged scenes. It's to the credit of the filmmaker that in one section a fellow cameraman has to admonish him as to the danger he is apparently embroiled in as he shoots a sequence. This wonderful play on the reflexivity so rarely admitted in film is reason enough to give this challenging but brilliant work of art a chance to leave its mark on you.

flawed yet thought provoking

[haasxaar · 7/10 · 10 July 2005]

This film really takes a while to get going. Much random footage is pieced together and it takes a good time before one can truly understand the purpose of the movie.

As for the actors - the main protagonists are beautiful - the very handsome Forster and his various female partners all light up the screen.

This film is also a great insight into the style, culture and atmosphere of the 60's - intermittent use of music and extensive camera shots of 60's USA all really serve to make this movie very stimulating as regards to the background setting.

This film is inventive, its acting performed by talented and attractive actors also adds some flavour. If it wasn't for the slightly cumbersome narrative and the characters not being all too interesting this film would be a stone cold classic.

Nevertheless, its original and definitely worthwhile viewing.

It captures a super-important period in US history....but it's also amazingly dull.

[planktonrules · 3/10 · 19 July 2016]

One of the craziest and most tension-filled time in America was during the Democratic Convention in Chicago in 1968. After all, Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy had just been killed, racial tensions were at an all-time high, folks were angry about Vietnam and people were simply scared. So, it's surprising that so few films actually deal with this in any way...and this is why I wanted to see "Medium Cool". Too bad the film was ponderous when is clearly should have been exciting.

The story is an odd one. In some ways, it looks like a documentary film where a film crew follows a reporter (Robert Forrester) during the course of him doing his job. And, as the film unfurls, you see the crazy events of the day as they take place. This documentary approach is heightened by most of the folks in the picture, as they are non-actors. But other moments seem more staged (such as the fun sex scene that originally earned the film an X rating) and often they are a bit dull. Overall, the picture desperately looks like it was done by a first-time filmmaker--complete with sub-par camera work, poor pacing and a semi-professional look to it. For the life of me, I cannot see why this film has been so well received.

Fascinating Sixties Document

[RobertF87 · 5 June 2004]

This film is a mixture of documentary footage and conventional narrative.

It tells the story of a tough news camera-man (Robert Forster) who falls for a young widow (Verna Bloom) and befriends her thirteen-year-old son, against the back-drop of the riots in Chicago in 1968.

The film utilises both professional actors and non-professionals, to very good effect. In fact there are scenes, such as the riot sequences, where there is a genuine sense of danger.

The main flaw in the film is that the love story is not well-handled and often quite dull, the far more interesting events are happening elsewhere.

This is a deeply political work and is savagely critical of the callous and cynical media, which distorts people's perceptions of the world.

Worth watching for anyone interested in the sixties, political cinema or American independent film.

Great soundtrack too.

everything it had to say could have been said in 20 mins.

[allar100 · 6/10 · 19 March 2003]

I did not partiucularily care for this film. Although I do like the social commentary that it brought up. It is shot in a largly documentary style, there is little editing, and almost no story until the half way mark. Some okay performances, but I am not really sure if they were really performances. Watch it as a documentary, not a real film. 6/10

Captures the time, place and feeling

[GethinVanH · 8/10 · 23 May 2009]

Movies have a way of capturing the moment better than recreating it. I can only dread what a recreated 1968 in Chicago would look like from a Hollywood perspective. It would probably resemble something out of Forrest Gump. But Medium Cool happened to capture some brutal fight scenes with police in Chicago as well as scenes from the black ghettos. You can't recreate this stuff. This isn't a documentary but cinema verité and combines fiction and non-fictional elements. It's all shot with Chicago of 68 in the background. A landmark and infamous year for the US with the assassinations of RFK and MLK as well as the 1968 Democratic National Convention which was met with severe state repression. The state wasn't negotiating at this time, it was brutally sending men off to war and attacking those at home with the hired goons of the police force.

It's a great movie which manages to combine fiction and non-fiction and shows us what the sixties were really like. It wasn't all love beads and LSD, although there is an amusing psychedelic sequence which takes place in a club.

I think what I liked most was that even people who were non-political were being dragged into the politics of the time. Events were that serious at the time and people had to begin picking sides, the pleasant, white, middle-class interior of the Chicago DNC or outside fighting and raging against the police.

Can you dig it?

[Red-Barracuda · 7/10 · 27 December 2006]

This experimental late 60's effort is a great time-capsule movie. It captures feelings of unease and paranoia that are synonymous with the time. This was at a time where events such as Altamont and the Manson murders helped kill the hippy dream. Medium Cool depicts a cynicism that is very much in line with times.

Set in Chicago during the '68 Democrat National Convention, the film follows a dispassionate news cameraman and his relationship with a country woman and her son. The story is slight. And the message is not entirely clear. But, apart from the time-capsule factor, what makes this movie worthwhile is the way in which it has been captured on film. The cinematography excellent in places. The opening credit sequence where the camera follows a dispatch bike rider through the streets of Chicago to the psychedelic main theme tune by Frank Zappa's Mothers of Invention is particularly well done. Similarly, the later shots of Verna Bloom walking through the anti-Vietnam riots clad in a little yellow summer dress is incredibly striking. Director Haskell Wexler was primarily a cinematographer so it is unsurprising that the look of the film is so important. On top of this, the idea of filming the actors in the settings of actual events, such as the riots and the Convention, gives the film a timeless quality and uniqueness that serves it well.

On the negative side, some scenes do go on too long and 'the message' aspect can get slightly tiresome at times. The acting is good but characters are maybe a little too detached at times, making it hard for us to care too much for them. That said, however, the ending still packs an emotional punch.

Other things to check out: An extended nude scene that must've been pretty shocking at the time. The psychedelic soundtrack is no too bad either – including a groovy rock concert scene. Lastly, a black radical who talks in fluent jive – 'you cat', 'you dig', etc – very funny.

If you're looking for a film with a great narrative then give Medium Cool a miss. If you would like to see a late 60's psychedelic/political mood piece with some great visuals and music, then give it a go.

a true representation of everything that happened in 1968

[lee_eisenberg · 9/10 · 13 May 2005]

It is hard to believe that Haskell Wexler was able to shoot a movie amid the turmoil surrounding the 1968 Democratic Convention, but he did it. Robert Forster plays a cameraman covering the event. He's not exactly enthused about his job, and in the process develops a relationship with single mother Verna Bloom.

The scenes of the protests almost eclipse the main plot. Chicago's mayor calls in the National Guard to attack the demonstrators, while in the convention, people seem unaware of what is going on outside. As the protesters remind everyone: "The whole world is watching."

It's so mind-boggling to think about 1968. That year, it seemed like one thing led to another. The Tet Offensive, the My Lai Massacre, Martin Luther King Jr's assassination, the Paris uprising, Bobby Kennedy's assassination, Prague Spring, the Democratic Convention, the Mexico City uprising (while the Olympics were happening there), and to crown everything, Nixon got elected.

Caught up in contradictions of the "hot summer" of 1969

[politfilm · 7/10 · 10 May 2019]

A realistic movie centered around a TV cameraman and his relationship with a single working class mother, made in the social atmosphere of a mass political awakening and loss of trust in the legitimacy of the system. The focus of the movie are events in Chicago in the summer of 1968, when the police and national guard smashed up the protests during the national convention of the Democratic Party.

The film was made from the perspective of a TV cameraman and we together with him experience the contradictions of his work and social role - he's at the same time a wage worker employed in the media industry, a communicator that shapes and sells media messages, and the victim of the media deception and manipulation.

Through the filmed stories that he makes, we travel with him through the contradictions of the society in which he lives: from the training and systematic indoctrination of young men in the National Guard to break up riots and crackdown on protesters, to discussions in the black ghetto where he meets racially and class conscious people who deconstruct racial relations and media stereotypes, flip every sentence and question established phrases. The dialogue and scenes carefully build-up the atmosphere of disillusionment.

Raw documentary footage recorded during the culmination of the "hot summer" of 1968 in Chicago creates the impression that the system may never even had legitimacy, for it has always been maintained through manipulation, repression and brute force. Based on actual events.

"Medium Cool is an extraordinary piece of cinematic art of the cinema verite-film style by Haskell Wexler".

[Jackkrsk · 10/10 · 30 June 2013]

I often like to watch films more than once and I recently did that with Medium Cool, which was originally released on August 27, 1969.

The film was directed, written, and cinematography recorded by Haskell Wexler. He invented and used an unforgettable cinema vérité-style documentary filmmaking technique, as well as combining fictional and non-fictional content.

Medium Cool was actor Robert Forster's first film in a lead role. Medium Cool is one of those films that shows cinematic footage of a nonfictional event in the movie - the 1968 Democratic National Convention protest activity. At that convention the protesters and the Chicago Police Department fought in the streets of Chicago while the US Democratic Party met during the convention in the International Amphitheater.

John Cassellis (played by Forster) is a Chicago television news reporter and cameraman. Cassellis and sound man Gus (played by Peter Bonerz) are reporting about the violence and racial tensions in the ghetto. One of people that interviewed is an African American taxi driver who lives in the ghetto. Cassellis later discovers that his network had helped the FBI by providing some of his video footage from the protests in order to aid the FBI in their search for suspects. When Cassellis protests, he is fired at which time he then decides to go to the convention to record more footage.

Cassellis ends up befriending Eileen (played by Vena Bloom), a welfare recipient who'd moved from her West Virginia home when her husband was sent to Vietnam. Eileen has a 13 year old son named Harold (Harold Blankenship).

Ruth (Marianna Hill) is an attractive nurse, who has a relationship with Cassellis.

Medium Cool is an extraordinary piece of cinematic art of the cinema verite-film style by Haskell Wexler. The way that the film combines a fiction and non-fiction story was very well explained and detailed due to Wexler's filmmaking style. The cinema verite genre combines well with a dramatic genre. One example: the argument scenes in the film that involve John Cassellis.

Haskell Wexler did an amazing job with the cinematography. The way that he recorded the 111 minutes of the movie was very well accomplished. I especially found his cinematography style of the film to be influential. Wexler's amazing style of the film could influence other filmmakers. The reason why it could influence filmmakers because the cinema verite style that used was very revolutionized for its time and young filmmakers has never laid eyes on this type of film style before. Wexler's film style mostly influenced documentary film makers.

The plot of the film was excellent and enhanced by the realism of the footage containing political protests of the late 1960s. I loved how the plot well captured and symbolized America in the 1960s and its political protests. One particularly interesting moment to me in the film is showed people setting up for the convention. Then, the black screen appears with the sentence: "America is wonderful". After that, John and Eileen are dancing in a psychedelic rock concert. This matters to me because this moment of the movie could bring back memories for people, who experienced late 1960s political conventions and psychedelic rock music concerts.

Here's my advice: The movie is a definite must see for all generations. I give the film an strong 4 out of 4 stars.

The anger is majorly hot.

[mark.waltz · 6/10 · 4 August 2022]

Definitely dated but interesting as a time capsule, I found this remotely interesting and fascinating in certain moments. This is a view of the late 60s when a presidential campaign followed two major assassinations and occurred during social unrest during a war that most people didn't understand or want. The traumas of this time are seeing through the eyes of a fictional television news cameraman, Robert Forster, and he's both praised and hated as he makes daily round trying to get human interest stories and covering important events leading up to the Democratic National convention in Chicago.

Those expecting a strong dramatic story will be sadly disappointed as the film really doesn't have a structure, just following Forster around, going to different neighborhoods and getting a taste of what he brings to the table that upsets people in regards to how their communities are presented. When he visits a black community with his sound editor, he's given a real look at a community disturbed by lack of genuine representation and unfair press that doesn't show the whole story.

The confrontation gets angry at one point and realistically describes how people don't always speak in ways that translate to total understanding, but towards the end two men make their feelings clear even if Forster knows that there's nothing that he can do just as the man behind the camera because he really has no power. His romance with a single mother (Verma Bloom) seems to be more frivolous at first, but eventually the real issues come out. I'm not sure that I can recommend this film because it does often feel like a two hour lecture, but for political science majors and history buffs, I do think it's a must see. For the most part though, it really is not entertainment. In fact, after a while, it's rather depressing.

'The Age of Awareness'

[youllneverbe · 9/10 · 19 February 2009]

"Medium Cool" (1968) Dir: Haskell Wexler

When I first saw "Medium Cool" I was far too young to appreciate it for what it actually is. I loved it anyway, perhaps partially because it baffled me. I was born in suburban England in 1986, and thus had no frame of reference for the setting of social unrest that is used as an omnipresent main character, alongside Robert Forster's brilliant John Cassellis - news cameraman, modern professional, and casual womaniser. Critics of this film have said that the plot is too thin and unlikely to support its pretensions, and that the final scenes are merely opportunistic instead of profound. I disagree with this, but not directly - it does have pretensions, and it is a little thin on plot. But the final scenes are literally stunning, and have deservedly assured this film's place in history.

Cassellis is clinical about his job and cynical towards his employers. In his own words, he loves to shoot film. He documents occurrences without judging them. In a way, he is like Gene Hackman's Harry Caul character in the equally brilliant "The Conversation", who doesn't care what people are talking about as long as he gets "a nice fat recording". But Cassellis is not an obsessive. Throughout the course of the film, he grows to accept the cultural and philosophical impact of his profession as a kind of vessel for public information. When he discovers his tapes are being viewed by the authorities, his principles are violated. We are shown the mutually antagonising relationship between 'the people' and 'the news media' as John realises the implications of what he has been contributing to. This sounds less than exciting, but the backdrop itself is Chicago circa 1968 - a city so restless and colourful that this fairly heavy concept is counterbalanced by the images themselves. We watch Cassellis and his soundman cover the National Guards' riot training, the morale-raising songs of a civil rights protest group, campaigners for Robert Kennedy, and more. A particularly memorable sequence involves the black residents of a tenement block explaining to the cameraman how he, as a representative of 'the media', carries the baggage of institutionalised prejudice through their front door. Sure, the tenants are actors (as is Peter Boyle as the Gun Clinic Manager) but they fit seamlessly. In this scene, as in most of the movie, the "cameraman" being spoken to is both the character of Cassellis, Haskell Wexler himself, and by extension everyone who is watching.

How Harold and his mother Eileen relate to all of this is a more abstract and difficult question - they are natives of West Virginia, and the flashback scenes of deep country woodlands and old-fashioned religion seem to suggest that they represent the past, the "age of innocence" in the movie's tag-line. But this isn't the effect they have on the plot. They are out of place in this volatile city, but so is everyone else, John included. And when we are plunged into the heart of the riots for the last scenes of the film, we have no time to speculate on what exactly Wexler was trying to say; because he himself is there - the director is holding the camera, dodging tear gas and avoiding the batons of the riot police, and filming the injured protesters. Its significance is elevated beyond mere entertainment. The fiction in "Medium Cool" exists mainly to highlight the intimidating labyrinth of fact.

There is technical boldness to be admired too: the cinematography is an impressive framing of undiluted reality, and the editing and soundtrack is inspired. The performances of Forster and the young amateur Harold Blankenship are equally captivating, with Verna Bloom not far behind.

Technique above all

[jellopuke · 7/10 · 18 October 2019]

This is more important for how it was made and the blending of non-fiction and fiction than for having much of an interesting story or characters. It's an exercise in construction and technique above all. Worth seeing, probably more meaningful for those alive at the time. Some very great footage of the riots that unfortunately doesn't come until the end. Before that, you get a lot of pigeons and kids playing that drags.

Maximum Bull

[rcraig62 · 4/10 · 11 July 2004]

Medium Cool is one of those hippie-dippie time capsule pictures that was probably dated by the time they released it. Now it's mostly laughable to watch as an attempt at art; it barely passes as memorabilia. The film was written and directed by cinematographer Haskell Wexler, so the emphasis, understandably, is on the look of the film, the images, and which is why the story and character development are so sadly lacking.

The film centers around a local Chicago cameraman (Robert Forster) and his travails in and around the high-tension scene around the time of the 1968 Democratic Convention, but the general theme that dominates the movie (yes, friends, it's a crusty old message movie) is the way the media controls our lives by controlling what we see and how we see it. Wexler presents this in a variety of ways, none particularly successful. The TV station's assignment editor is shown nixing a proposed feature on inner city suffering in favor of, among other things, baseball, and news events are depicted as staged. When Forster goes into a rant at his white trash girlfriend (Verna Bloom) about media tyranny (the big message scene which is, naturally, the low point of the film), one wonders if she has any idea what the hell he's talking about. A sequence where Forster is hassled in a black neighborhood is riveting, then that devolves into a message scene.

But where the movie fails is that IT looks staged when it's trying to be authentic. We see Verna Bloom's character tiptoeing behind a police barricade looking for her runaway son (by the way, is a political riot normally where a 13-year-old goes for kicks?), but the introduction of a paid actor into what is essentially news footage undercuts the seriousness of what Wexler is trying to sell. The opposite effect takes place, which is that the demonstration takes on the feel of staged drama; the documentary feel is lost. In another scene, two non-actors are heard shouting "Remember Prague" and "Don't forget Budapest" and it has all the legitimacy of a second-grade nature pageant; it was obviously looped on to the soundtrack in post-production. Wexler mixes true convention footage with drama and the hybrid stuff, and it doesn't really work on any level. I commend Wexler on the general look of the picture, it radiates the color of the times while mostly avoiding psychedelia: a shot of a father and son in a wheatfield is terrific, as are the shots of Verna Bloom searching for her son under the city lights, which are spectacular. The editing is curt and keeps the picture moving.

At the end, when Forster and Bloom have the auto accident, Wexler's camera pans over to a shot of another camera filming the wreckage. I guess Wexler's message is that they were just pawns in the game. But they're pawns in the movie too, and when they wipe out, we don't much care, since they were just implements for Wexler to put across his commentary on the state of things. Watching a young Robert Forster, I couldn't help but think how much I enjoyed him as the bail-bondsman in Jackie Brown. Now THERE'S a movie I recommend. With this, you take your chances. 2 ** out of 4