I saw that a couple of the reviewers gave this a '1', but the program warrants better than that. Irrespective of the merits, or lack thereof, of the National Enquirer, the program is still interesting, even for those of us who have never bought the paper. It gives a good overview of the background of the paper, and some of its sins. I gave it a 6.
8 Reviews
Good but not harsh enough
jnatch3 January 2021
Ok so I see some people trashing the doc for trashing Trump. Ignore them.
Those people have issues with reality. I feel everything in this doc is accurate. It is very well made, informative and entertaining. I learned many things from it. My issue with this documentary is that it softened the history of the rag known as the National Enquirer before Davis Pecker in order to make the post-Pecker changes more dramatic. Now it is true that the paper got extremely partisan. It is true it created the so-called catch and release tactic. It sold its soul to the devil with the comb over, so to speak. But it really downplays what an awful, lying, irresponsible piece of junk it had been in the 70's and 80's and even the 90's during it supposed "good period." No discussion here of all the crazy UFO stuff and made up nonsense and the lies and distortions. Anyone with a mediocre, or higher, I.Q. routinely laughed at the clearly false headlines you saw while checking out at the supermarket. You grew up knowing that and everyone talked about it for decades, scoffing at and laughing at the pathetic newspaper. I wish this documentary was harsher on the paper but instead had interview after interview of people justifying or glossing over the irresponsible things they were doing. I still recommend it.
Interesting Look at the Tabloid's Long History
larrys329 March 2020
An interesting look at the National Enquirer's decades old history, with its ups and downs along the way. The film illustrates how the tabloid publication often used unethical methods to get their stories and how a grain of truth can be stretched to its limit. But the doc also covers how the Enquirer can lead the mainstream media to some stories with intense investigation, like in the O.J. case.
The movie also describes the "catch and kill" policies, directed by owner David Pecker, beginning with the California Governor's race of Arnold Schwarzenegger and ending with the current occupant of the White House.
To note, there were no subtitles on my DVD copy but I was able to access them through the closed caption option on my remote.
The movie also describes the "catch and kill" policies, directed by owner David Pecker, beginning with the California Governor's race of Arnold Schwarzenegger and ending with the current occupant of the White House.
To note, there were no subtitles on my DVD copy but I was able to access them through the closed caption option on my remote.
A fun ride
Leofwine_draca15 September 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Well, I enjoyed this one for sure. A bit disappointed that the salacious, Fortean angle of the famous tabloid is toned down for a more serious exploration of politics and political journalism and the corruption that ensues. But nonetheless you get a fun journey through late 20th century popular culture and entertaining figures featuring, not least the former journalists being interviewed.
Actually Worse Than 1 star - Scandoulous
arthur_tafero13 November 2019
Wow. Fake News. Whudda Thunk It? The paper for IQs in the double digits and their methods and motivations. This film was about as enlightening as finding a fly in your soup. The screenplay, if you could call it that, was written in the men's room of a very good hotel in about an hour or so by someone with a very bad case of constipation. It is a simple-minded film for simple-minded people who have no life. Don't waste your time on this junk.
An odd historical revision of the National Enquirer's and media's history
saramgia13 September 2020
The first issue of National Enquirer I saw was in 1971 in Grandma's living room. As I picked it up, Grandma urgently told me: "That's not a real newspaper. Nothing in it is true. The stories are made up."
I asked, "Why do you read it then?"
"It's funny. The stories make me laugh. I don't know how they make up such wild stories," she replied, laughing.
The history of the National Enquirer and media are significantly different from the story in "Scandalous". No mention is made of the stories about aliens and humans marrying and having babies, sightings of the Loch Ness monster, Big Foot, and other oddities, speculations and stories about the Bermuda Triangle, all of which were presented as factual.
Rather, "Scandalous" portrays the National Enquirer as having been a largely reliable, respectable news source, which I can't write without laughing.
"Scandalous" alleges that the Enquirer started "catch and kill" during the Schwarzennegger campaign. "Catch and kill" is as old as journalism.
The primary agenda of "Scandalous" is revenge against David Pecker and the Enquirer for attacking Jeff Bezos. The story omits that Bezos bought The Washington Post, which Bezos now uses to attack the Enquirer and Trump.
Overall, the film misrepresents most of what it reports. I'm an independent observer, thinker, and voter. "Scandalous" is political propaganda and a jab at David Pecker, who deserves jabbing. The problem with "Scandalous" is that it is agenda-driven, historically inaccurate, and misleading.
I asked, "Why do you read it then?"
"It's funny. The stories make me laugh. I don't know how they make up such wild stories," she replied, laughing.
The history of the National Enquirer and media are significantly different from the story in "Scandalous". No mention is made of the stories about aliens and humans marrying and having babies, sightings of the Loch Ness monster, Big Foot, and other oddities, speculations and stories about the Bermuda Triangle, all of which were presented as factual.
Rather, "Scandalous" portrays the National Enquirer as having been a largely reliable, respectable news source, which I can't write without laughing.
"Scandalous" alleges that the Enquirer started "catch and kill" during the Schwarzennegger campaign. "Catch and kill" is as old as journalism.
The primary agenda of "Scandalous" is revenge against David Pecker and the Enquirer for attacking Jeff Bezos. The story omits that Bezos bought The Washington Post, which Bezos now uses to attack the Enquirer and Trump.
Overall, the film misrepresents most of what it reports. I'm an independent observer, thinker, and voter. "Scandalous" is political propaganda and a jab at David Pecker, who deserves jabbing. The problem with "Scandalous" is that it is agenda-driven, historically inaccurate, and misleading.
CNN bashes Trump via National Enquirer documentary
wyellen2 September 2020
This CNN creation does have some interesting material about the creation of the National Enquirer and it's history. However, after lulling the audience for a while with it's supposed central theme of NE history they get to the real meat of the matter pushing the narrative that the Enquirer had become a right wing publication and was very responsible for Donald Trump's election. It has hilarious moral platitudes from people like Carl Bernstein talking with a straight face about how awful the Enquirer had forsaken journalist standards of objectivity by demonstrating conservative political bias. As with Trump, many interesting facts about the editor-owner Generoso Pope Jr. that would cast him in a positive light were simply left out. While Pope had mob connections he attended the Horace Mann School and earned an engineering degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in electrical engineering; and was a Korean War vet. Getting a degree from MIT in electrical engineering, especially in those days, represented a intellectual feat that few can accomplish.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
