In a surprise announcement, the Republican National Committee has revealed it is bankrupt. A spokesman for the party said they had plenty of money in their accounts last week, but today they just don’t know where the money has gone. But not everybody is going begging. Amnesty International, Greenpeace and the United Negro College Fund announced record earnings this week, due mostly to large, anonymous donations.
Why it’s a left-wing film
Because I am both cursed and blessed with the kind of bad memory where after 20 visits I still need GPS to find my doctor’s office (no joke), director, co-writer Phil Alden Robinson’s “Sneakers” almost didn’t make this list, which would’ve been a regrettable oversight. But when it comes to films my memory curse is that while I’m lucky enough to make a living writing about them, regardless of how many times I might have seen a particular title, I remember very little outside the story’s general concept and always have to go back and give them a close look while taking meticulous notes. The blessing of my big balding airhead is that movies never grow old. My hundredth screening of “The Searchers” or “Deuce Bigalow” is just as landmark as the first.
So when this delightfully entertaining and under-appreciated Robert Redford caper film showed up as a suggested entry in the article introducing this series, I was surprised anyone considered it left-wing but more than happy to take another look. And here we are…
“Sneakers” opens on a snowy December night in 1969 with two college students (Cosmo and Bishop) in front of a computer screen using their spectacular programming skills to community organize in the form of criminal wealth redistribution. Via hacked bank accounts they rob from causes they see as undeserving — the Republican National Committee, President Nixon’s personal bank account — and give that money to such noble causes as the Black Panthers and a campaign to legalize marijuana. The police raid the place and purely by chance Bishop manages to evade capture. Cosmo, however, is caught and imprisoned.
Flash-forward 20-odd years and Bishop is now Robert Redford, a middle-aged 60’s radical still wanted by the Feds, living under a false name and making an interesting living as a security analyst who will use all the skills he and his talented team can summon to break into your whatever in order to find its weaknesses before the real bad guys do. It’s a living but not much of one and so when a couple of hard-nosed spies pretending to be National Security Agency Feds offer Bishop $175,000 and the clearing of his name if he’ll steal a computer chip for Uncle Sam, he reluctantly agrees… But not for God and country.
Thankfully for us, through the character of Donald Crease (the wonderful Sidney Poitier), an ex-CIA agent, friend of Bishop’s and member of his team, the film never approaches anything approaching outright anti-Americanism. Yes, government agencies such as the FBI, NSA, and CIA are each portrayed as sneaky, dishonest and manipulative, but when Bishop discovers what the chip he stole is truly capable of and says “any government would kill for it,” Crease informs him, “Not our government,” which does turn out to be the case.
Keep in mind, that’s the kind of line you wouldn’t have paid much attention to in 1992. It’s only within the context of Hollywood’s rabid anti-Americanism today that you can appreciate a film taking the time to make that kind of a moral distinction — a distinction backed up by no less than Wikileaks, by the way. However…
Our hero Bishop is still a man who refuses to take the side of America and is ultimately proven wise in not doing so. Before the film ends we’re informed that this wonder chip is wanted by the NSA but not to spy on our enemies, to spy on Americans; specifically other agencies like the FBI and CIA. Finally there’s that closing moment quoted above. Though Bishop appears to have matured beyond the college kid who confused stealing money with social justice, the film’s closing joke, while a good one, is still a partisan one and not the only partisan one. Early in the film there’s a gratuitous sucker shot aimed at then-President George H.W. Bush — and during an election year, no less!
Why it’s a great film
Let’s start with the cast. Redford’s smooth, easy-going presence as the leader of this unconventional clan is something George Clooney can only think of matching in those “Ocean” films, Sidney Poitier is always wonderful as our moral compass, David Strathairn’s blind Whistler provides some of the film’s most intelligent problem-solving moments, Dan Akroyd’s Mother is a reliably hilarious conspiracy theorist, Mary McDonnell the perfect romantic and mature Margaret Dumont to these Digital Marx Brothers, and River Phoenix makes the best of a small role.
Not only are the characters well drawn and easily distinguished, the chemistry between the actors makes all of their relationships believable. And so we like these people — we like these actors. There’s an unspoken and unforced warmth between them and best of all they each have a witty, self-aware sense of humor about themselves. And while we might not agree with the story’s over-arching politics, just as he successfully did with “Field of Dreams,” director Robinson crafts his characters well enough that the more strident political moments feel true to the characters and therefore the overall story. Left-wing? Yes. Preachy? No. And that makes all the difference in the world.
Finally, you have an excellent script with a number of complicated scenarios and watching our protagonists game-plan, execute, and eventually solve them is a real delight. Whistler’s use of his incredible hearing ability to recreate Bishop’s kidnap experience in a car trunk in order to locate where he was taken is a dazzler of a sequence and the use of the Cosmo character’s ultimate fate as a way to show how sixties radical “idealism” can be taken too far (“Field of Dreams” didn’t flinch from showing us the darkside of the hippie era either) helps to offset any creeping sense of a Bill Ayers’ vibe.
Funny, intelligent, well-paced, warm-hearted, and nothing approaching a mean spirit disarms you from opening scene to close. A terrifically entertaining film I look forward to forgetting and watching all over again and again and again.
What’s not on the list
Three that I don’t qualify as left-wing…
Dr. Strangelove (1964) – This was another film I was surprised to see pop up as a left-wing nominee. Obviously it’s brilliant enough to qualify on any “best” list, but is it a left-wing film? I don’t think so. There’s nothing leftist about an anti-war theme and writer/director Stanley Kubrick’s satire is just as witheringly directed at the Soviets as at us, probably more so. The U.S. President (a brilliant Peter Sellers in one of three roles) is an oddball to be sure, but also a reasonable and decent man trying to do the right thing — far from bloodthirsty. However, over in Russia, the Premiere is a drunken madman who created something infinitely more dangerous than nuclear weapons; a world-ending doomsday device that can’t be stopped once some mindless computer tells it to fire.
The Cold War and Mutual Assured Destruction, or MAD, was certainly a necessary posture at the time and still is, but that doesn’t mean the concept is above a satirical beating. For every bit of eye-rolling hilarity found in the likes of George C. Scott’s “mineshaft gap” madness there was also a Russian Ambassador making those fears legitimate with his secret photo taking of the “Big Board.”
There’s a lot of truth in Kubrick’s beautifully designed classic, but also a strain of affection. “Dr. Strangelove” feels like one of the family needling you, not some above-it-all jerkoff. Tone is everything and Kubrick’s tone is knowing not patronizing, which is why you can hate the Commies as much as General Jack D. Ripper and laugh at yourself at the same time — frequently on the floor.
Dawn of the Dead (1978) – I gave a lot of thought to this one, but in the end what’s really nothing more than a harmless message against consumerism didn’t justify my true motivations when it came to ranking it on this list: to use every opportunity available to say great things about The Mighty George Romero.
All the President’s Men (1976) – A political film but not a partisan one. The story is true and the theme is about the pursuit of truth and holding our government accountable. Obviously, had Nixon been a Democrat the press would’ve likely not pursued him to the point where he had to resign and therefore there would’ve been no movie. But what Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman’s Dynamic Woodstein Duo represent is the kind of mainstream media we would like to see today, regardless of who’s in office. We never will, though, because the institution of journalism is now as corrupted, politically partisan, and ready to add a name to their own Enemies List as Nixon himself.
Director Alan J. Pakula’s timeless thriller remains the ideal of something we lost decades ago and probably never really had to begin with. Besides, Nixon’s long dead. The legacy of “All the President’s Men” now shames the likes of the Washington Post, New York Times, Politico and the broadcast networks.
They’re the Palace Guards today, they’re the Haldemans and Ehrlichmans.
Comment count on this article reflects comments made on Breitbart.com and Facebook. Visit Breitbart's Facebook Page.