Connect with us

Entertainment

Inside a new documentary's provocative allegations about a famed Vietnam War photo

Published

on

Inside a new documentary's provocative allegations about a famed Vietnam War photo

Saturday night in Park City saw the world premiere of “The Stringer,” which calls into question the origins of one of the most famous photographs ever taken. Directed by Bao Nguyen, the documentary claims that the photograph taken on June 8, 1972, of a naked 9-year-old girl named Phan Thi Kim Phuc as she fled a napalm attack on the village of Trảng Bàng in South Vietnam was not taken by Nick Ut, the Associated Press photographer to whom it is credited.

Officially titled “The Terror of War” but more commonly known as “Napalm Girl,” the photo won Ut a Pulitzer Prize and was the cornerstone of his career until he retired from the Associated Press in 2017. Ut was only 21 years old when the incident at Trảng Bàng occurred.

Instead, “The Stringer” alleges, the photo was actually taken by Nguyen Thanh Nghe, a driver for an NBC news crew present that day whose photos came into the AP‘s possession as a freelancer, also known as a stringer.

The origin of the claim in the film comes from Carl Robinson, an AP photo editor in Saigon on that day. In the film, Robinson claims that Horst Faas, the chief of photos in Saigon, instructed him to “make it Nick Ut” and for Robinson to incorrectly credit what would within a few hours become the photo known around the world.

The film’s team set out on a two-year investigation of their own, eventually leading them to Nguyen Thanh Nghe, who says in the film that he took the photo. Of a moment when he later met Ut but did not bring up the origins of the shot, the Vietnamese photographer says in the film, “I worked hard for it, but that guy got to have it all.”

Advertisement

On Saturday afternoon, ahead of the film’s premiere screening, director Nguyen and executive producer Gary Knight, a veteran photojournalist who appears onscreen in the film, sat for an interview in Park City about the documentary and its startling allegations.

“This story challenges my profession and established truth in my profession,” said Knight. “And so we owe it to our profession to be very diligent and to get this right. And the pushback from the profession we expected would be tough. Rightfully so.

“Bao is a very prominent Vietnamese American filmmaker who comes from the same community as the stringer and as Nick,” said Knight. “So we were all heavily invested in making sure that we were diligent, thoughtful and treated everybody with respect and tried to get this right. So we’re all stakeholders in the story.”

Ahead of the release of the film, the AP conducted its own investigation into the origins of the photo over six months, interviewing seven people who were witnesses to the events on the road at Trảng Bàng that day and in the AP’s Saigon bureau where the picture was developed and printed. None of those witnesses were interviewed on camera for the film. Without having seen the film, the AP report concludes, “In the absence of new, convincing evidence to the contrary, the AP has no reason to believe anyone other than Ut took the photo.”

The internal report also said that AP “would look fully into any questions around the photo, and, if the credit was indeed incorrect, would take appropriate remedial actions.”

Advertisement

An image from the documentary “The Stringer.”

(Sundance Institute)

Knight is also co-founder and CEO of the VII Foundation, a nonprofit journalism advocacy and education organization. Nguyen’s previous work includes the documentaries “The Greatest Night in Pop,” on the recording of the song “We Are the World,” and “Be Water,” a portrait of Bruce Lee, both of which also premiered at Sundance.

“The life that many refugees and immigrants have left behind when they’re coming to a place that’s strange and foreign, there’s this expectation that they have the same agency to tell their narratives and tell their stories, but it’s not the same,” said Nguyen. “This film is in many ways a reckoning of that assumption that, ‘OK, if Nghe had this truth for so long, why didn’t he say something?’

Advertisement

“But can you imagine coming to a new culture, a new place, just trying to take care of your family and going up to a system that he doesn’t understand and that he believes that he does not belong to?” said Nguyen. “Documentary films specifically have a responsibility to try to acknowledge all these misrepresentations and systems that have existed.”

According to the AP report, in a 2005 oral history for AP’s corporate archives Robinson made no mention of misidentifying the photo and gave no indication of uncertainty whether Ut took the photo. There is also no reference to Robinson’s allegations in his own book about his time in Vietnam, though in the film he expresses regret over this omission.

“This story doesn’t hinge on Carl,” said Knight. “We interviewed 55 people, 45 on camera, and did the forensic research, which has been tested. So we don’t rely on Carl’s story. That was just the beginning of the journey. And whether AP choose to talk about Carl as a disgruntled employee or not, it doesn’t make him a bad witness per se. A lot of whistleblowers are in the same situation. So we wouldn’t have made a film based solely on one man’s accusations. That’s not journalism.”

In a telephone interview on Saturday, James Hornstein, an attorney representing Ut (who has also not yet seen the film), said in reference to Robinson, “I think it is outrageous that the VII Foundation has provided a platform to a man who clearly has a vendetta that’s been simmering for more than 50 years.”

Kim Phuc, who does not remember the events of that day, said in a statement provided to The Times by Hornstein, “I have refused to participate in this outrageous and false attack on Nick Ut raised by Mr. Robinson over the past years. … I would never participate in the Gary Knight film because I know it is false.”

Advertisement

Among the most compelling arguments put forth in the film is a visual timeline created using all available photographic and film evidence to place Ut out of position when the “Terror of War” image would have been created, with Nghe in the correct spot.

“I stand by the research and the forensics,” said Knight. “I think Nghe is the only person who was in the right place to have taken that picture.”

The AP’s own report says it also created a visual timeline using available materials but the results “offer little evidence about the provenance of the photo.” Also, the images, “along with Ut’s strong body of work from the day, show a scenario in which Ut, running around the scene energetically, had ample opportunity to capture the image.”

While no one involved with the documentary is disputing the powerful truth of what is in the image itself, the assertion that the photo’s origins and authorship are up for debate has a potentially life-changing dimension.

“It’s quite upsetting to him personally and emotionally, as one could imagine,” Hornstein said of the impact on Ut. “This is perhaps the most important piece of work that he’s done in his life in terms of the acclaim that this photo has brought. And for him to be accused of lying about it, which is what this film does, is devastating.”

Advertisement

For Nguyen, the film comes down to finally telling a story that has up to now been unheard.

“For me personally, the film is about finding the stringer,” said Nguyen. “It’s uplifting Nghe, this 53-year-old burden that he had on his shoulders for most of his life. And as you see in the film too, the stories of many Vietnamese journalists and Vietnamese American journalists have been neglected for decades.

“Nick’s narrative had been well established through past interviews, and with very little editorial. It’s just presented as he’s always stated it,” said Nguyen. “And so it’s more about focusing on this other part of the story that’s been in the shadows for so long.”

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

‘Greenland 2: Migration’ Review: Gerard Butler in a Post-Apocalyptic Sequel That’s Exactly What You Expect

Published

on

‘Greenland 2: Migration’ Review: Gerard Butler in a Post-Apocalyptic Sequel That’s Exactly What You Expect

Desperate migrants are forced to leave Greenland after a malevolent force makes their island uninhabitable. No, it’s not tomorrow’s headline about Donald Trump, but rather the sequel to Ric Roman Waugh’s 2020 post-apocalyptic survival thriller. That film starring Gerard Butler and Morena Baccarin had the misfortune of opening during the pandemic and going straight to VOD. Greenland 2: Migration (now there’s a catchy title) has the benefit of opening in theaters, but it truly feels like an unnecessary follow-up. After all, how many travails can one poor family take?

That family consists of John Garrity (Butler), whose structural engineering skills designated him a governmental candidate for survival in the wake of an interstellar comet dubbed “Clarke” wreaking worldwide destruction; his wife Allison (Baccarin); and their son Nathan (now played by Roman Griffin Davis). At the end of the first film, the clan had endured numerous life-threatening crises as they made their way to the underground bunker in Greenland where survivors will attempt to make a new life.

Greenland 2: Migration

The Bottom Line

It’s the end of the world as we know it…again.

Advertisement

Release date: Friday, January 9
Cast: Gerard Butler, Morena Baccarin, Roman Griffin Davis, Amber Rose Revah, Sophie Thompson, Trond Fausa Aurvag, William Abadie
Director: Ric Roman Waugh
Screenwriters: Mitchell LaFortune, Chris Sparling

Rated PG-13,
1 hour 38 minutes

Five years later, things aren’t going so well. Fragments of the comet continue to rain down on the planet, causing catastrophic destruction. The contaminated air prevents people from going outside, and resources are becoming increasingly scarce. But there are some plus sides, such as the bunker’s inhabitants still being able to dance to yacht rock.

When their safe haven in Greenland is destroyed, the Garritys, along with a few other survivors, are forced to flee. Their destination is France, where there are rumors of an oasis at the comet’s original crash site. And at the very least, the food is bound to be better.

Advertisement

It’s a perilous journey, but anyone who saw the first film knows what to expect. The Garritys, along with the bunker’s Dr. Casey (Amber Rose Revah), run into some very bad people, undergoing a series of life-threatening trials and tribulations.

Unfortunately, while the thriller mechanics are reasonably well orchestrated by director Waugh (Angel Has Fallen, Kandahar) in his fourth collaboration with Butler, Greenland 2: Migration feels as redundant as its title. While the first film featured a relatively original premise and some genuine emotional dynamics in its suspenseful situations, this one just feels rote. And while it’s made clear that the crisis has resulted in people resorting to cutthroat, deadly means to ensure their survival, the Garritys have it relatively easy. All John has to do is adopt a puppy-dog look, put a pleading tone in his voice, beg for his family’s help, and people inevitably comply.

To be fair, the film contains some genuinely arresting scenes, including one set in a practically submerged Liverpool and another in a dried-up English Channel. The latter provides the opportunity for a harrowing sequence in which the family is forced to cross a giant ravine on a treacherously fragile rope ladder.

Butler remains a sturdy screen presence, his Everyman quality lending gravitas to his character. Baccarin, whose character serves as the story’s moral conscience (early in the proceedings she spearheads a fight to open the shelter to more refugees despite the lack of resources, delivering a not-so-subtle message), more than matches his impact. William Abadie (of Emily in Paris) also makes a strong impression as a Frenchman who briefly takes the family in and begs them to take his daughter Camille (Nelia Valery de Costa) along with them.

Resembling the sort of B-movie fantasy adventure, with serviceable but unremarkable special effects, that used to populate multiplexes in the early ‘70s, Greenland 2: Migration is adequate January filler programming. The only thing it’s missing is dinosaurs.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Entertainment

Paramount stands by bid for Warner Bros. Discovery

Published

on

Paramount stands by bid for Warner Bros. Discovery

Paramount is staying the course on its $30-a-share bid for Warner Bros. Discovery, again appealing directly to shareholders.

The move comes after Warner Bros. Discovery’s board voted unanimously this week to reject Paramount’s revised bid, in which billionaire Larry Ellison agreed to personally guarantee the equity portion of his son’s firm’s financing package.

Paramount Skydance, in a Thursday statement, sidestepped Warner’s latest complaints about the enormous debt load that Paramount would need to pull off a takeover. Paramount instead said the appeal of its bid should be obvious: $30 a share in cash for all of Warner Bros. Discovery, including its large portfolio of cable channels, including CNN, HGTV, TBS and Animal Planet.

Warner board members have countered that Netflix’s $27.75 cash and stock bid for much of the company is superior because Netflix is a stronger company. Warner also has complained that it would have to incur billions in costs, including a $2.8-billion break-up fee, if it were to abandon the deal it signed with Netflix on Dec. 4.

The streaming giant has agreed to buy HBO, HBO Max and the Warner Bros. film and television studios, leaving Warner to spin off its basic cable channels into a separate company later this year.

Advertisement

The murky value of Warner’s cable channel portfolio has become a bone of contention in the company’s sale.

“Our offer clearly provides WBD investors greater value and a more certain, expedited path to completion,” Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison said in Thursday’s statement. Paramount said it had resolved all the concerns that Warner had raised last month, “most notably by providing an irrevocable personal guarantee by Larry Ellison for the equity portion of the financing.”

Paramount is gambling that Warner investors will evaluate the two offers and sell their shares to Paramount. Stockholders have until Jan. 21 to tender their Warner shares, although Paramount could extend that deadline.

The Netflix transaction offers Warner shareholders $23.25 in cash, $4.50 in Netflix stock and shares in the new cable channel company, Discovery Global, which Warner hopes to create this summer.

Comcast spun off most of its NBCUniversal cable channels this month, including CNBC and MS NOW, creating a new company called Versant. The result hasn’t been pretty. Versant shares have plunged about 25% from Monday’s $45.17 opening price. On Thursday, Versant shares were selling for about $32.50. (Versant has said it expected volatility earlyon as large index funds sold shares to rebalance their portfolios).

Advertisement

Paramount has argued that fluctuations in Netflix’s stock also reduces the value of the Netflix offer.

“Throughout this process, we have worked hard for WBD shareholders and remain committed to engaging with them on the merits of our superior bid and advancing our ongoing regulatory review process,” Ellison said.

Paramount is relying on equity backing from three Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds, including Saudi Arabia. It turned to Apollo Global for much of its debt financing. Warner said this week that Paramount’s proposed $94 billion debt and equity financing package would make its proposed takeover of Warner the largest leveraged buyout ever.

Amid the stalemate, Paramount and Warner stock held steady. Paramount was trading around $12.36, while Warner shares are hovering around $28.50 on Thursday.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: A real-life ’70s hostage drama crackles in Gus Van Sant’s ‘Dead Man’s Wire’

Published

on

Movie Review: A real-life ’70s hostage drama crackles in Gus Van Sant’s ‘Dead Man’s Wire’

It plays a little loose with facts but the righteous rage of “Dog Day Afternoon” is present enough in Gus Van Sant’s “Dead Man’s Wire,” a based-on-a-true-tale hostage thriller that’s as deeply 1970s as it is contemporary.

In February 1977, Tony Kiritsis walked into the Meridian Mortgage Company in downtown Indianapolis and took one of its executives, Dick Hall, hostage. Kiritsis held a sawed-off shotgun to the back of Hall’s head and draped a wire around his neck that connected to the gun. If he moved too much, he would die.

The subsequent standoff moved to Kiritsis’ apartment and eventually concluded in a live televised news conference. The whole ordeal received some renewed attention in a 2022 podcast dramatization starring Jon Hamm.

But in “Dead Man’s Wire,” starring Bill Skarsgård as Kiritsis, these events are vividly brought to life by Van Sant. It’s been seven years since Van Sant directed, following 2018’s “Don’t Worry, He Won’t Get Far on Foot,” and one of the prevailing takeaways of his new film is that that’s too long of a break for a filmmaker of Van Sant’s caliber.

Working from a script by Austin Kolodney, the filmmaker of “My Own Private Idaho” and “Good Will Hunting” turns “Dead Man’s Wire” into not a period-piece time capsule but a bracingly relevant drama of outrage and inequality. Tony feels aggrieved by his mortgage company over a land deal the bank, he claims, blocked. We’re never given many specifics, but at the same time, there’s little doubt in “Dead Man’s Wire” that Tony’s cause is just. His means might be desperate and abhorrent, but the movie is very definitely on his side.

Advertisement

That’s owed significantly to Skarsgård, who gives one of his finest and least adorned performances. While best known for films like “It,” “The Crow” and “Nosferatu,” here Skarsgård has little more than some green polyester and a very ’70s mustache to alter his looks. The straightforward, jittery intensity of his performance propels “Dead Man’s Wire.”

Yet Van Sant’s film aspires to be a larger ensemble drama, which it only partially succeeds at. Tony’s plight is far from a solitary one, as numerous threads suggest in Kolodney’s fast-paced script. First and foremost is Colman Domingo as a local DJ named Fred Temple. (If ever there were an actor suited, with a smooth baritone, to play a ’70s radio DJ, it’s Domingo.) Tony, a fan, calls Fred to air his demands. But it’s not just a media outlet for him. Fred touts himself as “the voice of the people.”

Something similar could be said of Tony, who rapidly emerges as a kind of folk hero. As much as he tortures his hostage (a very good Dacre Montgomery), he’s kind to the police officers surrounding him. And as he and Dick spend more time together, Dick emerges as a kind of victim, himself. It’s his father’s bank, and when Tony gets M.L. Hall (Al Pacino) on the phone, he sounds painfully insensitive, sooner ready to sacrifice his son than acknowledge any wrongdoing.

Pacino’s presence in “Dead Man’s Wire” is a nod to “Dog Day Afternoon,” a movie that may be far better — but, then again, that’s true of most films in comparison to Sidney Lumet’s unsurpassed 1975 classic. Still, Van Sant’s film bears some of the same rage and disillusionment with the meatgrinder of capitalism as “Dog Day.”

There’s also a telling, if not entirely successful subplot of a local TV news reporter (Myha’la) struggling against stereotypes. Even when she gets the goods on the unspooling news story, the way her producer says to “chop it up” and put it on air makes it clear: Whatever Tony is rebelling against, it’s him, not his plight, that will be served up on a prime-time plate.

Advertisement

It doesn’t take recent similar cases of national fascination, such as Luigi Mangione, charged with killing a healthcare executive, to see contemporary echoes of Kiritsis’ tale. The real story is more complicated and less metaphor-ready, of course, than the movie, which detracts some from the film’s gritty sense of verisimilitude. Staying closer to the truth might have produced a more dynamic movie.

But “Dead Man’s Wire” still works. In the film, Tony’s demands are $5 million and an apology. It’s clear the latter means more to him than the money. The tragedy in “Dead Man’s Wire” is just how elusive “I’m sorry” can be.

“Dead Man’s Wire,” a Row K Entertainment release, is rated R for language throughout. Running time: 105 minutes. Three stars out of four.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending