Quiz Show (1994)

User Rating:

7.5/10   

Director:

Robert Redford

Writers (WGA):

Paul Attanasio (screenplay)
Richard N. Goodwin (book)

Release Date:

14 September 1994 (USA)

Genre:

Drama | History

Tagline:

Fifty million people watched, but no one saw a thing.

Plot:

Dick Goodwin discovers game shows are fixed: pretty boy WASP Charles Van Doren is fed answers so he beats geeky Jew Herbie Stempel.

Plot Keywords:

Columbia University | Television | Investigation | Fraud | 1950s

Awards:

Nominated for 4 Oscars. Another 4 wins & 10 nominations

Cast

John Turturro	...	Herbie Stempel
Rob Morrow	...	Dick Goodwin
Ralph Fiennes	...	Charles Van Doren
Paul Scofield	...	Mark Van Doren
David Paymer	...	Dan Enright
Hank Azaria	...	Albert Freedman
Christopher McDonald	...	Jack Barry
Johann Carlo	...	Toby Stempel
Elizabeth Wilson	...	Dorothy Van Doren
Allan Rich	...	Robert Kintner
Mira Sorvino	...	Sandra Goodwin
George Martin	...	Chairman
Paul Guilfoyle	...	Lishman
Griffin Dunne	...	Account Guy
Michael Mantell	...	Pennebaker

Runtime:

133 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

1.37 : 1

Sound Mix:

Dolby

Certification:

USA:PG-13 (certificate no. 32957) | Netherlands:AL | Iceland:L | South Korea:15 | Philippines:PG-13 | Argentina:13 | Australia:M | Chile:14 | Finland:S | Germany:6 (w) | Singapore:PG | Spain:T | Sweden:Btl | UK:15

Filming Locations:

Bronx, New York City, New York, USA

Company:

Baltimore Pictures

Trivia:

Producers Barry Levinson and Mark Johnson had their names taken off the credits even though they had been instrumental in getting the film made. They settled instead for a namecheck for their production company Baltimore Pictures. This was because they felt that listing eleven producer credits for just one film was far too many.

Goofs:

Anachronisms: A theatre marquee advertises La dolce vita (1960).

Quotes:

Announcer: Geritol. America's #1 tonic. Geritol, the fast-acting, high-potentcy tonic, that helps you feel... stronger... fast... presents the exciting quiz program...”Twenty-One." Brought to you by NBC, The National Broadcasting Company, broadcasting nationally coast to coast, from New York to Los Angeles, from Seattle to St. Petersburg... via a vast network of affiliates crisscrossing the country. Coming up next, "Twenty-One," starring master of ceremonies Jack Barry!
[music cues build dramatically]
Announcer: Two players racing to score 21 points... each in a soundproof television studio, not knowing the other one's score... with $500 riding on each point... as they both play...”Twenty-One!"
[lively theme music plays]
Announcer: And here's your host... Jack Barry!
[the audience applauds as Jack runs on to the stage and stands behind his podium]
Jack Barry: [looking at us] Good evening. I'm Jack Barry. Due to a series of ties, Herbert Stempel, our 29-year-old ex-G.I. college student, must play at $3,000 a point, which means that in a few brief minutes, he can either win as much as $100,000 - the most money won on television to date - or lose everything he's won in the last eight weeks.
[as Jack continues to speak, Herbert and his opponent wait to be introduced]
Stempel's opponent: You nervous?
Herbie Stemple: [chuckles as he clean's his glasses] It's only money.
[...]

Movie Connections:

Spoofed in "Saturday Night Live: John Turturro/Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers (#20.6)" (1994)

Soundtrack:

MORITAT

A colorful, well-written portrayal of a forgotten event in the history of television

"Quiz Show" is the type of movie that invites viewers to ask themselves how they would act under similar circumstances. If you were a contestant on a TV game show and the producers offered you a load of money to do a fixed show where you're given the answers in advance, would you do it? Or would you turn your back on the producers and walk away? In this film, Charles Van Doren does not walk away, but he does hesitate. As played by Ralph Fiennes, he's a bright, likable fellow who seems like a good man despite his willing participation in a fraud.

The film is smartly written, tightly plotted, and populated by interesting characters. It is also entertaining. It unfolds like a great detective story, except that no murder has taken place. There isn't even any crime. As shocking as it may seem, there were no laws against rigging a quiz show back in the 1950s, because no lawmaker had considered that such a thing would ever happen. When the scandal came to light, those working behind the scenes who engineered the fraud managed to survive with their careers intact, and the people who suffered the harshest consequences were the contestants, who were simply pawns. That says something about the distortions of television culture, but this theme, among others, is nicely understated in the film.

Director Robert Redford has a gift for finding the drama in seemingly mundane topics, but not in a contrived or manipulative fashion. The '50s quiz show scandal is the sort of topic that could easily have made for a preachy and artificial TV movie. It's a great credit to Redford's film that it doesn't contain any long moralizing speeches. Though the movie has many great quotes, the characters talk like real people, and the situations grow out of their personalities. We end up rooting for several characters at once. We want Richard Goodwin (Rob Morrow), the lawyer sent to investigate the show, to succeed in uncovering the scandal. But we also feel for Van Doren, who almost comes off as a tragic hero. We even feel a little for the pathetic and unlikable Herb Stemple (John Turturro), the whistle-blower who's been bamboozled and humiliated by the producers.

The movie works on the most basic level as simple drama, the high points being those scenes where Goodwin uncovers each new layer to the case. The first time I saw the film, I was put in mind of a detective story like "Colombo." There's no mystery, of course, since we know from the start who the perpetrators are, what they did and how they did it. But the labyrinth of corruption that Goodwin must probe is fascinating to behold.

Goodwin naively assumes he's practically taking down the network (the movie hints that the scandal goes to the very top) even though no laws were broken. The situation has the feel of a conspiracy, the people talking in euphemisms like they were mob bosses or something ("For seventy grand you can afford to be humiliated"). The contestants themselves are no dummies: they are smart, knowledgeable people who could very well have been used honestly on a trivia show. The producers simply wanted to control the responses to make the show more dramatic. What made this unethical was the amount of deception it required. It's one thing to have entertainment that everyone knows is fake (e.g., pro-wrestling), it's quite another to pass off something phony as something real. Of course now I'm getting preachy, something I praised the movie for not doing. But that's exactly my point. In a lesser movie, there would have been characters explaining the distinction. Here, it's left to us to assess the situation. That's the best kind of movie, the kind that invites further discussion.

Above all, the movie is about integrity and what defines it. Goodwin (in a classic reversal of our culture's typical view of lawyers) is the boy scout in the story, who says at one point that he would never have participated in the fraud if he were in Van Doren's shoes, and we believe him. But a large part of the film involves his relationship with Van Doren, a man he likes and doesn't want to hurt. His desire to protect Van Doren (but not Stemple) from ruin while bringing down the true perpetrators of the scandal leads to one of the movie's most memorable lines, when Goodwin's wife calls Goodwin "the Uncle Tom of the Jews," because he's sticking up for a corrupt Gentile. We respect Goodwin and admire his reluctance to hurt Van Doren, but we, too, wonder whether he's handling the case with the proper objectivity.

The movie has some interesting subtexts dealing with the anti-Semitism coming from Jewish producers themselves. In one scene, producers Dan Enright and Albert Freedman basically explain to Van Doren, in so many words, that Stemple is too Jewish for the show. This is a phenomenon I've rarely seen dealt with in the movies, possibly because there aren't too many films depicting the history of television.

The film is often criticized for departing significantly from the facts of the case. For example, the real Goodwin actually played a minimal role in exposing the scandal. I can understand why those involved in the case may have resented these inaccuracies. But filmmakers do have dramatic license. Probably this film should have changed the names of the characters from their real-life counterparts, to reinforce the fact that it's not an exact account of what happened. The purpose of movies isn't to duplicate real life, but to reflect on real life, to gain fresh insight, and "Quiz Show" achieves that purpose with dignity and style.