Saw this movie yesterday and really enjoyed it.
My question is this...what was the document that Melinda and the housekeeper found to use against the therapist? I believe in the movie they showed it as a last will and testament for Brian. Does anybody have any backstory on this. Is that what was really used in the court case?
Don't have a backstory other than the bum glued himself to a lot of documents and monies going to Brian. In the movie, the housekeeper gave Melinda a changed will making Lundy sole benefactor.
Black men and a whole lot of *beep* white men have had plenty fun adoring my ass!
Thank you for your reply!
Do you have any control over how creepy you allow yourself to get?
Here to help.
Black men and a whole lot of *beep* white men have had plenty fun adoring my ass!
In real life, was Melinda as instrumental in prying Brian loose from Dr. Landy as we see in the film?
shareapparently. she wasn't family, so she couldn't do anything. she had to what she could to convince Carl and Brian's family to go to court and get Landy out of Brian's life.
Diane Sawyer did a report on this in '91. She interviews a lady who doesn't want her identity revealed. Most Beach Boys fans assume that's Melinda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdik8rP2TYU
it sure is a dog of a night
I wouldn't think Carl would have needed much convincing that Landy was a bad egg.
BTW, how is Carl Wilson portrayed in this new film? He's usually overlooked but he really loved his brother (and vice versa).
I wouldn't think Carl would have needed much convincing that Landy was a bad egg.
BTW, how is Carl Wilson portrayed in this new film? He's usually overlooked but he really loved his brother (and vice versa).
Thanks for sharing the clip. I need a shower to cleanse myself of Landy's pervasive grime.
Black men and a whole lot of *beep* white men have had plenty fun adoring my ass!
The revisions in the will shown in close up looked about as believable as a third grader's attempt at changing the grades on his report card. Bad prop work. Or Brian's dog ate the real one.
share😊
Black men and a whole lot of *beep* white men have had plenty fun adoring my ass!
They were shown for just a few seconds, and they had to be instantly perceived as phony by the audience, or the point is missed. Or think of it this way -- they look phony to our point of view characters who know Brian's handwriting and initials, but since we don't, the emendations need to be shown as crude and obviously forged.
Prepare your minds for a new scale of physical, scientific values, gentlemen.share
Sorry, Eric but I'm not buying it.
shareNot buying my explanation? Because it's pretty obviously true. These people aren't incompetent; they've spent years thinking about the film and months designing that prop. You really think that you spotted a legitimate, universal flaw in their design in three seconds?
Or not buying that this was the best way of doing it, even given the necessity of conveying the phoniness of the alterations? As in, they grossly overdid how obvious it was? That's a reasonable objection from your point of view, but only from yours.
There's no perfect solution for any narrative challenge in a film. The filmmakers were, alas, not trying to satisfy you (or me) specifically, but the highest possible percentage of filmgoers. If they had made it sufficiently mimetic (matching reality) to work for you, far too many viewers would have failed to understand it. It might not seem that way to you, but it sure does to me. And I haven't seen anyone else making your complaint.
The short version is that you often can't analyze a film's strengths and flaws in a vacuum, only in reference to a wide variety of viewers and viewing brains. Even something as basic as "boring" is not something that a film can have or be. There are people who love "slow" films where nothing much happens but are bored by action movies. (Except by Mad Max: Fury Road. That's just half a joke.)
Prepare your minds for a new scale of physical, scientific values, gentlemen.share
Your points are well taken, but it didn't work for me either, for different reasons. It was such a vague and random solution. Given as much as we knew about the document, which was nothing other than a three-second glimpse of it, there could have been any number of legitimate explanations for a draft of a will to have handwritten revisions on it. We must jump to the conclusion that it is criminally implicating Landy only because we know that's what the filmmaker is trying to make us conclude, making it a deus ex machina.
It would have helped if there had been some hint earlier that Landy was doing something shady with Wilson's finances, such as mentioning the true fact that he was taking 25% of Wilson's copyright without actually contributing to the songs. (While we do see evidence of Landy's controlling behavior and we can assume he's being paid handsomely for his "treatment," until this moment the film does not portray him as a financially incentivized crook; it just comes up out of the blue.)
In other words, the film could have instead replaced that insert shot of the will with an insert of a Polaroid of Landy and Wilson naked in bed together and let us conclude that Landy was drugging and raping Wilson. Neither the will nor the hypothetical Polaroid has any context with anything else in the film. Ultimately, the shot of the will was so weak, that it briefly took me out of the movie. Admittedly, this is nitpick. I loved this movie.
http://www.ScripTipps.com/
But the revelation that Landy to was being named in Brain's will did happen. It's a fact.
Any adult should be able to see that amended will (looked authentic to me) in the film and understand the seriously unethical practice (as if the overmedding wasn't enough) and the value it has in Melinda's quest to save Brian.
It was clear to me that in spite of being hired to be his therapist, Landy had usurped Brian's family, took his home away from him, tried to be his songwriting partner, had the temerity to "produce" Brian Wilson, all while filling him with meds. Being named in his will is shocking but I don't think it was a surprise given those facts delivered in the movie.
"I don't need to believe it's real. I just need to believe it."
I took it as , this was the revisions added to the will , that was to be changed . How he was to change it , not the Actual changed
Document but the changes that were to be made
I was waiting for my hearse what came next was so much worse
"Where the film does take artistic liberties is in its depiction of how Brian came to be rescued from Landy’s care. In the film, it is Ledbetter, aided by Brian’s housekeeper, Gloria Ramos, who persuades Carl Wilson to intervene by presenting evidence of Landy’s undue influence—specifically a 1989 will leaving most of Brian’s assets to Landy. The will is real: Landy was named Wilson’s primary beneficiary, though he claimed no knowledge of this at the time. But Carlin instead credits therapist and longtime Beach Boys fan Peter Reum with bringing Brian’s condition to the attention of Carl Wilson and biographer David Leaf. Reum, according to Carlin, noticed at a 1990 fan convention the physical changes Brian had undergone."
I saw this film a second time several hours ago. One of the funniest parts that I noticed this time was that Landy had written in "DR." in any place where his name was typed-- almost like the court didn't even want to validate that title.
When I read Brian's autobiography (which Brian said he didn't even read before it was printed, let alone write himself) Landy is always referred to as "Dr. Landy," which gets annoying extremely quickly.
Edit: someone wrote that they are actually Brian's initials to validate the changes. They look like "DR." to me, and I hope that's the case because it's just an effing hilarious testimony to his ego.
I don't think that he was purely evil as the film suggests-- actually, I think that film went insanely overboard. But his personality conflicted COMPLETELY with my anti-codependent personality.
I saw this film a second time several hours ago. One of the funniest parts that I noticed this time was that Landy had written in "DR." in any place where his name was typed-- almost like the court didn't even want to validate that title.
Edit: someone wrote that they are actually Brian's initials to validate the changes. They look like "DR." to me, and I hope that's the case because it's just an effing hilarious testimony to his ego.
Obviously you have experience with this matter. Thanks.
I just saw it for the first time and I noticed the "Dr." inserted before his name on the will. Hilarious!
http://www.ScripTipps.com/
The document was Brian's Last Will and Testament...as amended by his wacko shrink.
*Danny's not here, Mrs. Torrance*
Wilson's family discovered that Landy had been named as a chief beneficiary in Wilson's will, collecting 70%, with the remainder split between his girlfriend and Wilson's two daughters. Wilson's family contested Landy's control of Wilson, pursuing ultimately successful legal action in late 1991. The exploitation finally ended in 1992 when Landy was barred by court order from contacting Wilson. In December 1992 Landy was fined $1,000 for violating the court order when he visited Wilson in June for his birthday.
[deleted]
Is that a serious question? Umm, yes, the personal printer existed well before 1990 (I had one even as a poor self-supporting college student in the mid/late 80s, it was basic, but I also only paid maybe $100 or $200). I'm surprised that someone who is old enough to have been a member here since 1999 has to ask that question! ;)
shareWhoa -- that's a low blow. 1990 was 25 years ago. When I read the question about personal printers, I had to stop and think -- let's see, my first printer was a dot matrix Epson. Did I get that BEFORE or AFTER I got my first Internet connection (1992)? Jeez -- I really couldn't say for certain without going over a bunch of other things. When did I get a certain job? When did I get my first microcomputer (NorthStar Horizon. Okay, okay. I remember now. It was in the 80s. But really, it kind of depends on the number of associated events that one can use to recall something like that. You shouldn't have been so hard on that guy! (PS. I'm 67.)
shareThat comment was a "low blow?" I thought it was "lower" to criticize the movie by stating there couldn't have possibly been personal printers before 1990. Seriously, if you are going to deride someone's work, and least be sure of your reasons!
shareIt was discordant that she said "he left it in the printer by mistake" but it has handwriting all over it. Such a crucial scene should be scripted perfectly. A minor glitch in a good film.
shareMaybe it was a printer+copier+scanner. Maybe Gloria used the same misnomer in real life.
"I don't need to believe it's real. I just need to believe it."
The Document was "Last Will and Testament of Brian Douglas Wilson", but it was a discarded draft where (we assume) Eugene Landy made extra fixes with a pen before the definite version.
From the little glimpse I got, it basically made Landy the trustee of Wilson's assets.
I clearly saw "last will and testament" on the document shown in the film.
.