I had the opportunity, like some of you, to watch the final cut of UNVERIFIED last night.
After having thousands of reviews written about my own works over the years, I've learned the professional reviewer's drill.
Here goes:
If you like something, whether a film or a book. Here's the formula: 1.Say something nice about it. 2. Then say something negative to show how smart and objective you are and to show that you posses a detached air of criticality. 3. Close by saying something nice.
If you don't like something, be it a film or a book. Here's the formula: 1.Say something negative about it, and include the phrase "disappointed." 2. Then say something positive to show how smart and objective you are and to show that you posses a detached air of criticality. 3. Close by saying something negative.
In the case of UNVERIFIED, as far as I'm concerned, throw that formula out the window, because this was a piece of work, that in my judgment, was outstanding from start to finish. There's nothing negative to say.
If there's one thing the film did, it took question marks left by three entities involved in a false narrative against UNC athletics, namely (1) the press, (2) the Wainstein "investigation" and (3) the University's Incompetence in leadership, and magnified that question mark to something larger than the size of Mount Rushmore.
Not only did Bradley succeed in totally vindicating his two academic counselor friends, who were indeed railroaded and thrown under the bus as part of someone's prevaricating "this was an athletic scandal" narrative -- when anyone with half-a-brain knows it is totally academic oversight having nothing to do with athletics -- but his interview with the student athletes, particularly the football players, was compelling. As the players point out, and as many have argued, sometimes you actually learn more from an independent studies curriculum, where you actually have to figure out where to find something in the library or on the internet, than in a lecture class. Bradley even manages to rehabilitate the press's twisted narrative of Dionte Williams.
There was once the story of the Eskimo and the wolf. The Eskimo, who got tired of the wolf raiding is igloo, took a slab of meat, hung it out under the tree, and placed in it a dozen razor blades.
Each night, the wolf would come and take a bite of the meat, and in doing so, slightly sliced his tongue. But the slices were at first so subtle, that the wolf barely noticed. But after a while, the slices amalgamated to the point that wolf finally bled to death.
And so it is with Bradley's film. It's power, I think, is in the power of the subtle cuts, accumulated throughout.
Some of the highlights of the film included not only the Butch Davis interview, but the most reasonable Dookie I know, Jay Bilas, who was anything but subtle in declaring that this was not an athletic scandal, and so effectively pointed out the hypocrisy of the administration by asking, "if a recruiting violation had taken place, would the athletic department try and blame the university administration?"
Yet, as Jay was suggesting, here we have something that is solely academic, but the administration,in tying to cover it's own butt, is trying to make it into something athletic by blaming athletics for something that i solely academic.
How disingenious and how hypocritical.
In some respects, Bradley, who has now become my favorite Buckeye, saved his best work for last, and I thought his work with Chancellor Moeser was sublime. First, unlike the current chancellor, the current president, and every media hack who had written about this "scandal" that Bradley requested to interviews, at least Chancellor Moeser had the guts to go on camera. Give him credit for that.
And like so many in the establishment, it was painfully obvious that Chancellor Moeser had at first swallowed the talking points from the Wainstein Report ... which as I have pointed out on multiple occasions is seriously flawed more than it is credible.
But then, in a brilliantly subtle, charming, and methodical approach, Bradley pointed out certain insufficiencies in the Wainstein report to Chancellor Moeser, and by golly, had the man who hired Butch Davis turned around on a dime, questioning the report, and agreeing that UNC had been heavy handed with two innocent, powerless ladies, to drive a narrative. Brilliant work!
As I say, a font-sized question mark blown larger than Mount Everest.
Of course the film didn't touch on everything that could have been touched on. It's absolutely impossible to do that in a ninety minute film. For example, I'm absolutely convinced, based on my research, that it wasn't UNC money, but rather outside money, that paid for Wainstein ... which in my judgment may explain why he took the tack that he took. But in Bradley's defense, he doesn't even know about that, and perhaps that might be a topic in UNVERIFIED - THE REST OF THE STORY.
Nonetheless, those of us who have loved and defended the University, and who have been able to see through the lying narrative of the press, owe this young Ohio State grad a debt of gratitude for this powerful, easy-to-follow documentary to help the record straight.
UNVERIFIED is outstanding. It is a must see.
After having thousands of reviews written about my own works over the years, I've learned the professional reviewer's drill.
Here goes:
If you like something, whether a film or a book. Here's the formula: 1.Say something nice about it. 2. Then say something negative to show how smart and objective you are and to show that you posses a detached air of criticality. 3. Close by saying something nice.
If you don't like something, be it a film or a book. Here's the formula: 1.Say something negative about it, and include the phrase "disappointed." 2. Then say something positive to show how smart and objective you are and to show that you posses a detached air of criticality. 3. Close by saying something negative.
In the case of UNVERIFIED, as far as I'm concerned, throw that formula out the window, because this was a piece of work, that in my judgment, was outstanding from start to finish. There's nothing negative to say.
If there's one thing the film did, it took question marks left by three entities involved in a false narrative against UNC athletics, namely (1) the press, (2) the Wainstein "investigation" and (3) the University's Incompetence in leadership, and magnified that question mark to something larger than the size of Mount Rushmore.
Not only did Bradley succeed in totally vindicating his two academic counselor friends, who were indeed railroaded and thrown under the bus as part of someone's prevaricating "this was an athletic scandal" narrative -- when anyone with half-a-brain knows it is totally academic oversight having nothing to do with athletics -- but his interview with the student athletes, particularly the football players, was compelling. As the players point out, and as many have argued, sometimes you actually learn more from an independent studies curriculum, where you actually have to figure out where to find something in the library or on the internet, than in a lecture class. Bradley even manages to rehabilitate the press's twisted narrative of Dionte Williams.
There was once the story of the Eskimo and the wolf. The Eskimo, who got tired of the wolf raiding is igloo, took a slab of meat, hung it out under the tree, and placed in it a dozen razor blades.
Each night, the wolf would come and take a bite of the meat, and in doing so, slightly sliced his tongue. But the slices were at first so subtle, that the wolf barely noticed. But after a while, the slices amalgamated to the point that wolf finally bled to death.
And so it is with Bradley's film. It's power, I think, is in the power of the subtle cuts, accumulated throughout.
Some of the highlights of the film included not only the Butch Davis interview, but the most reasonable Dookie I know, Jay Bilas, who was anything but subtle in declaring that this was not an athletic scandal, and so effectively pointed out the hypocrisy of the administration by asking, "if a recruiting violation had taken place, would the athletic department try and blame the university administration?"
Yet, as Jay was suggesting, here we have something that is solely academic, but the administration,in tying to cover it's own butt, is trying to make it into something athletic by blaming athletics for something that i solely academic.
How disingenious and how hypocritical.
In some respects, Bradley, who has now become my favorite Buckeye, saved his best work for last, and I thought his work with Chancellor Moeser was sublime. First, unlike the current chancellor, the current president, and every media hack who had written about this "scandal" that Bradley requested to interviews, at least Chancellor Moeser had the guts to go on camera. Give him credit for that.
And like so many in the establishment, it was painfully obvious that Chancellor Moeser had at first swallowed the talking points from the Wainstein Report ... which as I have pointed out on multiple occasions is seriously flawed more than it is credible.
But then, in a brilliantly subtle, charming, and methodical approach, Bradley pointed out certain insufficiencies in the Wainstein report to Chancellor Moeser, and by golly, had the man who hired Butch Davis turned around on a dime, questioning the report, and agreeing that UNC had been heavy handed with two innocent, powerless ladies, to drive a narrative. Brilliant work!
As I say, a font-sized question mark blown larger than Mount Everest.
Of course the film didn't touch on everything that could have been touched on. It's absolutely impossible to do that in a ninety minute film. For example, I'm absolutely convinced, based on my research, that it wasn't UNC money, but rather outside money, that paid for Wainstein ... which in my judgment may explain why he took the tack that he took. But in Bradley's defense, he doesn't even know about that, and perhaps that might be a topic in UNVERIFIED - THE REST OF THE STORY.
Nonetheless, those of us who have loved and defended the University, and who have been able to see through the lying narrative of the press, owe this young Ohio State grad a debt of gratitude for this powerful, easy-to-follow documentary to help the record straight.
UNVERIFIED is outstanding. It is a must see.
Last edited:
