FROM CASTLE TO SPIELBERG
STRAIGHT-JACKET- [3.7] Joan Crawford is marvelous in this William Castle film that depicts a woman who, after being locked in an asylum for 20 years for the axe-murder of her husband and his lover, is released and sent to live with her daughter. Things aren’t right, as the perky daughter is about to get married and Joan seems to be slipping out of sanity. The story is a conventional suspense type, except for the moments where Joan bursts into exaggerated, hammy acting that makes the whole thing more funny and fascinating. I knew something was up when I saw that this film was written by Robert Block, who also wrote the PSYCHO novel. And trust me, when this film ends, you will be saying, “it’s just like PSYCHO” (and there is even a scene where a woman tears back a shower curtain, just like in…). Hell, the ending is just like SCOOBY DOO, Joan pulls off the killer’s mask and its…shock of all shocks!! Her daughter!! Hilarity ensues.
RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK- [3.8] This film has solidified the fact for me: Steven Spielberg cannot properly end a movie. Like Close Encounters, Catch Me if You Can, and possibly Minority Report, this movie’s “climax” lasts for nearly 30 or 40 minutes. Every time you think the thing will end, more and more happens, finally ending with 2 epilogues (the last of which, interestingly, is a direct homage to the final scene of CITIZEN KANE). This film is fun…and that’s about it. There is a major lack of story development, and for this I blame Spielberg, who pushed Lawrence Kasden to cut back on character in favor of action. Typical. While many scenes are wonderfully done, there is only so much adventure I can take, especially this pastiche kind. The film doesn’t take itself seriously, and this makes for great humor, but it also deflates my interest, and my boredom sets in. Again, the problem I have is that the climax of this film begins when Indiana finds the Ark…but then continues on through his imprisonment, his escape, his battle to steal the Ark, the voyage on the boat (which really feels like a proper epilogue), and then the Nazis return, Indiana battles them again, gets captured, the Ark is opened and finally the film ends, with an epilogue of Indiana talking to the Feds and the Ark being put away in a tomb with other Top Secret boxes. I may have been able to accept this as clever, in that it divides up the film into short segments, reminiscent of the old action serials, where several climaxes were possible, because a story kept continuing. But, this problem occurs in several Spielberg productions, so I know it is his editing problem as opposed to a specific stylistic choice. Oh well. Still, this film doesn’t deserve the highest of high praises it gets (#20 on IMDB’s top films??).
AMERICAN BEAUTY- [4.3]
BARB WIRE- [3.7]
JEZEBEL- [3.9] How prescient. New Orleans is struck by yellow fever, so the rich plantation owners seclude themselves in their rich homes in their safe parish, while sending the poor off to die alone on an island, so that they don’t infect the rest of the population. Sounds kinda like… Well, anyways, that’s not the MAIN story, but a wonderful backstory that seems like an omen from the past (interestingly, the movie is from the 1930’s, but the story takes place in the 1850’s. About 70 years between those two and about 70 years between the 30’s and today…). Anyways, I went to see this on account of Bette Davis, and boy did she deserve her second Oscar for this!! I’ve never seen Davis this young, and it was hard for me to get that old, haggard diva out of my head. This Davis is young, sharp as a tack, with big, beautiful eyes, and a flowery voice. Only occasionally could I find the signs of the Davis I knew: the sagging glacier eyes, husky, disparaging voice. I now see why Davis was such a star in the first place. Her role as the young Southern girl who doesn’t play by the old South’s rules is very memorable. Wyler does a good job exploring the nature of rules in society: By flouting the boundaries of taste, Davis loses her lover and, in vengeance, starts a chain reaction of destruction, leading to at least one death. And yet, it is ALSO the man who plays by these old rules who, because he can not turn down the customary duel, as ridiculous as Davis believes it to be, because the South’s culture is integral to these people’s identities. So, because he must follow these strict societal rules, the man duels and dies. The end, which redeems Davis by placing her in a martyr role, is satisfactory, but Davis’ character seems too complex to just give in and accept her faults. I take a more pessimistic look at the ending: she’s not sacrificing herself in order to save Henry Fonda and his wife; rather, she is still trying to win his heart back. But, that’s the cynic in me. Oh, and the soundtrack was very muddled, so it was difficult to understand and enjoy a lot of dialogue. I don’t know if this was Wyler’s fault or what. He’s still “undecided” on my list of great directors.
BAD GIRLS GO TO HELL- [3.3] Doris Wishman is supposedly the most prolific American female director. Sad, very very sad. Because I would probably say this was true. America has been extremely neglectful of women’s voices in cinema, of all the arts especially. And Wishman…well, she’s a cheapie sexploitation director. Not to demean her films, because we are studying them in an academic setting, and I can definitely see how they reflect an auterism and a particular voice, but… they’re still ill-concieved films. They are more “art” than “entertainment.” She strongly uses the motif of feet, cutting back to images of the lower half of people for much of the film. Also, she doesn’t use sync dialogue, so everytime someone speaks, we only see the person they are speaking to. And then when the other person replies, we go to the first person for a reaction shot. This really really fucks with a viewer’s head (cuz we never see mouths move; actually she’s very innovative with this, using everything from walkie talkies, to hands, to objects, all covering people’s mouth so we don’t see them “speaking”). This approach is very experimental, and does seem to reflect a certain sensibility, even if it was purely a money-saving technique. The story is lurid, but the movie is not. Basically, a lusty girl wears her showy nightgown when taking out the trash, the janitor sees her, and rapes her. She kills him, goes on the run, and then gets beaten and raped by some more men. Some of this is very funny, but its weird to think that this “roughie” film was supposed to titillate 1960’s men. And I can definitely see some men liking that stuff. But, the ending is quite unusual- she is being attacked by a detective when she suddenly wakes up from her dream. It was all a dream!! But, she wakes only to go thru the same actions all over again, including her rape by the janitor. It has a very Twilight Zone feeling to it. This is a classic trash film.
VIXON- [3.4]
WOMEN IN REVOLT- [3.9]
CALIGULA- [4.0] You have not lived till you’ve seen Caligula!
A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE- [3.8]
FASTER, PUSSYCAT! KILL! KILL!- [3.8] Tura Satana steals the show here, as the man-eating Amazon goddess, Varla. Well, she’s not actually any of those descriptions REALLY, but she may as well be. Along with her two other big breasted ass-kicking amigas, Varla bullies a young man who only wants to impress his girlfriend with his suped-up racecar. After Varla almost kills him, they get into a fight, and Varla snaps the young man’s neck. Then, they kidnap the girlfriend and bring her to an old farm house inhabited by the precursors of TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. As the grandpa tries groping the young girl, Billie (the blond) tries getting it on with the semi-retarded hunk of a son of grandpa. Soon, mayhem breaks loose, and Varla…well, she goes a bit crazy. The movie moves along at a quick pace, and has many great one liners, but mostly is impressive for its strong, unforgettably aggressive Tura Satana. She is the ultimate male-castration nightmare. Russ Meyer’s classic is more tame and sensible than his later “mainstream” masterpiece BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, but its still good fun. Its short enough that the repetitive violent moments, and the rather humdrum plot don’t get too boring. And it has possibly one of the greatest titles in cinema.
CUL-DE-SAC- [4.0] Surprisingly hilarious. When doubled billed with a quiet horror film like REPULSION, one doesn’t expect absurd humor. But here we have Polanski genius. A car slowly rolls to a stop as the credits wrap. Lionel Stander begins speaking and the audience immediately begins cracking up. Then, Donald Pleasance, whose role in HALLOWEEN is the only one to come to mind, fools around with his French wife, who dresses Donald up in her nightgown and make-up. When he hears someone breaking into their castle, Donald runs downstairs in drag to confront Lionel. Its quite a scene. They go back out to get the stranded wounded passenger from the car, only to discover that the tide has come in and made the car an island, with Albie trapped inside. If this all sounds weirdly stupid, its because it’s a British film (with that Polish touch). The highlight has to be when Donald’s “friends” storm the castle in order to inspect his French wife. Lionel, a thief who is waiting to be picked up by his Boss, has to pretend that he is the castle servant, and the situations are absurdly amusing. The end seems a bit too long (the Spielbergian syndrome of too many false endings). I would have been extremely satisfied if the film at faded to black right after Donald shoots Lionel to death, with the handsome man showing up, looking confusedly at the dead man and the car on fire. However, we get five more minutes of the wife shrieking how the man is dead, and then pleading with the handsome man to take her away from her crazy husband. The last image is Donald, having waded through the tidewater, sitting alone on top of a rock. It’s a strangely solemn ending, and one ripe with meaning (though I can’t seem to grasp it fully). A very pleasant film.
REPULSION- [3.8]
SLEEP- [3.4]
MANOS: THE HANDS OF FATE- [2.5] Truly monstrous film barely saved by the skilled comedy of Mystery Science Theatre 3000.
FEMALE TROUBLE- [4.3]
PLAY IT AS IT LAYS- [2.7] Slow moving, but with the feeling of moving quickly due to the rapid cutting technique employed. That is the deceptive magic of this film. It is not available yet on DVD or VHS and may not be for some time (so I was very surprised at how nice a print I saw for this ‘rare’ film). Anthony Perkins stole the show for me, giving a fantasticly different character from his trademark Norman Bates. I never knew Perkins had such depth. Aside from certain small mannerisms, its as if Perkins is a whole different person here. Tuesday Weld also does a fine job. The opening starts jarringly enough, with rapid cuts to the future and the past interlaced with the opening monologue. Then, the rest of the film takes on the form of a confused, dazed mess. Which kinda works in that it is supposed to be what the Weld character is feeling. Its frustrating, but it also almost put me to sleep. I didn’t understand much of what was going on, nor did I really care. This film attempted to be very serious, dealing with existentialist crisis of the time, but with that sly, early 70’s forced carelessness (probably a result of self-absorption). Some of the images, like the abortion, are memorable. As well there are many gay amusing moments, such as when a ‘hunky’ man wearing a skimpy bathing bottom walks out to Perkins and exclaims “this is a fake lemon” and then goes on to complain that its not a funny practical joke, he needs a real lemon. Perkin’s death in Weld’s arms, with her affirming that she knew what he was doing would be gut-wrenching if I still cared at that point.
DAY OF THE LOCUST- [4.4] Incredible. This film is another brilliant work by John Schlesinger (of MIDNIGHT COWBOY fame). Karen Black, who I only know from FAMILY PLOT, EASY RIDER, NASHVILLE and a strange cult following, shows off her early acting chops, and, unfortunately, she was really good!! Its sad to see someone so wonderful in an earlier film, but then never really getting any chances after that, and being relegated to trashy softcore films. But she is in HOUSE OF A THOUSAND CORPSES, so… William Atherton (who was really cute in SUGARLAND EXPRESS) is even more oddly attractive here; it must be that baby face. What I love about this film is that characters who you expect to be likeable, or at least become likeable as the film goes on, are NOT (thank god for 1970’s cynicism). In a typical Hollywood picture, Faye (Black) and Tod (Atherton) would have had a romance, gotten together even…at least cared about each other. But Tod, who we sympathize with from the beginning, is a very complex person; he gets drunk and tries to rape Faye, screaming “bitch” at her; he lies about the real cause of a stage disaster that caused several injuries; schmoozes his way up the Hollywood ladder; and was just really mean at times. Faye, who sums herself up by telling Tod “I could only marry someone rich,” seems to be just the typical dumb blonde wannabe-starlet, but by the end, you realize she’s not what you had pinned down. She lives with Homer Simpson not because she loves him, nor just because he buys her things, but because he doesn’t demand anything of her, he treats her right. Unfortunately she, along with everyone she knows, takes advantage of poor Homer. I know, “Homer Simpson,” I thought that the unintentional irony of the name would impact my view of the character, but Donald Sutherland amazes with his quiet, lonely, determined elderly accountant. The first two acts were marvelous, but I was beginning to think the third was dragging, and then Schlesinger pulls out all the stops. Two things I hate, that really get me ticked off in a movie: mob violence and picking on weaker, gentler people (especially when it’s the case of the poor taking advantage of the rich; call me a capitalist, but I feel that if poor Homer wants to live quietly and nicely with all of his possessions, there is no place for the greedy, spongy drifters to graft onto him). Well, both of those elements were present in the last part. While I was both thrilled to see Homer finally let out his aggression on the little child prick Adorre, it was also a shockingly brutal scene, culminating in a mass riot and bloody mob rule at the premier of a Cecil B. Demille picture. It was surreal, funny, and horrifying all at once. The announcer, blinded by the bright lights of the premier, does not see what is going on, and merely thinks it is the crowd going crazy over the stars of the picture. The film’s final coda isn’t necessary, but it does offer a sense of closure. Besides the final pandemonium-induced scene, one other scene will always remain classic to me: the evangelist, surrounded by bright neon crosses; she shrieks to the audience to let JEE-ZUS save them; she performs miracles and demands money because “God owns the oil fields” and “Jesus needs money to do his work!” It’s another haunting moment, one that harkens back to Fellini (and his Catholic scenes in ROMA), but is still distinctly American. Overall, not to be missed.
MR. DEATH: THE RISE AND FALL OF FRED A. LEUCHTER, JR. - [3.7] Very interesting documentary spoiled by my heady distaste of Errol Morris’ filmic techniques. He seems to like to blend reality and fiction (I think he was the first person to use ‘reenactment’ in a doc, THE THIN BLUE LINE). However, this seems to sensationalize the material, and make it harder for me to swallow what Morris is trying to say. He has Fred Leuchter sit in an electric chair, which Morris presents with wacky visual effects and an awkward overzealous score. The film feels rather objective, until we near the end, where I get the impression that this whole thing is an attempt by Morris to mock the man. Fortunately, it is only a slight wayward fleeing from the two sided-argument that Morris presents. The first half mainly deals with Fred’s history, telling of his expertise at building Death machines, improving on the electric chair, gallows, lethal injection, and gas chamber for states, in order to make capital punishment more humane (“I’m for capital punishment. I am not for capital torture” he says). Then, this interesting, though rather harmless bio-study shifts when we learn that he became a Holocaust denier when he went to Aushwitz to examine the supposedly-supposed gas chamber. Not only do we hear from a very slick, unlikeable neo-Nazi-ish Ernst Zundel, but we also hear from fanatical Zionistic women who shout that simply because Fred went to Canada to speak in defense of Zundel, he is automatically delusional, Anti-Semitic, and a Nazi. Umm…OK. The only hint at Anti-Semiticism I heard from Fred was when he mentioned that he couldn’t get any more jobs after he testified in Canada. He says that after working for weeks on a new death device for a prison, the warden, a man that Fred names as a “Mr. Silverman” has Fred fired and refuses to pay him for any of his work. The film then brings up the fact that the state tried suing him for working without an engineering license (shock, oh shock!! He doesn’t even have credentials!! How can we believe him about anything now?). So, Fred retorts that most engineers work without a license, and that even though he hints at a conspiracy against him, he says he harbors no ill will to certain people, but he was forced to move to California, and still can’t find work. It’s a very strange, I think tragic story. Don’t get me wrong, Fred seemed like a pompous asshole (he claims he couldn’t be wrong about the results of his gas chamber tests, but from all accounts, he doesn’t really seem like the most qualified man to be conducting these tests, as the lab chemist who examined the rock chippings from the gas chamber attests to). At least I give Morris credit for presenting a challenging, fair portrait of a man and his philosophy.
THE IN-LAWS (1979)- [4.2]
MIKEY AND NICKY- [4.4]
WINGS OF DESIRE- [3.5]
SCANNERS- [3.7]
EXISTENZ- [4.1] Tight, silly, gruesome, exciting, and wonderfully weird. This is classic Cronenberg. Jude Law does a great pre-star performance, complete with Canadian accent, in a futuristic world where virtual reality games seem to be everyone’s business. Jennifer Jason Leigh does a magnificent job as the world’s premier gamer, who is on the run from a cult of “realists” who want to kill her from bringing the game eXistenZ into being. Of course, the game controls are strange, almost alive, fleshy modules that must be plugged into your bio-port, which is located in the base of the spine. The bioport is one of the most clearly GAY SEX references in all cinema. It is an asshole like hole, that must be lubricated before the ambilical cord-like thing is inserted. There are great moments where the characters finger the bioport, or, in a moment of passion, Jude Law licks hers. The concept of alternate realities where we never know when we are playing the game or not, is fascinating, but done much more publicly the same year in the MATRIX. Too bad no one noticed the joy that is eXistenZ.
DOLEMITE- [3.5]
CHILDS PLAY- [3.6] One of the most illogical horror movie ever. And that’s saying a lot. So, a serial killer who happens to have learned Santeria, transfers his soul into that of a doll, and then, after remaining tranquil and silent about his animation, goes out to kill his ex-partner and a cop. Okay…but then, we have a cop who must have gotten his job by sucking every cock in town, because, damned if he does a single thing in the film. When he approaches the mother about the death of her babysitter, he tells her he’s from Homicide, and she asks him “what happened.” Ummm, he’s from HOMICIDE!!!! Someone died! And since your babysitters not there,…hm, lets think about it. After freaking out at the officer’s suggestion that the boy may have been involved, she throws him out of the house. How can she do this during a murder investigation? I’m not sure, but the officer complies. Later, the officer scoffs at the mother’s assertion that the doll is alive, even though she shows him teeth marks in her arm from Chucky. The officer tells her she’s crazy, and then refuses to stop her when she tells him she’s going to the shady part of town to check out a lead. When Chucky tries killing the cop, and this is the most frustrating part, the cop is in the car, and instead of stopping, he ACCELERATES, and keeps driving, watching the road, trying to steer, as Chucky tries choking and stabbing him. !!???? When the car crashes, the cop doesn’t even try to get out of the wrecked car, but remains in there trying to shoot at Chucky, who is outside. Further scenes of this nature made me want to just kill the fucking cop character, he was so frustrating. Finally, they burn Chucky, yet he remains alive (I thought he was becoming more human? So….humans can survive that, with a vengeance?). And then he gets decapitated. And he comes back. And the whole reason is so that he can transfer his essence into the boy. Cuz being in a boy’s body is far superior to being in the doll’s body. Clearly. It all makes so much sense. But, I must say, the babysitters death is horribly, hilariously excessive, as is this whole film. How this ever got made, or had sequels is beyond me (but I’m sure Bride/Seed of Chucky are tons better than this ).
LOLITA- [3.8] Okay, but overlong film about Lolita, the little sexy nymphet who has so masterfully enticed Humbert Humbert (another great James Mason performance), that he can’t help but marry Lolita’s mother in order to stay in the house so as to be near Lolita. First off, poor poor Shelly Winters is always getting fucked over (its like a sexier sequel to her role in NIGHT OF THE HUNTER!). The examination of modern “progressive” sexuality is surface deep and not entirely exciting. The apparent “couple swappers” that approach Humbert at the dance party are subtle but revealing enough that we think we are about to go into that territory, but unlike BOB,CAROL,TED, AND ALICE (which does cover the material excellently), the film continues on its merry way. Lolita, though played extremely believably by Sue Lyons, isn’t that interesting of a character, which may or may not make the whole film better for her banality. On the one hand, Humbert’s obsession becomes silly, trivial and more pathetic because we see her to be so beneath Humbert in terms of intelligence and interests. On the other hand, two and a half hours is a long time to drag out a relationship with characters who are so one-dimensional. All Humbert seems to want is Lolita. We don’t get much character background or personality beyond that. We only see him after he becomes obsessed, so we never learn how he has really changed. Also, the beginning is such an odd way to begin the film, it doesn’t quite set the right mood, and it sets up Peter Sellers to be an integral player, which he really isn’t. Also, the ending does a shoddy job of trying to patch together Lolita’s time with Quilty, leading to Humbert going to kill Quilty. Its forced and done in exposition rather than visually. I still don’t see what the big deal is about Lolita.
BASQUIAT- [3.8] Well, I can certainly tell you who stole the show in this one… a certain mr. David Bowie’s portrayal of the already eccentric mr. Andy Warhol.
YOUTH OF THE BEAST- [3.9]
EMPIRE OF THE SUN- [4.1] As much as Spielberg tried, he still couldn’t completely fuck up this near-masterpiece. This film has several big names in it, but it is Christian Bale who steals the show in one of the best child performances I’ve ever seen. Bale manages to pull off the know-it-all, brash, yet naïve boy that is usually played with so much sugar that I want to kill the annoying child actor. But Bale gracefully pushes the boundaries of a youth playing the role of an adult. This is a coming of age tale like few out there. After getting separated from his parents in WWII, Bale is taken under the wing of Americans John Malkovitch and Joey Pantoliano. Ben Stiller even shows up later as a young GI. Bale’s fascination with the Japanese army, and his respect for them even as they jail him in their internment camps, is a remarkably complex plot point. This is how war movies should be told; the action sequences and battle serve a point, but it is the human stories, the prisoners, and the emotional baggage of having to survive while everyone around you dies, which really interests me. If Spielberg could have let go of his family-friendly hang-ups and his selfish ambitions, he would have seen that he could have really reached a profound moment 2 hours into the film, when it looks as if the story will end. Bale, having been adopted by the American internment guys, looks out over the Japanese planes getting ready for takeoff, as the Kamikazi pilots prepare their special war rituals, drinking sake and so forth. As the kamikazi sing the national anthem, Bale joins in, with his fragile, high falsetto. He then salutes the planes, as all the soldiers look on. It is a complex, unpredictable scene; ridiculous yet moving. It cannot be broken down or fully explained, which adds to its beauty as a truer image. But instead of fading to black, Spielberg continues on with his saga for another 30 or 40 minutes, showing the bombing of the interment camp by the Americans, a move to another internment camp, the atomic bomb, and then Bale being reunited with both parents. Ummmm…unnecessary. The happy ending and all of the subsequent unused endings lessen the impact of the movie. There were so many opportunities for powerful finales, but Spielberg moves past them so that he may get to HIS favorite part: the idealic, unnatural family reunion. Gag me. Spielberg’s “charmy” style seemed valid (or at least watchable) in some scenes of the film, but by the end, with Bale riding around the empty camp on his motorcycles, as ration packages fall from the heavens, I was gaffawing with disgust. At least we know Bale is consistent in his greatness…
RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK- [3.8] This film has solidified the fact for me: Steven Spielberg cannot properly end a movie. Like Close Encounters, Catch Me if You Can, and possibly Minority Report, this movie’s “climax” lasts for nearly 30 or 40 minutes. Every time you think the thing will end, more and more happens, finally ending with 2 epilogues (the last of which, interestingly, is a direct homage to the final scene of CITIZEN KANE). This film is fun…and that’s about it. There is a major lack of story development, and for this I blame Spielberg, who pushed Lawrence Kasden to cut back on character in favor of action. Typical. While many scenes are wonderfully done, there is only so much adventure I can take, especially this pastiche kind. The film doesn’t take itself seriously, and this makes for great humor, but it also deflates my interest, and my boredom sets in. Again, the problem I have is that the climax of this film begins when Indiana finds the Ark…but then continues on through his imprisonment, his escape, his battle to steal the Ark, the voyage on the boat (which really feels like a proper epilogue), and then the Nazis return, Indiana battles them again, gets captured, the Ark is opened and finally the film ends, with an epilogue of Indiana talking to the Feds and the Ark being put away in a tomb with other Top Secret boxes. I may have been able to accept this as clever, in that it divides up the film into short segments, reminiscent of the old action serials, where several climaxes were possible, because a story kept continuing. But, this problem occurs in several Spielberg productions, so I know it is his editing problem as opposed to a specific stylistic choice. Oh well. Still, this film doesn’t deserve the highest of high praises it gets (#20 on IMDB’s top films??).
AMERICAN BEAUTY- [4.3]
BARB WIRE- [3.7]
JEZEBEL- [3.9] How prescient. New Orleans is struck by yellow fever, so the rich plantation owners seclude themselves in their rich homes in their safe parish, while sending the poor off to die alone on an island, so that they don’t infect the rest of the population. Sounds kinda like… Well, anyways, that’s not the MAIN story, but a wonderful backstory that seems like an omen from the past (interestingly, the movie is from the 1930’s, but the story takes place in the 1850’s. About 70 years between those two and about 70 years between the 30’s and today…). Anyways, I went to see this on account of Bette Davis, and boy did she deserve her second Oscar for this!! I’ve never seen Davis this young, and it was hard for me to get that old, haggard diva out of my head. This Davis is young, sharp as a tack, with big, beautiful eyes, and a flowery voice. Only occasionally could I find the signs of the Davis I knew: the sagging glacier eyes, husky, disparaging voice. I now see why Davis was such a star in the first place. Her role as the young Southern girl who doesn’t play by the old South’s rules is very memorable. Wyler does a good job exploring the nature of rules in society: By flouting the boundaries of taste, Davis loses her lover and, in vengeance, starts a chain reaction of destruction, leading to at least one death. And yet, it is ALSO the man who plays by these old rules who, because he can not turn down the customary duel, as ridiculous as Davis believes it to be, because the South’s culture is integral to these people’s identities. So, because he must follow these strict societal rules, the man duels and dies. The end, which redeems Davis by placing her in a martyr role, is satisfactory, but Davis’ character seems too complex to just give in and accept her faults. I take a more pessimistic look at the ending: she’s not sacrificing herself in order to save Henry Fonda and his wife; rather, she is still trying to win his heart back. But, that’s the cynic in me. Oh, and the soundtrack was very muddled, so it was difficult to understand and enjoy a lot of dialogue. I don’t know if this was Wyler’s fault or what. He’s still “undecided” on my list of great directors.
BAD GIRLS GO TO HELL- [3.3] Doris Wishman is supposedly the most prolific American female director. Sad, very very sad. Because I would probably say this was true. America has been extremely neglectful of women’s voices in cinema, of all the arts especially. And Wishman…well, she’s a cheapie sexploitation director. Not to demean her films, because we are studying them in an academic setting, and I can definitely see how they reflect an auterism and a particular voice, but… they’re still ill-concieved films. They are more “art” than “entertainment.” She strongly uses the motif of feet, cutting back to images of the lower half of people for much of the film. Also, she doesn’t use sync dialogue, so everytime someone speaks, we only see the person they are speaking to. And then when the other person replies, we go to the first person for a reaction shot. This really really fucks with a viewer’s head (cuz we never see mouths move; actually she’s very innovative with this, using everything from walkie talkies, to hands, to objects, all covering people’s mouth so we don’t see them “speaking”). This approach is very experimental, and does seem to reflect a certain sensibility, even if it was purely a money-saving technique. The story is lurid, but the movie is not. Basically, a lusty girl wears her showy nightgown when taking out the trash, the janitor sees her, and rapes her. She kills him, goes on the run, and then gets beaten and raped by some more men. Some of this is very funny, but its weird to think that this “roughie” film was supposed to titillate 1960’s men. And I can definitely see some men liking that stuff. But, the ending is quite unusual- she is being attacked by a detective when she suddenly wakes up from her dream. It was all a dream!! But, she wakes only to go thru the same actions all over again, including her rape by the janitor. It has a very Twilight Zone feeling to it. This is a classic trash film.
VIXON- [3.4]
WOMEN IN REVOLT- [3.9]
CALIGULA- [4.0] You have not lived till you’ve seen Caligula!
A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE- [3.8]
FASTER, PUSSYCAT! KILL! KILL!- [3.8] Tura Satana steals the show here, as the man-eating Amazon goddess, Varla. Well, she’s not actually any of those descriptions REALLY, but she may as well be. Along with her two other big breasted ass-kicking amigas, Varla bullies a young man who only wants to impress his girlfriend with his suped-up racecar. After Varla almost kills him, they get into a fight, and Varla snaps the young man’s neck. Then, they kidnap the girlfriend and bring her to an old farm house inhabited by the precursors of TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. As the grandpa tries groping the young girl, Billie (the blond) tries getting it on with the semi-retarded hunk of a son of grandpa. Soon, mayhem breaks loose, and Varla…well, she goes a bit crazy. The movie moves along at a quick pace, and has many great one liners, but mostly is impressive for its strong, unforgettably aggressive Tura Satana. She is the ultimate male-castration nightmare. Russ Meyer’s classic is more tame and sensible than his later “mainstream” masterpiece BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, but its still good fun. Its short enough that the repetitive violent moments, and the rather humdrum plot don’t get too boring. And it has possibly one of the greatest titles in cinema.
CUL-DE-SAC- [4.0] Surprisingly hilarious. When doubled billed with a quiet horror film like REPULSION, one doesn’t expect absurd humor. But here we have Polanski genius. A car slowly rolls to a stop as the credits wrap. Lionel Stander begins speaking and the audience immediately begins cracking up. Then, Donald Pleasance, whose role in HALLOWEEN is the only one to come to mind, fools around with his French wife, who dresses Donald up in her nightgown and make-up. When he hears someone breaking into their castle, Donald runs downstairs in drag to confront Lionel. Its quite a scene. They go back out to get the stranded wounded passenger from the car, only to discover that the tide has come in and made the car an island, with Albie trapped inside. If this all sounds weirdly stupid, its because it’s a British film (with that Polish touch). The highlight has to be when Donald’s “friends” storm the castle in order to inspect his French wife. Lionel, a thief who is waiting to be picked up by his Boss, has to pretend that he is the castle servant, and the situations are absurdly amusing. The end seems a bit too long (the Spielbergian syndrome of too many false endings). I would have been extremely satisfied if the film at faded to black right after Donald shoots Lionel to death, with the handsome man showing up, looking confusedly at the dead man and the car on fire. However, we get five more minutes of the wife shrieking how the man is dead, and then pleading with the handsome man to take her away from her crazy husband. The last image is Donald, having waded through the tidewater, sitting alone on top of a rock. It’s a strangely solemn ending, and one ripe with meaning (though I can’t seem to grasp it fully). A very pleasant film.
REPULSION- [3.8]
SLEEP- [3.4]
MANOS: THE HANDS OF FATE- [2.5] Truly monstrous film barely saved by the skilled comedy of Mystery Science Theatre 3000.
FEMALE TROUBLE- [4.3]
PLAY IT AS IT LAYS- [2.7] Slow moving, but with the feeling of moving quickly due to the rapid cutting technique employed. That is the deceptive magic of this film. It is not available yet on DVD or VHS and may not be for some time (so I was very surprised at how nice a print I saw for this ‘rare’ film). Anthony Perkins stole the show for me, giving a fantasticly different character from his trademark Norman Bates. I never knew Perkins had such depth. Aside from certain small mannerisms, its as if Perkins is a whole different person here. Tuesday Weld also does a fine job. The opening starts jarringly enough, with rapid cuts to the future and the past interlaced with the opening monologue. Then, the rest of the film takes on the form of a confused, dazed mess. Which kinda works in that it is supposed to be what the Weld character is feeling. Its frustrating, but it also almost put me to sleep. I didn’t understand much of what was going on, nor did I really care. This film attempted to be very serious, dealing with existentialist crisis of the time, but with that sly, early 70’s forced carelessness (probably a result of self-absorption). Some of the images, like the abortion, are memorable. As well there are many gay amusing moments, such as when a ‘hunky’ man wearing a skimpy bathing bottom walks out to Perkins and exclaims “this is a fake lemon” and then goes on to complain that its not a funny practical joke, he needs a real lemon. Perkin’s death in Weld’s arms, with her affirming that she knew what he was doing would be gut-wrenching if I still cared at that point.
DAY OF THE LOCUST- [4.4] Incredible. This film is another brilliant work by John Schlesinger (of MIDNIGHT COWBOY fame). Karen Black, who I only know from FAMILY PLOT, EASY RIDER, NASHVILLE and a strange cult following, shows off her early acting chops, and, unfortunately, she was really good!! Its sad to see someone so wonderful in an earlier film, but then never really getting any chances after that, and being relegated to trashy softcore films. But she is in HOUSE OF A THOUSAND CORPSES, so… William Atherton (who was really cute in SUGARLAND EXPRESS) is even more oddly attractive here; it must be that baby face. What I love about this film is that characters who you expect to be likeable, or at least become likeable as the film goes on, are NOT (thank god for 1970’s cynicism). In a typical Hollywood picture, Faye (Black) and Tod (Atherton) would have had a romance, gotten together even…at least cared about each other. But Tod, who we sympathize with from the beginning, is a very complex person; he gets drunk and tries to rape Faye, screaming “bitch” at her; he lies about the real cause of a stage disaster that caused several injuries; schmoozes his way up the Hollywood ladder; and was just really mean at times. Faye, who sums herself up by telling Tod “I could only marry someone rich,” seems to be just the typical dumb blonde wannabe-starlet, but by the end, you realize she’s not what you had pinned down. She lives with Homer Simpson not because she loves him, nor just because he buys her things, but because he doesn’t demand anything of her, he treats her right. Unfortunately she, along with everyone she knows, takes advantage of poor Homer. I know, “Homer Simpson,” I thought that the unintentional irony of the name would impact my view of the character, but Donald Sutherland amazes with his quiet, lonely, determined elderly accountant. The first two acts were marvelous, but I was beginning to think the third was dragging, and then Schlesinger pulls out all the stops. Two things I hate, that really get me ticked off in a movie: mob violence and picking on weaker, gentler people (especially when it’s the case of the poor taking advantage of the rich; call me a capitalist, but I feel that if poor Homer wants to live quietly and nicely with all of his possessions, there is no place for the greedy, spongy drifters to graft onto him). Well, both of those elements were present in the last part. While I was both thrilled to see Homer finally let out his aggression on the little child prick Adorre, it was also a shockingly brutal scene, culminating in a mass riot and bloody mob rule at the premier of a Cecil B. Demille picture. It was surreal, funny, and horrifying all at once. The announcer, blinded by the bright lights of the premier, does not see what is going on, and merely thinks it is the crowd going crazy over the stars of the picture. The film’s final coda isn’t necessary, but it does offer a sense of closure. Besides the final pandemonium-induced scene, one other scene will always remain classic to me: the evangelist, surrounded by bright neon crosses; she shrieks to the audience to let JEE-ZUS save them; she performs miracles and demands money because “God owns the oil fields” and “Jesus needs money to do his work!” It’s another haunting moment, one that harkens back to Fellini (and his Catholic scenes in ROMA), but is still distinctly American. Overall, not to be missed.
MR. DEATH: THE RISE AND FALL OF FRED A. LEUCHTER, JR. - [3.7] Very interesting documentary spoiled by my heady distaste of Errol Morris’ filmic techniques. He seems to like to blend reality and fiction (I think he was the first person to use ‘reenactment’ in a doc, THE THIN BLUE LINE). However, this seems to sensationalize the material, and make it harder for me to swallow what Morris is trying to say. He has Fred Leuchter sit in an electric chair, which Morris presents with wacky visual effects and an awkward overzealous score. The film feels rather objective, until we near the end, where I get the impression that this whole thing is an attempt by Morris to mock the man. Fortunately, it is only a slight wayward fleeing from the two sided-argument that Morris presents. The first half mainly deals with Fred’s history, telling of his expertise at building Death machines, improving on the electric chair, gallows, lethal injection, and gas chamber for states, in order to make capital punishment more humane (“I’m for capital punishment. I am not for capital torture” he says). Then, this interesting, though rather harmless bio-study shifts when we learn that he became a Holocaust denier when he went to Aushwitz to examine the supposedly-supposed gas chamber. Not only do we hear from a very slick, unlikeable neo-Nazi-ish Ernst Zundel, but we also hear from fanatical Zionistic women who shout that simply because Fred went to Canada to speak in defense of Zundel, he is automatically delusional, Anti-Semitic, and a Nazi. Umm…OK. The only hint at Anti-Semiticism I heard from Fred was when he mentioned that he couldn’t get any more jobs after he testified in Canada. He says that after working for weeks on a new death device for a prison, the warden, a man that Fred names as a “Mr. Silverman” has Fred fired and refuses to pay him for any of his work. The film then brings up the fact that the state tried suing him for working without an engineering license (shock, oh shock!! He doesn’t even have credentials!! How can we believe him about anything now?). So, Fred retorts that most engineers work without a license, and that even though he hints at a conspiracy against him, he says he harbors no ill will to certain people, but he was forced to move to California, and still can’t find work. It’s a very strange, I think tragic story. Don’t get me wrong, Fred seemed like a pompous asshole (he claims he couldn’t be wrong about the results of his gas chamber tests, but from all accounts, he doesn’t really seem like the most qualified man to be conducting these tests, as the lab chemist who examined the rock chippings from the gas chamber attests to). At least I give Morris credit for presenting a challenging, fair portrait of a man and his philosophy.
THE IN-LAWS (1979)- [4.2]
MIKEY AND NICKY- [4.4]
WINGS OF DESIRE- [3.5]
SCANNERS- [3.7]
EXISTENZ- [4.1] Tight, silly, gruesome, exciting, and wonderfully weird. This is classic Cronenberg. Jude Law does a great pre-star performance, complete with Canadian accent, in a futuristic world where virtual reality games seem to be everyone’s business. Jennifer Jason Leigh does a magnificent job as the world’s premier gamer, who is on the run from a cult of “realists” who want to kill her from bringing the game eXistenZ into being. Of course, the game controls are strange, almost alive, fleshy modules that must be plugged into your bio-port, which is located in the base of the spine. The bioport is one of the most clearly GAY SEX references in all cinema. It is an asshole like hole, that must be lubricated before the ambilical cord-like thing is inserted. There are great moments where the characters finger the bioport, or, in a moment of passion, Jude Law licks hers. The concept of alternate realities where we never know when we are playing the game or not, is fascinating, but done much more publicly the same year in the MATRIX. Too bad no one noticed the joy that is eXistenZ.
DOLEMITE- [3.5]
CHILDS PLAY- [3.6] One of the most illogical horror movie ever. And that’s saying a lot. So, a serial killer who happens to have learned Santeria, transfers his soul into that of a doll, and then, after remaining tranquil and silent about his animation, goes out to kill his ex-partner and a cop. Okay…but then, we have a cop who must have gotten his job by sucking every cock in town, because, damned if he does a single thing in the film. When he approaches the mother about the death of her babysitter, he tells her he’s from Homicide, and she asks him “what happened.” Ummm, he’s from HOMICIDE!!!! Someone died! And since your babysitters not there,…hm, lets think about it. After freaking out at the officer’s suggestion that the boy may have been involved, she throws him out of the house. How can she do this during a murder investigation? I’m not sure, but the officer complies. Later, the officer scoffs at the mother’s assertion that the doll is alive, even though she shows him teeth marks in her arm from Chucky. The officer tells her she’s crazy, and then refuses to stop her when she tells him she’s going to the shady part of town to check out a lead. When Chucky tries killing the cop, and this is the most frustrating part, the cop is in the car, and instead of stopping, he ACCELERATES, and keeps driving, watching the road, trying to steer, as Chucky tries choking and stabbing him. !!???? When the car crashes, the cop doesn’t even try to get out of the wrecked car, but remains in there trying to shoot at Chucky, who is outside. Further scenes of this nature made me want to just kill the fucking cop character, he was so frustrating. Finally, they burn Chucky, yet he remains alive (I thought he was becoming more human? So….humans can survive that, with a vengeance?). And then he gets decapitated. And he comes back. And the whole reason is so that he can transfer his essence into the boy. Cuz being in a boy’s body is far superior to being in the doll’s body. Clearly. It all makes so much sense. But, I must say, the babysitters death is horribly, hilariously excessive, as is this whole film. How this ever got made, or had sequels is beyond me (but I’m sure Bride/Seed of Chucky are tons better than this ).
LOLITA- [3.8] Okay, but overlong film about Lolita, the little sexy nymphet who has so masterfully enticed Humbert Humbert (another great James Mason performance), that he can’t help but marry Lolita’s mother in order to stay in the house so as to be near Lolita. First off, poor poor Shelly Winters is always getting fucked over (its like a sexier sequel to her role in NIGHT OF THE HUNTER!). The examination of modern “progressive” sexuality is surface deep and not entirely exciting. The apparent “couple swappers” that approach Humbert at the dance party are subtle but revealing enough that we think we are about to go into that territory, but unlike BOB,CAROL,TED, AND ALICE (which does cover the material excellently), the film continues on its merry way. Lolita, though played extremely believably by Sue Lyons, isn’t that interesting of a character, which may or may not make the whole film better for her banality. On the one hand, Humbert’s obsession becomes silly, trivial and more pathetic because we see her to be so beneath Humbert in terms of intelligence and interests. On the other hand, two and a half hours is a long time to drag out a relationship with characters who are so one-dimensional. All Humbert seems to want is Lolita. We don’t get much character background or personality beyond that. We only see him after he becomes obsessed, so we never learn how he has really changed. Also, the beginning is such an odd way to begin the film, it doesn’t quite set the right mood, and it sets up Peter Sellers to be an integral player, which he really isn’t. Also, the ending does a shoddy job of trying to patch together Lolita’s time with Quilty, leading to Humbert going to kill Quilty. Its forced and done in exposition rather than visually. I still don’t see what the big deal is about Lolita.
BASQUIAT- [3.8] Well, I can certainly tell you who stole the show in this one… a certain mr. David Bowie’s portrayal of the already eccentric mr. Andy Warhol.
YOUTH OF THE BEAST- [3.9]
EMPIRE OF THE SUN- [4.1] As much as Spielberg tried, he still couldn’t completely fuck up this near-masterpiece. This film has several big names in it, but it is Christian Bale who steals the show in one of the best child performances I’ve ever seen. Bale manages to pull off the know-it-all, brash, yet naïve boy that is usually played with so much sugar that I want to kill the annoying child actor. But Bale gracefully pushes the boundaries of a youth playing the role of an adult. This is a coming of age tale like few out there. After getting separated from his parents in WWII, Bale is taken under the wing of Americans John Malkovitch and Joey Pantoliano. Ben Stiller even shows up later as a young GI. Bale’s fascination with the Japanese army, and his respect for them even as they jail him in their internment camps, is a remarkably complex plot point. This is how war movies should be told; the action sequences and battle serve a point, but it is the human stories, the prisoners, and the emotional baggage of having to survive while everyone around you dies, which really interests me. If Spielberg could have let go of his family-friendly hang-ups and his selfish ambitions, he would have seen that he could have really reached a profound moment 2 hours into the film, when it looks as if the story will end. Bale, having been adopted by the American internment guys, looks out over the Japanese planes getting ready for takeoff, as the Kamikazi pilots prepare their special war rituals, drinking sake and so forth. As the kamikazi sing the national anthem, Bale joins in, with his fragile, high falsetto. He then salutes the planes, as all the soldiers look on. It is a complex, unpredictable scene; ridiculous yet moving. It cannot be broken down or fully explained, which adds to its beauty as a truer image. But instead of fading to black, Spielberg continues on with his saga for another 30 or 40 minutes, showing the bombing of the interment camp by the Americans, a move to another internment camp, the atomic bomb, and then Bale being reunited with both parents. Ummmm…unnecessary. The happy ending and all of the subsequent unused endings lessen the impact of the movie. There were so many opportunities for powerful finales, but Spielberg moves past them so that he may get to HIS favorite part: the idealic, unnatural family reunion. Gag me. Spielberg’s “charmy” style seemed valid (or at least watchable) in some scenes of the film, but by the end, with Bale riding around the empty camp on his motorcycles, as ration packages fall from the heavens, I was gaffawing with disgust. At least we know Bale is consistent in his greatness…