Sep 291984
 
four reels

Abby (Frances McDormand) has an affair with Ray (John Getz) to distract herself from her life with Marty (Dan Hedaya), who is also Ray’s boss.  Marty has hired a detective (M. Emmet Walsh) to watch his wife.  With the best of these four people a cheat and liar, and the worst an amoral murderer and thief, and no one willing to speak clearly and honestly, calamity and death are inevitable.

The rule, taught in every freshman lit class, is that tragedies display the best in humanity and comedies display the worst.  Tragedy is filled with flawed heroes.  Comedy is packed with fools.  So, it should be clear that all Noirs, in their hearts, are jokes: long, twisted and twisting, excruciating jokes.  Some, like Double Indemnity and Sunset Blvd. don’t try to hide it.  Others, like The Maltese Falcon are more subtle, but in the end, when you realize that these absurd characters have been chasing all over the world for a worthless chunk of metal, it becomes clear that the joke is on them, and on us.

Joel and Ethan Coen saw this, and created an impossible shaggy dog story of deceit, treachery, and murder.  Over and over, the characters in Blood Simple could escape their fate by doing insignificant things, such as speaking to each other.  But you know by the time the introduction is over that isn’t how the story is going to play out.  That would require these people to be, in some small way, heroic, and there are nothing but fools in sight.  Yup, this is no tragedy.  Step by step they doom themselves, and watching, we know what is going to happen right before it does, and it is always painful and always funny.

The story is told precisely, and while there are unanswered questions and multiple situations left open, nothing more (or less) needs to be said.  Every shot is both necessary and sufficient.  The camera work brings the viewer into the bar, the bedroom, and the field (where a grave is dug in the middle of the night).  You are the fifth character in this trial of human misery, and somehow it’s a fun place to be.

Blood Simple can lay claim to be a starting point three times.  It was the first in a long line of off-kilter (sometimes brilliant, like The Hudsucker Proxy, sometimes complete disasters, like The Ladykillers) productions from the Coen brothers.  It is also the start of yet another revitalization of Noir.  Three years earlier, Body Heat had finally resurrected the genre, but what followed tended to be sexual thrillers.  Blood Simple recreated the existential Noir, where each person is alone in the world, and each action leads to their damnation.  And for the hat trick, it was the beginning of the indefinable “Indie Film” movement that would culminate in the not-very-indie, big budget productions of Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez.

Originally released with an onscreen definition of the term “blood simple” (it’s a phrase invented by author Dashiell Hammett to sum up the muddled mindset of anyone attempting a murder), the brothers removed it when they edited approximately five minutes out of the film for a late ’90s re-release (they were just “tightening” the movie, and I can’t imagine how it could get any tighter).  Still, they state the movie’s theme without subtlety.  The detective explains in a voice over:

The fact is, nothin’ comes with a guarantee.  Now I don’t care if you’re the pope of Rome, President of the United States or Man of the Year; somethin’ can all go wrong.  Now go on ahead, y’know, complain.  Tell your problems to your neighbor; ask for help, ‘n watch him fly. Now, in Russia, they got it mapped out so that everyone pulls for everyone else… that’s the theory, anyway.  But what I know about is Texas, an’ down here… you’re on your own.

And they make you believe it in ninety minutes.

When they recut the movie, they also added an introduction by a  fake film restorer, who explains how they used modern technology to save Blood Simple, which was decaying rapidly.  For the recent DVD, they also included a full commentary with another non-existent employee of Forever Young Film Preservation Inc.  Together, these turn the film into a pure comedy.  You can’t ask for a better deal for you money than two entirely different ways of enjoying a single film.

 Film Noir, Reviews Tagged with:
Aug 201984
 
three reels

Kirk discovers that Spock’s soul is trapped in Bones, so the remaining bridge crew swipe the Enterprise to travel back to the Genesis planet to attempt to put Spock’s mind and body back together. Meanwhile a Klingon captain has set his sights on Genesis as a great weapon and will do anything to get it.

It didn’t take long for the jokes about “every odd number Trek film being bad” to start. I heard that when The Search for Spock came out, and it was solidified when Star Trek IV turned out to be a winner. It isn’t true, and is a bit unfair. The Search for Spock isn’t a bad film (nor is Start Trek: The Motion Picture). It is just a disappointing one. After the height of Wrath of Khan, this good but lesser film felt terrible at the time of its release. This is a smaller film and it doesn’t help that it undoes many of the great moments from Star Trek II. A great death is no more. Two new characters are dumped. Saavik has a new actress and either due to poor acting choices, poor scripting, or bad direction, the character no longer functions. Eliminating her Romulan half (which explained her emotional reactions in The Wrath of Khan) was a mistake.

We also get silly Vulcan mental transference that comes out of nowhere and a camp villain (played with gusto by Christopher Lloyd) who is fun, but a bit too arch, leaving the film feeling goofy. The lower budget is visible in the Genesis planet, which looks like the old series planets—tiny and filled with Styrofoam boulders.

The humor is more plentiful than in the previous two films, which is where Search For Spock works best. This is a very light weight flick. The best moments have nothing to do with excitement or drama or character. When the film tries for tragedy it only manages to be uncomfortable and false. Rather, it is Uhura pulling a phaser on an obnoxious Starfleet officer, Sulu telling a large security guard not to call him tiny, and Kirk stating that he will recommend them all in whatever fleet they end up serving where the film works. Plus there is the fan service unseen sex between Saavak and teen Spock that goes over the heads of the general public, but leaves geeks giggling.

The Search for Spock does complete the Vulcan civilization’s descent into absurdity. It’s hard to fathom what is illogical about returning the mind to a living body (sure, it hasn’t been done “since ages past” but how often do they have ghost minds with living bodies), but at least they have lines of Vulcan babes. For a logical race, they spend a good deal of effort on cute outfits. This is neither good nor bad, just amusing.

My ranking of all Star Trek movies is here.

Mar 271984
 
three reels

In exchange for the promise of resurrection of his dead lover, (Arnold Schwarzenegger) agrees to undertake a quest to retrieve a horn that will be used to wake a sleeping god.  Conan is accompanied by the thief Malak (Tracey Walter), the wizard Akiro (Mako), the warrior-woman Zula (Grace Jones), the queens guard Bombaata (Wilt Chamberlain), and the virginal princes Jehnna (Olivia d’Abo). Continue reading »

Nov 231983
 
three reels

This film is a lot of fun, no question. I enjoyed it when I first saw it and still do. That doesn’t mean it isn’t a disaster, just an enjoyable disaster. The problems really start with the acting. Yes, all the first six films have poor acting but among the original trilogy, it stands out here. The is partly due with the actors’ displeasure with the script. Harrison Ford wanted Han to die and when not only did he not, but he was forced to say sub-par dialog, Ford tossed in the towel. He wasn’t trying, and it shows. The rest of the cast isn’t good either. There’s also the repeated plot elements (another Death Star and another run of little ships to blow it up) and the Ewoks. There’s no getting around those teddy bears; they could have been cute or transgressive (if made vicious), but instead they scream out Mattel. By this time it was clear that much of the films were about selling merchandise, but couldn’t it have been done inconspicuously? Even things that would have been good in the first film were feeling old by now. The cycle chase is a bore, and I’ve already mentioned the final space battle. And no, they did not “always know” that Leia was Luke’s sister (a reveal that does not bear up to scrutiny). It’s a clunky retcon.

So what’s good? As always for the franchise, it looks good. We’re given the iconic Slave Leia that gets a bonus with the strangulation scene. The final lightsaber duel is excellent (though that is interrupted by the Emperor—he’d have won if he just shut up). And that’s about it.

Oct 261983
 
one reel

Evil businessman Ross Webster (Robert Vaughn), standing in for Lex Luthor, forces a computer genius (Richard Pryor… Yes, I said Richard Pryor. That’s not a mistake.) to control the weather and help in the destruction of Superman (Christopher Reeve).

Without Richard Donner to restrain the Salkind production team, and with director Richard Lester one-upping them on silliness, Superman III returned comic book movies to being juvenile jokes. More camp, yet less funny than the overly camp Batman and Robin,  Superman III is an embarrassment.

The first Superman movies had an epic tone, an interesting Lois, fantastic music, and perfect casting for the lead. For Superman III, the tone is that of a morning kid’s show, Lois is mostly absent (Margot Kidder having sided with Donner in his fight with the Salkinds), the old music is nice when it shows up, but the arrangements are lacking, and Reeve is stuck doing bad comedy, making Clark a complete idiot.

The film is doomed before the long, humorless, slapstick gag that runs under the opening credits ends. It’s clear this is going to be a comedy, but not a funny one. The Clark/Lana relationship is painful and Clark acts so stupidly that it is impossible to figure what even this lonely country girl sees in him. The movie grinds to a halt as we go to Clark’s high school reunion. The Superman “heroics” are drab and pointless, and often occur without any connection to the meandering plot. But who cares when you kill it all with Richard Pryor. Pryor agreed to star, having said he wanted to do a Superman film only as a joke. But his insult was taken as a genuine desire to act in a superhero movie and they paid him a lot, so he suffered, and so do we. Not a single second of his screen time is funny, believable, or dramatic. But then, not a single second of the screen time without him is either.

It followed Superman and Superman II, and was followed by Superman IV: The Quest for Peace and the semi-sequel Superman Returns. The character was rebooted by Zack Snyder for Man of Steel and Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice.

 Reviews, Superhero Tagged with:
Oct 101983
 
one reel

Searching for his estranged wife after she dropped off their daughter and then disappeared, Charles Bigelow (Paul Le Mat) travels to her hometown that appears to be unchanged since 1958.  It is also infested with body stealing aliens.  Fleeing from the extraterrestrials, he teams up with tabloid “journalist” Betty Walker (Nancy Allen) to uncover the truth of the invasion, which puts him in conflict with government agent Benjamin (Louise Fletcher), who knows more than she will say.

Strange Invaders is a loving homage to 1950s sci-fi, as long as “homage” is understood to mean comedy that isn’t funny and drama that can’t be taken seriously.  I have no doubt that the filmmakers were huge fans of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, It Came from Outer Space, and Invaders from Mars, but based on the material on display here, it is hard to imagine why.  Strange Invaders is never frightening, suspenseful, mysterious, exciting, tense, or thoughtful.  The concept of aliens living as if it was still 1958 presents comic opportunities, but they are all ignored.

The early scenes give every indication that we’re in for some camp fun.  Stereotypical ’50s teens are parking at their Midwest equivalent of Lover’s Lane when the aliens fly over.  It is reminiscent of Night of the Creeps, which did take the comedy route.  But here, the past fades away without a joke.  In the “present,” we are introduced to Charles, an entomologist whose scientific training turns out to have no part in the story.  Since there is no humor, this must be a drama, so I guess I was supposed to care about Charles and his personality-lacking daughter, though nothing in the film helps me do that.  But then what kind of a drama has an attacking, alien, Avon lady?

The acting varies from lackluster to “community players dropout.”  La Mat can charitably be called uninvolved while Allen recites her lines as if English is a foreign language.  Fletcher (slumming once again as she did with Exorcist II: The Heretic) shows no sign of the talent that earned her an Academy Award, but at least she didn’t embarrass herself.

With a script that steals from better films and bargain basement acting, it was up to director Michael Laughlin to add a bit of style to the production.  Unfortunately, Laughlin, who is also a co-writer, manages only straightforward, often static shots.  Colors tend to be washed out.  Everything about the look (and sound) scream insufficient funds.  The few special effects are primitive, and the rarely seen true form of the aliens comes down to guys in Halloween masks.

Strange Invaders is not really a professional movie, but a fan film that got out of hand.  I expect to see this kind of thing shot on low budget equipment picked up at Best Buy, and starring the “director’s” family.  Yes, this is better made than such home movie-type fare, but ends up being no more interesting.

 Aliens, Reviews Tagged with:
Oct 091983
 
three reels

Strange, silent Angela (Felissa Rose), whose family died in a boating accident, is sent to camp with her cousin. A murderer is also at the camp who takes out campers and counselors in typical Slasher fashion. What is the killer’s motive and what is the connection to Angela?

Quick Review: We’re in pure D-movie Slasher territory, and within those boundaries, Sleepaway Camp looks pretty good. Sure, the acting is weak, but no worse than in other slice’em pics, and the thirteen-year-old star, Felissa Rose is a cut above the norm. The campers are underage, so we’re spared the normal quick tit-flash and murders of the sexually active. In their place are pedophilic jokes that are funny. Sleepaway Camp is as frightening as the average cheap Slasher, but unlike those others, it knows that it’s silly and plays with that. It also has a famously jolting ending. Don’t watch it alone, but have some friends over, pour some potent drinks, get out the chips, and have fun. And watch out for ’em baldies.

Followed by Sleepaway Camp II: Unhappy Campers and Sleepaway Camp III: Teenage Wasteland.

 Reviews, Slashers Tagged with:
Oct 091983
 
three reels

Miserly Ebenezer Scrooge (Scrooge McDuck, voice: Alan Young), ignores Christmas and his fellow “man,” has nothing to do with his nephew, Fred (Donald Duck, voice: Clarence Nash), and makes life difficult for his employee, Bob Cratchit (Mickey Mouse, voice: Wayne Allwine).  The ghost of his partner (Goofy, voice: Hal Smith) appears to him at night to inform him that  he will be visited by three spirits:  The Ghost of Christmas Past (Jiminy Cricket, voice: Eddy Carroll), The Ghost of Christmas Present (Willie the Giant, voice: Will Ryan), and The Ghost of Christmas Future (Pete, voice: Will Ryan) (voice).  25 min.

There’s no surprises in this by-the-book animated rendition of A Christmas Carol, but what it lacks in originality, it makes up in beautiful drawings and first class voice work.  The tale has been simplified and told with the help of Disney’s stable of characters, which should be enough to make it loved by small children and acceptable to the whole family.  An extra twenty minutes would have helped it as the ghosts hardly have time to show Scrooge a scene from his life, much less enough to make him change his ways.  But, this bare bones approach covers the basics.

After an absence of thirty year, Mickey’s Christmas Carol was the return of Mickey Mouse to the screen, though he isn’t the star, even if his name is in the title.  It should have been Scrooge McDuck’s Christmas Carol, but putting Scrooge’s name before the title would have been overkill.  Even with a small part, Mickey makes a fine return.

Mickey’s Christmas Carol is too respectful of the material for its own good.  I’d like to have seen a few more witticisms and additional gags based on the Disney characters.  There are a few.  Willie the Giant searches by lifting the roofs of houses in one of the film’s better moments.  And Jiminy Cricket is his normal preachy self.  But the script prefers Dickens’ art to Disney’s.

Oct 051983
 
1.5 reels

In the far future, blond caveman Yor (Reb Brown) rescues an old man and a beautiful girl (Corinne Clery) from a dinosaur.  Returning with them to their cave, Yor learns of a mysterious woman who wears a medallion like his.  So they set off to find this woman, and uncover his past.  But his quest is a difficult one for the world is filled with blue-skinned savages, giant lizards, cultists, and killer androids.

There was a time, gentle reader, when manly, blond, cavemen with greased bodies and good hygiene were not afraid to fight stegoceratopses (yeah, that’s what you get when you crossbreed your dinosaurs) and wear little-girl wigs.  And that time is THE FUTURE!!  Well, the future as seen by Italian schlock director Antonio Margheriti, who gave us the groovy, 60s space operas Wild, Wild Planet, The War of the Planets, War Between the Planets, and The Snow Devils.  Having been so…successful…with his sci-fi vision then, he returns to the genre with a dollar fifty budget (in lira; you’ll have to do the conversion yourself), talentless actors, and an understanding that he wasn’t making great art.

Reb Brown stars as Yor, caveman from California.  Brown, who stared in such projects as the TV version of Captain America and Howling II: Your Sister Is a Werewolf, brings the same sort of artistry to this project that he displayed in those other classics.  That is to say, he’s in pretty good shape and can jump about.  But here, he does it in a loin cloth.  If you’re looking for a film with a blond guy in a loincloth and a bad wig, this is your movie, particularly if that is your only criteria.

To go with those flashing male thighs, you get several hot babes (don’t get too excited; this is a family caveman movie), and a lot of guys whose makeup consists of excess body hair and blue shoe polish.  I have no idea why the barbarians have blue shoe polish on their faces, but then I’m still working on Brown’s wig.  Still, they look better than the fearsome “dinosaurs” that would be at home on cable access.

Eventually, genetically superior caveman Yor (yup, it turns out this Arian has perfect genes, making him better than the dark haired Europeans he meets and…hmmmm; is there a hidden message here?) finds his tribe of blonds, and not only are they all fit and trim, but they still know how to run an electric coffee maker.  Unfortunately for them, someone named their child Overlord, which is always a bad idea.  Naturally, Overlord grew up to be an oppressive dictator (I’m guessing parental pressure is at fault).  He also decided to dress like the emperor from Star Wars.  That at least makes sense as he’s made an army of androids that look like Darth Vader (OK, they don’t exactly look like Vader, but rather as close as overextended credit at the corner costume shop will allow).  Naturally, Yor is going to do some bashing on those laser-wielding robots.  Good thing they are as accurate as storm troopers.

For an exploitation picture without any exploitation, Yor is pretty silly entertainment.  If you are looking for a bad movie, you’ll have a lot more fun with this one than with Battlefield Earth (or Lost in Translation).  But don’t look too hard for it.

Oct 051983
 
three reels

David Lightman (Matthew Broderick), a high school underachiever, accidentally hacks into NORAD and challenges the computer to a game of Global Thermonuclear War.  The problem is, the computer doesn’t differentiate between a game and the real thing, and it now controls the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

I recalled liking WarGames on the big screen back in ’83, but it’s a film that I’ve rarely thought about reviewing.  So, after more than twenty years, I sat down with this simple moral tale, and found it’s still a lot of fun.  A rapid-fire film, it doesn’t give you time to notice if something doesn’t work.  Comedy (via Matthew Broderick doing what he does best) flows into sentiment flows into suspense.  The end, which sounds silly if described (I’m not going to, you’ll have to see it) is surprisingly tense.  The supporting cast of Ally Sheedy, Dabney Coleman, John Wood, and Barry Corbin, give their roles exactly what is needed, though the parts aren’t deep.  The theme, that no one can win a nuclear war and that we need to change how we deal with our “enemies,” is hammered home a bit hard.  I cut the film some slack because that was a message that people needed to hear in 1983, but I prefer a bit more subtlety.

WarGames changed film and society, and only Blade Runner was substantially more important for Cyberpunk.  Before it, hackers were not part of the national consciousness.  Computers weren’t thought of as relevant for the home, and no one except computer fanatics knew about using a modem.

However, WarGames has lost something over the years.  This isn’t a character picture; it works on plot.  It is those characters within the story, in that world, that makes it work.  But the setting is gone.  The lesson on nuclear war has been learned, for the most part, and at least for now, it doesn’t matter anyway.  Maybe when another superpower rises, WarGames will regain its pertinence.

 Cyberpunk, Reviews Tagged with:
Oct 041983
 
five reels

Wealthy, elderly brothers (Ralph Bellamy and Don Ameche) switch the lives of snobbish Louis (Dan Aykroyd) and lower-class conman, Billy Ray (Eddie Murphy), and bet on the outcome.  As Billy Ray succeeds in corporate life, Louis is left with nothing, but finds help in a beautiful and clever prostitute (Jamie Lee Curtis).

Quick Review: I never get tired of Trading Places.  It combines P.G. Wodehouse-like class ridicule with a fish out of water story (well, two fish), sight gags, romance, action, revenge, redemption, and just a touch of exquisite nudity.  Aykroyd and Murphy were in that brief period of their careers when both were funny (so very long ago).  Jamie Lee Curtis was switching from sexy scream queen to comic actress (which she would perfect 5 years later in A Fish Called Wanda).  Director John Landis’s masterstroke was casting veteran actors Ralph Bellamy and Don Ameche as the vicious, rich old men who cause all the problems.  Both had been forgotten by Hollywood, but hadn’t lost their talent.  They give both life and cartoonish charm to their characters, which drive the story.  Great acting, good jokes (well, except for the gorilla…), and a bit of sex, what more could you ask for?

Oct 021983
 
one reel

John Baxter (Tony Roberts)—who, with his partner, Melanie (Candy Clark), debunks spiritualists—buys the Amityville house with the idea of writing a book. While Baxter offers his daughter, Susan (Lori Loughlin), her choice of rooms, his estranged wife, Nancy (Tess Harper), forbids her to enter the house. With bodies piling up, Susan, urged on by her friend, Lisa (Meg Ryan), holds a séance in the house, which leads to yet another tragedy.

Yes, this is a 3-D picture. When the most important thing for the filmmakers is to make sure that flashlights, arms, and flies, project out of the screen, you can guess at the quality of the script, acting, and non-3-D related camera work. This is a dreary possessed-house film, without frights or beauty.

At least it doesn’t pretend to be a true story. The original The Amityville Horror was based on a cheesy exploitation book that claimed to be the account of actual events in an evil house. That has been debunked long ago and few are still taken in by that gag. Without the “truth” stunt, the Amityville stories have little to interest anyone. This one is pretty standard for the series, repeating many events of the first (overweight men should not hang out with hordes of flies—trust me).

What we get is Tony Roberts with an afro, playing a part that the film uses to denigrate logical thought. Here is a film that celebrates being stupid. Its message in the end is: Just believe whatever you’re told. So, Roberts’ skeptic has a rather bad time of it. Though not nearly as bad as everyone around him, as the house burns them or drowns them or sucks them into hell.

Far, far too much time is spent with the skeptics’ unpleasant wife, who nags, complains, and tries to shatter glass with her shrill voice. At least if the house had eaten her, the film would have produced a moment of satisfaction.

Curiosity seekers might want to take in the early all-American-cutie-pie performance of Meg Ryan as the tough high school girl. I’d recommend renting one of her romantic comedies instead, but for completists, she’s here.

Strangely, the movie does pop up with an amusing plot idea. When a character dies, her spirit is seen walking in the house (or maybe it isn’t; it’s hard to tell with spirits). This prompts an all out attempt to free the spirit from the house. Sure, it’s a bit like Poltergeist, but an interesting movie could have been made from that. But this doesn’t pop up till the three quarter mark and is only used to introduce a guy in a rubber suit.

On its own, Amityville 3-D doesn’t belong on the Christian Mythos list, but the original film just barely nudges its way onto the list, so it’s hard to keep off a sequel.

It followed Amityville II: The Possession.

Back to DemonsBack to Christian Myth