"Frustratingly terrible and a chore to sit through" – Me, 2008
When I was finished being out of character, I wrote 44,000 more words of boringer movie reviews for dooyoo.co.uk from 2000–2008 (aged 17–22).
Here are my game-changing insights on films I owned on DVD or video, other films I'd seen and notorious turkeys I sought out for the sake of a "funny" review, because slagging something off is less intimidating than having to write about something good and risking enriching myself.
#
Psychiatry: the Latest Religion
*****
Written on 24.04.04 [2013 update]
Released in 1996, 'Twelve Monkeys' is a bleak and very intelligent film with elements of science fiction and time travel, presented ambiguously in order to keep the viewer guessing about its true nature. The film is not very widely known and by its very nature will deter many casual viewers, but this remains one of my favourite films due to its intriguing plot, excellent acting and one of the most interesting depictions of insanity since 'One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest.'
PLOT
5 billion of the world's population were wiped out by a mysterious virus between the years 1996 and 1997, and the surviving 1% are forced to live underground in unsanitary conditions. Animals once again rule the Earth.
The film centres around the character of James Cole, a man who, at the opening of the film, inhabits a cell in a dank structure that resembles a prison. It soon becomes clear that this is not the world we are used to, and Cole has been drafted into "volunteer duty" on the inhospitable surface of the Earth. Discovering signs relating to the "Army of the Twelve Monkeys," the oppressive future society sends Cole back in time to what they believe to be 1996, with the purpose of discovering how this underground Army caused mankind's near-extinction. They do not believe he can prevent anything from occurring, but still desire the information. With his talk of the future, Cole is almost immediately sent to a mental institution.
CAST
Cinemagoers may have been surprised by some of the big names gracing this film, and the high quality and recognition of the key players doubtless had some initial impact on its success.
BRUCE WILLIS, destined to be recognised for his role in 'Die Hard' no matter how many different roles he plays, car ries out one of his finest acting performances in the role of James Cole. Anyone who thinks Willis is all about a dirty vest, guns and one-liners should watch this film and realise that he isn't about the one-liners, although admittedly the clothes have become even filthier, and he does have a gun at one point.
MADELEINE STOWE is the least recognised lead in the film, but her performance as the psychiatrist Kathryn Railly is easy to sympathise with, and very compelling once she gets onto the side of Cole and therefore the viewer. Also hand-picked by Terry Gilliam, Stowe is not the best actress in the world, but her relative obscurity makes her character more believable in the way that Cole occasionally isn't.
BRAD PITT's brilliantly portrayal of the unbalanced Jeffrey Goines earned him an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor, and this nomination was well deserved. Proving once again that he's not just a pretty face (although I have never found him, or any man, physically enticing. I haven't.), Pitt manages to steal every scene he is in, and has obviously put a great deal of time into getting his character perfect.
There are no other prominent characters in the film, but CHRISTOPHER PLUMMER plays Jeffrey's father the scientist, while a bunch of quirky and funny old people, including Simon Jones who is one of my personal favourites and a regular performer in Gilliam's films, play the future scientists.
GILLIAM'S DIRECTION
Although this film was not written and planned out by Terry Gilliam, something which allowed his full visual realisations in the films 'Time Bandits,' 'Brazil' and others, his very distinctive touch and expert skills still shine through. The story is well written by David and Janet Peoples, but Gilliam's use of foreshadowing and parallels on countless occasions back up the psychiatrist's theories on how Cole is living inside his own mental landscape.
Gilliam's reputation for sets and events that are somewhat bizarre is toned down in this more realistic film, but his depiction of the future environment is where his creativity is let loose. Plenty of transparent plastic and hulking, wobbling devices create something slightly less believable and more akin to a fantasy film, again drawing some viewers into the mindset that this is indeed a false reality.
Some of the more interesting examples of this dichotomy and parallel include:
· The methods involved in, and the existence of, time travel. The first time Cole is sent we do not see this transition, and our first sight of him is in prison. Later, Cole glimpses a plastic vent and tunnel in a laboratory, and the next time he travels we see a very similar device being used for that purpose.
· Cole begins the film in something similar to a jail cell, and the first time we see him in 1990 he is in a jail cell. At this early point, it would be easy to assume he is being "mentally divergent."
· There are a great many references to monkeys made throughout the film
VERDICT
Films such as 'Twelve Monkeys' should be applauded for their ability to leave conclusions up to the viewer, but Terry Gilliam himself has commented that he would have preferred to end the film without a specific final scene. Universal demanded its inclusion and, although it is very low-key and not entirely necessary, Gilliam believes that it makes too strong a statement that everything the viewer has seen is genuine. While I do not completely agree with this, there are certainly parts of the film in which the ambiguity could have been expanded upon to make it more interesting. After all, if that's the future Cole is experiencing, it's understandable that he would think he was crazy.
This is certainly not a film "for the masses," as it relies heavily on dialogue and thought rather than impressive special effects and action. In fact, the only real computer effects are very realistically rendered animals at some points, but the acting, direction and storyline keep it interesting. This is also a film that feels very long, despite coming in at a reasonable 124 minutes, and casual viewers will likely lose interest at a number of points in the second hour. Still, it has two very well known male actors in fantastic performances, none of whom I am attracted to, and is among my top ten films. I would recommend to fans of interesting science fiction and intelligent films, although this is more accessible than cerebral outings such as the French art film comprised of a series of slides, 'La Jette,' that is was loosely based on, and that recent 'Pi' film that I didn't get or like. Apologies if I'm being a little vague there. The way in which insanity is handled also manages to be very sensitive and very funny.
THE DVD
Both the DVD and video covers of Twelve Monkeys, in the UK at least, show some of its artistic nature. Rather than featuring huge heads of Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt to sell the film, Universal have tastefully recreated the graffiti symbol of the Army of the Twelve Monkeys in white against a solid red background. This graphic is based on a clock design with eleven monkeys circling at each 'hour,' the twelfth having broken free of the monotonous cycle wh o is now free to scream and generally monkey around. I wish I had deleted that last phrase so much.
The film is presented in widescreen format with great picture quality, although it is a fairly recent film, with optional English subtitles for both the deaf and the hard-of-hearing. Although it is quite a budget release- this is the kind of DVD you will always find in sales on websites and in retailers- the special feature documentary is very impressive.
Entitled 'The Hamster Factor and other tales of Twelve Monkeys,' this 87-minute documentary charts the course of the filmmaking with Terry Gilliam and his cast and crew, from the ideas and filming to the slight disappointment of its box office success. Worth watching for fans of the film, and film-making in general, this was the footage Gilliam wished he could have had to hand when making his film 'Brazil,' which was almost rejected by the studio and took a number of years to gain a release. If nothing else, this is a chance to see Bruce Willis arguing about how to play a scene, and then making up for it, and the development of Pitt's manic character.
And why 'The Hamster Factor?' Well you'll just have to watch it to find out. Or ask me, I'm not that bothered. It's not a secret.
Advantages: Interesting and well-handled ideas, Excellent cast and direction, Touching, depressing and funny
Disadvantages: Not to everyone's tastes, Does drag on in places
2001: A Space Odyssey
Beyond the Infinite
*****
Written on 27.06.06
One of the landmark science fiction films of the twentieth century, ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ was a deliberate collaboration by successful director Stanley Kubrick and sci-fi author Arthur C. Clarke that intended to be precisely that; the ultimate space movie. Historically flawless by intent, ‘2001’ was released at just the right time to blow the minds of American cinemagoers, presenting a series of scientifically plausible portraits of a future envisaged during the ‘space race’ era.
‘A Space Odyssey’ exploits the universe of 2001 as an essential background and framework to explore the main plot, concerning humanity’s quest to solve an ancient, cryptic puzzle through the solar system. A terrifyingly inexplicable object has been excavated on the surface of the Moon, identical to an object that is seen to appear on prehistoric Earth and instigate the Dawn of Man. The monolith on the Moon sends a signal out to Jupiter, and the space shuttle Discovery is sent in that direction on the secret brief to essentially find out what’s going on. But the two-man crew of the Discovery are forced to contend with another developing life form in the form of the ship’s emotionally aware computer, HAL.
This plot is perhaps one of the least recognised aspects of 2001, but it is at least the driving force behind the film; a durable premise upon which everything else can gain relevance. Reading Kubrick and Clarke’s script without the visuals would give no idea as to what’s going on, as the creative and intellectual choice was made to narrate the events entirely in pictures; little of what the characters actually say in their brief moments of discourse has any effect on the plot or its underlying implications, with the exception of the HAL sub-plot. The monolith riddle is free to be interpreted according to the viewer’s own desire and beliefs, while the parallels between ape-man, ‘advanced’ man and the man-made computer couldn’t be illustrated better.
It’s difficult to avoid using artistic vocabulary such as ‘illustrating’ and ‘depicting’ when discussing this film, as much of it is structured like a sequence of moving (very, very slowly moving) storyboard frames rather than an action-oriented picture. ‘2001’ remains a powerful and popular film, but criticism of its pacing is well deserved. Kubrick and Clarke craft a deliberately static and sterile pseudo-Utopia, a world that seems drably believable in its sheer mundanity. The long, long scenes of twenty-first century life prior to the unveiling of the sinister monolith make for an incredibly dull and almost pointless viewing experience, a series of sequences comprised of minute plot exposition, occasional glimpses of futuristic life, and a whole host of tedious model shots and unnecessary conversations held between characters who never appear in the film thereafter.
Modern viewers (and likely, viewers for several decades now) won’t share the ‘wow’ factor that the lunar vista and docking sequence rely on in their excessive duration. The combination of futuristic visuals and antique symphonic music works extremely well and is deservedly memorable, but the film would only be improved by choice editing of the lengthy space scenes, especially in the second quarter. Pacing aside, the film really does look incredible, assuming modern viewers accustomed to CGI are prepared to suspend their disbelief at the less advanced and often very obvious model shots and matte paintings. From the opening scenes of a barren prehistoric wasteland (filmed on a roof at MGM in London) to the exterior space shots and clever gravity-defying set designs, 2001’s lasting strength is equally balanced between its iconic visuals and positive and critical interpretative sub-texts. The final quarter of the film, the legendary ‘Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite,’ is a psychedelic mind trip that will deter casual viewers and astound those who found themselves hooked even in the uneventful opening hour. Pink Floyd fans benefit from a whole extra dimension to this sequence (see comments).
Despite its focus on technological advancement, and its implications, ‘2001’ is ultimately (arguably) a story about the state of humanity, though is not necessarily a condemnation or sanction of our progress. To criticise the acting as stilted and wooden is to miss the point entirely. Dr. Floyd’s cold interaction with his daughter on video-phone concludes brilliantly with the character’s insistence that his daughter inform his wife that he called, Poole stares blankly at the TV screen as his parents sing ‘Happy Birthday’ on video, and Bowman doesn’t utter a word as he disconnects the ship’s circuitry and endures HAL’s admissions of fear. It would be shamefully elementary to declare that the computer character displays the most humanity (freedom of interpretation requires at least the possibility of contradiction, rather than a clear, single meaning).
The clean white sets and lofty sci-fi plot will prevent casual viewers from fully appreciating the psychological horror of the film’s second half, and indeed its general critical tone from the onset. Far from being a peaceful Utopia to contrast with something dingy in the vein of ‘Blade Runner,’ 2001 merely strives to anticipate the twenty-first century, without aesthetic embellishment, as best it can. Whether this works to create a visually compelling film is debatable, but the real focus is overtly that of man’s evolution and progress, aided perhaps by the first monolith that introduced weaponry to the world in the hands of apes. Humanity is still shown to be insular, untrusting, devious and reliant on artificiality and technology.
‘2001’ is a unique film, despite a few attempts to emulate its style. The excellent design concepts of space stations and craft interiors crept its way into the ‘Star Trek’ movie series, the first film of which attempted to emulate 2001’s style as an aid to telling an epic story. Sadly, only the most boring aspects of the film were replicated. The sequel to 2001, ‘2010,’ was based on Clarke’s sequel to the original’s novel (written alongside the production of the film, and only slightly different), but is a much different affair that even ignores some of the admirable stubborn traits of the original, the use of sound effects in the vacuum of space being particularly to my chagrin.
‘Star Wars’ may have polluted the science-fiction film forever, but ‘2001’ was a marvel of its age, and can only be fully appreciated placed in its pre-Moon historical context. The docking scenes are tedious and the ape suits are rubbish, but the music from Richard and Johann Strauss is great, and HAL’s soft-spoken voice is infectiously sinister and quotable. There’s a lot to consider in 2001, and a surprising amount going on, yet it’s all reconciled with near-perfection. Sequels are unnecessary and re-makes are out of the question. This isn’t a film for everyone; half-art and part-suspense, it’s a great piece of cinema that somehow clicks with a substantial portion of film fans.
Advantages: Intriguing concept, amazing visuals.
Disadvantages: Tedious pace, confused genres.
Airplane!
*****
Written on 27.06.04 [2015 update]
In 1980, Jim Abrahams, David Zucker and Jerry Zucker unleashed the comedy classic 'Airplane!' to international acclaim, a film that combines high-tension danger, struggling romance and a lot of silly jokes to create one of the most influential films of the early eighties. It's a funny film.
PLOT
Elaine Dickinson (Julie Hagerty) is a stewardess on a flight that her lover Ted Striker (Robert Hays) boards in an attempt to win her back following his mental health problems and failure to completely get over his war experiences. Unfortunately it becomes apparent that the fish course served to many of the crew, including Captain Oveur (Peter Graves), has caused massive and potentially lethal food poisoning. It's up to Striker to land the plane, aided by the ground control team, and save everyone's lives.
If this story seems like an overused cliché, that's because Airplane is essentially a parody of the stream of airline disaster films produced during the seventies, pioneering the spoof comedy genre that has now been sadly overused and destroyed thanks to unoriginal efforts such as 'Scary Movie.' Anyone who has seen and enjoyed 'Airplane!' will know that every scene is filled with jokes, from silly wordplay ("I am serious. And don't call me Shirley") to visual gags (a topless woman panicking in front of the camera) and basic slapstick fighting. The two lead characters are very reminiscent of the films being rightly mocked and as such carry out the story in a fairly traditional manner, albeit with plenty of time for comedy based on their actions, but the true comic genius of the film originates in the supporting players.
CAST & CHARACTERS
On the whole, the cast for this film are excellent, all contributing to the deadpan style of the whole thing. Although he is the main star, Robert Hays doesn't impress as much as some of the others and can seem out of place at times, but the inclusion of Leslie Nielsen raises the comic level of this film enormously. Nielsen is surely one of the funniest actors in history; everything he says in that monotonous voice has me micturating myself. The inclusion of the crazy ground control staff, from Lloyd Bridges' McCrosky, a man who picked the wrong week to stop abusing his body with chemicals, to the ludicrously camp Johnny played by Stephen Stucker.
Although it seems like a good idea at the beginning, the over-acting of Julie Hagerty becomes a little frustrating as the film progresses, and it's perhaps due to programmes such as 'The Office' and 'I'm Alan Partridge' that I find the more low-key performances the most enjoyable - real-life basketball star Kareem Abdul-Jabaar plays an exaggerated version of himself under the guise of the co-pilot, making his scenes with the excellent Peter Graves even more watchable.
Aside from Striker and Elaine, the lovers whose personal lives chaotically mingle with the plot, most of the characters are presented as ill-at-ease flyers with personal problems - in the end, not even the innocent children and religious characters are shown to be free of corruption, as a nun is seen beating a woman to keep her calm while a young girl tells a boy who is trying to befriend her that, "I like my coffee black, like my men." Even the calm Dr. Rumack clearly suffers from some kind of mental disorder, misinterpreting peoples' questions and how to act in a crisis situation.
THE HUMOUR
'Airplane!' is a hugely popular film as the comedy is present throughout, never becoming too complex for the average moviegoer to understand. That said, it may not appeal to everyone but as a fan of films such as 'The Naked Gun' and 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail,' I loved this instantly and have watched it many times since I was young. Even situations I wouldn't normally find amusing are executed perfectly here, such as an extended scene in which Robert Stack beats up a procession of religious workers in an airport. Clever humour is also used to trick the viewers however and some of this subtlety makes for the best jokes of the film - Bridges standing at his desk with a photo of himself standing at his desk on the wall, a doctor discussing a heart operation while a replacement heart leaps around his table and Stack stepping out of what was assumed to be a mirror (a joke repeated in the second film when William Shatner reveals that a TV screen was in fact a window) are excellently underplayed.
The parody element extends beyond disaster films, including a rendition of what could only be Saturday Night Fever with boomerang clothes, while some of the subjects made fun of could potentially be sensitive: mental problems, religion and suicide are all mocked to a degree, but then comes the hilariously literal "sh** hitting the fan" scene to keep everyone amused and content.
VERDICT
This film is an undeniable comedy classic, but it has obviously aged somewhat over twenty four years. The films it is criticising are no longer a common feature of the cinema and many of the jokes have been used repeatedly since, but the light-hearted comedy value of the film has not been lost. Two years later came the sequel, conveniently titled 'Airplane II: The Sequel,' which was also very funny but did basically re-use most of the jokes and situations from this first film. Writers Abrahams, Zucker and other Zucker soon went on to create the moderately successful TV series 'Police Squad!' followed by its hugely popular film incarnation 'The Naked Gun' which, while not as influential and perhaps not quite as funny, is another very entertaining series of films starring Leslie Nielsen. Nielsen is approaching eighty years of age but is still going strong, but 'Airplane!' may be his finest hour.
I would not hesitate in recommending this film to people of all ages as the only "controversial" elements are a pair of jiggling breasts and a couple of minor, well-timed swear words, and I loved it just as much when I was a child as I do today. I'm also sure plenty of old people will enjoy the plane dilemma, even if they do find these young people with their "drinking problem" jokes a bit silly.
*****
Written on 23.03.04
Recently re-released in the cinema and now on DVD is Alien: the Director's Cut, another attempt by Hollywood producers to make more money at the expense of the public. I haven't seen this new edition but judging by what has been changed I know I wouldn't like it as much; after all, being the director of the film in the first place, surely Ridley Scott's original direction is the true 'director's edition,' as the scenes which were cut were all done so for reasons of pacing and atmosphere. In any case, before I mislead you further this is not a review of the director's cut, but the original film on DVD.
Alien was not among the very first films to be transferred to the DVD format, but was relatively early on. It was certainly among the first wave to be packaged in what are now called 'DVD cases,' rather than those cardboard things.
The film will be familiar to countless people, whether you liked it or not, and is essentially a science-fiction-suspense-shocker where an entire crew, except one lady, are wiped out by a hostile and very very cool looking alien, courtesy of the great H. R. Giger, the painter from belgium or wherever it was who generously painted my desktop theme. Constantly referred to as one of the best sci-fi films of all time, or one of the scariest films of all time, Alien managed to impress the average thrill-seeker as well as greatly impress the dedicated fan. Oh yes, and it started a very famous, yet increasingly worse, film franchise. Sigourney Weaver will be forever known as Lieutenant Ripley, the strict scientist who ironically seems the first character who should be tokenly killed, but who manages to survive. Along with the cat.
Alien appeals to me for a number of different reasons. Primarily, I suppose, because I ; am a big fan of high quality science fiction, and the future depicted in Alien is an interesting take on the genre. Far from the stable Federation of Star Trek, Alien shows space to still be an unknown place where colonies and ships are sent out by the mysterious 'Company;' possibly Ridley Scott's idea that the increasing power of corporations in America would eventially end up with them ruling the world and indeed the sector. Alien is the only horror film I have ever bought, or am likely to buy, as I do not usually enjoy this genre apart from this exception. The sets and characters are all so believable and unique that I couldn't stop watching this film when I bought it off eBay, and I was also able to admire the top quality directing. I would recommend this film to any science fiction fan due to the 'tramp steamer' quality of the spaceship Nostromo, a look which was basically ripped off for Red Dwarf's third season. I have no problems with that though, it was certainly an improvement on the grey.
In terms of the DVD, this is very impressive considering it was brought out so long ago. The special features leave nothing to the imagination, including very important and famous deleted scenes including the infaous 'alien cocoon' sequence which was cut and reintroduced into the second film. Some of the deleted scenes are simply cut for time reasons, although there is one in particular which reveals that the alien is far too guy-in-a-suit; the less is more approach thankfully deleted this one! Director Ridley Scott's audio commentary was also, apparently, the first to be recorded for use on a DVD and it manages to raise interesting points, although not much that can't be found in the behind-the-scenes galleries and notes (which are too extensive even for me to re-read). A pe culiar feature of the DVD is an alternate version of the soundtrack by Jerry Goldsmith, probably removed to try and keep the tension with the very subliminal final score, which plays the whole film in silence apart from certain scenes where sound effects are changed or the music is different. I'm not sure I could sit through two hours of that though, even if this was something like Monty Python & the Holy Grail, arguably the greatest film of all time.
Overall, Alien is a very classic and very enjoyable film which I will always have in my collection. It manages to combine the interest and wonder of science fiction with the fear of being hunted and murdered by a spiky black alien, and is truly an original, especially in 1979. There are only a couple of scenes where the film shows its age, notably the very large and slow computer and the very fake head of Ian Holm (what a guy), but the cast are great, the directing is top quality and the overall look is of something incredible. Despite many years of hearing from my friends that Aliens (Alien 2) was the best because of the "dead cool guns" I found it very lacking as a film, although it was enjoyable as a straightforward blast-em-up. Alien 3 bored me as a child, although I did enjoy a bit where a man was pushed into a fan, and Alien Resurrection was simply a poor modern day average space film. It's a shame, as they could have done so much more with the franchise. This DVD is very cheap all over the internet, and I would recommend it to everyone, one of the finest films of all time.
ADDITIONAL
For those who are wondering, the main scenes added in the recent director's cut are the cocoon sequence and some others amidst the action. Apparently, Scott's original decision to cut these was because their slow pace ruined the momentum and tension of the last half hour of the film. The director's edition may also possess a higher definition picture but Alien is clear enough in this edition, and the special features are extensive enough.
Advantages: One of the true classics, both for sci-fi and horror fans, Original and unique look, much-copied, Plenty of special features
Disadvantages: A couple of scenes look dated, but that's nothing for a film that's 25 years old
Back to the Future Part III
The Final Showdown
*****
Written on 25.03.04 [2013 update]
"You're not thinking fourth dimensionally. When you hit 88 miles per hour you'll be sent back to the past and those indians won't even be there..." - Doctor Emmett 'Doc' Brown, 1955
The third and final chapter in the Back to the Future must have surprised long-time fans and move critics alike when it failed to become a box office flop and instead provided plenty of great action, comedy and compelling storyline to live up to its predecessors.
Although it could easily be described as a pathetic attempt to win audiences with a tacky time travel plot stuck on to a teen romance film, those people would be incorrect and rubbish. Certainly a film it would be easy to dislike, Robert Zemeckis' original "Back to the Future" was a very rare example of a film that my Dad considers to be a classic which I actually like: the regular list includes such 'classics' as Innerspace, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, the A-Team series and Short Circuit (he must have been at least 30 when that came out, what's going on?) It's also a film that I can watch again and again, and indeed have done since I was very young. Back to the Future, not Short Circuit. The shaky science sci-fi comedy about a teenager's adventure in the 1950s to save his friend and attempt not to screw up his own conception in the process proved incredibly popular worldwide and spawned the two great sequels, titled part II and part III a little unimaginatively, in which the miniscule yet ageing Michael J. Fox's portrayal of a seventeen year old became increasingly less convincing. Christopher Lloyd's rendition of Doctor Emmett Brown, the slightly crazy and very funny scientist, just keeps getting better.
I've never been a a fan of westerns, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying this film. I obviously can't appreciate the Clint Eastwood gags as much as someone who has seen all the films of that genre, but you benefit from the same kind of jokes if you've simply watched the previous two films. There are more parodies of the original's "mom, is that you?" and "I hate manure" scenes, while Buford 'Mad Dog' Tannen is as funny/annoying as the more regular Biff Tannen.
There are many stories regarding whether the 'you've got to come back with me- back to the future!' ending of the first movie was an intentional link to a sequel or, as my Dad's BTTF annual suggests, only a joke. However, the success of the film ensured that a more serious gripping finale could be left at the end of the second film to be resolved in this 1991 finale. Through a number of enjoyable catastrophes and accidents, Marty has ended up back in 1955 a second time and, although having just set history right yet again, has seen the time-travelling, flying DeLorean car struck by lightning with the Doc inside. Marty's fears are eased a little when he is handed a 'not to be opened until 1955' letter in which the Doc reports that he was sent back in time to 1885 and the Old West. Marty seeks out the Doc's 1955 equivalent who receives a bit of a shock as he's just sent the Marty from the first film back to the 1985 of the first film, and the film ends with the Doc lying on the ground. Is he dead?...
BACK TO THE FUTURE: PART III
No, he just fell for a while. Needless to say it takes a little convincing, in a scene with some great comic timing, but the Doc eventually manages to find the stored DeLorean from 1885 and sends Marty back to rescue his old pal. There are plenty of wild west shenanigans in the Hill Valley which, despite being a century earlier, still features the same basic bloodlines and actors.
There have been a number of prominent characters in all three films, but for me it's the dynamic between rock-n-roll near-adult Marty McFly and the slightly senile Doctor Emmett Brown, played brilliantly by Christopher Lloyd, that has always made it worth watching. They make a great team, no matter what age or time period they happen to be habiting, and in this final instalment it's even more enjoyable to see the role reversal taking place when Doc falls in love and finds himself distracted, and Marty must try and talk him out of it. This even proceeds to a scene contrasting brilliantly with the first film where Marty exclaims "great scott!" and Doc replies, "I know, this is heavy." Classic stuff! In this film, the Doc finds love with the intellectual school teacher Clara Clayton, while Marty is hung, dragged around and shot at.
If you enjoyed the other Back to the Future films, you should enjoy this. It's some light-hearted time travelling fun with a couple of great characters, but if you thought the original was a bit poor then you'll probably like this even less. I'm just glad that it lived up to the expectations by fans, something that seems to be a very rare event. Oh yes, and there was a cartoon series that aired shortly after this that I'm doing far too much justice by even mentioning. It was not good.
Most Triumphant
****
Written on 06.04.04
If a friend put on his video of this 1991 sequel to Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure and made me watch it for the first time, I would possibly murder him in cold blood. The instant appeal of this film for me is that since I saw it at the cinema when I was but six years old, it has been an important part of my childhood, and this allows me to better appreciate its merit as a movie.
Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure was the story, based on a comic book series [No it wasn't], of two underachieving High School rockers who get caught up in a quite silly but well-written time travel adventure, eventually finding out that they are considered revolutionary heroes for the music their band, 'Wyld Stallyns,' will go on to create. By the end of the film, it was difficult to see how Bill S. Preston Esq. (Alex Winter) and Ted "Theodore" Logan (Keanu Reeves) could be considered in any positive light, but this film serves to clear it up.
PLOT
Instead of focusing on time travel, the eponymous "bogus journey" of the film comes when Bill and Ted are mercilessly thrown off a cliff by evil robot versions of themselves, and die. When the Grim Reaper (William Sadler) arrives, they cleverly use their Melvin technique, more commonly known as a wedgie, and escape. They ultimately end up getting mistaken for evil dead dudes by their Missy, I mean Mom, and her spiritual group. They vow to escape from Hell in order to rescue their Princess babes and stop the evil robot thems from destroying the future of mankind...
STYLE
Clearly the film is quite silly, but the humour is much more mature and sophisticated than in the previous film (honestly). The depictions of Hell and Heaven are very impressive and avoid any possibility of disrespect or offence, unless you are offended by the Reaper ending up as a bass-playing rapper, while the storyline manages to stay interesting and unpredictable.
This is not the usual High School tale of romance and getting stoned, there are no mentions of addictive substances apart from the alcohol consumed by the evil robot clones, and this should be considered much more a sci-fi comedy than a teen movie.
HUMOUR
For me, the main comedy of the double-act comes from their unusual slant on the typical rock-loving US youth. For a start they are friendly, but also use fantastic expressions to describe their situations as "most triumphant" and "non-heinous."
Bill Sadler's Death character is also excellent as the butt of jokes, from his first Melvin through to the parody of Ingmar Bergman's Seventh Seal chess game: this time the heroes play Twister, Cluedo, some kind of ice hockey Subbuteo, and Battleships. "You haff sank my battlesheep."
RECOMMENDATIONS
I would recommend this film mainly to the younger, pre-18 generation, however there is still enough substance and plot to make it appeal to adults and parents. A film I feel I should watch every several years just to remind me of my youth. I suppose Wayne's World is the next step up, and a much funnier film, but isn't really in the same league as it isn't a sci-fi film. And however superior a film The Matrix manages to be, Keanu Reeves' best performance is still in this movie.
**
Written on 19.10.07
With a title like ‘The Brain That Wouldn’t Die,’ you would probably expect Joseph Green and Rex Carlton’s film to be a cheap, trashy, unoriginal and laughable sixties horror flick, when in fact these two screen legends managed to produce one of the more compelling, spine-chilling and scientifically cautionary masterworks of the decade. No, only joking. This is obviously just another fairly tedious and unspectacular R-rated sci-fi horror putting a contemporary spin on the Frankingstein plot, this time benefitting from the breakthroughs in plastic surgery, organ transplants and test tube babies that were hot topics in 1959. It’s just a shame the film was delayed a few years to 1962 to prevent it losing its one real niche.
The Frankingstein in this case is ambitious, smooth-talking young scientist Dr. Bill Cortner, played rather woodenly by Jason Evers, whose highly experimental and unorthodox treatments are gaining him some notoriety at the hospital where he works with his traditionalist father and devoted fiancée Jan (Virginia Leith). Bill finally decides to show Jan his nefarious experiments at his laboratory up at the isolated country house, but in his haste to get there in response to his assistant’s summoning, he accidentally veers off the winding path and narrowly escapes the burning car wreck with his life. Jan, sadly, is not so lucky, her corpse burning and decapitated, but Bill isn’t going to let that get in the way of a happily married life. Rescuing her head and making haste to the lab, Bill pumps it full of his experimental life juice and sets about finding a beautiful body to match before her time is up, too busy to heed his deformed assistant’s warning that a mutated monstrosity they’re keeping locked up in the closet seems increasingly eager on breaking free...
The film has an extremely simple plot divided into two strands: the vengeful plot brewing in the lab between the bitter Jan and the unseen monster, and the Doctor’s sleazy cruise for a corpse. Not an awful lot happens in the overlong scenes, and the film only lasts for an hour and ten minutes, though there’s supposedly a longer eighty-two minute uncut version featuring Bill’s encounter with some strippers amongst other things, though it’s probably not as interesting as it sounds and clearly not worth the trouble of tracking down when the standard version is freely available. The highest hopes prospective viewers can have when approaching a film like this is for some unadulterated campy horror fun, and if possible a wealth of cheesy dialogue and so-bad-it’s-good plot developments, all of which the film can boast to a moderate degree. For a start, it’s fairly watchable despite the lack of action in some scenes, as the writers successfully bait the audience along with a promise that the much-hyped monster will be revealed by the conclusion, and through the morbid fascination with Dr. Cortner’s dastardly scheme, easily and deliberately comparable to a psycho date-murderer and played completely straight and rather creepily throughout.
There’s very little in the way of special effects or gore that might be expected of a Frankingstein tale, but a satisfying balance is struck between convincing and authentic-sounding scientific reasoning and really rubbish lines, many of which I eagerly scribbled down. From the Doc’s laughably brief life’s work that has taken all of “a few weeks” to reach this advanced level, to his stereotypical arguments with his right-wing father and God-fearing assistant and the scornful moralising of ‘Jan in the Pan,’ it’s a script that essentially writes itself, and when Green’s screenplay tries to impress it fails very amusingly, though the blame also has to be placed on the poor acting. When the assistant asks his boss where he’s going to find a body, Evers repeats his line “there are ways. There are ways” in a flat monotone that fails to sound sinister in any way, even when adding a mischievous wink. The script’s most defining moment has to be Jan’s assertion that, “like all quantities, horror has its ultimate. And I’m that.”
Not all of the acting is terrible, but a few cast members are clearly hired entirely for their bodies, particularly Adele Lamont who goes way over the top with her attempted angry portrayal of the glamour model Doris. Despite a large amount of focus being given to scantily clad females, including some camera-eye sizing-up of their chief assets, the film avoids being truly sexist by presenting the whole thing as the Doctor’s dirty scheme; if anything, his repeated assurances that he can be trusted, backed up by his respectable profession, should actually serve as a warning to more gullible members of the audience, and this is probably where the film is at its best. Let’s face it, the competition is a static head in a scuba helmet whispering to a cupboard. The film really shows its rushed and half-hearted nature through some major slip-ups and inconsistencies in the script, and it’s additionally amusing to see the exceedingly picky Doctor passing up each opportunity to snag himself a body when presented with an irresistible better deal that he feels compelled to chase, despite the time pressure he keeps insisting upon. Nevertheless, the film manages to be truly creepy as he scans the merits of each currently occupied body and leads Doris along with a promise that he will fix her scarred face, when in fact like all men he’s only interested in one thing: everything from the collar downwards (right on).
Although the lack of major effects avoids making each minute of the film look ridiculous, it’s still badly dated through other means, especially the obtrusive musical score. The sleazy sax accompanying every scene of nude legs gets irritating very fast and spoils what should be a sinister tone, but the biggest offender has to be the grating, Batman-style squealing accompanying the overlong speeding scene, though admittedly it makes it funnier if you’re watching for that reason alone, which I suppose most people are. Minimal and effective trickery is used to disguise Virginia Leith’s body that everyone knows is under the table, and as for the scientific apparatus, you can’t really go wrong with a generic arrangement of tubes and beakers. Probably the aspect of the film I found the most difficult to understand was the apparent oversight that it was Bill’s reckless speeding that caused the accident in the first place, something Jan seems to overlook in her hatred of him simply for bringing her back in this unnatural state, and that Bill himself is only too happy to ignore as soon as he realises that his whole life and scientific training has been preparing him for this life-saving moment.
There are plenty of other films and books that carry off the Frankingstein plot much better (Mary Shelley’s original ‘Frankingstein’ still being the best), and really no reason for this film to exist other than to satisfy B-movie lovers who have already seen all the stupider films out there. At just over an hour it’s an easy viewing, and has long been in the public domain meaning that it’s freely downloadable from film link sites or the primary Internet Archive at http://www.archive.org/details/brain_that_wouldnt_die. But then, so are a lot of better films too.
Advantages: Quite creepy in a sleazy way, and tries its best to be bang up-to-date.
Disadvantages: It's a film about an angry head on a table, and that's it.
Conan the Barbarian
*****
Written on 10.08.03
Schwarzenegger's first starring role and for me, his greatest. As large portions of this film are intentionally without any speech at all, it is the power and look of Conan that could not be matched by anyone else other than Arnie. Conan's nemesis Thulsa Doom is also played excellently by James Earl Jones, whose character is much more about speech, and as such the two main stars of this film are perfectly cast.
Talking about the film itself, I found Conan surprisingly enjoyable, as I'd always assumed it was simply a film for boring people or those who liked to look at flexing, sweaty men, and it has possibly the most endruing, re-watchable quality of any film I have seen. Many a Friday night have been made perfection thanks to Sky Moviemax 4 playing Conan for a number of weeks in a row around my friend's house, rounded off with some late night online Diablo II. (For more information on these perfect nights, see my Diablo II review).
Each scene is relevant and enjoyable, and while there are ineviotably parts of the film that I like more than others, even the in-between sections are enjoyable. As I said, the cast are excellent, even those actors who obviously have less experience but still suit their parts perfectly, the 'sword and sorcery romp' is unbeatable for its genre, and the all-important musical score by Basil Poledouris, important as it is the only sound in some scenes, is equally perfect.
The story is basically that of a young boy (Conan) whose parents are killed by warriors bearing the sign of a serpent, who is taken from his home in the north to be raised as a slave and, ultimately, a gladiator. When he is set free, "like a wild animal that had been kept too long" according to Akero the narrator, he begins to live the life of a thief before being sent on a quest to rescue King Osric's daughter from the same snake cult that killed Conan's parents. There is plenty of action, a sweaty sex scene that shows boobies for people whose enjoyment of films may be based around these, and also a healthy dose of comedy.
Overall, Conan stands out from all the other action-fantasy films of the era and beyond thanks to the way it is kept to the original vision of Conan comic book creator Robert E. Howard; not over the top with magic, more concerned with strength and emotions. This is certainly a film that deserves a watch even if, like me, you would not have expected to have liked it. No other film has utilised Schwarzenegger's talents so much, and no other role has been "made for him" like this one.
Concerning the DVD, the picture quality is great, but on both my DVD and that of my friend, a lot of the movement goes very fuzzy which makes it less enjoyable. The music and sounds can be heard perfectly, and the extras on this "Special Edition" are also very worthy of the film, and were made specially for this release.
"Conan Unchained" is a very interesting look behind the creation of the film, and also gives memorable insights into the somewhat insane mind of the original Conan creator. Everyone in and behind the film is given their due credit.
The audio commentary is also very useful and different for when one has watched the film many times, while the inclusion of deleted scenes, trailers and special effects shots give you something to do when you've got a few minutes to kill.
It would be hard to improve this DVD, escept for the picture quality. I don't know how exactly to recommend Conan as I know for a fact it would not appeal to everyone, but if you are a fan of fantasy in general, or possibly action, you should find it an enjoyable watch, and will certainly be able to see why this deserves to be Arnold Schwarzenegger's finest hour (well, 119 minutes). A very, very quotable film!
Conan the Destroyer
Do You Still Like He-Man?
**
Written on 16.07.04
To many people the 80s conjures memories of male singers dressed as ladies backed by electronic drums or, in my case, watching 'Rainbow' and weeing my pants in playgroup that one time, but to a large proportion of the world's population it was the decade of He-Man, Conan and various other muscular warriors fighting evil sorcerors in fantasy worlds. In 1986, Dino DeLaurentiis and Edward Pressman decided to produce a sequel to their 1982 hit film 'Conan the Barbarian' that was certain to be a box office success among Dungeons & Dragons players and regular cinemagoers alike for one reason: Schwarzenegger. Unfortunately, as has been seen countless times since, the pectoral Austrian governor is no guarantee of a great film.
THE STORY
Fighting off some random gang or other, Conan (Schwarzenegger) and his inexplicable and annoying sidekick Malak (Tracey Walter, a man) are approached by ambassadors of a Queen and summoned to her palace. There, Conan is entrusted with the protection and guardianship of Princess Jehna (Olivia d'Abo) who must undergo a series of trials in distant regions to prove her worth, or something. Unbeknownst to Conan and his crap comedy sidekick, Queen Taramis (Sarah Douglas) is actually an evil sorceress who plans to kill the rejuvenated Princess on her return as a sacrifice to the statue Dagoth.
Conan, Malak and the Queen's trusted guard Bombaata (Wilt Chamberlain) lead the Princess around to her trials and are joined by accomplices old and new in the shape of Mako and Grace Jones to fight off ice wizards, clans and beasts. But will Conan realise he is being duped? More importantly, will he realise that this sequel completely fails to capture the spirit and general idea of the first one?
CAST & CHARACTERS
I'd be tempted to say that Schwarzenegger's always good as I do respect and like the guy, but he really isn't given any good material to work with here. His Conan character is barely recognisable as the original in terms of the writing: here, the warrior is shown to be a talkative, friendly, honourable man; a far cry from the orphaned boy taught to kill to survive and "bred to the finest stock" during his captivity in the original. Schwarzenegger's dominance in the film industry has also clearly led to him having to tone down his workout to play more believable roles: his muscles are still impressive (but not attractive, I am not inclined that way) but are nothing compared to the meat axe of the 1982 film (even this was the result of losing some muscle, as Arnie was apparently unable to wield a sword due to his bulky arms and chest previously).
Grace Jones is the other big name of the film, but I don't really see the appeal in terms of her character here. A ruthless warrior woman is a good addition to the cast but the attempted chemistry between her and Conan never feels genuine. Wilt Chamberlain is even more well-built than Arnie here which is quite enjoyable to watch, but he is unfortunately quite a bad actor, the same being true for Mako - excellent in the first film as the weird, nameless wizard but only seeming to be comic relief here. The worst offence of the film is the inclusion of the annoying Princess and the bumbling oaf Malak, neither of whom deserve any mention apart from "unwatchable."
THE DISAPPOINTMENT
1982's 'Conan the Barbarian' was Schwarzenegger's major film debut and, for all its alleged Aryan supremacy undertones, sexism and violence, was an impressive film by John Milius. Arnie's lack of acting skill didn't affect his performance as the efficient, vengeful warrior, the sets were realistic and the fantasy world potentially believable, not to mention the excellent musical score from Basil Poledouris. The supporting cast included a surfer and a dancer who had never acted before, but even this didn't spoil the film. You only didn't like Conan the Barbarian if you didn't enjoy films about sweaty body-builders carrying out a very simple revenge plot. It was good anyway.
'Conan the Destroyer' deliberately went for a more typical fantasy plot and ends up feeling much more like a run-of-the-mill adventure film that will appeal to children who liked 'Labyrinth.' Director Richard Fleischer is really good at ignoring every successful and interesting technique applied by John Milius in the original, while the writers Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway would be much more at home writing for 'Thundercats' than a big-budget action film. The violence is toned down to a comical level; the supporting characters are annoying and feel very contrived; there are far too many spoken lines for Schwarzenegger and co.; the fantasy world spoils the believable prehistoric landscape of the predecessor; the monsters look pathetic; there are far too many convenient events in the plot and, perhaps most importantly, the storyline is rubbish.
THE DVD
Conan the Destroyer is a fairly budget release DVD, demonstrating its obvious inferiority and less "classic" nature to the original, which received a deluxe release. A trailer, different language options and a brief biography of those involved is all that's present in terms of special features, but there's also a very impressive and enormous A4-size poster of the film artwork, if you feel that your jotter pad could do with a new cover. I don't think there's any chance of 20th century Fox re-releasing this film as it doesn't really deserve it (even from an unbiased point of view), although I believe it may have been released somewhere in a three-pack along with 'Conan 1' and 1985's 'Red Sonya,' a similar film to this that at least doesn't claim to be Conan (despite Arnie's character's obvious similarity).
VERDICT
I've been very harsh to this film, but that's mainly because I felt disappointed. I used to really like the first Conan film, although I haven't seen it in a while so my opinion may have changed a little, but none of the things I liked about it, and that gave it replay value, are present here. Even Basil Poledouris' musical score pales in contrast to the excellent symphonic backing to the first film, which relied on a lot less dialogue and more symbolism and visual storytelling.
I would have liked this film if I was a child, especially as a number of scenes actually seem geared towards a childish fantasy world - the lengthy scene with mirrors in the ice castle doesn't belong in an adult adventure film. The cheesy lines of all the characters and the deliberately modern dialogue of the comic relief characters, who are unfortunately really unfunny and irritating, makes this a distinctly average Hollywood action flick, cashing in on Arnie's huge success at the expense of continuing in the excellent style of its predecessor.
If you've managed to avoid this so far, please continue to do so. If you want to copy and paste this review into a word processor and insert a hilarious old chestnut Terminator or Californian Governor reference at the end, feel free to do so but please don't tell me about it.
Cradle of Fear
***
Written on 24.09.04
'Cradle of Fear' is a low-budget, tasteless, almost plotless British horror film, for all its flaws, at least knows its target audience and its expectations very well. Director Alex Chandon, the man behind the even more obscure 'Pervirella' and 'Drill Bit,' recruited members of black metal band Cradle of Filth along with a cast of midgets, amputees and very cheap actors to produce the most over-the-top gore film in recent memory. This straight-to-video film's tag-line says it all: "it's not IF they die, it's HOW."
This film is split into four distinct storylines, all of which loosely integrate into the primary plot in the tradition of Hammer and other horror classics such as 'Doctor Terror's House of Horror.' Chandon fills each one with adult material in the form of nudity, drug abuse and, primarily, extreme violence.
STORY
Convicted killer Kemper (David McEwan) is serving a life sentence in a dingy underground cell following a series of ritualistic child murders involving strange hypnotism. Kemper has established contact with his like-minded son (the mysterious silent character The Man, played by Dani Filth) and exacts revenge on those who put him away in the most violent and gruesome ways possible. Right from the onset, The Man is seen mutilating and gorging on the bodies of two would-be muggers, even finishing off with an alley cat. This man is pure evil.
I
The first story sees sexy goth Emily Bouffante feeling entranced by The Man in a gothic club and eventually bringing him home for a night of strange and painful intercourse. In the morning she feels used and very ill, seeing twisted demonic faces in the crowded streets on the way to her friend's flat. But then the stomach movements begin, leading to the most memorable and hilarious scene in the film.
II
The second part is connected far more loosely to the main plot and sees a pair of tough criminal girls break into an old man's house to steal his valuables and divide the spoils. But when the deaf old man is disturbed from his slumber, there is no choice but to dispatch him, several times if necessary... and then Sophie sees a way to keep all of the cash to herself.
III
Drug addict and crimelord Nick is still pining for his lost leg, feeling inadequate even with his devoted girlfriend by his side. Desperation leads to Nick asking his doctor for a replacement leg, but he is assured that none are in supply. If Nick can find a leg, it may be possible.
IV
The final chapter is the most interesting, concerning a sick underground website in which victims are incarcerated in a chamber and can be tortured and killed through a live video feed by the user. The son of the detective in charge of the Kemper investigation has become addicted to the experience, but soon ends up on the other side of the screen.
CAST & CREW
A low-budget film like this isn't going to attract the most successful or accomplished acting talent, and for many of the unextraordinary stars this will inevitably be their greatest achievement. There are several believable or otherwise interesting performances by the more prominent characters in the film, although Dani Filth does little more than stare wickedly and tear heads in twain, and token midgets and self-mutilated buddies of the director who would go on to appear in Cradle's music videos.
The film quality is sub-soap opera and the special effects are laughable but have character in these CGI-dominated times, but it's not the cheap look that would put people off this film so much as the gore, blood, stabbings and other explicitly adult material; most people will have purchased this video/DVD for precisely those reasons.
VERDICT
Cradle of Fear is to some people's taste. On its release it was most readily received by fans of Cradle of Filth due to the presence of band members and several of their more atmospheric songs in the gothic and groove soundtrack, but once that publicity died down it became something of a must-see for fans of the obscure, the occult and the horrible-but-light-hearted.
More brutal than anything in recent years but produced a couple of decades too late to enjoy the sheer cult status of gore films such as the infamous 'Cannibal Holocaust', Alex Chandon's video case praise that he is "the future of horror" is a little extreme for this piece of novelty sickness, but time will tell if he manages to exceed this cult-acclaimed severing of modern British horror.
Much more widely available than you would like to imagine.
Dark City
Nocturnal Pulse
*****
Written on 31.08.04
A phone rings, a man answers. At the other end is a voice, claiming to have all the answers to the man's identity and the nature of his world. The man is forced to hang up and run as shady, inhuman agents approach his location: he has a power unlike the other humans, but he must learn who and what he is before he can help free himself and the oblivious populace of the city from their reluctant roles in a terrifying extraterrestrial experiment.
It's easy to see why many film fans accuse the Wachowski brothers of ripping off this 1998 classic of modern science fiction cinema, but the style and tone of each respective film is very different. This is a review of Dark City, not a hateful list of reasons why the Matrix was copied from other sources in cinema and literature - if you're interested in that, the internet is full of information like that. I like the Matrix a lot, but I like Dark City more.
STYLE
Writer and director Alex Proyas was previously best known for his 1994 cult hit 'The Crow,' the violent but emotional adaptation of the popular gothic comic book series that became infamous for costing the life of star Brandon Lee during filming. These are the only two films directed by Proyas that I've seen, and there are very clear similarities in the shooting style for each. The most noticeable is the setting: grim darkness over the hulking skyscrapers of a modern city, filled with people going about their mundane lives and somehow failing to achieve true happiness within them.
Although the concept is primarily a science fiction one, this film is executed as a mystery thriller and even features the token detective bent on the investigation of a murderer. There are no real nods to genre classic 'Blade Runner' through use of this style, as the feel is more that of the film noir era that Ridley Scott's film was itself based upon. There are no flying cars here either.
As with the Crow (which was originally intended to be black-and-white), the colour palette of this film is strictly limited within scenes to reflect the mood: black, browns and the occasional neon for the rain-soaked cityscape at night, and a more electrifying blue lighting for the scenes underground in the lair of the Strangers. Memories of a happier childhood long ago make use of limited daylight and seascapes, and these fabricated memories are the only portions of the film that truly display happiness.
PLOT
This is not a light hearted blockbuster, but it also doesn't require in-depth examination in order to enjoy it, unless you enjoy watching the Matrix trilogy with a copy of Descartes at hand. The wheezing Doctor Schreiber (Kiefer Sutherland) provides the most basic introduction in his opening monologue, explaining that a dying alien race he calls the Strangers are in control of the city's inhabitants, forever altering their lives and memories in their search for the human soul that their collective culture lacks, and that they believe will allow them to survive. Schreiber was forced to wipe his own memory when he agreed to work for the Strangers, meaning that although he is one of the few humans who are aware of the truth, he has no knowledge of their origins, only that he is a traitor to his own species.
No one notices that they black out at midnight each night, only to be confronted with a slightly different landscape and lifestyle the next night. No one notices how it is impossible to leave the city, or that daylight never comes.
The protagonist who becomes known as John Murdock (Rufus Sewell) awakes in a bath in a dilapidated building, his accidental amnesia providing a means for the viewers to discover the mysteries of the film along with the character. John is unable to recall the identity he is supposed to be living, and his ability to consciously alter the environment around him (what the Strangers call "tuning," an ability that only their developed minds are supposed to achieve) makes him the target of the trenchcoat-clad bald aliens, led by the creepy Mr. Hand (Richard O'Brien) who attempts to become Murdock to discover how his mind works.
CAST
The acting in this film is first rate and allows for some very interesting and memorable performances by a couple of genre staples. Kiefer Sutherland (24, The Lost Boys) divides opinion with his portrayal of the reluctant collaborator Doctor Schreiber, but he does manage to steal most of his scenes with his unnerving posture and strange breathy voice. Similarly, the legendary Richard O'Brien (The Crystal Maze, The Rocky Horror Show) is delightfully weird as Dark City's equivalent of the Matrix's Agent Smith, although he is a little underused in the second half considering his relative importance. The third big name of the film, William Hurt, is a celebrated actor who is nevertheless not above accepting more minor roles in both TV and films, although he doesn't do anything particularly inspiring as the "good cop/bad cop" of the film.
Rufus Sewell is undoubtedly the main star of the film, an English actor whose big break can't be far away and who has starred in 'A Knight's Tale' and the BBC's 'Charles II.' His realistic performance as the confused and reluctant hero, who thankfully never goes into hero mode whatsoever, makes this a much more enjoyable film, and it's great to see him at the depths of despair. Jennifer Connelly is the only female lead and doesn't get too many lines, but the past Academy Award winner continues to prove that she's come a long way since playing the girl Sarah in the eighties classic 'Labyrinth.'
The supporting cast are used very sparingly and to great effect. The Strangers are all played by bald men of varying ages (including a very scary child), while Murdock's conversations with "unenlightened" inhabitants of the city makes for some of the best sequences of the film in the "imagine if that was me" manner. As Detective Walenski, Colin Friels plays a role that has been done again and again, that of the experienced man who is dismissed as crazy by everyone he meets, but manages to keep it down-to-earth and interesting rather than over-the-top wacko.
Everything in this film is kept low-key and mundane, which makes the later discoveries all the more surprising.
VERDICT
Dark City looks incredible and is never over the top, but the relative complexity of the plot may put off many casual viewers. This film does have some impressive action scenes towards the end, one of which is very, very reminiscent of the fight in the disappointing Matrix Revolutions, but this is primarily a cerebral and atmospheric piece of filmmaking that is something of an acquired taste. This is the best place to acquire that taste though.
The mystery and enigma of the plot starts to become a little tedious in the second half of the film before the most shocking piece of the puzzle is revealed, and from this point onwards, Dark City is a brilliant and compelling film that completely buries the latter efforts of the Matrix trilogy, and even makes the first one seem a little less impressive. Bleak, fascinating and intelligent, and I really love the title.
Who's Your Granddaddy
**
Written on 17.12.07
The two Dalek films of the 1960s starring Peter Cushing as Dr. Who are early oddities in of the legendary sci-fi franchise, standing distinctly apart from the established canon of the long-running television series despite being based entirely on the plots and characters from serials in the early William Hartnell years. Milton Subotsky adapted Terry Nation's television script for 'The Daleks' largely as an attempt to popularise the series in the American market, replacing Hartnell's aloof Doctor with a slightly sillier version played by the more internationally recognisable Cushing, and although the slight but jarring differences between the two mediums make it impossible to reconcile this adventure into the franchise, now experiencing a second wave of popularity through the resurrected series, 'Dr. Who and the Daleks' still stands strong as an entertaining if simplistic take on the classic theme of good versus evil, made more appealing by making the enemies xenophobic, armoured mutants.
Watching this first Dalek film with the slightly unfair hindsight of the later television episodes, the pepper-pot villains come off as a little disappointing. Even ignoring the trifling inconsistencies with the later revisions of the Tom Baker era, the Daleks don't seem as intimidating or downright chilling here as they were on the television, and even in the subsequent film sequel 'Daleks Invasion Earth 2150 A.D.' in which the battle is brought to home soil. Their death gas attack is only used very sparingly (replacing the originally scripted flamethrowers visible on the theatrical poster, deemed unsuitable for the young viewers this film is primarily aimed at), and despite spending the second half of the film plotting the obliteration of their neighbouring race the Thals, they are shown to be fairly incapable and awkward when faced with an assault even in their own custom-built city. Other slight disappointments come in the complete absence of their trademark phrase "exterminate!" and the less refined approach to Dalek dialogue, carried out in a more detached, staccato manner than the manic distorted yells they are more famous for, and making some of the longer scene of Dalek intercourse pretty tedious to sit through.
Now, I know what you're thinking: firstly, you're probably still dwelling on the phrase "Dalek intercourse" and trying to deduce how that would physically work, but you may also be shaking your head at my rather petty nitpicks with a film made in the early days of the series by which point many of its trademarks had yet to be established. But if I want to indulge in a film promising simply 'Dr. Who and the Daleks,' Daleks is what I bally well want. It's not all bad of course, and many of the villains' established traits are already firmly in place: the suits come in a variety of technicolour variants showing off for the luxury of colour film, inevitably leading young viewers to pick their favourite (I think mine was the gold one with black knobs seen in the sequel. My brother liked the red one, but I found that a bit garish), and their interior is controlled by a diminutive and fairly disgusting green mutant, glimpsed only briefly when a human tries the suit on for size. The Dalek background explained is the film is satisfyingly simple, casting them in a necessarily evil light for their treacherous ways compared to the peaceful Thals, though it may leave more thoughtful viewers pondering whether this outcome would have been the same if the Daleks had been the ones to develop an antidote to their planet's radiation, and the Thals mutated beyond recognition. The answer is, yes it would. The Daleks will always be Nazis, which has saved generations of writers from the burden on having to approach their story from a sympathetic angle that they clearly don't deserve.
The arrival at the Daleks' planet comes about entirely by accident, as the excited and slightly eccentric Dr. Who eagerly shows off his Tardis to his granddaughter's new boyfriend. The device resembles a police box, but appears deceptively small when viewed from the outside, and Dr. Who proudly claims it has the ability to traverse time and space (for the purposes of this story, it's not clear whether time travel played a role at all, apart from in the brief comedy finale). Due to general clumsy buffoonery on the part of Ian (Roy Castle from 'Carry On'), the group of hapless adventurers find themselves transported to a barren woodland, unable to return home without finding a source of mercury for Tardis; as fortune would have it, a technologically advanced city sits just over the hill, and Dr. Who is hopeful that whatever scientists they bump into there will be willing to help them. Can you guess what happens next?
This classic Doctor Who tale features the series' successful mix of science fiction, suspense and action, roughly in that order, as the exploration of the Daleks' pink city is made increasingly eerie as it's slowly revealed that Dr. Who and his companions are being monitored and lured into a trap. The Daleks, despite their occasional stupidity, seize the opportunity to send one of the humans as an ambassador to their old enemies the Thals, offering them essential food in return for the Thals' antidote to the planet's radiation poisoning, but a number of tediously overlong scenes with two characters I can only dub the Plot Exposition Daleks keep viewers informed of their real duplicitous goals. They are also presumably unable to leave the city themselves due to the lack of ramp access (ha ha, I am funny - actually, it's because they require magnetism), and one of the best scenes of the film sees young Susan (eleven-year-old Roberta Tovey) taking it upon herself to make the perilous journey, recognising her comparative fitness over that of her older companions, themselves starting to succumb to the radiation sickness, and at the same time realising that she can no longer rely on these powerless adults to protect her. Roberta Tovery is great in the role, never over-acting or slipping up as a less proficient child actor would tend to, and most importantly of all, providing a familiar role model for young audiences rather than alienating them by being annoying.
The rest of the cast is equally skilled, and with the exception of the rather generic, transvestite Thals, above the usual television quality standard of the series. Roy Castle successfully manages both the comic relief and action hero roles, Jennie Linden remains confident and practical and avoids screaming as Susan's oddly older sister Barbara, and main star Peter Cushing brings to life a notably different Doctor to his contemporary Hartnell, pulling off the silly early scenes in which Dr. Who is shown to be a little senile, forgetful and to enjoy reading a child's action comic a little too much, to his more passionate role later on when forced to bring ideas of violence back to a peaceful people. Dr. Who's relationship with Susan provides some nice warmth to their scenes, and never comes across as creepy in the way it sometimes threatened to in the early TV years as the old man travelled with his teenage granddaughter under careful scrutiny of her school teachers. There are other slight tweaks from the television series too, most notably the Doctor's apparently human background and use of the specific name "Dr. Who" being used for the character, but perhaps most disappointing of all is the replacement of the famous opening music with a generic piece from Malcolm Lockyer, whose score is reminiscent of other sixties production such as 'Thunderbirds' (alright, I'm not familiar with many others).
A slightly higher budget and lack of major special effects scenes keep this film from dating too badly, though the Daleks' colourful collection of lava lamps in their control room seems rather questionable in hindsight, and as long as the viewer is prepared to ignore the fact that the forest is an obvious set illuminated by equally unconvincing green lighting. It caused me to think that this would make quite a good children's play (a Dalek pantomime perhaps?), though with the recent series continuing to capture the youth's imaginations, much to the delight of parents who have to shell out for Dalek hybrid masks, such a venture would only prove confusing. The final half-hour of this film becomes a little long-winded, despite attempting to be action-packed, but on the whole this is a fun and viable alternative to watching the more in-depth William Hartnell serial on which it is based. This version is shorter, coloured-in, and has Peter Cushing playing a silly old man, but the following year's sequel was a lot better.
Advantages: Fair and concise re-make of the first Dalek episodes with a good cast.
Disadvantages: Pointless changes are made to the format, and the whole thing is rather simplistic and childish.
Dune
The Sleeper Awakens
**
Written on 09.07.06
Author Frank Herbert’s complex and fascinating vision of the future has only gained in popularity since the first publication of the epic ‘Dune’ in 1965. Combining classical fantasy themes and innovative science fiction concepts and yet still highly tuned to contemporary concerns, a Hollywood motion picture adaptation was, at the very least, inevitable. Herbert’s futuristic vision is incredibly detailed and involved, and even leaving aside the numerous sequels to the first novel, Dune’s vast scope and descriptive, expensive-sounding imagery deterred production companies and crews from pushing the project forward. A balance needed to be found between the complexity of the novel and the limitations of the cinema medium, including audience patience.
Director David Lynch and producer Dino DeLaurentiis struggled through budget issues and differences of opinion to finally unveil ‘Dune’ to the world in 1984, and their disappointing, overcomplicated, tedious film was relegated immediately to the non-prestigious and unprofitable backwater realm of ‘cult’ movies, one of the most (in)famous flops in film history.
Lynch’s film – which ends up far shorter and more harshly edited than he desired – adapts the linear plot of the first Dune novel, from the introduction of the political situation and characters to the lasting, dramatic effects they have on the planet Arrakis, also known as Dune. In the far future, the Spacing Guild is ruled by the devious Emperor Shaddam IV of House Corrino, and its member planets, notably the powerful House Atreides and House Harkonnen, are engaged in a historical feudal battle. The Guild’s entire existence is owed to the Spice, a substance that powers space flight and technology and that can be cultivated only from one planet in the known universe: Dune. House Atreides is sent to oversee spice production on Dune under orders from the Emperor, who hopes to instigate conflict between the Atreides and Harkonnen houses in order to eliminate them as potential political rivals.
This is the basic backstory for Dune, and the background that allows the main plot to happen. This concerns Paul Atreides (Lynch staple Kyle MacLachlan), son of Duke Leto and heir to the house, who is the result of selective breeding. Displaying an almost intuitive grasp of survival and customs on the desert world, Paul takes refuge with the native Fremen after the Harkonnens reclaim the planet, and starts to raise an army to stop spice production and destroy the corrupt Emperor’s Guild forever.
Watching Dune isn’t the most comfortable experience, as those who haven’t read the book will likely find themselves struggling to keep up, and even missing the point of some developments. For a film to be a successful adaptation, it needs to sever such ‘companion-piece’ ties to its novel of origin, and Lynch’s Dune doesn’t succeed. Oddly, some of the film’s most commendable decisions lie in the departures from Herbert’s novel, such as the use of sound-based weapons as practical, visible applications of the ‘Weirding Way’ battle technique, which in the book is far more introspective. The pacing also presents a problem, which makes me wonder just how dull Lynch’s director’s cut of the film (never released) would have been. The characters all act cold and distant throughout, even those in familial relationships, and despite some nice acting in a couple of scenes between MacLachlan’s Paul and Francesca Annis’ Lady Jessica Atreides, this film never seems to be about the characters as much as the grand scale of the plot, which is itself alternately difficult to follow and predictably drawn-out.
Dune isn’t all bad. Herbert’s plot itself is excellent, and when the translation to screen succeeds, it succeeds well. The problem, as you may be able to see even in the short synopsis, concerns the story’s depth and quantity of original terminology. Criticism seems to lie in two opposing camps: fans of the book who wish to see the most faithful adaptation possible, and fans of sci-fi films who don’t wish to be inundated with unnecessary details that distract from the essential plot. Dune is admittedly full of such elaborate exposition, and attempts to narrate the entire backstory that Herbert feels is necessary to follow the events of the story would be impractical and terrible.
Unfortunately, the completed film fails in both areas: an opening monologue by Princess Irulan (Virginia Madsen), a minor character, wrestles with audience patience in filling us in with historical information, and another scene near the start of the film sees Paul ‘reminding himself’ of the galactic political situation on his computer. Not exactly a gripping opening, and to make matters worse, much of what is said is unnecessary to the plot, leaving out some issues that could have done with a bit more explanation. It reminds me of the current Hollywood trend for superhero movies that insist on spending most of the plot showing the hero’s origin; audiences should be given a little credit for their ability to suspend disbelief and simply accept what they’re presented with, especially in a sci-fi / fantasy film such as this.
The most impressive aspect of Dune for me, as a viewer who’s never read the books and thus isn’t so enthusiastic about the plot, is the film’s impressive visual accomplishment. Despite my disappointment that plans to involve ‘Alien’ designer H. R. Giger were dropped as the film’s pre-production crew constantly shifted hands, the final job is striking, impressive and memorable, if a little obviously false in a cool early-eighties matte painting way. The desert scenes were filmed in Mexico, on great empty expanses of barren land that were made even more barren and empty by the film crew, and this makes them far more effective than they would have been in a studio set (as was done for the more recent TV mini-series of Dune) or the customary quarries that have resulted in so many near-believable desert scenes in cheaper science fiction over the years. The royal palace on Dune is huge and impressive also, and that’s not even to mention the other locations glimpsed only briefly: the rainy coastal palace of House Atreides on Caladan and the gritty, industrial-gothic lair of the Harkonnens. It’s strange, but watching Dune with the foreknowledge of its lack of box-office success makes me feel an irrational sense of financial guilt for viewing the tall, lavish sets that ate so much of Universal’s finances. The enormous sandworms are pretty amazing too, and a positive memory to take away from the film, even if their importance to the plot later on is a bit distracting; they're much more interesting as simple massive beasts that can be tricked into ferrying Fremen on their backs.
The film’s soundtrack is its other notable point, as it’s interesting and unusual, regardless of the viewer / listener’s musical taste. Departing from the customary orchestration of similar genre giants such as ‘Star Wars,’ the decision was made to use a rock band. Electronic rockers Toto were recruited, and wrote several brilliant and moving pieces for the soundtrack, including its opening theme, as well as a large amount of average, unimpressive material. Brian Eno contributes the ‘Prophecy Theme’ to gain himself a place in the opening credits, and this duality has led to complicated releases of the soundtrack album over the years. Personally, I love the music: Toto’s synth symphonies are fitting to Herbert’s fusion of the historical and the futuristic, however dated those instruments may sound in the 21st century, and I’m easily won over by a nice guitar solo.
It’s unlikely that Dune will be re-made as a movie, if only because the Sci-Fi channel produced a couple of mini-series of the first few books several years ago. The format doesn’t particularly suit Frank Herbert’s detailed world, and even some nice guitar solos, a shouty Patrick Stewart and a ridiculous Sting (yes, that Sting) can’t save this from being something of a failure in all but cult circles. I’m sure I’ll read the novel some day, and at least the film was successful in introducing many prospective readers to Herbert’s universe. The price they pay is the struggle to disassociate characters with actors’ confused faces and planets with model shots.
The advantage of Dune's (continuing) commercial failure is that video and DVD releases can be found for very low prices almost everywhere. In fact, my DVD version (sans extras) was given away free with the Observer. Anyone interested in seeing this adaptation of the novel should do their best to avoid the dreadful 'Dune: TV Edition,' which is pointlessly re-edited to the point of being unwatchable, and adds a patronising animated opening that explains even more unnecessary information than Irulan's boring monologue in the feature. Maybe Dune would work as a rock opera double-album, I’d buy that.
Advantages: Striking vistas, fairly impressive cast, memorable soundtrack
Disadvantages: The book doesn't really work on screen, especially in this version
The Empire Strikes Back
*****
Written on 31.08.04
The impending release of the re-re-mastered Star Wars trilogy on DVD next month provides yet another source of hatred from more obsessive fans towards George Lucas over his general inability to leave a great film alone, but these frustrated fans (who are most likely bespectacled and talk in one of them whiny John Major-style voices and are men) are ignoring the positive side of the release: Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi can now be seen in all their glory on crystal clear DVD format, complete with special features and a soundtrack that doesn't wobble all over the place through overuse because they're the only good videos available when you're round your Dad's.
PART V
Far from being a mediocre central film bridging the gap between the beginning and explosive end of a film series, The Empire Strikes Back is the darkest, strongest and most enjoyable part of the Star Wars trilogy. The three-part structure is similar to the other films, and it doesn't have much of an ending to speak of, but the fascinating development of the plots and characters is enhanced by spectacular visual effects and locations that show Industrial Light and Magic at their very best. Oh yes, and George Lucas' involvement in this film was kept below the totalitarian level as well.
The Empire Strikes Back is among my favourite films for one primary reason: it's an incredibly fun piece of fantasy cinema. No deconstruction or symbolism-seeking is required to enjoy the speedy chases, the epic confrontations or the funny little beeping robot with Kenny Baker inside it. This is one of the greatest sit-back-and-relax films of all time, unless you like Disney which I don't.
STORY
Filling the viewer in with the opening crawl, 'Empire' takes place some time after the previous film, but the destruction of the Death Star has clearly not left a devastating mark on the forces of the Empire. Darth Vader is alive and well, and has sent probes out into the galaxy in search of the Rebel Alliance. He finds them. A skirmish with hulking Imperial robots on the ice planet Hoth ends with victory for the Rebels, but Vader has become obsessed with finding the potential Jedi Luke Skywalker and turning him to the Dark Side to fight with him.
The characters break up to pursue their different paths: Han Solo, Princess Leia and the others on board the Millennium Falcon get into some hairy business with the Imperial fleet while Skywalker travels to meet the aged Jedi master Yoda to continue his training. As his powers develop, Luke realises that he must head into Vader's trap to save the lives of those he cares about.
CAST
Mark Hamill's performance in the first Star Wars film was a little distracting to say the least; the delivery of lines such as "I'm Luke Skywalker, I'm here to rescue you" and "I was going into Toshi Station to pick up some power converters" made Luke something of an annoying adolescent rather than the developing hero he was supposed to be, but in the three years between Star Wars and Empire his acting talents seemed to improve immensely. And he stopped wearing his pyjamas, which adds to the credibility of the character. Some people have a problem with his reaction to Vader's classic revelation in the cloud city, but I think Hamill puts in a great performance as the potential Jedi with ever-increasing confidence.
Harrison Ford is again the big name of the film, and his one-liners and loveable scoundrel persona must have attracted more than just Princess Leia. Ford shines even more in this film thanks to the much better script, and his importance to the whole saga is really demonstrated by the conclusion that effectively hinges on his successful recovery. The third star of the film, Carrie Fisher, is again an enticing and very human character whose finest moment is nevertheless fated to be her incredible outfit in Return of the Jedi. If I were twenty years older, she would still be right out of my league (and married to that Simon and Garfunkel guy or something I expect). This film also introduces Billy Dee Williams as Lando Calrissian, but without watching his more noble antics in the following film it's difficult not to see him as a double-crossing arse.
Aside from the token dashing lead stars, the Star Wars films also feature the greatest inhuman characters around, granting legendary status to actors who would otherwise be too small, too large or too strange to be considered for other roles. Kenny Baker and Anthony Daniels are again the men inside the Droids, and when the Star Wars films drag on in parts I enjoy playing the "guess when Kenny's not inside there" game, which usually involves the cutaway from a rotating R2-D2 head to a static shot of the robot falling over into sludge. Peter Mayhew looks scarily like Chewbacca in real life, while Somerset-born Dave Prowse is again overdubbed in his role as Darth Vader by the vocally talented James Earl Jones. Have fun with a friend speculating why this was.
FINISHING TOUCHES
A developing plot and recognisable characters can make a popular show, but without spectacular effects and a rousing orchestral score you’d just be watching Coronation Street or something, and who likes that? Industrial Light and Magic put the noticeably larger budget to excellent use in this film in creating three believable alien worlds (the ice planet Hoth, the swampy Dagobah and the cloud city over Bespin) as well as action scenes involving the Millennium Falcon and the Imperial walkers as memorable as the Death Star battle from the first film, an impressive feat indeed. The animatronic Yoda is far more enjoyable to watch than any of the computer generated equivalents in the modern films, and at the same time far more convincing, while the use of lightsaber and blaster effects is not overdone.
John Williams' epic score is one of the most recognised in the history of cinema, recycling some of his creations from the first film (the title sequence for one) but also creating the excellent Imperial March theme for Vader and several speedy compositions that make the chase scenes even more exciting. The vacuum of space has never sounded so grand.
VERDICT
If you haven't seen the Star Wars films, this has likely been a deliberate decision on your part. After all, they're no strangers to television (especially if you have Sky) and were re-released as box office hits less than a decade ago. Star Wars films certainly aren't for everyone, but they do seem to be for more people than other sci-fi or fantasy adventure films, and bridge the generation gap perfectly. Children will get a kick out of seeing that green guy they have the action figure of standing in the background of a scene, teenagers will enjoy Carrie Fisher and want to be Han Solo, adults will enjoy Carrie Fisher or Harrison Ford if they are a woman or gay, and old people will enjoy Alec Guiness' cameo in a series of films that he has repeatedly expressed his disappointment at being involved in. The old idiot (rest in peace).
The Empire Strikes Back is a classic film that many people would remember more fondly if George Lucas stopped messing around with their favourite lines (Vader's angry bark "bring my shuttle!" at the climax was changed to the calm "alert my Star Destroyer" in the special edition, and Luke's noble albeit not fatal sacrifice as he falls through the windy shaft was spoiled by the dubbing of the Emperor's scream from Return of the Jedi. The internet is full of important information isn't it?). Nevertheless, this is a great film from the eighties which proved that space could be fun.
Appendix: DVD Changes
As unnecessarily anal and nerdy as it is, I nevertheless found the list of supposedly confirmed changes to the DVD editions quite interesting reading. There are a predictably huge number of websites dedicated to these, complete with pictures that suggest this isn't just a big hoax, but the Empire Strikes Back changes that may be of interest are as follows.
Firstly, many effects shots have been cleared up and specially retouched, which is arguably something that makes the film better at no cost to the "classic" feel. Lightsaber and blaster effects have been made more colourful and crisp, while hologram and ghost effects have been made less fuzzy and indistinct.
Now onto the more controversial changes, which I can't confirm but that are currently providing sleepless nights to many fans who take things a little too seriously. The voices of the Stormtroopers in all three films have reportedly been changed to fit in with Episode II, which apparently showed that all Stormtroopers are clones of Boba Fett's father and would therefore have the same voice. Boba's cool growly voice may also have been changed as a result to make him more human, which is a shame as everyone who had the action figures knows not to mess with the Fett.
The discussion between Vader and the Emperor has also (apparently, remember?) been changed to feature the Palpatine actor from the disappointing Return of the Jedi and the even more disappointing prequel trilogy, rather than the weird wrinkly monkey thing that originally featured in the scene. The Emperor's dialogue has also been changed so that it echoes Vader's immortal line towards the end of the film ("look inside yourself, you know it to be true") which kind of ruins that for me. Lucas is an idiot.
I wonder if they'll ever remedy Harrison Ford's disappearing jacket routine in the carbonite room...?
Eraserhead
Just Like Regular Chickens
****
Written on 12.08.06
‘Eraserhead’ is director/writer David Lynch’s first film, and represents a height of strangeness that he has never again reproduced. A cult classic and labour of love, the film invites criticism as much as it does acclaim, the obsessive pet project of a film art student in pursuit of being abnormal. Although some sections rely almost entirely on the WFTSOW factor (weird for the sake of weird), there’s enough interesting and insightful material to keep dedicated viewers hooked past the end credits, and Lynch succeeds perfectly in capturing an original and specific horrific atmosphere in crisp black-and-white.
Like Stanley Kubrick’s ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ a decade earlier, Eraserhead contains very little dialogue, and scenes are extended to the point of extreme ennui. There’s a sense that Lynch would prefer to avoid such a ‘mainstream’ cinematic trait as having the characters actually speak at all, especially considering Eraserhead’s debt to silent era cinematography, but like ‘2001’ the dialogue is only there to clarify the basic plot events. All of the weird interpretative stuff is left for the audience and critics, and the entire screenplay reputedly lasts only twenty-one pages; a whole hundred less than the Hollywood standard encouraged by screenwriting manuals. Despite one heated scene in which Mary loses her temper, the conversations make for the most tedious viewing, as Lynch insists on epic pauses between the simplest of lines. I prefer all the weird stuff with pencils.
The film’s plot follows what may be the final days in the life of Henry Spencer, a timid printing worker currently ‘on vacation,’ who has a most triumphant hairstyle. Henry is called by his girlfriend Mary to come to dinner with her parents, where he learns that Mary has given birth to something or other after a bizarrely short pregnancy. The two are forced to marry by Mary’s domineering mother, and to look after the deformed creature in Henry’s flat. Whatever Lynch’s personal feelings towards children and married life, the film acts as a remarkably strong deterrent towards pursuit of either, as Henry is driven to insanity by the disturbingly persistent infant’s cries.
Eraserhead’s setting is a bleak and decadent industrial dystopia. Without the benefit of special effects in exterior scenes, Lynch relies on filming run-down areas, which proves just about adequate. More impressive is Henry’s dingy apartment block, darkened by eerie, active shadows and cursed with unpredictable electricity. By contrast, the ‘X’ family home appears outwardly unscathed by the nightmare world. This indicates something of a Christian moral on Lynch’s part, however ironic the intention, in which conjugal life is admired and rewarded, and pre-marital sex is punished.
This is certainly not a film for the masses, but it’s recognisable enough in its themes and domestic situation to be popular, especially after Lynch hit the big time with ‘The Elephant Man.’ It’s a bit of pop culture that people who like to think they are interesting or subversive will try to track down, and then decide for themselves whether they’re wasting their lives and should just get into ‘Lost’ instead. The final scenes of the film are the most surreal and disturbing, but on the whole there’s quite a nice balance between the conventional, the unsettling and the WFTSOW. The visit to the X family’s household is an example of all three: Mrs. X’s over-the-top fits don’t convince me, and when she abruptly starts to make out with Henry it becomes a little silly. By contrast, the scene with the motionless grandmother begins as something of a comedy sketch but becomes quite sinister when Mrs. X ‘helps’ the corpse to mix the salad bowl. The bleeding, dancing mini chicken carcass is somewhere in-between. Most impressive of all is the horrifying mutant baby, which must be one of the most convincing (animatronic?) monsters in cinema history.
Once you’ve interpreted the destruction of the Death Star in ‘Star Wars’ as a magnificent scene of penetration, ejaculation and fertilisation, there’s no going back. ‘Eraserhead’ contains similar imagery in its opening scene, in which Henry, in a dream-like trance, vomits an ethereal worm/sperm creature that splashes into a pool on the surface of a barren, rocky sphere, signifying Mary’s pregnancy. The worms and the ‘planet’ (as it’s referred to in the end credits) reappear later in the film, in what may be dream sequences. It’s hard to tell; when Henry’s waking world is that screwed-up in the first place, it doesn’t really matter. There’s also a nice song in the middle of the film that aims to either comfort Henry, or encourage his suicide. It’s a very open-ended film, and the director has kept tight-lipped for thirty years.
If the film’s about anything, it’s about the fear of commitment, the restrictions of married life, how to cope with the ungrateful burden of a child, romanticising the past and condemning the present, and the truth about rubber-tipped pencils. As a reward for keeping the electrified hairstyle for the five years of filming, Lynch cast Jack Nance in every film and TV project made until the actor’s murder in 1996. Eraserhead has always been popular on video, and seems to be currently between DVD releases, unavailable from online and offline retailers perhaps in anticipation of a thirtieth anniversary release next year.
Advantages: A very original film that succeeds in disturbing.
Disadvantages: Goes too far in places, and will only bore unattentive viewers.
The Great Space Ape Escape
****
Written on 19.04.04
The original Planet of the Apes film, while dated and a little unfeasible in places, is often hailed among the greatest science fiction movies of the last century, but possibly less well-known are its four sequels. Out of all four, only this fourth instalment, 'Escape From the Planet of the Apes,' manages to be captivating and memorable, and despite a tendency for light-hearted moments it is on the whole a sinister and moving film.
HISTORY
The 1968 Planet of the Apes film was interesting and engaging, as astronaut Taylor (Charlton Heston) and his ill-fated comrades travelled through space and time, crash-landing on a planet uncannily similar to Earth. The difference was, this planet was dominated by speaking, intelligent apes of different varieties, who hunted the mute and primitive humans for sport and scientific research.
Having befriended two pacifistic chimpanzee scientists called Cornelius and Zera, Taylor is helped in escaping to the 'Forbidden Zone' where he can live away from gorilla oppression. The ominous messages of the orangutan leader, stating that Taylor will not like what he sees, are confirmed when the ex-astronaut sees the Statue of Liberty and collapses, realising that is was Earth all along.
The second film, 'Beneath the Planet of the Apes,' was far less successful and impressive, and didn't really add anything to the established storyline: another astronaut arrives at the future Earth and experiences harsh treatment by apes before making his way into the ancient New York sewer system, now inhabited by very cheesy post-apocalyptic mutants who even more cheesily worship an A-bomb. The reappearance of Taylor ends with both humans being killed, but on his dying breath Taylor takes out his anger on the ape civilisation and detonates the doomsday weapon.
PLOT
The third film in the series opens with a shot of a helicopter and army personnel arriving on a beach, ready to greet whatever new or familiar life has crashed to Earth in a pod. No time is wasted in introducing the setting and upbeat tone of the film's beginning when the astronauts remove their helmets and reveal themselves to be damn stinking apes.
The apes, being Cornelius, Zera and their associate Dr. Milo, initially act mute in order to avoid undue attention, but their presence in a NASA spacecraft and their obvious intelligence earn them much scrutiny and investigation. When confronted with puzzles by the human psychiatrist Lewis, Zera cannot contain herself any longer and tells the man that she "loathes bananas." The so-called "apenauts" are revealed to the public in an interesting and touching interview, and then the film has begun in earnest...
STYLE
A necessary departure from the style of the previous films, this film is more interesting than it may at first appear; the first half hour is insightful in commenting on human nature, but is mainly a light-hearted look at aliens fitting in to a contemporary environment. Sound familiar? Fortunately, the "cute" gags and "she did something that we would consider unusual" scenes are tastefully done and do not detract from the storyline.
It is clear from early on that there are those who are sympathetic to the apes' plight, but also those who would rather they had not arrived from the future with their messages of evolution and recession. After the first half hour, the tone of the film becomes much darker and more adult as the real dangers present themselves. An exploration of humanity's mistrust and judgements, the film opts for a clever ending, but one that is ultimately bleak.
CHARACTERS
The look of the apes has not changed from the previous films, but the slight dodginess of make-up is soon forgotten. The portrayal of Cornelius and Zera is the highlight of the film as Roddy McDowell and Kim Hunter have a great chemistry that allows the viewer to sympathise with them, although having performed experimentation on humans, and accidentally killing their guard at one point in this film, they are far from innocent.
The sympathy is increased with Zera's pregnancy and the bias shown towards the "evil" characters, and this film isn't without its fair share of quite token players: there are the kindly man and woman scientists sympathetic to the apes who will risk their careers to help them, an advisor of the President who believes the aliens are a threat, a level-headed President (William Windom) and something of a deus ex machina, an unnecessarily complicated but impressive term used to describe a character or event at the end of a story which very conveniently provides some answers, in the animal-loving circus owner played by acclaimed actor Ricardo Montalban (who would go on to star in the next film, 'Conquest of the Planet of the Apes').
DODGY COMEDY OR POIGNANT SCI-FI?
This film manages a fine balancing act between humour and grief, and brings up some very interesting ideas. The science fiction aspect is not abandoned, and this film reveals more about the Planet of the Apes story than before; humans took apes as their pets following a plague that wiped out most domestic breeds, and ape legends speak of Caesar, the first ape ever recorded to have spoken: he told his human oppressors, "no."
Not wishing to spoil the climax of the film, but the tight and impressive script for this film deals with the notion of predetermined, unalterable fate and the idea of the paradox very well; had the ape scientists not escaped Earth prior to its destruction and accidentally travelled back in time, it seems likely that the ape revolution would never have begun.
VERDICT
This is a film that starts with a little promise, but expands to become something very enjoyable. It shows many signs of age, and is not truly original or innovative by any means, but stands out amongst the rest of the fairly mediocre 'Planet of the Apes' sequels. The performances are excellent and the film never really gets boring, coming in at a moderate 91 minutes, and will appeal to both sci-fi fans and causal viewers.
A similar film in style and appeal is the fourth Star Trek film, 'The Voyage Home' from 1986. In a similar manner to this film, Star Trek IV saw characters from the future having to interact with Americans of the late twentieth century in a somewhat silly manner, but this was also tastefully done and never became an embarrassment to watch, simply providing an excuse for casual cinema-goers to be introduced to concepts from Star Trek. Unlike Star Trek IV, viewers of 'Escape From the Planet of the Apes' should be prepared for a more heavy-hitting story and a lack of any real hope for the future; that of the film's continuity at least
'Conquest of the Planet of the Apes' is the violent and often dull portrayal of the ape revolution and "enlightenment," while the final film, 'Battle for the Planet of the Apes,' occurs early in the age of the apes, and is similarly uninteresting, but does hold some appeal. The original will always be best-remembered, but in many ways this third part stands up to more viewings over time.
Granny
She... She Was Knitting!
*
Written on 05.05.08
Some horror films are notoriously awful, to the point that they develop a cult following in the so-bad-it's-good genre (such as the brilliantly incompetent 'Troll 2'). Others such as 'Manos: The Hands of Fate' are just frustratingly terrible and a chore to sit through. Fortunately, Boris Pavlovsky's lesser-known 'Granny' lies firmly in the first camp, an independent horror/slasher film from 1999 starring a killer in a granny mask that tries so hard to be cool and intelligent, it goes all the way round past infinity and comes back hilarious.
Produced by the somewhat ironically titled Ambitious Productions, 'Granny' is content to occupy the already overcrowded slasher genre without making much of an impact, but still insists on its own cleverness in the form of a double-twister ending that raises as many problems as it solves. With its minimal locations, drama school acting and day-glo blood obsession, this shows all the signs of a student production, with the notable exception of unreasonably high quality film equipment that could easily be mistaken for professionalism if you really aren't paying attention.
Blame for this film's poorness can be laid equally on co-writer/co-producer/director Pavlovsky and co-writer/co-producer/actor/composer TOMI (who insists everybody spell his artistically minimal name in capital letters like that). This is evidently the only thing either of them has ever done, perhaps out of anxiety that any future project would be incapable of living up to this magnum opus - though more likely not. TOMI's synthesised theme is reminiscent of Art Zoyd's modern takes on silent film scores, and is actually quite enjoyable the first few dozen times it loops through its four-second length, but after that it displays an irritating lack of variety.
Like many slasher films, this inevitably turns into a sequence of increasingly desperate murders as the young characters are dispatched by Granny one at a time, the question being 'how' they die rather than 'if.' But being penned by a pretentious musician called TOMI, it also spends a significant portion of its hour-long playing time in deep conversations designed to explore the psyche of 1999 American youth, or something like that, carried out by amateur actors trying desperately to look like they're improvising these unlikely debates.
Fortunately, this is just as amusing as the deaths that come later, as the Pavlovsky/TOMI juggernaut disproves the myth that it's only middle-aged Hollywood screenwriters who have trouble accurately imagining what today's young people talk about when meeting up in an empty house, and the action of the film is finally precipitated by one of the guys announcing, "let's talk about our paranoias!" If it wasn't for these early scenes, the mercifully short film would seem more like an episode of 'Are You Afraid of the Dark?'
I'm not entirely sure what slasher fans expect from their preferred genre, but if it's a series of motiveless murders carried out in a range of increasingly contrived methods, Granny should satisfy your tragically low expectations, even if the tedious pace of the editing (or entire lack of it) serves to dissipate the very tension that it's attempting to create. The most offensive scene in this regard comes when one of the stereotyped girls (the conservative one, as opposed to the slut and the virgin) heads off to the bathroom to apply make-up in front of the mirror for about five whole minutes, accompanied by TOMI's inappropriately blaring score the whole time.
Despite all the attempts at making a serious and credible independent film, there are a couple of scenes that are commendably tongue-in-cheek. Granny retreating to the toilet cubicle with toilet roll in hand after over-enthusiastically knifing a girl is clearly one of the film's few intentional laughs, even if it doesn't say much for the writers' sense of humour, and one of the film's most iconic scenes comes when one of the last survivors tensely approaches the back of a chair, only to reveal Granny's painted nails reaching out... for her knitting!
This is probably the film's only real achievement, being able to poke fun at the slasher genre and showing an obvious familiarity with its conceits (or perhaps more likely, the writers watched 'Scream' and thought "we could just do that, but with a different mask so no one will notice"). But don't dismay, bad film fans: the majority of the film's humour is clearly due to incompetence and really, really bad decisions.
You can watch the official trailer on YouTube, which isn't so much a piece of promotional material as a linear summary of events that pretty much spoils every death, but nevertheless accurately features many of the film's finest moments of cinematography, including the token arrogant nerd waggling his glasses in an ominous fashion, and TOMI making an ominous plus sign at the window as his friends leave. If you really must buy it, the DVD is available from Amazon.co.uk for the tellingly low price of £3.97. The generic Granny mask itself is widely available, my friend bought one.
*
Written on 02.11.07
Giacomo Gentilomo’s bland fantasy action film wasn’t originally about Hercules at all, but rather the similar character Maciste, popular in the Italian cinematic tradition. While the half-hearted American dub changed the character’s name to the more well-known Hercules, and the Steve Reeves-style bodybuilder in the lead role allowed himself to be billed as Alan Steel rather than Sergio Ciani for ignorant US audiences (the same way Schwarzenegger started out as “Arnold Strong” in the same role), the dub was sadly incapable of raising the film’s overall quality in any way. In fact, it seems to have made it more confusing.
Although it incorporates a degree of science fiction with its titular Moon Men (who originally came from the Moon but now live in a Greek mountain, or perhaps evolved in the mountain in the first place, I was left confused on that issue), this film is simply another hastily produced Italian flick in the so-called sword ’n’ sandal tradition a year or two before the Spaghetti Western took over as an easily duplicable money-maker in that country’s film industry. The main character is a greasy, bare-chested bodybuilder on a horse who spends most of his time throwing enemies around – which apparently counts as killing them, according to later dialogue – and as little time speaking as possible, which would thus reveal his non-existent acting skills.
Hercules/Maciste has a flimsy and inconsequential love interest in the form of Agar (Anna Maria Polani), whose father summoned the strongman to Samar to help a rising rebel force overthrow an evil, endless sacrificial rite to monsters dwelling in the nearby Mountain of Death, perpetuated by the ruling dynasty. Their current leader, the ambitious and easily duped Queen Samara (Jany Clair), has made a pact with the Moon Men to help them become the dominant force on the Earth, which they promise will be hers to rule, but the arrival of Hercules threatens to disrupt their evil plan to sacrifice the Queen’s innocent sister, Princess Billis (Delia D’Alberti).
The story is plain and about as black and white and conservatively moral as you can get, to the extent that the evil Queen wears black and her contrasting good sister wears white. The Princess also has blonde (i.e. good) hair, as opposed to the femme fatale’s nefarious dark brown (boo! hiss!) As a cheaply made film, the film appears to benefit from the production values of its many genre predecessors by borrowing or hastily redecorating sets and re-using unconvincing armour, and accordingly none of the actors have gone to the trouble of really immersing themselves in the role by slightly messing up their neatly styled sixties hair in the interests of historical accuracy.
Hercules himself looks rather silly by modern standards, wearing a pointless leather sash in a Tarzan-style sweep across his hairless, bulging, constantly polished body, and with his hair nearly trimmed into a flat top, but any film based around hand-to-hand combat between a superhuman strongman and rock monsters from the Moon benefits from a moderate suspension of disbelief. His introduction, and in fact all scenes of him riding his white (good) horse in the extensive location shots, are accompanied by an irritating screechy fanfare just in case a few slow, blind and stupid people at the back didn’t get that he was the good guy.
Leaving aside a few distracting contradictions and inconsistencies with the script that render the whole thing kind of pointless, especially the conclusion, there’s really nothing about this film that hasn’t been done to death in many far superior productions, but for that same reason it has a small degree of appeal as potential last-minute schedule filler for afternoon matinees. The violence is limited and tame, featuring no gore or blood whatsoever in the fight scenes and only a couple of on-screen deaths, as Hercules prefers to throw men over his shoulders and into barrels of water. There’s also no sexual content beyond some obvious and shallow seduction on the Queen’s part that only leads to a kiss, and although the cleavagey Princess is extremely cleavagey, there’s nothing too outrageous there. The film’s main problem lies in its terrible editing, which stretches action scenes beyond all reasonable length in an apparent goal to meet a ninety-minute deadline, leading to three scenes in particular testing the audience’s patience as Hercules wallows in a slowly filling pit of water, holds back crushing jaws of iron, and then gets lost in a sandstorm for aaaaaaaaaaages.
About the only scene that really works is Herc’s confrontation with a bear man thing underground, which actually looks quite good, and to top it all off he bends some bars to break free at the end. This is the only scene anyone should have to endure of this film, as the rest seems pretty throwaway and plot-heavy by comparison. The Moon Men themselves aren’t much of a sight, the silent minions advancing very slowly on their targets and their talkative leader not looking particularly menacing in his skull mask and silver glam rock cape, but the film at least satisfies those extremely patient viewers who sat through all ninety minutes with the promised final confrontation at the end. Needless to say, it’s an inevitable disappointment, a fact only made worse by the extended build-up.
‘Hercules Against the Moon Men,’ or whatever you want to call it in your own language, is at best a historical curiosity as a random example of the Italian mid-sixties action fantasy genre, but the mass of competition ultimately renders it pointless and obsolete. It’s not even particularly funny in the way many rubbish films unintentionally manage to be, losing its quality points through sheer tedium and lousy production rather than hilariously bad dialogue, tacky effects or wild plot developments. Seeing the camera constantly stumble around in an effort to centre its subject, and Alan Steel struggle to ride a horse with any degree of speed or practicality is more irritating than amusing, and unless you’re a real fan of the genre who can’t get enough of greased-up bodybuilders in white nappies, this film isn’t going to offer an awful lot to you. A Region 1 DVD is available, and the film is available to stream from Google video if, like me, you’re wise enough not to pay for this rubbish, but not so clever that you pass it by completely.
Advantages: It tries to have some kind of plot.
Disadvantages: A fair few.
Mission to Mars
***
Written on 31.12.00
Mission to Mars starts out looking too much like Apollo 13, but soon turns into a science fiction adventure with unresalistic notions and an unconvincing plotline.
The special efects look good, but they're nothing we haven't seen before, and it does get slightly tedious to watch yet another film set "realistically into the future", predicting what life will be like in a few decades. However, there certainly isn't a lack of tension, especially in a scene orbiting Mars when a crew member finds himself floating away from his comrades and heroically pulls off his own helmet to stop his wife risking her life to try and save him.
The final scenes drag on for too long, as we find out the truth behind the aliens, but the film could have been better, in my opinion, if we had never had this scene. The alien looks very computer generated, and cannot be accepted as real to my eyes. There's also a little too much explanation, as we are given information we could have guessed, or just don't want to know. I think a mysterious ending of people walking towards a shadowy alien would have made this film better, and more memorable.
****
Written on 31.07.04 [2018 update / 2000 downdate]
Monty Python’s fourth and final feature film was greeted with a fair degree of criticism by the media and cinemagoers, some finding it unnecessarily gratuitous at the expense of the humour and others feeling disappointed by the return to a sketch-based style following their 1979 hugely popular comedy epic ‘Life of Brian.’ While the Meaning of Life clearly doesn’t succeed as a motion picture in the way that ‘Life of Brian’ and ‘Monty Python and the Holy Grail’ did, it also carries with it a very relaxed attitude that suggests the Pythons knew they had made their classics and now wanted to return to more familiar territory for a final cinematic fling: this is still a far cry from the classic ‘Flying Circus’ television series however, based loosely on a musical concept and pushing the barriers of taste further than the team had previously been permitted or desired.
THE PYTHONS
As usual, every member of the Monty Python team (Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones and Michael Palin) wrote and starred in the film in a number of roles, mostly chosen according to each member’s strengths. Director Terry Jones’ housewife character was made famous in ‘Life of Brian’ and returns here, albeit as a less aggressive mother figure, John Cleese’s authority figures are better than ever and Eric Idle again plays several silly cockneys. Again. It’s great to see Graham Chapman integrating as a regular player into the sketches after his leading roles in the previous films, but Terry Gilliam’s American accent and lack of acting experience again leads to smaller screen time for the wacky animator, although he does get to manufacture some more of those classic animations to link scenes and introduce the film (not to mention the short feature presentation, explained later).
There are some excellent ensemble scenes in which every performer contributes and these are some of my favourite scenes in the film: the World War I trench birthday celebrations, the excellent Zulu war section and, of course, the strange human-headed fish that occasionally comment on the film and are indeed the instigators of the title sequence once they see their fish friend Howard being devoured:
Cleese Fish: “Makes you think dunnit?”
Palin Fish: “I mean what’s it all about?”
Chapman Fish: “Beats me.”
LIFE
‘The Meaning of Life’ is divided into seven distinct (but quite loose) parts to reflect the seven stages of man in his eternal quest for the eponymous meaning of life. From ‘The Miracle of Birth’ to ‘Death,’ the development of humans and even our relative insignificance in the grand scheme of things are discussed, which would make for quite a prophetic film if anything genuinely fascinating was revealed. Instead, the Python team provide a collection of well thought-out sketches of varying quality (some quite dull and lacking the originality of the TV series; others rating among the best the team have created) along with a fair selection of musical numbers. Following are some of the most memorable scenes:
The Crimson Permanent Assurance – a classic short film by Terry Gilliam (Time Bandits, Brazil, Twelve Monkeys) permanently tagged as the opening to this film. Aside from a brief mix with a later scene this is very different from the main film but is a great opening and I know a few people who prefer it to the main feature for its bizarre but believable fantasy world.
The Miracle of Birth – I hate the damn ‘Every Sperm is Sacred’ routine that cost a third of the film’s budget (apparently) but the birth scene and the impossible overcrowded Catholic household make a great opening to the film.
Sex Education – one of the more adult scenes in which John Cleese performs intercourse with his wife as a demonstration to his class. Thankfully they are all played by adults and aside from the obvious shock value there are some excellent lines and decisions made.
Fighting Each Other – a fun but brief scene in which Palin plays a maniacal screaming army officer is followed by a lengthy take on the Zulu wars, exaggerating the class division between officer and soldiers and leading to my favourite scene in the film as two men in a tiger skin try to explain their situation and deny stealing Eric Idle’s leg, eventually admitting “oh, a leg… there might be a leg around here somewhere, I think someone left it because they knew you were coming” when the soldiers search the thicket. Brilliantly unexplained.
Mr. Creosote – not one of my favourites, but the massively obese man played by Terry Jones who explodes when he eats too much food is clearly one of the most memorable scenes. A bit over-the-top for me though, I’m surprised that the team resorted to things like this considering their track record (the violent and bloody Python classic ‘Salad Days’ is hilarious for its unnecessary gore, but this doesn’t feel like that. The same goes for the organ donor scene, although I quite like that).
The musical numbers include the afore-mentioned ‘Every Sperm is Sacred,’ Eric Idle’s ‘Universe Song’ and title theme and the dull ‘Christmas in Heaven’ that is thankfully interrupted just prior to its conclusion by the low-key ending to the film.
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?
Based on the horrific ending of the excellent ‘Holy Grail’ where unexplained police cars halt King Arthur’s final attack, the Python team could have been expected to avoid answering the ultimate question entirely. True, the film does veer wildly away from the discussion for almost the entire duration, and the section titled ‘Part VI B: The Meaning of Life’ featuring a slightly irritating journey following Eric Idle’s French waiter from the city to the wilderness basically ends with him getting frustrated at his inadequacy and telling the audience to “f*** off!”, but Michael Palin does indeed answer the big question at the end, albeit dressed as a woman next to a flower pot with a hand in it. You have to watch the film to discover the true meaning, but now I’ve said that, please don’t rush out and buy this DVD to satiate your thirst – it’s not worth it if you don’t like the film.
SPECIAL EDITION DVD
‘The Meaning of Life’ has recently been re-released as a special edition, two disc DVD loaded with extras in a similar way to the earlier ‘Holy Grail’ release (the special edition ‘Life of Brian’ has yet to be released, despite it being introduced for Region 1 well over a year ago). I haven’t yet invested in this edition but from what I’ve read on the internet it certainly does the film justice and includes full-length deleted scenes (including ‘The Adventures of Martin Luther’ and more from the American tourist couple in their heavenly hotel), plenty of documentary and archive material and new audio commentaries – one by Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam on directing the film, the other a ‘commentary for the lonely’ in which Michael Palin watches the film in almost total silence, occasionally fidgeting in his chair or making small noise so you can imagine he’s in the room with you. Great stuff!
The special edition includes the original film as well as a director’s cut with the deleted scenes (isolated for viewing on disc two) re-inserted and is also a much clearer print than that of the first, very budget DVD release. For this reason, anyone interested in buying the Meaning of Life should consider investing in the special edition – after all, this isn’t a film you would buy if you weren’t a big fan.
VERDICT
This isn’t the best Monty Python film and, discounting their original ‘And Now For Something Completely Different’ which was a collection of reworked sketches from the TV series to sell the show to American channels, this is the least vital and enjoyable of the films. But saying that, I still really like it, and although I felt a little disappointed at some of the decisions made (especially involving the bizarrely popular ‘Mr. Creosote explodes’ section that I find quite poor apart from Cleese’s classic line “it’s only waff-er thin”) I realised I have watched this even more than ‘Life of Brian.’ Not more than ‘Holy Grail’ though, that’s the film that really gets me going.
Some of the extreme violence is unnecessary and it’s strange that it made it into the film considering the self-censoring that the team (especially the more traditional-minded Cleese) often applied to their TV series, but there’s enough variety to keep audiences interested throughout and feel intrigued about what is to come next. The visuals of this film are excellent and although it feels like a step back after the epic Life of Brian, this is essentially a film to please the fans rather than the critics. I wouldn’t recommend it as a starting point to Monty Python though, and although I’m usually very liberally minded about such matters (considering the kind of things I watched in my own childhood), this is not a film for children. They’d only laugh at Mr. Creosote anyway, the young idiots.
Advantages: Every Python on top form, Some classic scenes and visuals, They don't know much about art, but they know what they like
Disadvantages: Original DVD release is disappointing, Hit-and-miss sketches, Too extreme at points
Leslie Nielsen's Movie
Written on 14.10.03 [2015 update]
*****
The Naked Gun 'trilogy' of movies, although that word hardly seems appropriate in light of the film's silliness and lack of anything epic, is one of the rare things to have come out of America that I find truly funny. The jokes are all very well written and the actors are even better, especially Leslie Nielsen, finally finding what he's best at following roles in "The Forbidden Planet"-esque sci-fi and "Murder She Wrote" programmes. His deadpan delivery of some of the lines makes for some painful laughs!
The Naked Gun films chronicle the attempts of Lieutenant Frank Drebbin to successfully solve the cases he is working on, which he somehow eventually succeeds in, against all logic. Foreign enemies, voluptuous females and accidental detours all make sure he has a very hard time getting anywhere. Priscilla Presley makes her first appearance in Frank's life here, and we also see the Police Squad gang Nordberg, the Chief whose name I forget, and the 'Q' character whose contraptions are considerably less advanced than in James Bond films, although I've never watched one.
The plot of this film is that Frank is given the responsibility of protecting the Queen when she arrives: yes it is that Queen. However, he must also attempt to solve the case that put his friend Nordberg (O. J. Simpson) in hospital, quite clearly controlled by Ricardo Montalban's character. (He is Khan in Star Trek, amongst other things). I'd recommend this movie to anyone who likes Monty Python and 'silly humour' films in that vein. The jokes are constant and varied, from lines such as: "Would you like a nightcap?" "No thanks, I don't wear them." To visual jokes such as Nordberg's chalk outline where he landed in the sea and Frank practicing 'safe sex' with a full body condom, to the Film Noir voice overs as Frank wanders the streets, ending with the punchline "...and where the hell was I?" as he looks back to the distant city and realises he's been walking in wilderness for several miles.
For fans of obvious and subtle visual humour and characters who can deliver these lines so well, Naked Gun would be recommended, especially as I find this the funniest of the three films. Leslie Nielsen is the perfect aged police investigator, just don't watch this if you feel like watching something of an epic nature (e.g. "Lord of the Rings") as you won't get that here.
*****
Written on 23.03.04
Made in 1922, Nosferatu (or to use its full title, Nosferatu: Ein Symphonie des Grauens) is the most effective and chilling vampire film ever made. The antique look of the sepia film cells and the ominous lack of a voice track only adds to the impact of this great movie.
As the first silent movie I saw, and I have seen several since, the age and look of the film even made the domestic scenes at the very start quite unnerving on my first watch. I was constantly reminding myself that everyone I was looking at came from another age and would now certainly be dead. It is important at this stage that you realise I am not some aged movie critic who only appreciates films that are heaped in symbolism; I am an eighteen-year-old slacker who just spent a weekend watching the Back to the Future films with my father.
For vampire enthusiasts or people familiar with any incarnation of Dracula, the story is essentially the same; if it hadn't been, there would never have been the infamous lawsuit by Bram Stoker's widoe that led to all but one print of the film being destroyed. However, character names are changed, location is moved from London to the more effective Wisborg in Germany, and the story is adapted to suit the silent cinema.
DAS PLOT
Thomas Hutter works for a rather mad-looking estate agent called Knock, who receives a telegram written in strange symbols. He tells Hutter to pack his bags and visit Count Orlock in the distant Carpathian mountains, to arrange for the wealthy man to purchase a house in their area. Kissing his wife goodbye, Hutter travels 'far away, to the country of thieves and ghosts' and, despite warnings from an innkeeper about travelling any further, the naive and innocent Hutter heads towards a sinister coach driver that takes him to Orlock's castle...
Holding much novelty value in the modern day, the acting in Nosferatu often seems very over the top, as exaggeration was essential in those times, but the foreboding and terrifying Count Orlock played by Max Schreck (English translation, Max Terror) has remained one of the most powerful and recognisable horror characters in film history. Unlike other German expressionist films, which were largely filmed in a studio with elaborate sets, Nosferatu is primarily filmed outdoors at a number of excellent locations throughout Germany.
TAKE THOU HEED AND BE THOU WARNED - BORING DVD SECTION FOLLOWS:
For fans of the film, buying the right DVD is essential. Not meaning to criticise, although I suppose I am, the budget releases by companies such as Stonevision are the most readily available and cheap, but also result in a very poor film experience. These re-releases of silent films possess awful soundtracks, inconsistencies in brightness and film quality, and are simply black-and-white. Many also miss out a number of scenes, which is criminal for a film of the perfectionist German expressionist movement! My personal copy is the 'Special Edition' released on an American label which I imported from Amazon.com for around the equivalent of £10, and this has excellent picture quality - bear in mind that it is still taken from a very old and damaged negative - and a choice of two excellent soundtracks, an organ score and a modern orchestral and electronic score that suits surprisingly well. People with Region 2-only players, or who would prefer a British release, can find several good exampl es on websites such as Play.com. The BFI edition is reportedly superior, however there is a 2-disc set currently on sale at only £8.99 on that website which my friend owns, and which introduced me to the film, and I would also recommend.
Clearly a film of the past, Nosferatu will always remain my favourite horror film due to its believability; although the special effects are unimpressive, this is part of the film's appeal, as is the fact that it looks like it was made in the time the film is set, which is in reality roughly a century earlier. I recently watched the Jack the Rupper thriller "From Hell" and, despite fantastic sets and costumes, it was obvious that I was watching a modern film, but at least Ian Holm was in it- what a guy. Anyone put off by having to read their way through a film is also largely spared that, as the director F. W. Murnau deliberately limited the captions to those that are absolutely necessary.
If your idea of a great film moment is an exploding bridge taking down some helicopters then I support your view and suggest you finance my friend's movie idea for 'Murderocutor,' however if you prefer a slow and gradual progression through a dark plot, with some great music, this film is for you. And Cradle of Filth fans. A recent movie 'Shadow of the Vampire' took an interesting take on this film's production, as it picked up on the old rumour that star Max Schreck may have been a vampire. Despite the fact that there is tons of evidence against this, not least his roles in other prominent German films of the time, it might be quite funny, although it does have Eddie Izzard in it. Watch Nosferatu first though.
Advantages: A true classic, Not as dated as it may seem, Some DVDs have amazing quality soundtracks, special features and picture clarity
Disadvantages: Some DVDs are rubbish, Won't appeal to the masses, but I'm going to give it five stars.
Orgazmo
Now You're a Man
**
Written on 07.03.06
This camp and ridiculous film from 'South Park' co-creator Trey Parker was deservedly overlooked on its initial release in 1997, but the appeal of Parker's later works soon established it as something of a cult hit. To some extent lampooning the porn film-making industry and superhero films, a fluke prediction of 21st century Hollywood's obsession with that genre, Orgazmo's main appeal is to fans of cheap, lightweight comedy films, and perhaps the whole "so-bad-it's-good" crowd.
There isn't a direct link between Orgazmo and South Park, aside from the preoccupation with sleaze and digestive processes, but that briefly phenomenally successful cartoon series clearly saw Parker finding his feet, in a format with short running times. This film sees several arbitrary and undeveloped cheap jokes stretched for far too long and never satisfactorily concluded.
Orgazmo is primarily based in a Hollywood porn studio owned by Maxxx Orbison (Dean Jacobs), a deliberately tacky bedroom set-up with easily breakable walls providing easy penetration for the film's titular superhero. The film opens in over-used and over-exaggerated metadramatic style, the audience being presented the plot of the film-with-in-the-film before the "realistic event" occurs and we realise, whoa, that was just a bunch of actors all along... but still is. Orgazmo never veers into true adult territory (explicit or mature) as all but the briefest glimpses of female nudity are obscured by enormous close-ups of male rears in one of the director's few admirable decisions, quite funny and displaying some integrity at the same time.
The main character of the film is Elder Joe Young (played by writer-director-actor Trey Parker), a typically pleasant and naïve Mormon missionary with an adoring and equally sickly fiancée (Robyn Lynne Raab) waiting to marry him on his return. After a compulsory sequence of house calls to recruit residents to the Latter Day Saints, one involving an old woman in a particularly predictable wolf-in-sheep's-clothing skit, Joe is spotted in a reluctant display of his inexplicable self defence talents by Orbison and offered $20,000 to play the lead role of Orgazmo in his latest XXX hit, which will involve a mere two days of filming. Despite being promised a "stunt cock" for the raunchy scenes, Joe has moral and religious qualms over the subject matter of the film, but eventually concedes so that his fiancée, to whom he must lie about the shoot, can have her expensive dream Temple wedding.
The bulk of the film basically sees Joe, along with his new friend and co-star Ben, aka Orgazmo's sidekick 'Choda Boy' (Dian Bachar), filming the cheesy porn action of Orgazmo and its sequel, created due to the resulting box office success. But just when the film seems to be meandering towards nowhere at all, the second, driving, pointless plot of the film takes over and adds nothing but a distraction from the events so far. The Japanese homeboy G-Fresh is enjoyably unusual in his innocent introduction, but for Joe and Ben to don their superhero apparel and fight to reclaim his sushi bar with their phallic devices like some disturbing parody of Batman and Robin could have been made more convincing and diverse.
There are a number of funny scenes throughout the film, but it doesn't hold together as a consistent and entertaining experience. Joe's guilt/lie plot is carried out predictably but not too badly (apart from the ending), and my favourite scene was when the supposedly enlightened Mormon prays to Christ for a sign that he should not go through with the movie deal. Ignoring the subsequent thunderous earthquake that wrecks his kitchen, Joe repeats: "...any sign at all."
There is an over-reliance on the audience finding sex toys amusing. Admittedly some of them are, but the principal 'Orgazmorator' weapon is used about twenty times too many. As is currently popular with shows like 'Little Britain,' the grotesque body also provides some unwholesome laughs, there is one memorable scene in particular, but on the whole this is harmless, stupid stuff. The presence of Ron Jeremy, the moustachioed porn superstar, is a nice in-joke, but very few of the characters have anything to do outside a few repeated jokes, notably the "queer" Dave (Matt Stone, the other South Park guy), the afore-mentioned G-Fresh and the enigmatic Sancho, fairly amusing in an odd way but completely dispensable.
Orgazmo is a well-liked film that knows its target audience and doesn't aspire to anything above toilet humour, but its forced reliance on action and romance plots, however farcical they may be, grounds it too much in everyday Hollywood style for whatever potential the film really had to be expanded upon. Trey Parker's earlier effort 'Cannibal the Musical' sounds more individual and original, meaning I therefore respect it to some degree no matter how crap it may be, while his later releases with Matt Stone such as 'BASEketball' pander, probably successfully, to more conventional film formats.
Orgazmo is very much a transitionary work occupying a shaky, dodgy middle ground between free expression and a desire for success and money, but it is at least noteworthy for introducing the porn jargon "DVDA" into the public domain, if little else. It's also surprisingly unquotable, the two or three lines that clearly took the most time not really being worth repeating.
Raiders of the Lost Ark
*****
Written on 26.10.07
‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ (not ‘Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark’ as the increasingly mad George Lucas wants us to call it – I had to get this off my chest before we could go further) is the first film in the Indiana Jones franchise which consists of two other, equally famous and only slightly less popular films; a forgettable TV series that Lucas is currently giving an even more pointless ‘Star Wars’ style makeover to; some excellent and terrible video game spin-offs, and a brand new film scheduled for release sometime next year. Like the James Bond franchise, it’s a series I oddly had no real experience with outside of a hazy childhood memory of a bloke running from a rolling boulder that could easily have been one of a billion parodies of this film’s famous early scene, but recently I was in the specific mood for watching a classic 1980s Hollywood action adventure with no pretensions or symbolism to worry about, the kind of film that even my Dad would enjoy. They really don’t come any better than this.
Set in various exotic locations in 1936, during the early, obscure period of Nazi dominance before they had all their famous hits, ‘Raiders’ was conceived and largely written by George Lucas and director Steven Spielberg during Lucas’ most prolific and impressive period between the first two Star Wars films, and intended to bring back the gritty adventurer figure in an Earth-bound plot that would allow Lucas to escape the fairy tale fantasy overload of his slightly more famous work (seriously, this guy created two of the greatest and most successful film franchises within a few years of each other – he was so damn good, it’s a tragedy that he’s become such a butthole). Indiana Jones, or ‘Indy’ as he is cutely known by his loyal sometime-sidekick played by John Rhys-Davies, is a bespectacled, besuited University lecturer by day who earns a more substantial income selling rare artefacts to prestigious museums who wisely avoid asking questions. The truth is that Jones’ day job acts more as a Clark Kent cover, at least as far as the audience is concerned, as the ‘real’ Indy is a highly skilled adventurer and tomb raider with a multi-purpose whip, rugged stubble, a hat everyone would love to wear and no glasses whatsoever.
Harrison Ford brings just enough inoffensive machismo and smarmless charm to perhaps his most famous role, far surpassing the supporting part he largely ambles through as Han Solo in Lucas’ Star Wars trilogy, and the rest of the cast is just as good. Karen Allen is great as the lead lady Marion Ravenwood, and manages to overcome the character’s clichés of being Indy’s old, burnt flame and frequent damsel-in-distress to make a memorable performance out of it. Rhys-Davies (‘Sliders,’ ‘Lord of the Rings’) provides some highly effective comic relief as Jones’ trusty sidekick Sallah in Egypt through his great delivery of well-written dialogue, rather than bumbling and falling over to make the hero look better by comparison (though the actor did allegedly defecate in his costume at one point due to food poisoning), and although all the enemy Nazis are pretty straightforward stereotypes, Ronald Lacey’s creepy Gestapo agent makes his presence felt as a serious threat throughout the film. The real villain Rene Belloq (Paul Freeman) is a convincing arch enemy for Indy who can be relied on to appear at all the least convenient moments with nefarious aplomb, even if his role is a little smaller than I expected, and there’s a great cockiness in hearing an enemy actually proclaim himself “a shadowy reflection” of our hero. Filmed on location in Tunisia and elsewhere (purporting to be Egypt), the film also boasts an enormous background cast of non-speaking extras who provide great crowded realism and also manage to be amusing in their complete indifference to the gunfights and chases going on around them, primarily acting as scenery to be toppled.
The plot itself is well conceived and easy to follow, especially as it mainly acts as a motive for Indy and his cohorts to travel across the globe getting into increasingly life-threatening situations. A fantastic opening scene sets up Jones’ profession and almost superhuman skills, acting as both a prelude and stand-alone episode in its own right, almost like the short films they used to play in cinemas before the main feature. I wouldn’t be surprised if many VHS copies of the film were worn down due to over-playing of this exciting idol-stealing sequence without bothering to watch the rest of the film which is a bit long and has boring words and stuff in it. Of course, these action junkies are wrong and quite stupid as the main plot is crammed with lengthy and inventive action scenes that see the hero plunged into various different genres of scrape, all permitted because the story itself is so compelling: the race to discover the fabled Ark of the Covenant that gave immortality and godly powers to the Hebrews in their escape from Egypt. The Dark Lord Hitler is interested in its acquisition, a scenario all the good guys (the ones without German accents or eye-patches) aren’t too keen on. Just like an episode of ‘Mission: Impossible’ or a James Bond film (I imagine), the plot is explained to the audience early on in a briefing scene so we can all enjoy the following hour and a half of twists and turns without fear of having to learn something until right at the slightly confusing finale.
Okay, so there isn’t a great deal of characterisation for Indiana after the first few scenes establish what he’s all about, and Harrison Ford’s portrayal is typically cool but impenetrable (though not to the extent of his depressing, lethargic cop in ‘Blade Runner’), and to be honest I was a little disappointed at some of the more ludicrous action scenes robbing him of much human credibility, particularly towards the end of the film where he launches a successful attack on a fleet of heavily armed Nazi vans with nothing but a white horse, and then proceeds to somehow stow away on a U-boat with only wet clothes to show for it (I was even left slightly confused as to whether he was supposed to have been outside the hull for the whole journey, presumably being able to hold his breath for a considerable time). Because of these more superhuman moments, it’s really satisfying to see him get shot in the shoulder and knocked down repeatedly by a beefy topless guy, and to be confronted with endless unplanned and highly inconvenient scenarios, especially when they involve snakes. Probably his best and funniest scene comes at the end of the opening idol sequence, where he runs screaming at his getaway plane, the pilot of which hesitates for a hilariously long time before reluctantly abandoning his fishing rod, only for Indy to be trapped with his pet snake Reggie when he finally leaps aboard. You can always be confident that Indy will never be killed (unless Lucas is planning something for the next film), but it’s likely he’ll end up battered and knackered in a hospital while the end credits play.
In terms of technicalities, there’s little to fault the film, and though the stormy sky is quite obviously bluescreened in one scene it doesn’t distract in any way, though I bet Lucas isn’t too happy with it. Spielberg’s direction is fast and exciting, not that I feel really qualified to talk about such things, but there are a couple of mistakes such as a prop rock that can clearly be seen bouncing and a tell-tale reflection revealing that the cobra leering at the actors is really behind protective glass. The score is handled by John Williams who creates something quite similar to the Star Wars themes he was producing at the same time (the similarity is particularly evident in the more mellow sections) and is perhaps a little too bombastic overall, especially with the first arrival of the Nazis that attempts to establish them as hellish demons just a little bit too emphatically, but it all suits the film nevertheless and like his slightly more famous work, helped to establish the definitive sound of jungle-based action films for ever after. Just like Lucas, it’s pretty incredible that Williams scored so many big hits in such a short space of time (he also did ‘Jaws’ and ‘Superman’ with their recognisable signature themes), and the Indiana Jones series’ memorable ‘Raiders theme’ is in no way overplayed here.
I really can’t fault this film as a perfect action movie, probably the most definitive and entertaining I’ve ever seen and certainly one I wish someone had taped off TV when I was a child. Carrying a PG certificate there’s the expected minimal use of swearing for realism (I counted one “son-of-a-b****” and one “holy s***” in case you’re interested) and nothing sexual beyond a shot of Karen Allen’s bare back as she gets changed, but there is a fair amount of violence and death, most graphic in the bar scene in Nepal, while the climax is quite laughably gruesome. Snake lovers are advised to skip over one particular moment, while a weird scene of screaming skeletons will probably scare old people and mothers rather than young viewers, who will probably love that kind of thing. I don’t think I’m being too extreme in suggesting that any parents who decide not to allow their children to watch the film, in fact anyone who has seen it and doesn’t force it on their offspring from a ripe early age, should be imprisoned for child abuse.
‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ was my embarrassingly late initiation into the Indiana Jones franchise at age 22, and leaves me hopeful that the other films will be equally enjoyable, though somehow I doubt it. It’s really impressive that George Lucas produced something so down-to-earth (comparatively) in contrast to ‘Star Wars,’ and despite being much more low-key there are still some classic signs of his handiwork, from the overlaid maps depicting Jones’ global journeys that would look really stupid in any other film, just as could be said for the wipes in Star Wars, and an ingenious Nazi monkey. This is the only film I’ve seen in a long time that I could easily watch again soon after and still enjoy, though I have to admit that there’s one thing nagging me. It’s not an original criticism or a clever point to make, but... why the hell don’t the bad guys shoot Indiana? Why do they tie him to masts and lock him in tombs for the satisfying irony? Those mad Nazis.
Advantages: Flawless adventure film.
Disadvantages: A fair amount of clichés.
The Satanic Rites of Dracula
**
Written on 12.10.07
As the eighth film in Hammer’s Dracula series, it would be reasonable to expect a certain drop in quality and authenticity by this point, or at the very least a drastic deviation from author Bram Stoker’s original plot. With its modern-day (1974) setting, plot points of a deadly contagion and Count Dracula wearing a business suit and calling himself D. D. Denham, and chase scenes from furry-waistcoated moustachioed bikers in sunglasses taken straight from ‘The Avengers,’ you would be fairly accurate. But it’s a Hammer film, and this means ninety minutes of classic seventies-style action, presentations of odd cults complete with the orgasmic sacrifice of a nude, and the immortal duo of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee facing each other as Van Helsing and Dracula for the third and final time.
A few lines of dialogue make it clear that this film is a rough sequel to its predecessor, the more well-known ‘Dracula A.D. 1972,’ but this is in no way required viewing in order to enjoy this (I haven’t seen it, though I’d guess it would be the slightly better of the two). After an undercover agent snaps incriminating photos of government officials attending a shady series of occult meetings, Scotland Yard Inspector Murray (Michael Coles) decides to call in his old associate Professor Van Helsing, whose family has specialised in the occult for generations... amongst other things. Van Helsing (Cushing) instantly recognises the signs of a blood cult, and fears that his old enemy Count Dracula has been reincarnated after he so definitively staked him two years earlier. Visiting an old college friend who was caught attending these sinister rituals, Van Helsing learns of a dastardly plot ordered by an unseen higher power to re-create an even more devastating strain of the Bubonic Plague that has the potential to wipe all life from the face of the Earth. But why would the Count wish for the total eradication of his only food source, unless he’s finally grown tired of the chase, the ceaseless resurrections and the typecasting...
This is quite an unusual Dracula film, in that the contemporary setting, car chases and sci-fi themes are a far cry from the company’s more well-known gothic mansions and unconvincing forests, but taken on its own merits its a reasonably enjoyable clashing and corruption of genres. The sequences involving the silent assassins are probably the worst of the whole lot, feeling very much like generic seventies spy thrillers, and it never feels like a true synthesis of gothic and modern horror; the scenes involving vampire attacks are all filmed in traditional crypt-like environments or creaking rooms that contrast strongly with the look of the rest of the film, and although I really hated the quite rubbish reveal of the shadowy D. D. Denham as Dracula (hmm, he’s got a Slavic accent, and there’s something about the repetition of the letter ‘D’ that I can’t quite put my finger on...), it almost makes up for it at the very end with some interesting, if overdone Armageddon and antichrist parallels with a rare moment of subtle symbolism in a film that otherwise credits its audience with little intelligence.
This really is a film that can be approached by anyone, whether they have previous experience with this series or the vampire myth in general, as Van Helsing talks us through the methods used to dispatch a vampire once again, and seemingly has to remind himself of these methods constantly, as demonstrated through a poorly contrived flashback at a critical moment towards the end. Rest assured that this script leaves no room for speculation beyond its own limited scope, and every reference it makes – from the various ways of dispatching the undead to the roles of minor characters – will come into play at some point. This proves particularly disappointing when it comes to ticking off the various means of executing Dracula’s female horde, who very soon lose their ability to scare after failing repeatedly to sink their teeth into anyone, and are written off completely when it’s revealed that a simple sprinkler system can lay waste to a large group (why would the Count have that installed in his coffin rooms in the first place?) Even some nice hints towards the beginning, such as the apparently blank photograph that the majority of audience members will identify as a failed attempt to capture a vampire on film, are explained in dialogue later on for slower viewers, rather than being left hauntingly unexplained and incongruous. But then, no one would claim that ‘Dracula 8’ was aiming to be taken seriously as art.
As a horror film, this entry is moderately successful and never descends intentionally into farce, despite its original working title of ‘Dracula is Dead and Well and Living in London’ which caused a fair degree of resentment and embarrassment in Lee, and the only comedic moments are its slips into (most likely unintentional) stupid dialogue: the security guard’s whispered revelation that Van Helsing should press “the secret red button” in the lift to take him right to the boss’ main office was my favourite. The finale of the film is more action-oriented than horror, as Dracula and Van Helsing face off in a burning building, and the only moments that approach creepiness are the ones rooted in Hammer’s more traditional, gothic style, with a hand-held camera following Joanna Lumley as she creeps through a crypt, and Dracula’s entirely pointless but cool introduction scene where he attacks Valerie Van Ost’s character in a creaking wooden room with crashing shutters and dry ice. There’s an impressive amount of screaming women who reeeeally screeeeam, which I assume is typical for Hammer (at least I hope so), balanced out by an equal amount of coffee drinking on the part of the men to keep up the cop side of things.
The film’s real saving grace, and perhaps the only real reason to watch, is the classic teaming of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee who are both fantastic, even if Lee seems a little unenthused to be back in the role. Cushing’s cold and utterly convincing performance of the determined Van Helsing achieves the unusual in actually making me root for the good guy, and his character’s explanations of blood rituals and the cyclical Sabbath of the Undead are told with such conviction that it’s impossible not to believe wholeheartedly in all the rubbish he’s saying, backed up with an attractive, nonsensical diagram of interconnected hoops that can similarly be taken as fact so long as you don’t allow your eyes to dwell on it for too long, or your mind to start thinking about it. Elsewhere, the presentation of the satanic ritual will probably annoy more dedicated occult fans, but it appears convincing enough on-screen and is very nicely interspersed between other scenes in the first half hour as the truth slowly comes to light. It also gets bonus points for its over-the-top symbolism of a nude young woman being doused with the blood of a cock (I meant that kind of cock – oh I see, you knew) and orgasming with increasing intensity as old men rub it over her belly, before the butch female leader stabs her in the crotch.
I could have chosen better for my introduction to Hammer’s Dracula series than this rather weak offering from fifteen years down the line, but it’s the only one of the films to have slipped into the public domain, and has been made available on numerous cheap horror collections over the years (as well as widely available on the internet). The mixed elements and styles clash more often than they compliment each other, but I found some ideas such as Dracula’s suspected ennui and death wish quite interesting, before the film failed to deliver on them in a satisfying way. Lee’s character is also fairly prominent towards the end, despite taking over an hour to utter his first line, but all things considered I’d much rather watch the two fight it out in a creepy castle instead of an unconvincing office block and plain country manor. There’s also something really unsatisfying about the ending, not only because it simply ceases after the inevitable slaying has been accomplished, but because dialogue earlier in the film makes it clear that Dracula can simply reincarnate and rise again any time Hammer fancy dragging him through his paces once again. Fortunately, Lee decided to forego the resurrection this time, and his fans can be satisfied that although this is far from a fitting swan song for the performer, at least they don’t have to sit through ‘The Legend of the Seven Golden Vampires.’
Advantages: Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee and some gratuitous sexual symbolism (unrelated).
Disadvantages: Weak incorporation of spy clichés into horror.
The Secret of NIMH
****
Written on 23.11.07
Don Bluth's first animated feature since leaving the sleazy corporate tyranny of Disney behind, remains one of the most accomplished and critically acclaimed in the history of cartoon cinema, and easily upstages all of his company's subsequent productions despite the greater box office success of 'An American Tail' and 'The Land Before Time.' It was produced by Bluth's dedicated, overworked team over the course of thirty gruelling months from 1979 to 1982 as a direct rival to Disney's continuing productions, which Bluth felt were cruising comfortably along on their laurels and lacked the excitement and magic of the company's distant golden era. 'The Secret of NIMH' was created specifically to return to older, more intricate styles of animation while conversely continuing to push the format to greater extremes and innovations, and the result, while perhaps not a timeless masterpiece due to its position so far down the line, seems to have been unanimously praised as a success.
The film is adapted from Robert C. O'Brien's award-winning children's novel 'Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH' with a few customary alterations for the screen (including changing the lead character's name to the less easily mocked Mrs. Brisby), after Disney elected not to produce the same adaptation earlier in the seventies. O'Brien's story seems tailor-made to have its rights licensed out to an animation company, with its noble rodent characters, shoehorned magical overtones and marginal, annoying child characters, and the resulting script produced by Bluth and four others clearly takes its cues from the Disney tradition, thus reluctantly mirroring the company's contemporary productions - indeed, the character of Jeremy the crow, who has no real relevance to the story as it progresses apart from offering clumsy comic relief, seems fairly similar to that seagull in Disney's later success 'The Little Mermaid.' Though as you can probably tell, my long-standing hatred of Disney means I'm not familiar enough with the latter film to take this comparison any further (and even if I did like Disney, that was a girl's film anyway; sword-fighting rats is what boys like).
The story is quite interesting, and inevitably comparable to other children's novel-turned-animations 'The Animals of Farthing Wood' and 'Watership Down' in its tale of small animals struggling to adapt and survive in a world controlled by humans (and populated with the occasional predator), but it has enough original ideas of its own to stand strong and apart. Taking place entirely on a large patch of farmland, the main characters are a mix of rodents - common field mice and the more secretive and elusive rats, while featuring a couple of birds and an adversarial cat that strangely lacks the intellect and speech ability of the smaller creatures. It's great to see how the rodents have adapted the waste of human industry to form their homes and gadgets out of abandoned machinery and hollowed concrete blocks among other things, and for once there's even an unspoken arrangement of sorts between the relatively innocent farmer and the creatures of the field; although the farmer has some issues with the rats that will be explained shortly, he seems to have no problem with the other wildlife inhabiting his fields, but doesn't let its presence interfere with his farming duties. The rodents and small mammals, by consequence, are intelligent enough to have learned his farming practices, and prepare for a mass exodus each time the tractor is due to be pulled from its mothballs to plough over their homes.
What evolves into the main 'plot' of the film actually arrives rather late, and is an interesting and obviously critical exploration of scientific animal testing. The widowed Mrs. Brisby learns from the strangely advanced rats, developing their own industrial civilisation beneath the farmer's rose bush, that her late husband was one of many rodents plucked from the streets by a human organisation known as NIMH, the United States' National Institute of Mental Health, and injected with chemicals that somehow increased their intelligence to the point that they were able to lead a mass jailbreak. Now, NIMH appears to have received word of the farmer's tales of rats in his fields being able to avoid traps and are arriving to investigate, causing the rodents to join together in a journey to faraway safety, but they must also contend with rising political conflicts within their own ranks.
Perhaps the main drawback of this film is that the plot is very uneven, changing its focus every once in a while and subsequently having to rush some major elements towards a hasty conclusion in very little screen time. It initially seems to be a story entirely about the exodus of the field mice from the impending ploughing of the field, a journey complicated by the pneumonia of Mrs. Brisby's youngest son, but once Brisby begins her journey to the darker recesses of the wilderness and learns about her husband, these concerns are shifted to the background. This is relieving in a way, as it means viewers are spared a film that threatened to be based around Brisby's annoying juvenile son Martin (voiced by a prepubescent Wil Wheaton who would later star as the much-hated boy genius in 'Star Trek: The Next Generation'), but it also makes for a more episodic series of events that's a little unsatisfying. Coming off worst of all is the emergence of the evil rat opportunist Jenner, whose story is introduced and concluded far too late in the narrative to have any real impact, though it does make for a fittingly dark and violent dramatic climax, with the rain acting as textbook pathetic fallacy for any media students watching.
Of course, the most appealing and spectacular aspect of this film is its visual artistry, from the fluid animation that serves to define Bluth's style here before being replicated in all the productions that followed, to the incredible and lavish backgrounds. There is no element of laziness or haphazard production anywhere in this film's art, introducing spectacular touches such as the frequently used backlighting for magical and sunlight effects that would be ripped off in much animation hereafter. The rodents themselves are somewhat doomed to border on Disney-style caricatures, complete with illogical clothes that are even flatly stated to be impractical by characters in two scenes, but their design somehow manages to be distinctive enough to mark them out as 'trademark Don Bluth rodents,' paving the way for Feivel in the next feature, while also coming a few years before Disney's major rodent blowout in 'Basil the Great Mouse Detective' (oddly, the only Disney film I liked as a child. I must have a thing about animated mice, though only the more obscure ones obviously). I was content to spend most of the film gazing at the excellent painted backgrounds, from the beautiful sunrise and sunsets over the fields to the creepy owl's tree complete with cobwebs and terrifying tarantula. Not that I was scared by it though, I wasn't. I'm 22 after all, and it was clearly a coincidence that I accidentally knocked my drink over by accident when it appeared. I wasn't scared.
Laid over the top of this fantastic art is a fairly standard orchestral soundtrack from Jerry Goldsmith, responding logically to the fluctuating landscape and level of excitement and danger at any given time, but also repeating the main theme intermittently to the point of irritation, particularly when Paul Williams adds some terrible lyrics to it for the end credits. There's thankfully only one song incorporated into the film itself, which is great news for any Disney-haters like me who also happen to despise musicals, and this harks back once again to the early animated films of the mid-twentieth century in its lullaby-like female warble. Although this film was quite innovative on its release, I wouldn't be surprised if these nods to the old school serve to confound animation historians as to this film's age in a few centuries' time. The voice acting has some of the natural banter feel of Don Bluth's later projects, mainly due to the ever-present Dom DeLuise filling in as the comedy character, but is on the whole more traditional and less rife with the amusing, free-form banter that some of the company's later films achieved to great success, particularly the riffing between DeLuise and Burt Reynolds in the otherwise far inferior 'All Dogs Go to Heaven.' The presence of wise, mystical old figures such as Nicodemus the rat and the Great Owl allow for some great performances from crusty English actors such as Derek Jacobi, which adds a touch of class amidst the childish fantasy much as it did for George Lucas' original 'Star Wars.'
With its detailed production, independent credentials and sword-fighting rats, 'The Secret of NIMH' was destined to be a cult hit more than a box office blockbuster, but this attitude also makes it a little easy to fall into the trap of proclaiming it the best thing ever. The animation and design work are all miles ahead of anything Disney were doing around that time, especially as they mainly seemed to be focusing on live-action sci-fi like 'The Black Hole,' 'Tron' and 'Flight of the Navigator' before making their mermaid-based animation comeback at the end of the Eighties, but the plot is all a little too jumbled and uneven to stand up well to repeated viewings. The magical dues ex machina (I hope you media students are still taking notes) is far too convenient and doesn't really fit in with the earthy tone of the rest of the film, and characters are all too frequently dropped or ignored as the action comes to a head. I'd still recommend it as one of the finest animated films of the last couple of decades, certainly something that should please fans of Farthing Wood and Watership Down (though it's less graphic), but perhaps easily scoffed at by fans of Brian Jacques' 'Redwall' books, that I believe have something to do with rats fighting wars against each other or something. Alas, I'm too old to read them now.
Now that Disney is all but resigned to making tedious and repetitive computer-generated films and Don Bluth Films have been silent for the decade as Bluth concentrates on failed revivals of his brilliant 80s arcade games, it's time for another independent release with the spirit of 'NIMH' to make hand-drawn films fantastic again, and hopefully cutting out the songs while they're at it. The DVD has long been available as a budget release with only a promotional trailer tagged on, and is available from Amazon UK for a piffling £3.97. There was an inevitable straight-to-video sequel some years later that should be easy to avoid.
Advantages: Rejuvenates cartoon cinema, causing Disney to back off for a while.
Disadvantages: Uneven plot and perhaps too many similarities to archaic cartoon tradition.
Shadow of the Vampire
Nosfera-Two
****
Written on 05.04.04
'Shadow of the Vampire' is a horror film regarding a German vampire, that takes the interesting turn of expanding on an ancient (and unfounded) view: that Max Schreck, the actor who played the eponymous vampire in the 1922 silent classic 'Nosferatu,' was himself a vampire. The film is set in Germany in 1921 and follows director Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau, his production crew and the actors from Nosferatu as they attempt to film their controversial motion picture.
NOSFERATU: BACKGROUND
In the 1910s-20s, Germany was seen as the world leader in the new industry of film-making. Silent films of the Expressionist era required the actors to exaggerate their movements and emotions in order for the story to be told in more than just words. F.W. Murnau was interested in creating a film version of Bram Stoker's novel Dracula, however involvement of Stoker's widow meant that this would not be possible; still determined to make his vampire film, Murnau simply changed the names of the characters, the location of the story, and adapted scenes to suit his vision. Following the release of the film, Stoker's estate filed a lawsuit which led to all copies of Nosferatu being destroyed, however one survived. This surviving copy has provided the template for all video, televison and DVD releases of Nosferatu to this day.
SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE: BACKGROUND
This 2000 film is both a celebration of the efforts of early film-making, as well as an attempt to create a believable tribute to the ancient film. The rumour that Max Schreck (whose name translates from German as 'Max Terror') was indeed a vampire appear quite ludicrous when he is listed as appearing in a number of other silent films of the era in different roles, however this film presents the actor in a much more believable way than would be expected.
There has also been constant talk since the 20s that actor Gustav von Wangeheim, who plays the innocent Thomas Hutter in the original film, was poorly trained and quite a bad actor, and Eddie Izzard's portrayal of a struggling actor whose only moments of glory arise from his genuine fear of Max Schreck make this film all the better.
There are also exaggerations, presumably, of Murnau being so dedicated to his art that he allows the principal cast and crew to be killed on film, while leading lady Greta Schroeder is shown to be a drug addict drama queen with aspirations of becoming a star. The quite clear lack of sexual chemistry between the actors in the original film is also explored here, however the oft-debated air of homosexuality between Gustav and Nosferatu is not. It is fortunate that the original actors and crew are not alive to press charges...
PLOT
A background knowledge of the original Nosferatu is not required as the film features several captions that explain its history, however, as a fan of that film who has seen it many times, this interesting look behind-the-scenes is all the more rewarding. It is also very satisfying to see a mixture of clip inserts from the original silent movie, such as scenery, along with newly recorded re-makes of character scenes featuring the modern actors, which manage to stay true to the original.
Murnau is travelling across Germany to the locations he has painstakingly researched for use in his film, however the actors are all told that Max Schreck, playing the vampire, will only appear in full make-up when he is required for a shot. The rest of the time, he will be staying at the remote locations in order to 'soak up the culture.' As the film progresses it is clear that Schreck is himself some form of vampire, or at least a mutant with a lust for blood that can be killed through the same methods, and despite his killing of some of the cast, the film proceeds to be made.
The final scene, in which Nosferatu is to feed off the sacrificial Ellen and then be killed by sunlight, goes ahead...
CAST
John Malkovich plays Murnau expertly, making a totally believable director who is obsessed with creating his 'science.' The other principal actor is William DaFoe, playing Schreck, whose performance is convincing, especially in his recreation of Schreck's original scenes in Nosferatu.
Eddie Izzard plays the part of the arrogant and confused Gustav von Wangeheim surprisingly well, considering he's a blue stand-up comic most of the time, while Catherine McCormack plays the part of Greta Schroeder, making the ultimate sacrifice for her art, playing the part of Ellen, a character who makes the ultimate sacrifice for love. The actors playing the production crew are also very believable as they question their sanity and Schreck's methods.
OVERALL
Anyone who has seen Nosferatu and enjoyed it should see this film, as it serves as a fitting tribute. Despite obvious inconsistencies - 'Shadow' only feratures scenes which serve its vision that Schreck was a vampire and miss out a number that could prove he was simply an actor - there is nothing herein that would serve to spoil the film. Obviously Eddie Izzard, William DaFoe and Catherine McCormack look different to the original actors, but the similarity of their costumes, make-up and the lok of their filmed scenes are a joy to behold.
The film does drag on in places, and could be seen as too arty or seperate from modern society for casual vampire fans, but it is a good film in its own right that is well thought-out, well-produced and very faithful to an old classic. Even the musical score reflects the original and contemporary scores associated with Nosferatu. This is a very good and interesting take on the vampire film format, which clearly needs to be taklen in original directions to avoid repetition, and works very well when compared to the original.
The final scenes are genuinely chilling and even the most hardened Nosferatu fan with his head firmly out of the clouds will find himself thinking, "Gustav does look a little genuinely scared of Schreck in the film doesn't he..." NOTE: Thank you to lookaroundcafe2 for recommending this film following my review of Nosferatu on DVD, I'm glad I noticed it on BBC1 last night.
Sleepy Hollow
*****
Written on 26.03.04
Tim Burton's films have a reputation for featuring bizarre sets and creating a balance between truly good and evil characters. The director responsible for such films as Beetlejuice, the Nightmare Before Christmas and Batman always produces films which I find interesting to watch, even if the plot is not to my liking. With Sleepy Hollow however, the plot, characters and filming style all combine to produce a fantastic film which could be described, if films could be described as magical, as magical.
As actress Christina Ricci explains on the DVD's special features, Washington Irving's 'the Legend of Sleepy Hollow' is one of America's few fairy tales and concerns the plight of a village falling victim to a Headless Horseman. The Horseman in the film is played by Christopher Walken, veteran of a number of films including Burton's previous works, while his good 'adversary' is played excellently by Johnny Depp; a true Tim Burton film veteran who played the title role in Edward Scissorhands.
Christina Ricci, an actress who will hopefully escape one day from the 'Wednesday from the Addams Family movies' label, plays the young and innocent spellbook-dabbler Katrina Van Tassel, Miranda 'Queenie from Blackadder' Richardson plays her evil stepmother and a load of talented old men play old men. The music is all composed by Danny Elfman, a name which I cannot help but link completely with that of Tim Burton as he has been responsible for the powerful, classical themes of all the Tim Burton films I've seen; even "Mars Attacks!" from 1997.
The film's plot is that Depp's Ichabod Crane, an innovative and scientific New York constable at the end of the eighteenth century with a really great name, is sent to the town of Sleepy Hollow by Christopher Lee to investigate murders in which the victims' heads were severed clean from their bodies. Upon arriving at the town, Ichabod soon discovers that the inhabitants all firmly believe in the legend of the Headless Horseman who will come to kill one person every night until he has enough heads for his sinister purposes. Following more deaths, Ichabod enlists the help of an eager young apprentice Masbeth, whose parents were killed by the Horsemen and who is impressed by Ichabod's devices, but their investigations soon start to link to one of the village's most noteable families. And is the horseman real...? Well, after a relatively short investigation it obviously turns out that he is!
Tim Burton is a classic modern director, and if like me you're not trained in the subtleties of directing then you can appreciate the film even more after having listened to the director's commentary. Burton directed a number of scenes to reflect the atmosphere of Hammer Horror-era movies and that works really well, even though I've only seen a few of those old films. The sets are all fantastic, and really give across the feel of the film; a small town was constructed right here in Blighty for the film's exterior shots, while the lengthy wood sequences were filmed expertly inside a studio back in Yank. The fact that you really can't tell is a testament to both the film's set designers and high budget, as the 'dead' feeling couldn't have been found in any un-artificial forest. The majority of the film was shot through a blue lens to create the dark and sinister feel, while the short portions of Ichabod's tortured childhood memories are filmed in bright, dream-like colours of white and strong red. As a humorous note, all the blood in the film was required to be made bright orange as the blue filter could 'red it up,' and there's certainly a lot of blood in this film which is odd as it doesn't appear particularly gory; only in a fantasy and often darkly comedic way.
As well as the excellent look and directing of the film, special credit must be given to the actors who are fantastic. Johnny Depp plays Ichabod as a man who is stern in his principles but clearly an abject coward, although he manages to find love with Christina Ricci, another very talented actress. Christopher Walken is great as the Horseman, his contact lenses and sharp teeth really creating an unforgettable image, and the group of old men played by Michael Gambon, Jeffrey Jones and others make an enjoyable and humorous bunch; director Burton seems especially fond of their scenes. The only slight problem I have is with actor Casper Van Dien, who played the lead role in Starship Troopers; I just don't find he suits his character too well, although he is adequate.
If you have ever been put off by Sleepy Hollow's fairy tale nature or apparent childishness, there is truly none of that; this is something which I would have really liked as a child but really love as an [eighteen-year-old] adult. The film has horror - some really great and shocking scenes, most notably when the Horseman is sent to a family's home, while Ichabod's surfacing memories are also very chilling; fantasy - the notion of a horseman, witchcraft and the Western Woods are all very well realised; romance - it's obvious from the chemistry between the characters and actors that Ichabod and Katrina belong together; and humour - heads designed to spin when severed and occasional jokes such as blood squirts and Ichabod terrified of a spider under his bed prevent it from becoming too sinister. The only problems I have with the film is that the ending seems to last a lot longer than expected, taking place over a number of scenes, and this can make it a little tedious after multiple watches.
In terms of the DVD, Sleepy Hollow's animated menus are very attractive and include images and musical scores from the film. There are two interesting 'making of' documentaries, including great scenes of the decapitated heads being made and how Christopher Walken managed to ride a horse without being able to ride horses. There are also two trailers, which I always find a nice addition, cast biographies which can be useful, a photo gallery and the afore-mentioned director's commentary.
I would recommend Sleepy Hollow to anyone who hasn't seen it as, although violent and horrific in parts, it's a really enjoyable film with some classic scenes and the film's atmosphere is very involving and mystical. If you feel like watching something special at night, this is a film I'd recommend for all the family, even though it's a 15 certificate - this is only for the death and gore; there is no swearing, sex or nudity.
Advantages: Excellent actors, sets, plot and soundtrack
Disadvantages: Some scenes are less memorable
Star Trek: The Motion Picture
Born Again
***
Written on 20.10.00 [My Trek film thoughts 18 years later. Jesus.]
The first in the continuing line of Star Trek films has often been criticized for having a poor storyline and just being a special effects extravaganza, but I still like to watch it every so often, possibly for sentimental reasons.
The story is set two years after the end of the classic Star Trek: The Original Series and involves the USS enterprise NCC-1701 (which has been given a cinema special effects makeover to make it look less "sixties") trying to stop an invading, vast object over eighty AUs (astronomical units- the distance between Earth and the sun) in diameter eventually turning out to be an old Earth space probe, Voyager VI, launched from Earth in 1999 (well, this film was created twenty years earlier) that was found by a race of living machines (who some fans think may be the Borg from The Next Generation and Voyager, although this is not stated) and sent back to Earth, its mission garbled, to exterminate all living beings. [What a magnificent sentence.]
The story is rather poor, but there are some important and very good scenes. If you're a Star Trek fan then you'll like this film, but if you're just a person who likes to watch movies, this may not be to your taste. However, the special effects, for the most part, are exceptional by 1979 standards, and that earned the film a well-deserved award. The film was criticized, but still had a massive viewership because of it being a Star Trek film, and the seed for the successful box office hits were sown…
Advantages: A new hope for the franchise, great effects.
Disadvantages: Not as good as its successors.
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
*****
Written on 01.04.04
Following the success of the first, disappointing Star Trek movie released in 1979 it was inevitable that a second film would follow. While "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" had seemed too driven by technology and special effects at the expense of most peoples' favourite aspect of the original series, I'm talking about the characters although you may have only tuned in to see the scantily-clad alien temptresses, the second film took a completely different direction and is widely recognised as the best Star Trek film.
The Wrath of Khan was directed by Nicholas Meyer and his influence over the look and feel of the film, as well as that of the set designers, costumers and writer Harve Bennett, makes more a much more appealing and understandable future than the antiseptic chalk-toned Utopia of the previous film. Starfleet uniforms were now dark red and more military in style, while the bridge of the famous Enterprise was darker and more akin to a submarine even than in the original series. This submarine design would certainly come into use later in the film, with the sequence often described as "submarine battles in space" with Kirk against Khan in the Mutara nebula.
PLOT
The plot of Star Trek II follows on, in a way, from the original series episode "Space Seed" although as with most Star Trek films and episodes, a background knowledge is not required for the full enjoyment. In that episode, the Enterprise picked up cryogenically frozen Middle Eastern men who, it turned out, were the genetically engineered superhumans responsible for the devastating Eugenics Wars of 1992 - 1996. (I know, I can't remember them either, but Star Trek did predict that the first moon landing would be on a Wednesday in 1969 so who knows?) The leader of the soldiers, Khan Noonien Singh, was eventually banished with his crew, and a member of the Enterprise's very fickle crew who had decided she was in love with him, to Ceti Alpha V: a planet which Kirk promised would be visited periodically with supplies.
It's over fifteen years later, the year 2285 which I depressingly know without having to look it up, and the USS Reliant is investigating what it believes to be the decimated remains of Cati Alpha VI. Unfortunately for the crew, who are either killed or turbed into controllable zombies by 'ceti ells' inserted into their ears, the planet is actually Ceti Alpha V and a rather disgruntled Khan decides to take this chance to become all powerful again. When the distress call goes out that there's something afoot, the Enteprise is called out of cadet training service and back into commission, albeit with a crew made up of inexperienced cadets and obese old men called Kir, Spock, Scott, etc. The film is a quest to stop the ingenious madman from obtaining the Genesis device, a constructive device which has been developed to terraform "life from lifelessness" on a dead planet in a matter of days, but which could also be used to eradicate an entire planet of its population. There's always a snag isn't there?
CAST & CREW
The adventurous plot and bold characters made this a huge box office success to the point that even my A-Team loving Dad can remember phrases such as "Kobayashi Maru" and several story points, and finally did justice to the sixties show. As well as the return of everyone's favourite characters from the sixties show there are some interesting additions to the cast, namely Ricardo Montalban reprising his role as Khan - you may know him from "The Naked Gun" or one of the sensible films he's no doubt been in - and Kirstie Alley as the Vulcan Saavik. Kirsti Alley is best known from her role in "Cheers" and every single American film released between 1982 and 1987, excluding Star Trek III in which she was replaced by someone who fit the budget more.
As well as the afore-mentioned great sets, the special effects are excellent, especially for 1982. The phaser and photon torpedo blasts look convincing, the ever-changing transporter and warp effects look nice and there's even a section which won some kind of special effects award showcasing the potential of the Genesis device; this lengthy computer-generated scene was deemed slightly too unrealistic to feature in the actual plot and was instead shown to be a computer animation prediction. It still looks amazing though, no wonder it was repeated in the next two films. Even the musical score is fitting and enjoyable, with the regular Jerry Goldsmith replaced for some reason by James Horner. Suiting to his name he does like to ad a lot of horns, and his music for the nebula battle is great. I won't do a joke about him feeling 'horny' because... oh, I am sorry.
LEGACY
The recent Star Trek: The Next Generation feature, "Nemesis," was largely based on this film due to its success. There's the captain against an intelligent foe in command of a weapon of awesome destructive power, the death of a major character and even a battle sequence inside a nebula; I can imagine Brannon Braga or one of the less talented Trek writers remaining after the close of the excellent DS9 explaining "It's not the same, it's a green nebula this time, so it's obviously different isn't it."
Even if you despise Star Trek and hate everything that it stands for... well no, in that case you'd probably despise this film. But even if you're not a Star Trek fan, but enjoy a bit of space adventure with great characters, I would definitely recommend this film. For the fans who know it's the year 2285 without even having to research it there's a very interesting special edition DVD version out which is crammed with about a day's worth of extras so I'll certainly be buying that soon. Along with 1996's First Contact, which got me interested in Star Trek in the first place, this is my favourite Trek film. A brief summary of my opinions and general opinions on the Trek legacy:
STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (1979)
Disappointing SFX extravaganza. It won awards for its effects but it was a dull and lengthy plot with annoying sets and complete lack of character development.
STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (1982)
You didn't read my review did you?
STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK (1984)
Continuing the story in the same style this is an enjoyable film, aided by one of my favourite actors Christopher Lloyd, but not quite as compelling.
STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME (1986)
The Enterprise on Earth in the 80s. Funny and popular, but not as good a Trek film as some. You can't help but be intrigued by Spock in hippie clothes.
STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER (1989)
Directed by ego-maniac William Shatner (Kirk), this is my worst Trek film and is often regarded as boring, unimpressive and embarrassing. They go to find God. Again.
STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY (1991)
A return to grace, this was made up of all the same ingredients as Star Trek II in terms of production. Loads of Klingon action and great planets, a contender for best Trek film.
STAR TREK GENERATIONS (1994)
The first Next Generation film, Generations seems too much like an episode for it to be a successful movie. Made too soon, and the metting of Kirk and Picard isn't too great.
STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT (1996)
An action film in Earth's orbit a little bit in the future. I love this film as it sums up a lot of what Trek's about while showing a lot of Borg-blasting at the same time.
STAR TREK: INSURRECTION (1999)
Overlooked and not as good as it could have been. Picard and crew go against naughty Starfleet, but the scale isn't epic enough and there's an annoying kid.
STAR TREK: NEMESIS (2002)
Enjoyable but a blatant rip-off of Star Trek II. Showing the downfall of Star Trek since Voyager was the only show on the air, but the special effects are excellent.
The later Kirk & crew romps seem a little silly due to the crew's age but are nonetheless still (on the whole) worth watching. I personally hope that the next film will be Deep Space Nine related, but that's probably not going to happen. In 1982 the Star Trek franchise was going strong, even enough to contend with Star Wars though this was never the intention. Can't we all just get along? Possibly a message of Star Trek II, a great emotional film with something for everyone. Even if you hate Kirk and his bunch, watch it.
He's Not Quite Dead
***
Written on 23.08.06 [2000 downdate]
The third Star Trek feature film picks up precisely where the second left off, and would end up as a disappointing middle section in a very loosely connected trilogy. ‘The Search for Spock’ is a victim of a cut budget and plot structure recycled verbatim from the previous film; this is likely the least disappointing of the cursed odd-numbered Star Trek films, even if its entire plot is based on ruining the dramatic finale of Star Trek II.
Like the second ‘Back to the Future’ film, the second part of this Trek ‘trilogy’ owes an awful lot to its predecessor, revisiting the same concepts but nevertheless highlighting thoughtful issues that were given only brief passing earlier. Both sequels aren’t as strong in their own respect, but form important moral centrepieces that benefit their respective trilogies as a result. They also have more cool props than their fore-runners: ‘Back to the Future Part II’ had the hoverboard and all the other futuristic stuff, while ‘The Search for Spock’ introduces the Excelsior-class starship, the mushroom-esque Spacedock and the bird-like Klingon ship, the stock footage for which would be re-used countless times in ‘The Next Generation.’ Now I’ve made that point, I can start talking about the film itself rather than trying to be clever, especially as this parallel between franchises would probably break down at the next bullet point… oh yes, both films star Christopher Lloyd too.
Following the events of Star Trek II, the badly crippled U.S.S. Enterprise plods home for repairs. Admiral Kirk (William Shatner) finds it hard to concentrate, feeling the death of his friend Captain Spock “like an open wound,” but Doctor McCoy (DeForrest Kelley) is acting even stranger, speaking in Leonard Nimoy’s voice and asking to be taken home to Vulcan. McCoy is dismissed as a fruit loop and placed in a cell once the starship reaches Earth, but a visit from Spock’s Vulcan father Sarek (Mark Lenard) convinces the formerly atheistic Kirk that Spock’s body has to be recovered from its casket, orbiting the newly-created Genesis Planet, in order to be reunited with the soul he transferred to McCoy. Unfortunately for them, travel to the Genesis Planet is highly illegal, meaning Kirk and his loyal rebels have a difficult choice to make. Meanwhile, renegade Klingon captain Kruge (Christopher Lloyd) is en route to Genesis under his ship’s cloak, intent on discovering the secrets of its ultimate weapon.
The ending of Star Trek II certainly left enough plot threads floating through the vacuum, but it was one scene in particular that clinched the deal for a direct sequel, added at the last moment once Nimoy was persuaded to return despite his character’s heroic death. Touching DeForrest Kelley’s face and asking him to “remember” was deemed vague enough to give writers creative freedom in penning what came next, and this ridiculously contrived result is about as good as can be expected. Religion never played a role in Gene Roddenberry’s universe until now, and setting it in an alien context doesn’t make the plot of “we’ve got Spock’s soul, now we have to go get his dead body and put it back in” any more credible. It is interesting to see the Genesis Planet itself, created as an accidental side effect of Khan’s attack in Star Trek II. Writers Nimoy and Harve Bennett use the planet’s rapid deterioration as an excellent metaphor for the danger posed by the good-willed Genesis Project, and this leads to some interesting character development for Kirk’s son David Marcus, even if this does lead to more ‘Wrath-of-Khan’-referencing than the casual filmgoer is prepared to take.
The film is filled with exciting visuals and some nice plot developments outside the primary ‘search for Spock’ storyline (which itself is fairly uneventful, and extremely padded out). The Klingons make their first appearance as aggressors since the original television series, and the always excellent Christopher Lloyd makes a formidable villain out of the few scenes he’s given as Kruge, despite this film being produced before canonical Klingonness had been established in the series. Kirk’s rebellion against Starfleet is far more interesting than the final showdown with Kruge, although the space fight between the two ships, and Kirk’s ingenious solution, is an excellent and memorable scene. Kruge just doesn’t hold up as an adversary so soon after Khan, and his fist-fight with Kirk over a molten sea doesn’t come close to Star Trek II’s space-submarine battle of wits, which managed to be far more effective despite Shatner and Ricardo Montalban never even appearing on screen together.
Leonard ‘I Am Not Spock’ Nimoy was baited back to the Star Trek franchise with the promise of directing the two subsequent films, and he does an acceptable job here, even if most of it involves copying what Nicholas Meyer did on the previous outing. The lack of Spock on screen is certainly felt throughout, and even McCoy is absent for much of it. This leaves Kirk with the secondary characters of Scotty and the multicultural bridge officers; after being neglected in previous films, these actors are given a couple of moments to shine, although sadly almost all of these are weak comedic scenes. Nichelle Nichols locks a guy in a closet, James Doohan grumbles about technology again, and George Takei says “don’t call me tiny.” As for Shatner himself, he’s his usual, somewhat irritating toupeed self, and adds to his exaggerated off-screen caricature when he stamps on Kruge’s head and tells him “I… have had… enough of… you.” Robin Curtis takes over Kirstie Alley’s role as Saavik and is a lot less enticing (although the adolescent Spock wouldn’t say no), but Merritt Butrick is a lot better this time round as David. Leonard Nimoy may or may not feature in the film’s conclusion – I wouldn’t want to spoil anything.
Audiences liked Spock, so his return was a necessity. It’s just a shame that this anticipated return takes an entire film to play out, although it’s preferable to Kirk waking up after a horrible nightmare and seeing Spock alive and well, and stepping out from a shower (I believe there are websites for that sort of thing). The notion that an enemy force would view the Genesis Device as the ultimate weapon for eradicating civilisations, despite its peaceful intention of creating habitable planets from barren rocks, is chilling and exciting, but was already used in Star Trek II. To repeat the same thing with a ship of Klingons rather than genetically engineered superhumans adds nothing to the experience other than to allow Marc Okrand to show off the Klingon language he was developing at the time.
‘The Search for Spock’ lies awkwardly between action, sci-fi, comedy and spirituality, and doesn’t do any of them very well. The visual effects from Industrial Light and Magic are amazing for the most part, really conveying a sense of scale between the gigantic Spacedock, the various Starfleet and Klingon ships and the planets they orbit, land on and explode around. The sets betray the film’s low budget at times, always feeling under-populated and confined and, in the case of the very obvious sound stage used for the Genesis Planet ‘exteriors,’ painfully false. If the film had been shot on location and the script almost completely rewritten, it could have been a masterpiece. Instead, it’s merely a dull middle chapter to link ‘The Wrath of Khan’ to ‘The Voyage Home,’ two much better Star Trek films.
The DVD has been re-released in two-disc collector’s edition, featuring a generous amount of interviews and commentaries. Unlike many of these re-releases, the film is exactly the same as the original DVD print, with no extended or deleted scenes re-inserted into the main feature.
Advantages: Logical continuation of the previous film with great visual effects from ILM.
Disadvantages: Doesn't say much that wasn't covered in Star Trek II.
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
*****
Written on 20.10.00
The film that appealed to the most people, both science fiction fans and regular cinemagoers, was due in no small part to its depiction of Kirk and his 23rd. century crew trying to adjust to life in "the late twentieth century" which was supposed to be 1986, but was never actually stated. There is a lot of comedy, especially on the part of Spock, and a very good, believable storyline.
Sights such as Spock mind-melding with a humpback whale in front of a crowd of unknowing people and Scotty's attempts to use a contemporary computer are hilarious, and there's also some more romance for Kirk in the form of Doctor Gillian Taylor.
The story concerns the Cetacean Probe, a mysterious cylinder that is wreaking havoc on Earth's oceans. Kirk and his bunch of rebels hear about it en route back to Earth in their Klingon Bird-of-Prey (which McCoy has christened the H.M.S. Bounty in light of their recent mutinous actions to save Spock in Star Trek III: The Search For Spock) and Spock reasons that the probe is attempting to find humpback whales to communicate with. Since they were hunted to extinction in the twenty-first century, the Bounty slingshots around the Sun to take it back in time to 1986. Kirk and Spock attempt to procure a pair of humpback whales named George and Gracie, while Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, McCoy and Chekov look for a nuclear reactor to power the Bounty, as its dilithium crystals were burnt out during the time trip.
Eventually they return to the present with Doctor Gillian Taylor, the whales' cherished carer, and save Earth. Because of these actions their charges are taken lightly and Kirk is demoted to captain, and given command of a new Enterprise, the NCC-1701-A. They set out once again, boldly going where no man has gone before.
Advantages: Hilarious, and appealing to everyone.
Disadvantages: Not a lot of action, or special effects.
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
Kirk V God
*
Written on 20.07.06
If you sat patiently through the first four Star Trek films solely in the hope of seeing awe-inspiring sights like Kirk in a chequered shirt, Spock eating some baked beans and neck-pinching a horse, Scotty banging his head on the ceiling in an almost convincing way, an ageing Nichelle Nichols performing a nudie dance behind big leaves, ingenious foreshadowing of rocket boots as a subsequent plot device, a second-rate actor pretending to be Sean Connery, and God zapping lightning from His eyes… you probably would have left the cinema feeling extremely disappointed. But have no fear: Star Trek V is here! For all your overacting, franchise-embarrassing needs. You make me sick. It’s only a shame that Kirk’s pursuit by a rock monster was cut. Apparently, they couldn’t make the costume look convincing enough, because a scene like that would be quality Star Trek in all other respects.
It’s easy to dismiss Star Trek V as the worst of the profitable and popular Star Trek film series by far, and as a wholly unwatchable film in general. It just gives you so much material to work with. But for fairness’ sake, the end result of this shambles is largely due to studio interference and general bad decisions and bad luck all round. Ego-mad director William Shatner gets criticised slightly more than he is due in attempt to repeat the success of his co-star Leonard Nimoy, who did a nice job helming Star Treks III and IV.
Star Trek V is the story of a madman’s search for God. The Vulcan Sybok (Captain Spock’s brother), blessed with a unique telepathic ability, holds Federation, Klingon and Romulan delegates hostage on Nimbus III in a ploy to lure a starship which he can then steal to travel through the Great Barrier at the centre of our galaxy. Unfortunately for the holidaymaking crew of the new and not-quite-operational U.S.S. Enterprise, they are once again the only available ship to deal with the disturbance, and to play right into Sybok’s hands.
The search for God in an apparently godless Utopian future is marketed as the greatest adventure yet for the Enterprise crew, but this whole film feels like a second rate episode of the television series, especially disappointing after the high quality of its cinematic predecessors. Everything has been done before, and more impressively: the ship’s takeover, the mutual deal with Klingons, a powerful alien masquerading as God and the shock factor that other Vulcans are related to Spock. Gene Roddenberry’s atheistic universe is founded on the principle that all organised religion is detrimental to human progress and enlightenment, following his own beliefs; The Final Frontier does nothing but dance around this issue with some poor action scenes, out-of-place humour and forced attempt to regain the character dynamics of the original series.
This film does contain some particularly cringe-worthy humour from the onset, which serves to completely ruin what should have been a thoughtful, mystical and sombre tone. The success of Star Trek IV, which was occasionally funny in its ‘people of the future visit the 1980s’ plot, somehow convinced Paramount that audiences would only accept a sequel that was full of silly jokes. Thus, we have the embarrassing campfire scene in which Kirk, Spock and McCoy perform ‘Row, Row, Row Your Boat’ and Spock’s hilarious punchline: “Captain… life is not a dream.” “Go to sleep, Spock.” The most offensive scene comes when the late James ‘Scotty’ Doohan is forced to reduce his engineering genius to a bumbling, fat fool who falls over, while the triumphant rescue scene near the end is spoiled by Spock’s out-of-character quip: “please Captain, not in front of the Klingons!” Woo-hoo, what a script! If it wasn’t for all of these pointless and detracting light hearted moments, I could begin to take the predictable plot of Star Trek V a little more seriously.
Supporters of this film praise the return of the ‘power trio’ from the original series, namely the interaction of Kirk, Spock and Doctor McCoy. This featured a little in the earlier films, but for the most part the characters were separated into one-on-one discussions, nevertheless providing some great Spock and McCoy banter in Star Trek IV. The trio’s early scene in Yosemite National Park doesn’t fit comfortably into the Star Trek world, but thankfully their scenes on the Enterprise are somewhat better. As usual, Uhura, Scotty, Chekov and Sulu are all but ignored (they have always merely been supporting characters after all), but most are at least assigned tasks that are relevant to the plot.
This is arguably the only film in the franchise that plays out exactly as a TV episode would, with the ship’s crew at their correct posts and the status quo effectively being restored by the end with no lasting consequences. Whether this makes it better or worse as a film, in contrast to the ‘to be continued’ style of the successful trilogy of sorts in the three previous films, is down to the viewer’s patience.
As if all of the important aspects of the film aren't bad enough, the special effects of Star Trek V are also pretty poor. Apparently due to Industrial Light and Magic’s commitments elsewhere, we have to settle for substandard optical effects of the Great Barrier, shuttle antics and a space battle with the Klingons. The musical score is also strangely unsatisfactory, and is easily the least impressive of the franchise; Jerry Goldsmith’s fanfare-heavy theme for the first Star Trek film (re-used for the TV series Star Trek: The Next Generation) is re-used completely here for the opening titles, and the only music that stands out elsewhere is the silly 80s ‘ethnic dance’ number for Uhura’s dance. This film really doesn’t have a lot in its favour. Just imagine if Sean Connery had accepted the role he was offered to play Sybok, if he hadn’t been busy filming Indiana Jones. Just imagine if Shatner hadn’t been offered the script.
Star Trek V has long been available on video and DVD, and was recently re-released as a special edition with bonus features. Eager to repair the film’s quality and reputation, Shatner reportedly asked for the opportunity to re-cut the film, as Robert Wise was permitted for the first Star Trek picture. Shatner’s original proposal for The Final Frontier would have resulted in a much darker and less silly end result, in which all of the film’s first half would have been the same, including the rubbish mountain climbing / campfire scenes. On second thought, maybe this guy deserves everything we can throw at him.
His request was denied, leaving Star Trek V as one-star material for ever more. Kirk’s mock-prophetic justification for climbing dangerous mountains reflects the only real reason for Star Trek fans to accept this terrible film into their collection between films IV and VI: “because it’s there.” Shatner’s egotism is evident in his over-the-top acting, self-indulging rock-climbing and fist fight scenes and steadfast, rebellious dialogue with ‘the Almighty.’ It all culminates quite spectacularly at the end of the film, in Kirk’s response to McCoy’s starry-eyed question of whether God is really ‘out there.’ Shatner grins, points to his own chest and says: ‘maybe he’s right here.’
Admittedly, he then follows up with the Roddenberryesque point that God resides ‘in the human heart,’ but if your video happened to screw up at that point, it would make for a far more satisfying ending and moral. He should have been given that director’s cut.
Advantages: Um... at least we didn't get a Starfleet Academy movie?
Disadvantages: Numerous
Star Trek Generations
**
Written on 02.08.06
‘I’ve always known… I’ll die alone,’ said James T. Kirk in the godawful fifth Star Trek film, misleadingly sub-titled ‘The Final Frontier.’ It’s probably for the best that anything and everything from that forgettable script be forgotten, and the movie be shelved for infinity along with ‘Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.’ The Star Trek movie franchise continued regardless, the U.S.S. Enterprise and most of its crew under Kirk being decommissioned in 1991, but a few of the old faces remained to pass the torch to Patrick Stewart and company in this seventh feature.
Despite being promoted HEAVILY as the bridge between the original crew and the cast of the television spin-off The Next Generation, ‘Star Trek Generations’ is almost entirely a Next Generation adventure, with three of the classic, decrepit actors squeezed in (get it? They got all fat). The first scene of the film sees William Shatner reprise his role as Kirk, along with the late James ‘Scotty’ Doohan and Walter ‘Chekov, the Russian one’ Koenig, due to the more prestigious Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley declining the walk-on roles.
Fans of The Next Generation should enjoy ‘Generations,’ but those more suited to following the film series will take a lot of convincing. This is what the historic meeting between Kirk and Patrick Stewart’s Jean-Luc Picard spectacularly fails to achieve. Generations is as rickety and unstable as Kirk’s final bridge, in traversing the reasonably enjoyable TV series and the more independent movies that followed, playing out much like an average TV episode. The effects are better, the sets more impressive and the events a little more epic, but the bright, primary-coloured uniforms and unnecessary return of villains from the TV series do little to push the films into a new, promising era.
The film begins with a history lesson, or rather a final glimpse of the 23rd century before the franchise moves well and truly into the 24th. Kirk, Scotty and Chekov are honoured guests aboard the maiden flight of the U.S.S. Enterprise-B, when the ship receives a badly timed distress call and, once again, the hi-tech but unprepared Enterprise is the only ship in range. In the process of rescuing a group of wandering aliens from a destructive but strangely compelling space anomaly, Kirk acts the part of the hero one last time and is presumed killed in the process. Jump 78 years further into the future to the holodeck of the Enterprise-D, where festivities surround Lieutenant Worf’s promotion and Picard learns the tragic news of his family’s untimely death. Data decides to use his emotion chip, with comedic results, and an aged alien scientist strikes a deal with the Klingon Duras sisters to accomplish his sophisticated and fiendish plan to lure a familiar energy ribbon to a heavily populated star system.
Generations begins the trend that would continue throughout the Next Generation films, by focusing on Picard’s butch heroism and the android Data’s quest to become more human, doing little to advance the other characters. Perhaps the most offensive part of the film comes late on with the disappointing joined forces of the two famous, elderly Enterprise captains. The tedious and pointless debate over which one was best fails spectacularly to be settled here, as neither captain does anything of worth: Picard’s strength was always shown to lie in diplomacy as a contrast to Kirk’s ‘I’m a soldier, not a diplomat’ attitude, reflecting the contrast between the two TV series’ roots in the Kennedy and Reagan eras, but there’s very little diplomacy in the fist fights with Malcolm McDowell on a rocky hilltop. Kirk’s final scene is also disappointing, as the legendary character deserved better, regardless of personal feelings towards the series or to Shatner.
There are a few positive points about this film, although many are fan-pleasers that will be of no concern to the casual viewer. There are some nice touches for fans outside the primary crossover, with Data finally achieving a greater degree of humanity, the final appearance of the Duras sisters, the final voyage of the hotel-in-space that had graced their TV screens for the previous seven years and the final piece in the Enterprise chronology with Captain John Harriman’s Enterprise-B (after the ‘C’ appeared in an episode). The TV sets are re-designed quite conspicuously for the big screen and look better than they ever did, plus there are a couple of cool new rooms that somehow failed to appear in 150+ episodes of the TV series. Not to mention the special effects which, aside from a couple of obvious re-uses from Star Trek VI, are pretty amazing.
Lazy film critics up to speed with their Trek knowledge would point to the fabled ‘odd numbered film curse’ as an easy way to explain the mediocrity of ‘Generations,’ but as usual the reasons are a little more intelligent than that. Production began before the final season of The Next Generation had even ceased, and it seems that most of the cast and crew involved still thought they were making another feature-length TV episode rather than the seventh film in a prestigious series. That’s not to mention the re-use of a re-use of a re-use of a re-use with the ‘Enterprise captain versus a madman with a fiendish scheme’ plot, which appeared in four of the previous six films. The stakes are more underwhelming than ever, amounting only to an unseen civilisation on an insignificant planet rather than the fate of the planet Earth, the Federation, the galaxy or the universe.
Patrick Stewart has a couple of touching scenes as he copes with the death of his brother and nephew, performed with the Shakespearean actor’s usual grace, and Brent Spiner handles Data’s undemanding comic relief scenes adequately. Marina Sirtis is surprisingly given more than a handful of lines as Counsellor Troi, and even an ill-fated chance to pilot the Enterprise, but Gates McFadden is once again practically invisible as Dr. Crusher. We can be thankful that her fictional son Wesley, much loathed by viewers and played by Wil Wheaton, was given a send-off a number of episodes before. Riker leads an away team, but that’s about it. Sadly William Shatner is disappointing as Kirk in this final adventure, and the banter between captains is meagre and lifeless. Special appearances by Whoopi Goldberg, who was a recurring guest star in the TV series already, and Malcolm McDowell as yet another white-haired, English-speaking villain aren’t enough to convince me that this is a worthy successor to films like ‘The Wrath of Khan,’ and a great deal of the TV episodes are better. Thankfully, the films that came after feel stronger and are more worthy of viewers’ time (odd-number-cursed inclusive).
‘Star Trek Generations’ was given a bog-standard DVD release several years ago along with seven of its movie brethren, but was recently re-released as a collector’s edition with worthwhile extras including interviews, commentaries and interesting deleted scenes, notably the excised orbital skydiving sequence that would have opened the film. This was perhaps a necessary stepping stone between the excellent ‘The Undiscovered Country’ and ‘First Contact,’ but the whole arbitrary crossover thing smells like bad fan fiction that could have been written better by anyone who wears a plastic phaser and refers to himself, or herself, as Lieutenant Commander. Let’s face it, it’s a he.
Advantages: Impressive CGI and some amazing model shots.
Disadvantages: Tedious and pointless plot, with disappointing use of the 'wow' factor.
Star Trek: First Contact
****
Written on 09.03.03
It was seeing this film at the cinema in 1996 that first got me into Star Trek, and I soon was into it in a BIIIG way. Plenty of sci-fi action with a threatening enemy and lots of action, couldn't have been better- but this opinion will not focus on the film, which I love for both appreciative and nostalgic reasons, but on the DVD release itself, which I was a little disappointed in.
I've recently started noticing that Paramount are re-releasing the Star Trek film DVDs, they're currently up to Star Trek IV, giving me the impression that a 'Director's Cut' edition of this film, Star Trek VIII, will soon be released (soon being at least six months). Such a release would be favourable, due to the lack of extras.
There are two different trailers on the disc which I enjoy watching, one a "teaser trailer" brought out inadvisably early and featuring plenty of special effects of a much poorer quality, and of completely different subject, to those which would feature in the film (mostly taken from The Next Generation episodes, the Deep Space Nine pilot episode and the film Star Trek Generations), and a more advanced "theatrical trailer" that actually serves to show what the film is about. There are also a large variety of language options and a chapter select, but the extras end there- not even any nice animated menus.
The film itself is of pristine quality, in "anamorphic widescreen 16:9" (simply saying widescreen would be enough for me, personally), and the sound quality is excellent, I'd just expect a lot more from a DVD that would obviously have to cater for such an attention-seeking, extras-loving people as the Trekkie community. It's serving me well for watch purposes for now, but will definitely be sold again on eBay if a director's cut is released- I'd like to see this film which marked a landmark in my tastes given much more attention, especially some behind-the-scenes of which there must have been many made, I know the film was quite well received and eagerly anticipated.
Star Trek: Nemesis
Die Hard Picard 4.0
**
Written on 28.09.07
Despite the claims of its producers after the tenth Star Trek film failed to score at the box office, it was clear that ‘Star Trek Nemesis’ was never going to be the last in this mostly prestigious and highly profitable line, and now an eleventh movie (based on the original crew, but played by a different cast) is due to begin filming in November. Blame for the tenth film’s weak box office performance, grossing significantly lower than any of its nine predecessors (even the really rubbish ones), was mostly targeted at what the cast, crew and disgruntled television viewers everywhere saw as ‘an over-saturation’ of the Star Trek franchise, having run endlessly and desperately for fifteen consecutive years since ‘Star Trek: The Next Generation’ first brought Gene Roddenberry’s franchise back to the small screen, and mostly plummeting into repetitive and meaningless drivel as soon as its brightest spark ‘Deep Space Nine’ finished in 1999, leaving viewers with the unoriginal ‘Voyager’ and poorly conceived ‘Enterprise’ which ended in embarrassing cancellation. It might also have had something to do with the direct competition of the reasonably popular ‘Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers,’ ‘Die Another Day’ and ‘Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets’ opening around the same time, I couldn’t say for sure.
Fandom has long sworn by the so-called ‘odd-numbered movie curse’ for Star Trek feature films, the theory stating that, by some mysterious phenomenon probably involving subspace or thalaron radiation or other form of technobabble, each even-numbered Star Trek film is guaranteed to be excellent, while each odd-numbered film in-between is sure to be damned. It’s a fun theory, but naive and frequently incorrect (though it’s right about Star Trek V – what a load of crap), and this tenth film was widely considered to finally put an end to that curse nonsense by failing to live up to its predictions of even-numbered excellence. Always intended as the final voyage of the Next Generation crew whether it bombed at cinemas or not, it seems that ‘Nemesis’ is widely panned by fans of the series for failing to give it a proper send-off, and instead relying on publicity stunts and gimmicks unsuited to the Star Trek universe, such as a ridiculous desert buggy chase and far too much focus on shooting things. I thought I’d take quite a controversial stance on this film by not completely hating it, and struggling to the best of my objective ability to voice its defence, having just finished watching it for the first time since that disappointing night in the Crewe Apollo all those years ago.
There are indeed numerous problems with Star Trek X; for a start, it’s significantly more action-oriented than even the previous Next Generation films, and macho battles between starships and between characters comprise an unusually large portion of the screen time, seemingly around half of the entire film (though I’m sure the actual amount is slightly less). The film’s script has also been criticised for being a mere copy of the second Star Trek film, 1982’s ‘The Wrath of Khan,’ which general consensus among Trekkies and casual film fans alike judges (very accurately) to be the best in the franchise. It’s true that there are an alarming number of parallels: a dangerous human adversary, a lengthy starship battle in a nebula, homo-erotic sub-text between the main villain and his second-in-command (because it’s not enough for Hollywood villains to be English, they have to be gay as well), a potentially catastrophic ultimate weapon capable of instantly wiping out entire civilisations, a conveniently long activation period in which said weapon can be deactivated, and a necessary and noble sacrifice from a popular character at the conclusion. But this paltry list of offenses aside, ‘Nemesis’ adds a number of exciting and intriguing new elements to the Star Trek film franchise, while acting as a satisfying and thoughtful finale at the same time. Honestly.
Considering some of the major stylistic changes made by this film, and the nine-year legacy of Next Generation films taking the series increasingly away from its roots, I was pleasantly surprised at how authentically Next-Gen the film managed to be, at least for the first 12 minutes and 46 seconds. Not only are all the original main cast members present, with the exception of characters such as Tasha Yar and Dr. Pulaski whose tenure on the television show was comparatively brief, but several unexpected surprises turn up at Riker and Troi’s wedding ceremony early in the film (itself a nice, if sudden conclusion to their relationship arc) and in some of the later scenes, namely Whoopi Goldberg’s Guinan, Wil Wheaton’s much-hated Wesley Crusher (who doesn’t get any lines in the final version, but hangs around in shot near his mom the Doctor), and even Data’s pet cat Spot. Some of the series’ most effective character dynamics also make a long-awaited return, the scenes between Data and Geordi LaForge in particular (Brent Spiner and LeVar Burton) making me feel right at home in the old Enterprise again. Of course, being a stand-alone film there isn’t adequate time to focus equally on all the characters like the television series managed, especially in its later years, and ‘Nemesis’ follows the example of its three predecessors by centring primarily on lead man Patrick Stewart in his most famous role as Captain Jean-Luc Picard, with the customary secondary role for Spiner’s lovable android.
The female characters Deanna Troi and Beverley Crusher (Marina Sirtis and Gates McFadden) are largely ignored as usual, though Deanna does get a larger role in her capacity as empathic damsel-in-distress and bit-of-alright (nice to see these modern series progressing from the sexual exploitation of the 1960s), and for the second film in a row, Michael Dorn’s heroic Klingon officer Worf is largely wasted as the mere butt of badly written jokes. To the writers’ credit, they attempt to provide the Enterprise’s often overlooked first officer Will Riker (Jonathan Frakes) with a more prominent role and story arc in this final outing before he leaves to pursue an intended command of his own, and although his main action scene is largely pointless and confusing, it at least makes more sense within the context of the series than Patrick Stewart’s vest-clad ‘Die Hard Picard’ action hero scenes in the previous couple of films, which still remain to a smaller extent as the old man pilots an assortment of testosterone-fuelled (metaphorically speaking) vehicles and ships. All the performers know these roles like the ridges on their foreheads, and it’s an unadulterated delight to see them playing these famous characters for one last time to the best of their abilities. The final ingredient is the film’s necessary enemy, Picard’s titular nemesis Shinzon, who turns out rather unexpectedly to be some form of clone of the captain at a younger, more reckless age, and ultimately loyal to the cause of conquering the Federation to make his adoptive race strong. Tom Hardy’s main responsibility is to look and sound like a convincingly youthful Patrick Stewart and he does this about as well as can be expected, though his character moves on from sympathetic figure of mystery to clichéd villainous enemy commander before the film’s half-way point, and is given little to work with thereafter.
What really surprised me about this film was its focus on the Romulans, a prominent enemy power in the Star Trek universe in the original series and even more so in The Next Generation, who have nevertheless remained oddly obscure in comparison to the more famous Klingons and Borg used to pull in the viewers to previous films. Focusing and expanding on this interesting and highly secretive race is another satisfying gift to fans, as is the first ever exploration of Romulus’ sister planet Remus after it was mentioned in a passing comment in the original series episode ‘Balance of Terror’ back in the sixties. Romulan concerns shift into the background after the horrific opening scene as focus shifts to Shinzon and his Reman brothers, a ghoulish, bat-like race clearly owing to the silent classic ‘Nosferatu’ in the make-up department. Their homeworld, the twin of Romulus, is a veritable Hell of fire, darkness and thankless slave labour, and the hellish metaphor is handled slightly less clumsily than the Roman one, which bears no real relevance in the series outside the Centurions and winged helmets of the original series. There is a B-plot to this film that attempts to mirror the main events, which was largely written by Brent Spiner himself; in this, which originally serves as little more than a distraction from the Shinzon plot, a dismantled android twin of Data is located on a planet near the Romulan Neutral Zone, and after some terrible car-chase shenanigans designed to appease brainless cinemagoers and annoy Trek fans, the android is eventually re-assembled aboard the Enterprise. This plot primarily gives something for Data to do, and although it is eventually weaved fairly well into the larger story in the second half of the film, it still seems quite distracting and redundant on the whole. Earlier ‘models’ of Data had already been used in the TV series to great effect, which only makes this disappointing by comparison as well as confusing in the characters’ failure to even name-check the recurring villain Lore, who was originally found in similar circumstances and subsequently attempted to annihilate the Enterprise crew on several occasions. But then, this film wasn’t just made for the fans.
This film is a confusing mess of loyal fan service and Hollywood clichés, and this is probably its biggest failing. It was widely reported that director Stuart Baird was hired specifically to provide a new perspective on the dwindling franchise, and his inexperience with the Star Trek universe really shows. While Nicholas Meyer succeeded in a similar task with Star Trek II, Baird opts for a hugely action-oriented direction, cutting many ‘non-essential’ character scenes that can be found on the DVD extras, and are among the best written and performed. Even despite all the explosions, photon torpedo battles and random fist-fights, the film falls into the trap of featuring far too much dull, moralising conversation between the two enemies Picard and Shinzon, falling into all the usual clichéd traps to disappoint fans, and only getting in the way of the loud explosions that the rest of the audience came to see. Watching the final battle in the nebula is like watching someone play one of the Star Trek video games that similarly don’t fit into the tone of the franchise, and much of the action seems to occur purely for the sake of it, most evident in Riker’s arbitrary and dialogue-free hand-to-hand struggle with a random Reman inside the Enterprise’s service ducts towards the end. While such scenes do indeed expand the Star Trek franchise, they only make it seem more like other, more famous, and far better films. The stealthy sneaking around on Shinzon’s ship, culminating in a corridor phaser fight complete with corny “this isn’t really the time for witty banter, but we’re going to have a conversation anyway, while I score direct hits against the idiotic stormtroopers who are all useless at shooting, despite this being the precise thing they are trained to excel at” event. Just in case the Star Wars homage/theft wasn’t already obvious enough, they blow a hole in the wall and jump into it after the prisoner is rescued.
I really quite enjoyed ‘Star Trek Nemesis’ for the first 12 minutes and 46 seconds. The wedding reception was rife with cringe-worthy banter, but felt like a proper send-off for the characters about to embark on their final mission, and all the stuff with the Romulan Senata being wiped out makes for a nice shocker opening. Once everybody is aboard the Enterprise and a suitable amount of weak gags have been made at Worf’s expense, the film really captures the atmosphere of the TV show as Geordi detects an unusual positronic signal coming from a planet and the ship warps off to investigate. Picard decides to lead the away team in an uncharacteristic move, and the shuttle lands in a tense silence... then a Starfleet desert buggy leaps from its interior, and the film goes downhill instantly. The special effects and explosions are all quite good, if that’s what you enjoy about films, but there’s really very little point for anyone else to watch this, a significant and tragic mis-step in the even-numbered Star Trek film legacy (even performer LeVar Burton has gone on record as saying “it sucked”). The DVD has long been available as a budget release with some special features, but was more recently re-released as the final instalment of the often-impressive ‘Special Edition’ line, though disappointingly this only adds some interviews to the previous list of extras and doesn’t attempt to modify and improve the film by re-inserting deleted scenes as was done for the special editions of the first two Trek films, before Paramount decided to stop wasting money on such a silly idea and simply repackage their budget releases with some hastily filmed interviews and a snazzy new cover tagged on. Fans of Picard and his Enterprise crew that dominated science fiction television from the late eighties to the mid-nineties will almost certainly be disappointed by this (presumably) final chapter of its legacy, and are far better off collecting the TV series on DVD. Many of the earlier Star Trek films are well worth watching too, especially if you stick to the even numbers (though ‘The Search for Spock’ isn’t all that bad).
Advantages: Another couple of hours with Patrick Stewart and co.
Disadvantages: Wees on Gene Roddenberry's grave, then that wee is launched into space to join his celestial ashes.
The Terminator
Evil Schwarzenegger!
***
Written on 03.08.03
With the release of Terminator 3, a film which I don't really have any desire to see, I was reminded that my Dad owned the other two on video. As I've overwatched his Star Wars and Back to the Future boxsets, I thought I might as well watch the first in what is now a trilogy, which I consider better than the second.
Whether Terminator is classed as action fantasy or violent sci-fi, to me it's got to compete against the likes of the Alien films, which I greatly prefer. Although the concept of the Terminator is interesting, I am not a big fan of action films and as such most of this film I do not find too appealing.
However, there are certainly bits that I enjoyed; the mystery surrounding the two naked strangers emerging from the lightning, the tension as Schwarzenegger's character gets closer to finding the real Sarah Connor, the scenes depicting the post-apocalyptic future of 2029 and, of course, the sex scene. And while the 'stop-start animation' style movement of the frightening skeletal Terminator towards the end is done very well, I still find it looks a lot more dated than it should, from 1984- although my biggest problem is with the scenes showing the schwarzenegger 'head dummy.' I cannot help thinking that there could have been a more convincing way of seeing the Terminator pull out his dead eye, as the false head is painfully obvious, but it's just the time that's elapsed since the film came out I suppose.
I'm rarely disappointed with big, futuristic laser battles so the future scenes were particularly memorable, and I liked the purple light of the laser beams contrasting with the dark blue of the landscape. Yes, that was nice.
Overall, weak acting at times, especially near the start, but Schwarzenegger lives up to the challenge of playing the evil robot better than anyone else could have, and Linda Hamilton is excellent as Sarah Connor, but I'm not too fond of the other actors. I can see the appeal of these films, basically a relentless killing machine 'after you,' but I prefer films to be on a more epic scale, especially if they're science fiction. I definitely like this better than Terminator 2 however, as this is a chance to see evil Schwarzenegger, and I assume I'd like it more than the most recent release.
Advantages: Good idea of the future, glad the future scenes were included, Schwarzenegger and Hamilton are great
Disadvantages: Too many car chases and explosions for me
This Is Spinal Tap
Lick My Love Pump
****
Written on 11.05.04
One of the biggest cult films of all time, the spoof "rockumentary" This is Spinal Tap seems to be remembered fondly by everyone who has sat through it, further emphasised by the 100% recommendation status here on Dooyoo.
THE TRUTH ABOUT TAP
Strangely, although this is very obviously a comedy - though all viewers would be forgiven for taking a while to realise this due to a lot of the subtle silliness - many people seem to have the impression that Spinal Tap are a real band, and this may be due in a large part to their "appearance" in a very early and much-seen episode of the Simpsons. It is also a testament to the film that, as with some recent spoof documentaries such as 'The Office' and to a lesser extent 'Operation Good Guys,' every effort is made to ensure believability. A lot of time has gone into making 'Tap's songs believable heavy metal tracks, while every actor and actress is excellent, and the untreated film quality keeps the documentary style alive right to the end.
STORY
The film opens with an introduction by film and commercial maker Martin DiBergi (Rob Reiner) on the "rockumentary" the viewer is about to witness. On the release of Tap's eighteenth album 'Smell the Glove' in 1982, and with their first US tour in six years, DiBergi "jumped at the chance" to get up close with the band during their tour. "I wanted to capture the sights, the sounds... the smells of a hard working rock band on the road, and I got that. But I got more, a lot more."
From the first interview with the band - frontman David St. Hubbins, lead guitarist Nigel Tufnel and bassist Derek Smalls (Michael McKean, Christopher Guest and Harry Shearer) with their overly-complicated band origins and history of doomed and spontaneously combusting drummers, it's clear that this band is not genuine. They aren't even genuine Englishmen, but anyone can do a mock 70s British accent (apart from Sean Connery I expect).
DiBergi and his film crew follow the band as their concerts are cancelled, initially due to "lack of advertising" or at least that's the excuse, and problems are evident as soon as it becomes clear that the album the boys are on tour to promote has not even been released due to complaints regarding the sexist nature of the cover. Continuing to tour disinterested locales in favour of an album that doesn't even exist (until the disappointing final cover is revealed at least), the band's loyalties and friendships are put to the test under extreme pressure. And then Derek removes a foil-wrapped cucumber from his trousers to break the seriousness of the moment. As a spoof documentary there is no real linear plot to speak of, although the storyline does develop right up to the conclusion that manages to be satisfying and a little pitiful. Not everything lasts forever, in fact the film itself comes in at under 90 minutes.
STYLE
Everyone who loves the film will have their favourite scenes, and along with the main storyline there are enough cuts to unrelated material to make every scene a classic. Memorable scenes include the much talked about scene with guitars ("the sustain, listen to that... well you would hear it if I was playing it") and amplifiers ("these go to eleven"), the visit to Elvis' grave that turns into a debate over what key to sing his songs in, the malfunctioning pod on stage and the show becoming a "comedy number" with a miniature monument and small dancers.
This must also be one of the most quoted films of all time, as some of the lines the cast come out with are hilarious in their idiocy. "There's such a thin line between clever and... stupid" is one that springs to mind, although the ramblings during interviews are when the chemistry is at its greatest. It is interesting to note that the main cast wrote and performed all of the songs, as well as writing the film's script which indicates that at least some will have been improvised for the camera to keep it seeming genuine.
RUNNING THEMES
DECLINE: The band's obviously decreasing popularity throughout the film is evident when their gigs are cancelled and they have to seek out less promising and reliable ventures. This is further evidenced by visual jokes; the opening scenes show stage crew setting up an enormous facsimile of a demonic skull for one of Tap's popular shows, and later in the film comes the embarrassingly funny scene involving an eighteen inch Stonehenge monument being lowered into view of a much smaller crowd, although however many of them are actually able to see this piece of "set" is unclear.
CAMARADERIE: The long-term friendship between David and Nigel is a lot more turbulent than either of them admit, and their disagreements are very reminiscent of immature teenagers at times, however Nigel's claim that they are "closer than brothers: brothers always fight" shows how close they really are when disagreements begin. The band are loyal to their music, and in some ways the viewer can feel sympathy when things aren't going well, but that wouldn't be anywhere near as funny. David's life partner Jeannine also keeps him from depression, although her suggestions for the band's Zodiac theme go down less well. The band's manager Ian Faith also reveals some of his true feelings when the band come under stress.
MUSIC: There is an impressive amount of concert 'material' shot for this film and interspersed throughout, featuring the songs "Hell Hole," "Big Bottom," "Sex Farm," "Give Me Some Money," "Stonehenge" and others. Despite Derek Smalls' claim during the credits that the band have grown to a level where they are producing sophisticated lyrics, there is very little evidence to support that!
VERDICT
'This is Spinal Tap' may seem a little dated in light of modern "mockumentaries," but the humour and the themes are as strong now as they ever were. Heavy metal was not be as powerful, popular or ludicrous as it once was, with the possible exception of The Darkness, but as a fan of some of the bands that are being respectfully mocked through the efforts of 'Tap, I feel I can relate to the film. In the modern world of reality TV shows, audiences need to watch films like 'Spinal Tap' to prove that life isn't always fair, and it's much more fun to watch people's lives fall apart than it is to watch a success, as 'I'm Alan Partridge' has also shown.
'Spinal Tap' is a very funny and original film that deserves all the credit it is given and although a little on the short side, the special edition DVD - that can be purchased for £7.99 from a number of online retailers - reportedly includes around 45 minutes of extra material that was never used, and ties in loosely with the film (but probably deserves to be left out of the edit).
Merchandise: Not Got Enough 'Tap?
Fans may also be interested in the "Reunion" concert of 1992, also available on video and DVD, which features many songs from this original film as well as some from the official album 'Break Like the Wind,' interspersed with new footage of the band revisiting some of their old haunts. And a search of eBay also shows that the film's huge popularity even led to action figures being released. I cannot really suggest you buy these.
The Toxic Avenger
***
Written on 05.10.07
Lloyd Kaufman’s cheesy and violent horror spoof ‘The Toxic Avenger’ was the first film produced by Troma Entertainment and remains their most popular, in a cultish, B-movie way. A daft send-up of violent vigilante films, it succeeds by balancing out the stupid humour with an equal degree of over-zealous gore and an actual plot, though this primarily involves getting the titular monster between increasingly extravagant assaults in the shortest time possible.
Weirdly, my experience with this film franchise (which has spawned comics and three increasingly unpopular sequels) began when I was about six and the short-lived spin-off cartoon ‘Toxic Crusaders’ was aired on Children’s BBC and Saturday morning shows for what seemed like far more than thirteen episodes. The premise was largely the same, which made the motions of the film enjoyable to watch in a nostalgic way sixteen years later, but it goes without saying that the film is far more violent and obscene in other ways than the seemingly harmless, environmentally-friendly cartoon series, featuring a wealth of jokes about a seemingly endless list of offensive stereotypes in the way only an 80s B-movie could get away with, from black and gay men to midgets and the blind, and prevalence of clichéd nerd, jock and corrupt government archetypes. It’s certainly not a clever film, and the few plot developments it has outside the Toxic Avenger’s vengeful rampages are taken straight from the book of formulaic film clichés. Writers Kaufman and Joe Ritter instead focus on creating some well thought-out methods of torture and execution using devices and features of each setting, which moves from an alleyway to a fast food diner and then back to the gym where it all started, and the daftness and general poor quality of the whole thing is ultimately forgivable for being so funny.
The film centres on a nerdy young man named Melvin, who works as an inept mop boy at Tromaville fitness centre and incurs the wrath of a murderous gang of jocks led by Bozo, who are shown elsewhere indulging in a game of road rage where points are allocated for killing children and people of minorities. Wanting to humiliate the mop boy, Bozo’s girlfriend Julie entices him into the pool room where he winds up wearing a frilly pink tutu and kissing a sheep, causing Melvin to run screaming from the humiliation and accidentally fall into a drum of green, bubbling toxic waste that happened to be parked outside when the van drivers randomly decided to start smoking pot. Undergoing a transformation into a hideously deformed creature of superhuman size and strength, Melvin seems compelled by an unknown force to fight crime and vanquish evil, turning up wherever sinister dealings are afoot and learning that true love really is blind, especially if your girlfriend can’t see your disgusting face.
‘The Toxic Avenger’ is so incredibly 80s that it’s a lot of fun to watch back, clearly aspiring to go above and beyond in terms of graphic and creative deaths and mutilations for video nasty fans but reigning it all in under the acceptable cloak of parody. There’s plenty of splattering from the onset, almost always involving faces and crotches, some of which is pointless and throwaway but most of which demonstrates the mutant vigilante’s apparent sense of irony and creativity when it comes to dispatching his victims. The plot attempts to moralise to a small degree, events coming to a head with the usual we-only-fear-him-because-he’s-different angle, but it’s essentially ninety minutes of mindless fun with no artistic aspirations. The transformation scene itself is always a key moment in films like this, stemming right back to the early Jekyll and Hyde films of the 20s and 30s, and it’s handled rather well, but a bit less convincing is the directors’ single attempt at being classy by withholding the monster’s face from viewers for about half the film in order to build up anticipation or something; it’s fairly pointless, and it’s a relief once this pretension over and done with. The music helps in dating the film considerably, a recurring theme being an annoying, overplayed disco style song and with some occasional use of Mussorgsky’s ‘Night on a Bare Mountain’ accompanying the mutant’s early attacks that works quite well, but only really because I love the piece. There’s also some typical violin music when the monster is sad, ahh.
Although it’s essentially a comedy, some of the more stupid humour outside of the main plot events actually goes a little too far in spoiling the experience, from scenes of the Toxic Avenger helping out the public with boy scout style good deeds to the pointless character of the Nazi police chief whose tendency to call the Mayor “mein Fuhrer – um, I mean, my Mayor” and need to stifle his salutes seem like a watered down blend of ‘Dr. Strangelove’ and ‘Allo Allo’ that serve no purpose in the film at all. There’s a lot of quite bad editing that really adds to the home-grown atmosphere of the piece, as the camera frequently cuts to shots of the performers standing in a completely different position to a moment earlier, with a corresponding tell-tale change in the background sounds. Even the Toxic Avenger’s polite, Spiderman-style voice is over-dubbed laughably and unconvincingly above his early scenes, without even bothering to get rid of the underlying grunts. The actors themselves are all clearly aware that they’re taking part in a horror send-up and are permitted to over-act to the extreme, and of course to get their breasts out if they are girls, and it’s the sort of film that would be completely ruined if a big star showed up (not that they could afford such a thing in a million years).
I’ll avoid watching any of the universally panned sequels, but ‘The Toxic Avenger’ is an enjoyable film for anyone who doesn’t mind the boundary between cinema and art being entirely non-blurred. It’s quite amateurish as the studio’s first feature-length production, and it really offers nothing to dedicated horror fans apart from some clever but at the same time rather obvious misuse of gym equipment and deep fat fryers to dispense violent justice. Fans of urban vigilantes like Batman and Spawn should find something to enjoy, and anyone who enjoyed ‘Toxic Crusaders’ owes it to themselves to see where it all began – there aren’t any sentient mops or companion heroes designed specifically with an action figure line in mind however. It was produced in 1985 and it really shows; the only real problem is that it’s disappointingly unquotable.
Advantages: Enjoyable violent spoof of 80s horror, gore and vigilante films.
Disadvantages: Quite rubbish at the same time.
Vanilla Sky
Neapolitan Dawn
**
Written on 16.02.07
It’s hard to feel sympathy for Tom Cruise’s character in this weakly surreal, lowest-common-denominator faux-high-brow sci-fi thriller, and I’m not sure whether this was the point. From the very start, David Aames (Cruise, in crafty ‘beat Aaron Aardvark to alphabetical top spot’ manoeuvre) is revealed to be a semi-talentless yuppie born into supreme wealth and status, who relies on this, along with his good looks, to have meaningless one night stands with anyone he chooses. This is not a nice guy, clearly, but one who is somehow respected by his peers, who unbelievably fail to see the funny side in his partial disfigurement following a car crash. Even David’s best friend, whose girl he’s unashamedly set about stealing, can only wish that ‘the old David’ could come back. The David who was pretty much the same, only with a very slightly less wonky mouth and eye.
Then again, as ‘Vanilla Sky’ approaches its inevitable plot-twist conclusion, it becomes obvious that all is not what it seems… yet the character remains the same, and suddenly becomes the everyman with whom the audience is expected to sympathise in his existential plight. It’s an investment I wasn’t prepared to make, instead crossing my fingers that I would see the cocky character’s two biggest fears realised: the fear of heights, and, by extension, the fear of being splattered over a wide area. David’s superficiality may have been one of the film’s themes, but no amount of tense hesitation before he pulls the light cord can make me care whether the face in the mirror is going to be handsome or malformed, albeit disappointingly. Sadly, we’re stuck with him throughout every single scene (a necessity, once it’s revealed what’s going on).
That’s not to criticise Cruise’s acting, which is adequate, even if it didn’t blow me away. He portrays Aames in various stages of sanity, hospitality and drunkenness, and his delivery of cheesy chat-up lines has the right mix of arrogance and slight awkwardness (‘I work in a dental surgery.’ ‘Boy, do I go to the wrong dentist!’) He spends parts of the film framing the narrative from behind a latex mask, and is at his most sinister and least irritating here. The film is populated by big-name stars which will probably be viewed as a good thing, but for me is always a little distracting. Cameron Diaz is given some exciting and also quite sweet dirty talk, but this failed to hit the spot, as for me she’ll always be that blonde who made out with The Mask. Penélope Cruz doesn’t have that much to do as Sofia, David’s other woman, despite having already played the very same character in the original Spanish version of this film. The character’s best scenes are all given to Diaz as the film shifts into weird mode and those characters become jumbled. Elsewhere, Kurt Russell plays an over-sympathetic psychologist and does the best he can with the material, while the most entertaining casting decision is Timothy Spall as one of David’s loyal and well-paid assistants, though his role is largely without comic merit aside from an extreme close up of his ever-bewildered face on a webcam.
The familiar faces, flashy camera angles and sex scenes make this more approachable than the majority of films that tackle similar themes, but it’s clear once the ‘real world’ is revealed that this is pretty much the same plot that’s been done countless times before, despite setting itself up to be something quite interesting in the first few scenes. The major problem I have with the film is its patronising attitude to the audience in the final scene, in which a monotonous drone-representative-of-the-corporation type explains the last hour of the film in far more detail than is strictly necessary, and in a manner that allows the filmmakers to show off about the two or three quite clever visual jokes they inserted, rather than insert more subtle visual clues that could actually serve to encourage multiple viewings. Instead of being shown an album cover of a man and woman in brown coats walking down a road shortly before seeing Cruise and Cruz re-enact the scene in their ‘real life,’ we are explicitly told that they did so because of the scene’s similarity to said album cover (a reference that particularly annoyed me, as the characters wouldn’t see themselves from a third person camera angle anyway). It’s a bit like the similarly over-explanatory scene in ‘The Matrix Reloaded’ with the Architect, and really drains any sense of interpretation from the film, not that there was a whole lot to go with in the first place. After it finished, all I could think was that so much more could have been done with the format and the premise, and I felt let down. I may still have been thinking about the dirty talk a bit, too.
Even viewed as a pretentious film, which it really isn’t (it would have been a lot more interesting if it was), ‘Vanilla Sky’ is able to hold its own a little bit. There were limited instances of subtle foreshadowing, despite the final revelation being unprecedented by any kind of real information or clues whatsoever. My favourite came in the many instances of inappropriate music on the soundtrack, which at first appeared to be a pointless but enjoyable quirk but which is eventually hinted at in the part of the film just before the revelation, when the clever viewers suss out what’s going on about a minute before the less clever people, and feel insulted that the lower classes are pandered to by such spoon-feeding. The soundtrack itself is mainly bright and cheery in an acoustic-indie manner, but could easily have been replaced by a creative score or something and possibly improved. It works to further hide the evidence that this is partly a sci-fi film, in order for it to still seem cool. And while the car crash a quarter of the way through doesn't look that exciting or dangerous, the insane rape scene later gets it all right, and is probably the film's most powerful moment.
I was disappointed by ‘Vanilla Sky,’ but only because I was expecting something a bit more thoughtful. I’m not really sure why. There’s definitely a moral, but it’s such a watered down combination of those from ‘The Matrix’ and ‘Total Recall’ that the character’s stereotypical decision only heightened by anger. Both of those afore-mentioned films are far more deserving of your viewing time, especially ‘Total Recall,’ which keeps the themes of artificiality and freedom of choice, but adds Schwarzenegger, loads of head-shots and, of course, a mutant stripper with three breasts. Cameron Diaz is wrong; four isn’t the magic number. It is three.
Advantages: Thoughtful in places.
Disadvantages: 'Relevations' appear out of nowhere, and tie everything up a little too neatly.
Lost reviews
All Quiet on the Western Front ****
Being John Malkovich *****
Brazil *****
Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam *
The Hunger ***
The Matrix Revolutions **
Monty Python's Life of Brian *****
My Wrongs #8245–8249 & 117 ****
PLOT
5 billion of the world's population were wiped out by a mysterious virus between the years 1996 and 1997, and the surviving 1% are forced to live underground in unsanitary conditions. Animals once again rule the Earth.
The film centres around the character of James Cole, a man who, at the opening of the film, inhabits a cell in a dank structure that resembles a prison. It soon becomes clear that this is not the world we are used to, and Cole has been drafted into "volunteer duty" on the inhospitable surface of the Earth. Discovering signs relating to the "Army of the Twelve Monkeys," the oppressive future society sends Cole back in time to what they believe to be 1996, with the purpose of discovering how this underground Army caused mankind's near-extinction. They do not believe he can prevent anything from occurring, but still desire the information. With his talk of the future, Cole is almost immediately sent to a mental institution.
CAST
Cinemagoers may have been surprised by some of the big names gracing this film, and the high quality and recognition of the key players doubtless had some initial impact on its success.
BRUCE WILLIS, destined to be recognised for his role in 'Die Hard' no matter how many different roles he plays, car ries out one of his finest acting performances in the role of James Cole. Anyone who thinks Willis is all about a dirty vest, guns and one-liners should watch this film and realise that he isn't about the one-liners, although admittedly the clothes have become even filthier, and he does have a gun at one point.
MADELEINE STOWE is the least recognised lead in the film, but her performance as the psychiatrist Kathryn Railly is easy to sympathise with, and very compelling once she gets onto the side of Cole and therefore the viewer. Also hand-picked by Terry Gilliam, Stowe is not the best actress in the world, but her relative obscurity makes her character more believable in the way that Cole occasionally isn't.
BRAD PITT's brilliantly portrayal of the unbalanced Jeffrey Goines earned him an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor, and this nomination was well deserved. Proving once again that he's not just a pretty face (although I have never found him, or any man, physically enticing. I haven't.), Pitt manages to steal every scene he is in, and has obviously put a great deal of time into getting his character perfect.
There are no other prominent characters in the film, but CHRISTOPHER PLUMMER plays Jeffrey's father the scientist, while a bunch of quirky and funny old people, including Simon Jones who is one of my personal favourites and a regular performer in Gilliam's films, play the future scientists.
GILLIAM'S DIRECTION
Although this film was not written and planned out by Terry Gilliam, something which allowed his full visual realisations in the films 'Time Bandits,' 'Brazil' and others, his very distinctive touch and expert skills still shine through. The story is well written by David and Janet Peoples, but Gilliam's use of foreshadowing and parallels on countless occasions back up the psychiatrist's theories on how Cole is living inside his own mental landscape.
Gilliam's reputation for sets and events that are somewhat bizarre is toned down in this more realistic film, but his depiction of the future environment is where his creativity is let loose. Plenty of transparent plastic and hulking, wobbling devices create something slightly less believable and more akin to a fantasy film, again drawing some viewers into the mindset that this is indeed a false reality.
Some of the more interesting examples of this dichotomy and parallel include:
· The methods involved in, and the existence of, time travel. The first time Cole is sent we do not see this transition, and our first sight of him is in prison. Later, Cole glimpses a plastic vent and tunnel in a laboratory, and the next time he travels we see a very similar device being used for that purpose.
· Cole begins the film in something similar to a jail cell, and the first time we see him in 1990 he is in a jail cell. At this early point, it would be easy to assume he is being "mentally divergent."
· There are a great many references to monkeys made throughout the film
VERDICT
Films such as 'Twelve Monkeys' should be applauded for their ability to leave conclusions up to the viewer, but Terry Gilliam himself has commented that he would have preferred to end the film without a specific final scene. Universal demanded its inclusion and, although it is very low-key and not entirely necessary, Gilliam believes that it makes too strong a statement that everything the viewer has seen is genuine. While I do not completely agree with this, there are certainly parts of the film in which the ambiguity could have been expanded upon to make it more interesting. After all, if that's the future Cole is experiencing, it's understandable that he would think he was crazy.
This is certainly not a film "for the masses," as it relies heavily on dialogue and thought rather than impressive special effects and action. In fact, the only real computer effects are very realistically rendered animals at some points, but the acting, direction and storyline keep it interesting. This is also a film that feels very long, despite coming in at a reasonable 124 minutes, and casual viewers will likely lose interest at a number of points in the second hour. Still, it has two very well known male actors in fantastic performances, none of whom I am attracted to, and is among my top ten films. I would recommend to fans of interesting science fiction and intelligent films, although this is more accessible than cerebral outings such as the French art film comprised of a series of slides, 'La Jette,' that is was loosely based on, and that recent 'Pi' film that I didn't get or like. Apologies if I'm being a little vague there. The way in which insanity is handled also manages to be very sensitive and very funny.
THE DVD
Both the DVD and video covers of Twelve Monkeys, in the UK at least, show some of its artistic nature. Rather than featuring huge heads of Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt to sell the film, Universal have tastefully recreated the graffiti symbol of the Army of the Twelve Monkeys in white against a solid red background. This graphic is based on a clock design with eleven monkeys circling at each 'hour,' the twelfth having broken free of the monotonous cycle wh o is now free to scream and generally monkey around. I wish I had deleted that last phrase so much.
The film is presented in widescreen format with great picture quality, although it is a fairly recent film, with optional English subtitles for both the deaf and the hard-of-hearing. Although it is quite a budget release- this is the kind of DVD you will always find in sales on websites and in retailers- the special feature documentary is very impressive.
Entitled 'The Hamster Factor and other tales of Twelve Monkeys,' this 87-minute documentary charts the course of the filmmaking with Terry Gilliam and his cast and crew, from the ideas and filming to the slight disappointment of its box office success. Worth watching for fans of the film, and film-making in general, this was the footage Gilliam wished he could have had to hand when making his film 'Brazil,' which was almost rejected by the studio and took a number of years to gain a release. If nothing else, this is a chance to see Bruce Willis arguing about how to play a scene, and then making up for it, and the development of Pitt's manic character.
And why 'The Hamster Factor?' Well you'll just have to watch it to find out. Or ask me, I'm not that bothered. It's not a secret.
Advantages: Interesting and well-handled ideas, Excellent cast and direction, Touching, depressing and funny
Disadvantages: Not to everyone's tastes, Does drag on in places
Beyond the Infinite
*****
Written on 27.06.06
One of the landmark science fiction films of the twentieth century, ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ was a deliberate collaboration by successful director Stanley Kubrick and sci-fi author Arthur C. Clarke that intended to be precisely that; the ultimate space movie. Historically flawless by intent, ‘2001’ was released at just the right time to blow the minds of American cinemagoers, presenting a series of scientifically plausible portraits of a future envisaged during the ‘space race’ era.
‘A Space Odyssey’ exploits the universe of 2001 as an essential background and framework to explore the main plot, concerning humanity’s quest to solve an ancient, cryptic puzzle through the solar system. A terrifyingly inexplicable object has been excavated on the surface of the Moon, identical to an object that is seen to appear on prehistoric Earth and instigate the Dawn of Man. The monolith on the Moon sends a signal out to Jupiter, and the space shuttle Discovery is sent in that direction on the secret brief to essentially find out what’s going on. But the two-man crew of the Discovery are forced to contend with another developing life form in the form of the ship’s emotionally aware computer, HAL.
This plot is perhaps one of the least recognised aspects of 2001, but it is at least the driving force behind the film; a durable premise upon which everything else can gain relevance. Reading Kubrick and Clarke’s script without the visuals would give no idea as to what’s going on, as the creative and intellectual choice was made to narrate the events entirely in pictures; little of what the characters actually say in their brief moments of discourse has any effect on the plot or its underlying implications, with the exception of the HAL sub-plot. The monolith riddle is free to be interpreted according to the viewer’s own desire and beliefs, while the parallels between ape-man, ‘advanced’ man and the man-made computer couldn’t be illustrated better.
It’s difficult to avoid using artistic vocabulary such as ‘illustrating’ and ‘depicting’ when discussing this film, as much of it is structured like a sequence of moving (very, very slowly moving) storyboard frames rather than an action-oriented picture. ‘2001’ remains a powerful and popular film, but criticism of its pacing is well deserved. Kubrick and Clarke craft a deliberately static and sterile pseudo-Utopia, a world that seems drably believable in its sheer mundanity. The long, long scenes of twenty-first century life prior to the unveiling of the sinister monolith make for an incredibly dull and almost pointless viewing experience, a series of sequences comprised of minute plot exposition, occasional glimpses of futuristic life, and a whole host of tedious model shots and unnecessary conversations held between characters who never appear in the film thereafter.
Modern viewers (and likely, viewers for several decades now) won’t share the ‘wow’ factor that the lunar vista and docking sequence rely on in their excessive duration. The combination of futuristic visuals and antique symphonic music works extremely well and is deservedly memorable, but the film would only be improved by choice editing of the lengthy space scenes, especially in the second quarter. Pacing aside, the film really does look incredible, assuming modern viewers accustomed to CGI are prepared to suspend their disbelief at the less advanced and often very obvious model shots and matte paintings. From the opening scenes of a barren prehistoric wasteland (filmed on a roof at MGM in London) to the exterior space shots and clever gravity-defying set designs, 2001’s lasting strength is equally balanced between its iconic visuals and positive and critical interpretative sub-texts. The final quarter of the film, the legendary ‘Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite,’ is a psychedelic mind trip that will deter casual viewers and astound those who found themselves hooked even in the uneventful opening hour. Pink Floyd fans benefit from a whole extra dimension to this sequence (see comments).
Despite its focus on technological advancement, and its implications, ‘2001’ is ultimately (arguably) a story about the state of humanity, though is not necessarily a condemnation or sanction of our progress. To criticise the acting as stilted and wooden is to miss the point entirely. Dr. Floyd’s cold interaction with his daughter on video-phone concludes brilliantly with the character’s insistence that his daughter inform his wife that he called, Poole stares blankly at the TV screen as his parents sing ‘Happy Birthday’ on video, and Bowman doesn’t utter a word as he disconnects the ship’s circuitry and endures HAL’s admissions of fear. It would be shamefully elementary to declare that the computer character displays the most humanity (freedom of interpretation requires at least the possibility of contradiction, rather than a clear, single meaning).
The clean white sets and lofty sci-fi plot will prevent casual viewers from fully appreciating the psychological horror of the film’s second half, and indeed its general critical tone from the onset. Far from being a peaceful Utopia to contrast with something dingy in the vein of ‘Blade Runner,’ 2001 merely strives to anticipate the twenty-first century, without aesthetic embellishment, as best it can. Whether this works to create a visually compelling film is debatable, but the real focus is overtly that of man’s evolution and progress, aided perhaps by the first monolith that introduced weaponry to the world in the hands of apes. Humanity is still shown to be insular, untrusting, devious and reliant on artificiality and technology.
‘2001’ is a unique film, despite a few attempts to emulate its style. The excellent design concepts of space stations and craft interiors crept its way into the ‘Star Trek’ movie series, the first film of which attempted to emulate 2001’s style as an aid to telling an epic story. Sadly, only the most boring aspects of the film were replicated. The sequel to 2001, ‘2010,’ was based on Clarke’s sequel to the original’s novel (written alongside the production of the film, and only slightly different), but is a much different affair that even ignores some of the admirable stubborn traits of the original, the use of sound effects in the vacuum of space being particularly to my chagrin.
‘Star Wars’ may have polluted the science-fiction film forever, but ‘2001’ was a marvel of its age, and can only be fully appreciated placed in its pre-Moon historical context. The docking scenes are tedious and the ape suits are rubbish, but the music from Richard and Johann Strauss is great, and HAL’s soft-spoken voice is infectiously sinister and quotable. There’s a lot to consider in 2001, and a surprising amount going on, yet it’s all reconciled with near-perfection. Sequels are unnecessary and re-makes are out of the question. This isn’t a film for everyone; half-art and part-suspense, it’s a great piece of cinema that somehow clicks with a substantial portion of film fans.
Advantages: Intriguing concept, amazing visuals.
Disadvantages: Tedious pace, confused genres.
A
We Have Clearance, Clarence. Roger Roger, What's Our Vector Victor?
*****
Written on 27.06.04 [2015 update]
In 1980, Jim Abrahams, David Zucker and Jerry Zucker unleashed the comedy classic 'Airplane!' to international acclaim, a film that combines high-tension danger, struggling romance and a lot of silly jokes to create one of the most influential films of the early eighties. It's a funny film.
PLOT
Elaine Dickinson (Julie Hagerty) is a stewardess on a flight that her lover Ted Striker (Robert Hays) boards in an attempt to win her back following his mental health problems and failure to completely get over his war experiences. Unfortunately it becomes apparent that the fish course served to many of the crew, including Captain Oveur (Peter Graves), has caused massive and potentially lethal food poisoning. It's up to Striker to land the plane, aided by the ground control team, and save everyone's lives.
If this story seems like an overused cliché, that's because Airplane is essentially a parody of the stream of airline disaster films produced during the seventies, pioneering the spoof comedy genre that has now been sadly overused and destroyed thanks to unoriginal efforts such as 'Scary Movie.' Anyone who has seen and enjoyed 'Airplane!' will know that every scene is filled with jokes, from silly wordplay ("I am serious. And don't call me Shirley") to visual gags (a topless woman panicking in front of the camera) and basic slapstick fighting. The two lead characters are very reminiscent of the films being rightly mocked and as such carry out the story in a fairly traditional manner, albeit with plenty of time for comedy based on their actions, but the true comic genius of the film originates in the supporting players.
CAST & CHARACTERS
On the whole, the cast for this film are excellent, all contributing to the deadpan style of the whole thing. Although he is the main star, Robert Hays doesn't impress as much as some of the others and can seem out of place at times, but the inclusion of Leslie Nielsen raises the comic level of this film enormously. Nielsen is surely one of the funniest actors in history; everything he says in that monotonous voice has me micturating myself. The inclusion of the crazy ground control staff, from Lloyd Bridges' McCrosky, a man who picked the wrong week to stop abusing his body with chemicals, to the ludicrously camp Johnny played by Stephen Stucker.
Although it seems like a good idea at the beginning, the over-acting of Julie Hagerty becomes a little frustrating as the film progresses, and it's perhaps due to programmes such as 'The Office' and 'I'm Alan Partridge' that I find the more low-key performances the most enjoyable - real-life basketball star Kareem Abdul-Jabaar plays an exaggerated version of himself under the guise of the co-pilot, making his scenes with the excellent Peter Graves even more watchable.
Aside from Striker and Elaine, the lovers whose personal lives chaotically mingle with the plot, most of the characters are presented as ill-at-ease flyers with personal problems - in the end, not even the innocent children and religious characters are shown to be free of corruption, as a nun is seen beating a woman to keep her calm while a young girl tells a boy who is trying to befriend her that, "I like my coffee black, like my men." Even the calm Dr. Rumack clearly suffers from some kind of mental disorder, misinterpreting peoples' questions and how to act in a crisis situation.
THE HUMOUR
'Airplane!' is a hugely popular film as the comedy is present throughout, never becoming too complex for the average moviegoer to understand. That said, it may not appeal to everyone but as a fan of films such as 'The Naked Gun' and 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail,' I loved this instantly and have watched it many times since I was young. Even situations I wouldn't normally find amusing are executed perfectly here, such as an extended scene in which Robert Stack beats up a procession of religious workers in an airport. Clever humour is also used to trick the viewers however and some of this subtlety makes for the best jokes of the film - Bridges standing at his desk with a photo of himself standing at his desk on the wall, a doctor discussing a heart operation while a replacement heart leaps around his table and Stack stepping out of what was assumed to be a mirror (a joke repeated in the second film when William Shatner reveals that a TV screen was in fact a window) are excellently underplayed.
The parody element extends beyond disaster films, including a rendition of what could only be Saturday Night Fever with boomerang clothes, while some of the subjects made fun of could potentially be sensitive: mental problems, religion and suicide are all mocked to a degree, but then comes the hilariously literal "sh** hitting the fan" scene to keep everyone amused and content.
VERDICT
This film is an undeniable comedy classic, but it has obviously aged somewhat over twenty four years. The films it is criticising are no longer a common feature of the cinema and many of the jokes have been used repeatedly since, but the light-hearted comedy value of the film has not been lost. Two years later came the sequel, conveniently titled 'Airplane II: The Sequel,' which was also very funny but did basically re-use most of the jokes and situations from this first film. Writers Abrahams, Zucker and other Zucker soon went on to create the moderately successful TV series 'Police Squad!' followed by its hugely popular film incarnation 'The Naked Gun' which, while not as influential and perhaps not quite as funny, is another very entertaining series of films starring Leslie Nielsen. Nielsen is approaching eighty years of age but is still going strong, but 'Airplane!' may be his finest hour.
I would not hesitate in recommending this film to people of all ages as the only "controversial" elements are a pair of jiggling breasts and a couple of minor, well-timed swear words, and I loved it just as much when I was a child as I do today. I'm also sure plenty of old people will enjoy the plane dilemma, even if they do find these young people with their "drinking problem" jokes a bit silly.
Alien
The Original Cut Reigns Supreme
*****
Written on 23.03.04
Recently re-released in the cinema and now on DVD is Alien: the Director's Cut, another attempt by Hollywood producers to make more money at the expense of the public. I haven't seen this new edition but judging by what has been changed I know I wouldn't like it as much; after all, being the director of the film in the first place, surely Ridley Scott's original direction is the true 'director's edition,' as the scenes which were cut were all done so for reasons of pacing and atmosphere. In any case, before I mislead you further this is not a review of the director's cut, but the original film on DVD.
Alien was not among the very first films to be transferred to the DVD format, but was relatively early on. It was certainly among the first wave to be packaged in what are now called 'DVD cases,' rather than those cardboard things.
The film will be familiar to countless people, whether you liked it or not, and is essentially a science-fiction-suspense-shocker where an entire crew, except one lady, are wiped out by a hostile and very very cool looking alien, courtesy of the great H. R. Giger, the painter from belgium or wherever it was who generously painted my desktop theme. Constantly referred to as one of the best sci-fi films of all time, or one of the scariest films of all time, Alien managed to impress the average thrill-seeker as well as greatly impress the dedicated fan. Oh yes, and it started a very famous, yet increasingly worse, film franchise. Sigourney Weaver will be forever known as Lieutenant Ripley, the strict scientist who ironically seems the first character who should be tokenly killed, but who manages to survive. Along with the cat.
Alien appeals to me for a number of different reasons. Primarily, I suppose, because I ; am a big fan of high quality science fiction, and the future depicted in Alien is an interesting take on the genre. Far from the stable Federation of Star Trek, Alien shows space to still be an unknown place where colonies and ships are sent out by the mysterious 'Company;' possibly Ridley Scott's idea that the increasing power of corporations in America would eventially end up with them ruling the world and indeed the sector. Alien is the only horror film I have ever bought, or am likely to buy, as I do not usually enjoy this genre apart from this exception. The sets and characters are all so believable and unique that I couldn't stop watching this film when I bought it off eBay, and I was also able to admire the top quality directing. I would recommend this film to any science fiction fan due to the 'tramp steamer' quality of the spaceship Nostromo, a look which was basically ripped off for Red Dwarf's third season. I have no problems with that though, it was certainly an improvement on the grey.
In terms of the DVD, this is very impressive considering it was brought out so long ago. The special features leave nothing to the imagination, including very important and famous deleted scenes including the infaous 'alien cocoon' sequence which was cut and reintroduced into the second film. Some of the deleted scenes are simply cut for time reasons, although there is one in particular which reveals that the alien is far too guy-in-a-suit; the less is more approach thankfully deleted this one! Director Ridley Scott's audio commentary was also, apparently, the first to be recorded for use on a DVD and it manages to raise interesting points, although not much that can't be found in the behind-the-scenes galleries and notes (which are too extensive even for me to re-read). A pe culiar feature of the DVD is an alternate version of the soundtrack by Jerry Goldsmith, probably removed to try and keep the tension with the very subliminal final score, which plays the whole film in silence apart from certain scenes where sound effects are changed or the music is different. I'm not sure I could sit through two hours of that though, even if this was something like Monty Python & the Holy Grail, arguably the greatest film of all time.
Overall, Alien is a very classic and very enjoyable film which I will always have in my collection. It manages to combine the interest and wonder of science fiction with the fear of being hunted and murdered by a spiky black alien, and is truly an original, especially in 1979. There are only a couple of scenes where the film shows its age, notably the very large and slow computer and the very fake head of Ian Holm (what a guy), but the cast are great, the directing is top quality and the overall look is of something incredible. Despite many years of hearing from my friends that Aliens (Alien 2) was the best because of the "dead cool guns" I found it very lacking as a film, although it was enjoyable as a straightforward blast-em-up. Alien 3 bored me as a child, although I did enjoy a bit where a man was pushed into a fan, and Alien Resurrection was simply a poor modern day average space film. It's a shame, as they could have done so much more with the franchise. This DVD is very cheap all over the internet, and I would recommend it to everyone, one of the finest films of all time.
ADDITIONAL
For those who are wondering, the main scenes added in the recent director's cut are the cocoon sequence and some others amidst the action. Apparently, Scott's original decision to cut these was because their slow pace ruined the momentum and tension of the last half hour of the film. The director's edition may also possess a higher definition picture but Alien is clear enough in this edition, and the special features are extensive enough.
Advantages: One of the true classics, both for sci-fi and horror fans, Original and unique look, much-copied, Plenty of special features
Disadvantages: A couple of scenes look dated, but that's nothing for a film that's 25 years old
B
The Final Showdown
*****
Written on 25.03.04 [2013 update]
"You're not thinking fourth dimensionally. When you hit 88 miles per hour you'll be sent back to the past and those indians won't even be there..." - Doctor Emmett 'Doc' Brown, 1955
The third and final chapter in the Back to the Future must have surprised long-time fans and move critics alike when it failed to become a box office flop and instead provided plenty of great action, comedy and compelling storyline to live up to its predecessors.
Although it could easily be described as a pathetic attempt to win audiences with a tacky time travel plot stuck on to a teen romance film, those people would be incorrect and rubbish. Certainly a film it would be easy to dislike, Robert Zemeckis' original "Back to the Future" was a very rare example of a film that my Dad considers to be a classic which I actually like: the regular list includes such 'classics' as Innerspace, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, the A-Team series and Short Circuit (he must have been at least 30 when that came out, what's going on?) It's also a film that I can watch again and again, and indeed have done since I was very young. Back to the Future, not Short Circuit. The shaky science sci-fi comedy about a teenager's adventure in the 1950s to save his friend and attempt not to screw up his own conception in the process proved incredibly popular worldwide and spawned the two great sequels, titled part II and part III a little unimaginatively, in which the miniscule yet ageing Michael J. Fox's portrayal of a seventeen year old became increasingly less convincing. Christopher Lloyd's rendition of Doctor Emmett Brown, the slightly crazy and very funny scientist, just keeps getting better.
I've never been a a fan of westerns, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying this film. I obviously can't appreciate the Clint Eastwood gags as much as someone who has seen all the films of that genre, but you benefit from the same kind of jokes if you've simply watched the previous two films. There are more parodies of the original's "mom, is that you?" and "I hate manure" scenes, while Buford 'Mad Dog' Tannen is as funny/annoying as the more regular Biff Tannen.
There are many stories regarding whether the 'you've got to come back with me- back to the future!' ending of the first movie was an intentional link to a sequel or, as my Dad's BTTF annual suggests, only a joke. However, the success of the film ensured that a more serious gripping finale could be left at the end of the second film to be resolved in this 1991 finale. Through a number of enjoyable catastrophes and accidents, Marty has ended up back in 1955 a second time and, although having just set history right yet again, has seen the time-travelling, flying DeLorean car struck by lightning with the Doc inside. Marty's fears are eased a little when he is handed a 'not to be opened until 1955' letter in which the Doc reports that he was sent back in time to 1885 and the Old West. Marty seeks out the Doc's 1955 equivalent who receives a bit of a shock as he's just sent the Marty from the first film back to the 1985 of the first film, and the film ends with the Doc lying on the ground. Is he dead?...
BACK TO THE FUTURE: PART III
No, he just fell for a while. Needless to say it takes a little convincing, in a scene with some great comic timing, but the Doc eventually manages to find the stored DeLorean from 1885 and sends Marty back to rescue his old pal. There are plenty of wild west shenanigans in the Hill Valley which, despite being a century earlier, still features the same basic bloodlines and actors.
There have been a number of prominent characters in all three films, but for me it's the dynamic between rock-n-roll near-adult Marty McFly and the slightly senile Doctor Emmett Brown, played brilliantly by Christopher Lloyd, that has always made it worth watching. They make a great team, no matter what age or time period they happen to be habiting, and in this final instalment it's even more enjoyable to see the role reversal taking place when Doc falls in love and finds himself distracted, and Marty must try and talk him out of it. This even proceeds to a scene contrasting brilliantly with the first film where Marty exclaims "great scott!" and Doc replies, "I know, this is heavy." Classic stuff! In this film, the Doc finds love with the intellectual school teacher Clara Clayton, while Marty is hung, dragged around and shot at.
If you enjoyed the other Back to the Future films, you should enjoy this. It's some light-hearted time travelling fun with a couple of great characters, but if you thought the original was a bit poor then you'll probably like this even less. I'm just glad that it lived up to the expectations by fans, something that seems to be a very rare event. Oh yes, and there was a cartoon series that aired shortly after this that I'm doing far too much justice by even mentioning. It was not good.
Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey
Most Triumphant
****
Written on 06.04.04
If a friend put on his video of this 1991 sequel to Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure and made me watch it for the first time, I would possibly murder him in cold blood. The instant appeal of this film for me is that since I saw it at the cinema when I was but six years old, it has been an important part of my childhood, and this allows me to better appreciate its merit as a movie.
Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure was the story, based on a comic book series [No it wasn't], of two underachieving High School rockers who get caught up in a quite silly but well-written time travel adventure, eventually finding out that they are considered revolutionary heroes for the music their band, 'Wyld Stallyns,' will go on to create. By the end of the film, it was difficult to see how Bill S. Preston Esq. (Alex Winter) and Ted "Theodore" Logan (Keanu Reeves) could be considered in any positive light, but this film serves to clear it up.
PLOT
Instead of focusing on time travel, the eponymous "bogus journey" of the film comes when Bill and Ted are mercilessly thrown off a cliff by evil robot versions of themselves, and die. When the Grim Reaper (William Sadler) arrives, they cleverly use their Melvin technique, more commonly known as a wedgie, and escape. They ultimately end up getting mistaken for evil dead dudes by their Missy, I mean Mom, and her spiritual group. They vow to escape from Hell in order to rescue their Princess babes and stop the evil robot thems from destroying the future of mankind...
STYLE
Clearly the film is quite silly, but the humour is much more mature and sophisticated than in the previous film (honestly). The depictions of Hell and Heaven are very impressive and avoid any possibility of disrespect or offence, unless you are offended by the Reaper ending up as a bass-playing rapper, while the storyline manages to stay interesting and unpredictable.
This is not the usual High School tale of romance and getting stoned, there are no mentions of addictive substances apart from the alcohol consumed by the evil robot clones, and this should be considered much more a sci-fi comedy than a teen movie.
HUMOUR
For me, the main comedy of the double-act comes from their unusual slant on the typical rock-loving US youth. For a start they are friendly, but also use fantastic expressions to describe their situations as "most triumphant" and "non-heinous."
Bill Sadler's Death character is also excellent as the butt of jokes, from his first Melvin through to the parody of Ingmar Bergman's Seventh Seal chess game: this time the heroes play Twister, Cluedo, some kind of ice hockey Subbuteo, and Battleships. "You haff sank my battlesheep."
RECOMMENDATIONS
I would recommend this film mainly to the younger, pre-18 generation, however there is still enough substance and plot to make it appeal to adults and parents. A film I feel I should watch every several years just to remind me of my youth. I suppose Wayne's World is the next step up, and a much funnier film, but isn't really in the same league as it isn't a sci-fi film. And however superior a film The Matrix manages to be, Keanu Reeves' best performance is still in this movie.
The Brain That Wouldn't Die
It's You That's Been Stealing Those Limbs from the Amputee Operations!
**
Written on 19.10.07
With a title like ‘The Brain That Wouldn’t Die,’ you would probably expect Joseph Green and Rex Carlton’s film to be a cheap, trashy, unoriginal and laughable sixties horror flick, when in fact these two screen legends managed to produce one of the more compelling, spine-chilling and scientifically cautionary masterworks of the decade. No, only joking. This is obviously just another fairly tedious and unspectacular R-rated sci-fi horror putting a contemporary spin on the Frankingstein plot, this time benefitting from the breakthroughs in plastic surgery, organ transplants and test tube babies that were hot topics in 1959. It’s just a shame the film was delayed a few years to 1962 to prevent it losing its one real niche.
The Frankingstein in this case is ambitious, smooth-talking young scientist Dr. Bill Cortner, played rather woodenly by Jason Evers, whose highly experimental and unorthodox treatments are gaining him some notoriety at the hospital where he works with his traditionalist father and devoted fiancée Jan (Virginia Leith). Bill finally decides to show Jan his nefarious experiments at his laboratory up at the isolated country house, but in his haste to get there in response to his assistant’s summoning, he accidentally veers off the winding path and narrowly escapes the burning car wreck with his life. Jan, sadly, is not so lucky, her corpse burning and decapitated, but Bill isn’t going to let that get in the way of a happily married life. Rescuing her head and making haste to the lab, Bill pumps it full of his experimental life juice and sets about finding a beautiful body to match before her time is up, too busy to heed his deformed assistant’s warning that a mutated monstrosity they’re keeping locked up in the closet seems increasingly eager on breaking free...
The film has an extremely simple plot divided into two strands: the vengeful plot brewing in the lab between the bitter Jan and the unseen monster, and the Doctor’s sleazy cruise for a corpse. Not an awful lot happens in the overlong scenes, and the film only lasts for an hour and ten minutes, though there’s supposedly a longer eighty-two minute uncut version featuring Bill’s encounter with some strippers amongst other things, though it’s probably not as interesting as it sounds and clearly not worth the trouble of tracking down when the standard version is freely available. The highest hopes prospective viewers can have when approaching a film like this is for some unadulterated campy horror fun, and if possible a wealth of cheesy dialogue and so-bad-it’s-good plot developments, all of which the film can boast to a moderate degree. For a start, it’s fairly watchable despite the lack of action in some scenes, as the writers successfully bait the audience along with a promise that the much-hyped monster will be revealed by the conclusion, and through the morbid fascination with Dr. Cortner’s dastardly scheme, easily and deliberately comparable to a psycho date-murderer and played completely straight and rather creepily throughout.
There’s very little in the way of special effects or gore that might be expected of a Frankingstein tale, but a satisfying balance is struck between convincing and authentic-sounding scientific reasoning and really rubbish lines, many of which I eagerly scribbled down. From the Doc’s laughably brief life’s work that has taken all of “a few weeks” to reach this advanced level, to his stereotypical arguments with his right-wing father and God-fearing assistant and the scornful moralising of ‘Jan in the Pan,’ it’s a script that essentially writes itself, and when Green’s screenplay tries to impress it fails very amusingly, though the blame also has to be placed on the poor acting. When the assistant asks his boss where he’s going to find a body, Evers repeats his line “there are ways. There are ways” in a flat monotone that fails to sound sinister in any way, even when adding a mischievous wink. The script’s most defining moment has to be Jan’s assertion that, “like all quantities, horror has its ultimate. And I’m that.”
Not all of the acting is terrible, but a few cast members are clearly hired entirely for their bodies, particularly Adele Lamont who goes way over the top with her attempted angry portrayal of the glamour model Doris. Despite a large amount of focus being given to scantily clad females, including some camera-eye sizing-up of their chief assets, the film avoids being truly sexist by presenting the whole thing as the Doctor’s dirty scheme; if anything, his repeated assurances that he can be trusted, backed up by his respectable profession, should actually serve as a warning to more gullible members of the audience, and this is probably where the film is at its best. Let’s face it, the competition is a static head in a scuba helmet whispering to a cupboard. The film really shows its rushed and half-hearted nature through some major slip-ups and inconsistencies in the script, and it’s additionally amusing to see the exceedingly picky Doctor passing up each opportunity to snag himself a body when presented with an irresistible better deal that he feels compelled to chase, despite the time pressure he keeps insisting upon. Nevertheless, the film manages to be truly creepy as he scans the merits of each currently occupied body and leads Doris along with a promise that he will fix her scarred face, when in fact like all men he’s only interested in one thing: everything from the collar downwards (right on).
Although the lack of major effects avoids making each minute of the film look ridiculous, it’s still badly dated through other means, especially the obtrusive musical score. The sleazy sax accompanying every scene of nude legs gets irritating very fast and spoils what should be a sinister tone, but the biggest offender has to be the grating, Batman-style squealing accompanying the overlong speeding scene, though admittedly it makes it funnier if you’re watching for that reason alone, which I suppose most people are. Minimal and effective trickery is used to disguise Virginia Leith’s body that everyone knows is under the table, and as for the scientific apparatus, you can’t really go wrong with a generic arrangement of tubes and beakers. Probably the aspect of the film I found the most difficult to understand was the apparent oversight that it was Bill’s reckless speeding that caused the accident in the first place, something Jan seems to overlook in her hatred of him simply for bringing her back in this unnatural state, and that Bill himself is only too happy to ignore as soon as he realises that his whole life and scientific training has been preparing him for this life-saving moment.
There are plenty of other films and books that carry off the Frankingstein plot much better (Mary Shelley’s original ‘Frankingstein’ still being the best), and really no reason for this film to exist other than to satisfy B-movie lovers who have already seen all the stupider films out there. At just over an hour it’s an easy viewing, and has long been in the public domain meaning that it’s freely downloadable from film link sites or the primary Internet Archive at http://www.archive.org/details/brain_that_wouldnt_die. But then, so are a lot of better films too.
Advantages: Quite creepy in a sleazy way, and tries its best to be bang up-to-date.
Disadvantages: It's a film about an angry head on a table, and that's it.
C
The Riddle of Steel... now in Special Edition
*****
Written on 10.08.03
Schwarzenegger's first starring role and for me, his greatest. As large portions of this film are intentionally without any speech at all, it is the power and look of Conan that could not be matched by anyone else other than Arnie. Conan's nemesis Thulsa Doom is also played excellently by James Earl Jones, whose character is much more about speech, and as such the two main stars of this film are perfectly cast.
Talking about the film itself, I found Conan surprisingly enjoyable, as I'd always assumed it was simply a film for boring people or those who liked to look at flexing, sweaty men, and it has possibly the most endruing, re-watchable quality of any film I have seen. Many a Friday night have been made perfection thanks to Sky Moviemax 4 playing Conan for a number of weeks in a row around my friend's house, rounded off with some late night online Diablo II. (For more information on these perfect nights, see my Diablo II review).
Each scene is relevant and enjoyable, and while there are ineviotably parts of the film that I like more than others, even the in-between sections are enjoyable. As I said, the cast are excellent, even those actors who obviously have less experience but still suit their parts perfectly, the 'sword and sorcery romp' is unbeatable for its genre, and the all-important musical score by Basil Poledouris, important as it is the only sound in some scenes, is equally perfect.
The story is basically that of a young boy (Conan) whose parents are killed by warriors bearing the sign of a serpent, who is taken from his home in the north to be raised as a slave and, ultimately, a gladiator. When he is set free, "like a wild animal that had been kept too long" according to Akero the narrator, he begins to live the life of a thief before being sent on a quest to rescue King Osric's daughter from the same snake cult that killed Conan's parents. There is plenty of action, a sweaty sex scene that shows boobies for people whose enjoyment of films may be based around these, and also a healthy dose of comedy.
Overall, Conan stands out from all the other action-fantasy films of the era and beyond thanks to the way it is kept to the original vision of Conan comic book creator Robert E. Howard; not over the top with magic, more concerned with strength and emotions. This is certainly a film that deserves a watch even if, like me, you would not have expected to have liked it. No other film has utilised Schwarzenegger's talents so much, and no other role has been "made for him" like this one.
Concerning the DVD, the picture quality is great, but on both my DVD and that of my friend, a lot of the movement goes very fuzzy which makes it less enjoyable. The music and sounds can be heard perfectly, and the extras on this "Special Edition" are also very worthy of the film, and were made specially for this release.
"Conan Unchained" is a very interesting look behind the creation of the film, and also gives memorable insights into the somewhat insane mind of the original Conan creator. Everyone in and behind the film is given their due credit.
The audio commentary is also very useful and different for when one has watched the film many times, while the inclusion of deleted scenes, trailers and special effects shots give you something to do when you've got a few minutes to kill.
It would be hard to improve this DVD, escept for the picture quality. I don't know how exactly to recommend Conan as I know for a fact it would not appeal to everyone, but if you are a fan of fantasy in general, or possibly action, you should find it an enjoyable watch, and will certainly be able to see why this deserves to be Arnold Schwarzenegger's finest hour (well, 119 minutes). A very, very quotable film!
Do You Still Like He-Man?
**
Written on 16.07.04
To many people the 80s conjures memories of male singers dressed as ladies backed by electronic drums or, in my case, watching 'Rainbow' and weeing my pants in playgroup that one time, but to a large proportion of the world's population it was the decade of He-Man, Conan and various other muscular warriors fighting evil sorcerors in fantasy worlds. In 1986, Dino DeLaurentiis and Edward Pressman decided to produce a sequel to their 1982 hit film 'Conan the Barbarian' that was certain to be a box office success among Dungeons & Dragons players and regular cinemagoers alike for one reason: Schwarzenegger. Unfortunately, as has been seen countless times since, the pectoral Austrian governor is no guarantee of a great film.
THE STORY
Fighting off some random gang or other, Conan (Schwarzenegger) and his inexplicable and annoying sidekick Malak (Tracey Walter, a man) are approached by ambassadors of a Queen and summoned to her palace. There, Conan is entrusted with the protection and guardianship of Princess Jehna (Olivia d'Abo) who must undergo a series of trials in distant regions to prove her worth, or something. Unbeknownst to Conan and his crap comedy sidekick, Queen Taramis (Sarah Douglas) is actually an evil sorceress who plans to kill the rejuvenated Princess on her return as a sacrifice to the statue Dagoth.
Conan, Malak and the Queen's trusted guard Bombaata (Wilt Chamberlain) lead the Princess around to her trials and are joined by accomplices old and new in the shape of Mako and Grace Jones to fight off ice wizards, clans and beasts. But will Conan realise he is being duped? More importantly, will he realise that this sequel completely fails to capture the spirit and general idea of the first one?
CAST & CHARACTERS
I'd be tempted to say that Schwarzenegger's always good as I do respect and like the guy, but he really isn't given any good material to work with here. His Conan character is barely recognisable as the original in terms of the writing: here, the warrior is shown to be a talkative, friendly, honourable man; a far cry from the orphaned boy taught to kill to survive and "bred to the finest stock" during his captivity in the original. Schwarzenegger's dominance in the film industry has also clearly led to him having to tone down his workout to play more believable roles: his muscles are still impressive (but not attractive, I am not inclined that way) but are nothing compared to the meat axe of the 1982 film (even this was the result of losing some muscle, as Arnie was apparently unable to wield a sword due to his bulky arms and chest previously).
Grace Jones is the other big name of the film, but I don't really see the appeal in terms of her character here. A ruthless warrior woman is a good addition to the cast but the attempted chemistry between her and Conan never feels genuine. Wilt Chamberlain is even more well-built than Arnie here which is quite enjoyable to watch, but he is unfortunately quite a bad actor, the same being true for Mako - excellent in the first film as the weird, nameless wizard but only seeming to be comic relief here. The worst offence of the film is the inclusion of the annoying Princess and the bumbling oaf Malak, neither of whom deserve any mention apart from "unwatchable."
THE DISAPPOINTMENT
1982's 'Conan the Barbarian' was Schwarzenegger's major film debut and, for all its alleged Aryan supremacy undertones, sexism and violence, was an impressive film by John Milius. Arnie's lack of acting skill didn't affect his performance as the efficient, vengeful warrior, the sets were realistic and the fantasy world potentially believable, not to mention the excellent musical score from Basil Poledouris. The supporting cast included a surfer and a dancer who had never acted before, but even this didn't spoil the film. You only didn't like Conan the Barbarian if you didn't enjoy films about sweaty body-builders carrying out a very simple revenge plot. It was good anyway.
'Conan the Destroyer' deliberately went for a more typical fantasy plot and ends up feeling much more like a run-of-the-mill adventure film that will appeal to children who liked 'Labyrinth.' Director Richard Fleischer is really good at ignoring every successful and interesting technique applied by John Milius in the original, while the writers Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway would be much more at home writing for 'Thundercats' than a big-budget action film. The violence is toned down to a comical level; the supporting characters are annoying and feel very contrived; there are far too many spoken lines for Schwarzenegger and co.; the fantasy world spoils the believable prehistoric landscape of the predecessor; the monsters look pathetic; there are far too many convenient events in the plot and, perhaps most importantly, the storyline is rubbish.
THE DVD
Conan the Destroyer is a fairly budget release DVD, demonstrating its obvious inferiority and less "classic" nature to the original, which received a deluxe release. A trailer, different language options and a brief biography of those involved is all that's present in terms of special features, but there's also a very impressive and enormous A4-size poster of the film artwork, if you feel that your jotter pad could do with a new cover. I don't think there's any chance of 20th century Fox re-releasing this film as it doesn't really deserve it (even from an unbiased point of view), although I believe it may have been released somewhere in a three-pack along with 'Conan 1' and 1985's 'Red Sonya,' a similar film to this that at least doesn't claim to be Conan (despite Arnie's character's obvious similarity).
VERDICT
I've been very harsh to this film, but that's mainly because I felt disappointed. I used to really like the first Conan film, although I haven't seen it in a while so my opinion may have changed a little, but none of the things I liked about it, and that gave it replay value, are present here. Even Basil Poledouris' musical score pales in contrast to the excellent symphonic backing to the first film, which relied on a lot less dialogue and more symbolism and visual storytelling.
I would have liked this film if I was a child, especially as a number of scenes actually seem geared towards a childish fantasy world - the lengthy scene with mirrors in the ice castle doesn't belong in an adult adventure film. The cheesy lines of all the characters and the deliberately modern dialogue of the comic relief characters, who are unfortunately really unfunny and irritating, makes this a distinctly average Hollywood action flick, cashing in on Arnie's huge success at the expense of continuing in the excellent style of its predecessor.
If you've managed to avoid this so far, please continue to do so. If you want to copy and paste this review into a word processor and insert a hilarious old chestnut Terminator or Californian Governor reference at the end, feel free to do so but please don't tell me about it.
Video Nasties: the New Breed
***
Written on 24.09.04
'Cradle of Fear' is a low-budget, tasteless, almost plotless British horror film, for all its flaws, at least knows its target audience and its expectations very well. Director Alex Chandon, the man behind the even more obscure 'Pervirella' and 'Drill Bit,' recruited members of black metal band Cradle of Filth along with a cast of midgets, amputees and very cheap actors to produce the most over-the-top gore film in recent memory. This straight-to-video film's tag-line says it all: "it's not IF they die, it's HOW."
This film is split into four distinct storylines, all of which loosely integrate into the primary plot in the tradition of Hammer and other horror classics such as 'Doctor Terror's House of Horror.' Chandon fills each one with adult material in the form of nudity, drug abuse and, primarily, extreme violence.
STORY
Convicted killer Kemper (David McEwan) is serving a life sentence in a dingy underground cell following a series of ritualistic child murders involving strange hypnotism. Kemper has established contact with his like-minded son (the mysterious silent character The Man, played by Dani Filth) and exacts revenge on those who put him away in the most violent and gruesome ways possible. Right from the onset, The Man is seen mutilating and gorging on the bodies of two would-be muggers, even finishing off with an alley cat. This man is pure evil.
I
The first story sees sexy goth Emily Bouffante feeling entranced by The Man in a gothic club and eventually bringing him home for a night of strange and painful intercourse. In the morning she feels used and very ill, seeing twisted demonic faces in the crowded streets on the way to her friend's flat. But then the stomach movements begin, leading to the most memorable and hilarious scene in the film.
II
The second part is connected far more loosely to the main plot and sees a pair of tough criminal girls break into an old man's house to steal his valuables and divide the spoils. But when the deaf old man is disturbed from his slumber, there is no choice but to dispatch him, several times if necessary... and then Sophie sees a way to keep all of the cash to herself.
III
Drug addict and crimelord Nick is still pining for his lost leg, feeling inadequate even with his devoted girlfriend by his side. Desperation leads to Nick asking his doctor for a replacement leg, but he is assured that none are in supply. If Nick can find a leg, it may be possible.
IV
The final chapter is the most interesting, concerning a sick underground website in which victims are incarcerated in a chamber and can be tortured and killed through a live video feed by the user. The son of the detective in charge of the Kemper investigation has become addicted to the experience, but soon ends up on the other side of the screen.
CAST & CREW
A low-budget film like this isn't going to attract the most successful or accomplished acting talent, and for many of the unextraordinary stars this will inevitably be their greatest achievement. There are several believable or otherwise interesting performances by the more prominent characters in the film, although Dani Filth does little more than stare wickedly and tear heads in twain, and token midgets and self-mutilated buddies of the director who would go on to appear in Cradle's music videos.
The film quality is sub-soap opera and the special effects are laughable but have character in these CGI-dominated times, but it's not the cheap look that would put people off this film so much as the gore, blood, stabbings and other explicitly adult material; most people will have purchased this video/DVD for precisely those reasons.
VERDICT
Cradle of Fear is to some people's taste. On its release it was most readily received by fans of Cradle of Filth due to the presence of band members and several of their more atmospheric songs in the gothic and groove soundtrack, but once that publicity died down it became something of a must-see for fans of the obscure, the occult and the horrible-but-light-hearted.
More brutal than anything in recent years but produced a couple of decades too late to enjoy the sheer cult status of gore films such as the infamous 'Cannibal Holocaust', Alex Chandon's video case praise that he is "the future of horror" is a little extreme for this piece of novelty sickness, but time will tell if he manages to exceed this cult-acclaimed severing of modern British horror.
Much more widely available than you would like to imagine.
D
Nocturnal Pulse
*****
Written on 31.08.04
A phone rings, a man answers. At the other end is a voice, claiming to have all the answers to the man's identity and the nature of his world. The man is forced to hang up and run as shady, inhuman agents approach his location: he has a power unlike the other humans, but he must learn who and what he is before he can help free himself and the oblivious populace of the city from their reluctant roles in a terrifying extraterrestrial experiment.
It's easy to see why many film fans accuse the Wachowski brothers of ripping off this 1998 classic of modern science fiction cinema, but the style and tone of each respective film is very different. This is a review of Dark City, not a hateful list of reasons why the Matrix was copied from other sources in cinema and literature - if you're interested in that, the internet is full of information like that. I like the Matrix a lot, but I like Dark City more.
STYLE
Writer and director Alex Proyas was previously best known for his 1994 cult hit 'The Crow,' the violent but emotional adaptation of the popular gothic comic book series that became infamous for costing the life of star Brandon Lee during filming. These are the only two films directed by Proyas that I've seen, and there are very clear similarities in the shooting style for each. The most noticeable is the setting: grim darkness over the hulking skyscrapers of a modern city, filled with people going about their mundane lives and somehow failing to achieve true happiness within them.
Although the concept is primarily a science fiction one, this film is executed as a mystery thriller and even features the token detective bent on the investigation of a murderer. There are no real nods to genre classic 'Blade Runner' through use of this style, as the feel is more that of the film noir era that Ridley Scott's film was itself based upon. There are no flying cars here either.
As with the Crow (which was originally intended to be black-and-white), the colour palette of this film is strictly limited within scenes to reflect the mood: black, browns and the occasional neon for the rain-soaked cityscape at night, and a more electrifying blue lighting for the scenes underground in the lair of the Strangers. Memories of a happier childhood long ago make use of limited daylight and seascapes, and these fabricated memories are the only portions of the film that truly display happiness.
PLOT
This is not a light hearted blockbuster, but it also doesn't require in-depth examination in order to enjoy it, unless you enjoy watching the Matrix trilogy with a copy of Descartes at hand. The wheezing Doctor Schreiber (Kiefer Sutherland) provides the most basic introduction in his opening monologue, explaining that a dying alien race he calls the Strangers are in control of the city's inhabitants, forever altering their lives and memories in their search for the human soul that their collective culture lacks, and that they believe will allow them to survive. Schreiber was forced to wipe his own memory when he agreed to work for the Strangers, meaning that although he is one of the few humans who are aware of the truth, he has no knowledge of their origins, only that he is a traitor to his own species.
No one notices that they black out at midnight each night, only to be confronted with a slightly different landscape and lifestyle the next night. No one notices how it is impossible to leave the city, or that daylight never comes.
The protagonist who becomes known as John Murdock (Rufus Sewell) awakes in a bath in a dilapidated building, his accidental amnesia providing a means for the viewers to discover the mysteries of the film along with the character. John is unable to recall the identity he is supposed to be living, and his ability to consciously alter the environment around him (what the Strangers call "tuning," an ability that only their developed minds are supposed to achieve) makes him the target of the trenchcoat-clad bald aliens, led by the creepy Mr. Hand (Richard O'Brien) who attempts to become Murdock to discover how his mind works.
CAST
The acting in this film is first rate and allows for some very interesting and memorable performances by a couple of genre staples. Kiefer Sutherland (24, The Lost Boys) divides opinion with his portrayal of the reluctant collaborator Doctor Schreiber, but he does manage to steal most of his scenes with his unnerving posture and strange breathy voice. Similarly, the legendary Richard O'Brien (The Crystal Maze, The Rocky Horror Show) is delightfully weird as Dark City's equivalent of the Matrix's Agent Smith, although he is a little underused in the second half considering his relative importance. The third big name of the film, William Hurt, is a celebrated actor who is nevertheless not above accepting more minor roles in both TV and films, although he doesn't do anything particularly inspiring as the "good cop/bad cop" of the film.
Rufus Sewell is undoubtedly the main star of the film, an English actor whose big break can't be far away and who has starred in 'A Knight's Tale' and the BBC's 'Charles II.' His realistic performance as the confused and reluctant hero, who thankfully never goes into hero mode whatsoever, makes this a much more enjoyable film, and it's great to see him at the depths of despair. Jennifer Connelly is the only female lead and doesn't get too many lines, but the past Academy Award winner continues to prove that she's come a long way since playing the girl Sarah in the eighties classic 'Labyrinth.'
The supporting cast are used very sparingly and to great effect. The Strangers are all played by bald men of varying ages (including a very scary child), while Murdock's conversations with "unenlightened" inhabitants of the city makes for some of the best sequences of the film in the "imagine if that was me" manner. As Detective Walenski, Colin Friels plays a role that has been done again and again, that of the experienced man who is dismissed as crazy by everyone he meets, but manages to keep it down-to-earth and interesting rather than over-the-top wacko.
Everything in this film is kept low-key and mundane, which makes the later discoveries all the more surprising.
VERDICT
Dark City looks incredible and is never over the top, but the relative complexity of the plot may put off many casual viewers. This film does have some impressive action scenes towards the end, one of which is very, very reminiscent of the fight in the disappointing Matrix Revolutions, but this is primarily a cerebral and atmospheric piece of filmmaking that is something of an acquired taste. This is the best place to acquire that taste though.
The mystery and enigma of the plot starts to become a little tedious in the second half of the film before the most shocking piece of the puzzle is revealed, and from this point onwards, Dark City is a brilliant and compelling film that completely buries the latter efforts of the Matrix trilogy, and even makes the first one seem a little less impressive. Bleak, fascinating and intelligent, and I really love the title.
Dr. Who and the Daleks
Who's Your Granddaddy
**
Written on 17.12.07
The two Dalek films of the 1960s starring Peter Cushing as Dr. Who are early oddities in of the legendary sci-fi franchise, standing distinctly apart from the established canon of the long-running television series despite being based entirely on the plots and characters from serials in the early William Hartnell years. Milton Subotsky adapted Terry Nation's television script for 'The Daleks' largely as an attempt to popularise the series in the American market, replacing Hartnell's aloof Doctor with a slightly sillier version played by the more internationally recognisable Cushing, and although the slight but jarring differences between the two mediums make it impossible to reconcile this adventure into the franchise, now experiencing a second wave of popularity through the resurrected series, 'Dr. Who and the Daleks' still stands strong as an entertaining if simplistic take on the classic theme of good versus evil, made more appealing by making the enemies xenophobic, armoured mutants.
Watching this first Dalek film with the slightly unfair hindsight of the later television episodes, the pepper-pot villains come off as a little disappointing. Even ignoring the trifling inconsistencies with the later revisions of the Tom Baker era, the Daleks don't seem as intimidating or downright chilling here as they were on the television, and even in the subsequent film sequel 'Daleks Invasion Earth 2150 A.D.' in which the battle is brought to home soil. Their death gas attack is only used very sparingly (replacing the originally scripted flamethrowers visible on the theatrical poster, deemed unsuitable for the young viewers this film is primarily aimed at), and despite spending the second half of the film plotting the obliteration of their neighbouring race the Thals, they are shown to be fairly incapable and awkward when faced with an assault even in their own custom-built city. Other slight disappointments come in the complete absence of their trademark phrase "exterminate!" and the less refined approach to Dalek dialogue, carried out in a more detached, staccato manner than the manic distorted yells they are more famous for, and making some of the longer scene of Dalek intercourse pretty tedious to sit through.
Now, I know what you're thinking: firstly, you're probably still dwelling on the phrase "Dalek intercourse" and trying to deduce how that would physically work, but you may also be shaking your head at my rather petty nitpicks with a film made in the early days of the series by which point many of its trademarks had yet to be established. But if I want to indulge in a film promising simply 'Dr. Who and the Daleks,' Daleks is what I bally well want. It's not all bad of course, and many of the villains' established traits are already firmly in place: the suits come in a variety of technicolour variants showing off for the luxury of colour film, inevitably leading young viewers to pick their favourite (I think mine was the gold one with black knobs seen in the sequel. My brother liked the red one, but I found that a bit garish), and their interior is controlled by a diminutive and fairly disgusting green mutant, glimpsed only briefly when a human tries the suit on for size. The Dalek background explained is the film is satisfyingly simple, casting them in a necessarily evil light for their treacherous ways compared to the peaceful Thals, though it may leave more thoughtful viewers pondering whether this outcome would have been the same if the Daleks had been the ones to develop an antidote to their planet's radiation, and the Thals mutated beyond recognition. The answer is, yes it would. The Daleks will always be Nazis, which has saved generations of writers from the burden on having to approach their story from a sympathetic angle that they clearly don't deserve.
The arrival at the Daleks' planet comes about entirely by accident, as the excited and slightly eccentric Dr. Who eagerly shows off his Tardis to his granddaughter's new boyfriend. The device resembles a police box, but appears deceptively small when viewed from the outside, and Dr. Who proudly claims it has the ability to traverse time and space (for the purposes of this story, it's not clear whether time travel played a role at all, apart from in the brief comedy finale). Due to general clumsy buffoonery on the part of Ian (Roy Castle from 'Carry On'), the group of hapless adventurers find themselves transported to a barren woodland, unable to return home without finding a source of mercury for Tardis; as fortune would have it, a technologically advanced city sits just over the hill, and Dr. Who is hopeful that whatever scientists they bump into there will be willing to help them. Can you guess what happens next?
This classic Doctor Who tale features the series' successful mix of science fiction, suspense and action, roughly in that order, as the exploration of the Daleks' pink city is made increasingly eerie as it's slowly revealed that Dr. Who and his companions are being monitored and lured into a trap. The Daleks, despite their occasional stupidity, seize the opportunity to send one of the humans as an ambassador to their old enemies the Thals, offering them essential food in return for the Thals' antidote to the planet's radiation poisoning, but a number of tediously overlong scenes with two characters I can only dub the Plot Exposition Daleks keep viewers informed of their real duplicitous goals. They are also presumably unable to leave the city themselves due to the lack of ramp access (ha ha, I am funny - actually, it's because they require magnetism), and one of the best scenes of the film sees young Susan (eleven-year-old Roberta Tovey) taking it upon herself to make the perilous journey, recognising her comparative fitness over that of her older companions, themselves starting to succumb to the radiation sickness, and at the same time realising that she can no longer rely on these powerless adults to protect her. Roberta Tovery is great in the role, never over-acting or slipping up as a less proficient child actor would tend to, and most importantly of all, providing a familiar role model for young audiences rather than alienating them by being annoying.
The rest of the cast is equally skilled, and with the exception of the rather generic, transvestite Thals, above the usual television quality standard of the series. Roy Castle successfully manages both the comic relief and action hero roles, Jennie Linden remains confident and practical and avoids screaming as Susan's oddly older sister Barbara, and main star Peter Cushing brings to life a notably different Doctor to his contemporary Hartnell, pulling off the silly early scenes in which Dr. Who is shown to be a little senile, forgetful and to enjoy reading a child's action comic a little too much, to his more passionate role later on when forced to bring ideas of violence back to a peaceful people. Dr. Who's relationship with Susan provides some nice warmth to their scenes, and never comes across as creepy in the way it sometimes threatened to in the early TV years as the old man travelled with his teenage granddaughter under careful scrutiny of her school teachers. There are other slight tweaks from the television series too, most notably the Doctor's apparently human background and use of the specific name "Dr. Who" being used for the character, but perhaps most disappointing of all is the replacement of the famous opening music with a generic piece from Malcolm Lockyer, whose score is reminiscent of other sixties production such as 'Thunderbirds' (alright, I'm not familiar with many others).
A slightly higher budget and lack of major special effects scenes keep this film from dating too badly, though the Daleks' colourful collection of lava lamps in their control room seems rather questionable in hindsight, and as long as the viewer is prepared to ignore the fact that the forest is an obvious set illuminated by equally unconvincing green lighting. It caused me to think that this would make quite a good children's play (a Dalek pantomime perhaps?), though with the recent series continuing to capture the youth's imaginations, much to the delight of parents who have to shell out for Dalek hybrid masks, such a venture would only prove confusing. The final half-hour of this film becomes a little long-winded, despite attempting to be action-packed, but on the whole this is a fun and viable alternative to watching the more in-depth William Hartnell serial on which it is based. This version is shorter, coloured-in, and has Peter Cushing playing a silly old man, but the following year's sequel was a lot better.
Advantages: Fair and concise re-make of the first Dalek episodes with a good cast.
Disadvantages: Pointless changes are made to the format, and the whole thing is rather simplistic and childish.
The Sleeper Awakens
**
Written on 09.07.06
Author Frank Herbert’s complex and fascinating vision of the future has only gained in popularity since the first publication of the epic ‘Dune’ in 1965. Combining classical fantasy themes and innovative science fiction concepts and yet still highly tuned to contemporary concerns, a Hollywood motion picture adaptation was, at the very least, inevitable. Herbert’s futuristic vision is incredibly detailed and involved, and even leaving aside the numerous sequels to the first novel, Dune’s vast scope and descriptive, expensive-sounding imagery deterred production companies and crews from pushing the project forward. A balance needed to be found between the complexity of the novel and the limitations of the cinema medium, including audience patience.
Director David Lynch and producer Dino DeLaurentiis struggled through budget issues and differences of opinion to finally unveil ‘Dune’ to the world in 1984, and their disappointing, overcomplicated, tedious film was relegated immediately to the non-prestigious and unprofitable backwater realm of ‘cult’ movies, one of the most (in)famous flops in film history.
Lynch’s film – which ends up far shorter and more harshly edited than he desired – adapts the linear plot of the first Dune novel, from the introduction of the political situation and characters to the lasting, dramatic effects they have on the planet Arrakis, also known as Dune. In the far future, the Spacing Guild is ruled by the devious Emperor Shaddam IV of House Corrino, and its member planets, notably the powerful House Atreides and House Harkonnen, are engaged in a historical feudal battle. The Guild’s entire existence is owed to the Spice, a substance that powers space flight and technology and that can be cultivated only from one planet in the known universe: Dune. House Atreides is sent to oversee spice production on Dune under orders from the Emperor, who hopes to instigate conflict between the Atreides and Harkonnen houses in order to eliminate them as potential political rivals.
This is the basic backstory for Dune, and the background that allows the main plot to happen. This concerns Paul Atreides (Lynch staple Kyle MacLachlan), son of Duke Leto and heir to the house, who is the result of selective breeding. Displaying an almost intuitive grasp of survival and customs on the desert world, Paul takes refuge with the native Fremen after the Harkonnens reclaim the planet, and starts to raise an army to stop spice production and destroy the corrupt Emperor’s Guild forever.
Watching Dune isn’t the most comfortable experience, as those who haven’t read the book will likely find themselves struggling to keep up, and even missing the point of some developments. For a film to be a successful adaptation, it needs to sever such ‘companion-piece’ ties to its novel of origin, and Lynch’s Dune doesn’t succeed. Oddly, some of the film’s most commendable decisions lie in the departures from Herbert’s novel, such as the use of sound-based weapons as practical, visible applications of the ‘Weirding Way’ battle technique, which in the book is far more introspective. The pacing also presents a problem, which makes me wonder just how dull Lynch’s director’s cut of the film (never released) would have been. The characters all act cold and distant throughout, even those in familial relationships, and despite some nice acting in a couple of scenes between MacLachlan’s Paul and Francesca Annis’ Lady Jessica Atreides, this film never seems to be about the characters as much as the grand scale of the plot, which is itself alternately difficult to follow and predictably drawn-out.
Dune isn’t all bad. Herbert’s plot itself is excellent, and when the translation to screen succeeds, it succeeds well. The problem, as you may be able to see even in the short synopsis, concerns the story’s depth and quantity of original terminology. Criticism seems to lie in two opposing camps: fans of the book who wish to see the most faithful adaptation possible, and fans of sci-fi films who don’t wish to be inundated with unnecessary details that distract from the essential plot. Dune is admittedly full of such elaborate exposition, and attempts to narrate the entire backstory that Herbert feels is necessary to follow the events of the story would be impractical and terrible.
Unfortunately, the completed film fails in both areas: an opening monologue by Princess Irulan (Virginia Madsen), a minor character, wrestles with audience patience in filling us in with historical information, and another scene near the start of the film sees Paul ‘reminding himself’ of the galactic political situation on his computer. Not exactly a gripping opening, and to make matters worse, much of what is said is unnecessary to the plot, leaving out some issues that could have done with a bit more explanation. It reminds me of the current Hollywood trend for superhero movies that insist on spending most of the plot showing the hero’s origin; audiences should be given a little credit for their ability to suspend disbelief and simply accept what they’re presented with, especially in a sci-fi / fantasy film such as this.
The most impressive aspect of Dune for me, as a viewer who’s never read the books and thus isn’t so enthusiastic about the plot, is the film’s impressive visual accomplishment. Despite my disappointment that plans to involve ‘Alien’ designer H. R. Giger were dropped as the film’s pre-production crew constantly shifted hands, the final job is striking, impressive and memorable, if a little obviously false in a cool early-eighties matte painting way. The desert scenes were filmed in Mexico, on great empty expanses of barren land that were made even more barren and empty by the film crew, and this makes them far more effective than they would have been in a studio set (as was done for the more recent TV mini-series of Dune) or the customary quarries that have resulted in so many near-believable desert scenes in cheaper science fiction over the years. The royal palace on Dune is huge and impressive also, and that’s not even to mention the other locations glimpsed only briefly: the rainy coastal palace of House Atreides on Caladan and the gritty, industrial-gothic lair of the Harkonnens. It’s strange, but watching Dune with the foreknowledge of its lack of box-office success makes me feel an irrational sense of financial guilt for viewing the tall, lavish sets that ate so much of Universal’s finances. The enormous sandworms are pretty amazing too, and a positive memory to take away from the film, even if their importance to the plot later on is a bit distracting; they're much more interesting as simple massive beasts that can be tricked into ferrying Fremen on their backs.
The film’s soundtrack is its other notable point, as it’s interesting and unusual, regardless of the viewer / listener’s musical taste. Departing from the customary orchestration of similar genre giants such as ‘Star Wars,’ the decision was made to use a rock band. Electronic rockers Toto were recruited, and wrote several brilliant and moving pieces for the soundtrack, including its opening theme, as well as a large amount of average, unimpressive material. Brian Eno contributes the ‘Prophecy Theme’ to gain himself a place in the opening credits, and this duality has led to complicated releases of the soundtrack album over the years. Personally, I love the music: Toto’s synth symphonies are fitting to Herbert’s fusion of the historical and the futuristic, however dated those instruments may sound in the 21st century, and I’m easily won over by a nice guitar solo.
It’s unlikely that Dune will be re-made as a movie, if only because the Sci-Fi channel produced a couple of mini-series of the first few books several years ago. The format doesn’t particularly suit Frank Herbert’s detailed world, and even some nice guitar solos, a shouty Patrick Stewart and a ridiculous Sting (yes, that Sting) can’t save this from being something of a failure in all but cult circles. I’m sure I’ll read the novel some day, and at least the film was successful in introducing many prospective readers to Herbert’s universe. The price they pay is the struggle to disassociate characters with actors’ confused faces and planets with model shots.
The advantage of Dune's (continuing) commercial failure is that video and DVD releases can be found for very low prices almost everywhere. In fact, my DVD version (sans extras) was given away free with the Observer. Anyone interested in seeing this adaptation of the novel should do their best to avoid the dreadful 'Dune: TV Edition,' which is pointlessly re-edited to the point of being unwatchable, and adds a patronising animated opening that explains even more unnecessary information than Irulan's boring monologue in the feature. Maybe Dune would work as a rock opera double-album, I’d buy that.
Advantages: Striking vistas, fairly impressive cast, memorable soundtrack
Disadvantages: The book doesn't really work on screen, especially in this version
E
This One a Long Time Have I Watched
*****
Written on 31.08.04
The impending release of the re-re-mastered Star Wars trilogy on DVD next month provides yet another source of hatred from more obsessive fans towards George Lucas over his general inability to leave a great film alone, but these frustrated fans (who are most likely bespectacled and talk in one of them whiny John Major-style voices and are men) are ignoring the positive side of the release: Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi can now be seen in all their glory on crystal clear DVD format, complete with special features and a soundtrack that doesn't wobble all over the place through overuse because they're the only good videos available when you're round your Dad's.
PART V
Far from being a mediocre central film bridging the gap between the beginning and explosive end of a film series, The Empire Strikes Back is the darkest, strongest and most enjoyable part of the Star Wars trilogy. The three-part structure is similar to the other films, and it doesn't have much of an ending to speak of, but the fascinating development of the plots and characters is enhanced by spectacular visual effects and locations that show Industrial Light and Magic at their very best. Oh yes, and George Lucas' involvement in this film was kept below the totalitarian level as well.
The Empire Strikes Back is among my favourite films for one primary reason: it's an incredibly fun piece of fantasy cinema. No deconstruction or symbolism-seeking is required to enjoy the speedy chases, the epic confrontations or the funny little beeping robot with Kenny Baker inside it. This is one of the greatest sit-back-and-relax films of all time, unless you like Disney which I don't.
STORY
Filling the viewer in with the opening crawl, 'Empire' takes place some time after the previous film, but the destruction of the Death Star has clearly not left a devastating mark on the forces of the Empire. Darth Vader is alive and well, and has sent probes out into the galaxy in search of the Rebel Alliance. He finds them. A skirmish with hulking Imperial robots on the ice planet Hoth ends with victory for the Rebels, but Vader has become obsessed with finding the potential Jedi Luke Skywalker and turning him to the Dark Side to fight with him.
The characters break up to pursue their different paths: Han Solo, Princess Leia and the others on board the Millennium Falcon get into some hairy business with the Imperial fleet while Skywalker travels to meet the aged Jedi master Yoda to continue his training. As his powers develop, Luke realises that he must head into Vader's trap to save the lives of those he cares about.
CAST
Mark Hamill's performance in the first Star Wars film was a little distracting to say the least; the delivery of lines such as "I'm Luke Skywalker, I'm here to rescue you" and "I was going into Toshi Station to pick up some power converters" made Luke something of an annoying adolescent rather than the developing hero he was supposed to be, but in the three years between Star Wars and Empire his acting talents seemed to improve immensely. And he stopped wearing his pyjamas, which adds to the credibility of the character. Some people have a problem with his reaction to Vader's classic revelation in the cloud city, but I think Hamill puts in a great performance as the potential Jedi with ever-increasing confidence.
Harrison Ford is again the big name of the film, and his one-liners and loveable scoundrel persona must have attracted more than just Princess Leia. Ford shines even more in this film thanks to the much better script, and his importance to the whole saga is really demonstrated by the conclusion that effectively hinges on his successful recovery. The third star of the film, Carrie Fisher, is again an enticing and very human character whose finest moment is nevertheless fated to be her incredible outfit in Return of the Jedi. If I were twenty years older, she would still be right out of my league (and married to that Simon and Garfunkel guy or something I expect). This film also introduces Billy Dee Williams as Lando Calrissian, but without watching his more noble antics in the following film it's difficult not to see him as a double-crossing arse.
Aside from the token dashing lead stars, the Star Wars films also feature the greatest inhuman characters around, granting legendary status to actors who would otherwise be too small, too large or too strange to be considered for other roles. Kenny Baker and Anthony Daniels are again the men inside the Droids, and when the Star Wars films drag on in parts I enjoy playing the "guess when Kenny's not inside there" game, which usually involves the cutaway from a rotating R2-D2 head to a static shot of the robot falling over into sludge. Peter Mayhew looks scarily like Chewbacca in real life, while Somerset-born Dave Prowse is again overdubbed in his role as Darth Vader by the vocally talented James Earl Jones. Have fun with a friend speculating why this was.
FINISHING TOUCHES
A developing plot and recognisable characters can make a popular show, but without spectacular effects and a rousing orchestral score you’d just be watching Coronation Street or something, and who likes that? Industrial Light and Magic put the noticeably larger budget to excellent use in this film in creating three believable alien worlds (the ice planet Hoth, the swampy Dagobah and the cloud city over Bespin) as well as action scenes involving the Millennium Falcon and the Imperial walkers as memorable as the Death Star battle from the first film, an impressive feat indeed. The animatronic Yoda is far more enjoyable to watch than any of the computer generated equivalents in the modern films, and at the same time far more convincing, while the use of lightsaber and blaster effects is not overdone.
John Williams' epic score is one of the most recognised in the history of cinema, recycling some of his creations from the first film (the title sequence for one) but also creating the excellent Imperial March theme for Vader and several speedy compositions that make the chase scenes even more exciting. The vacuum of space has never sounded so grand.
VERDICT
If you haven't seen the Star Wars films, this has likely been a deliberate decision on your part. After all, they're no strangers to television (especially if you have Sky) and were re-released as box office hits less than a decade ago. Star Wars films certainly aren't for everyone, but they do seem to be for more people than other sci-fi or fantasy adventure films, and bridge the generation gap perfectly. Children will get a kick out of seeing that green guy they have the action figure of standing in the background of a scene, teenagers will enjoy Carrie Fisher and want to be Han Solo, adults will enjoy Carrie Fisher or Harrison Ford if they are a woman or gay, and old people will enjoy Alec Guiness' cameo in a series of films that he has repeatedly expressed his disappointment at being involved in. The old idiot (rest in peace).
The Empire Strikes Back is a classic film that many people would remember more fondly if George Lucas stopped messing around with their favourite lines (Vader's angry bark "bring my shuttle!" at the climax was changed to the calm "alert my Star Destroyer" in the special edition, and Luke's noble albeit not fatal sacrifice as he falls through the windy shaft was spoiled by the dubbing of the Emperor's scream from Return of the Jedi. The internet is full of important information isn't it?). Nevertheless, this is a great film from the eighties which proved that space could be fun.
Appendix: DVD Changes
As unnecessarily anal and nerdy as it is, I nevertheless found the list of supposedly confirmed changes to the DVD editions quite interesting reading. There are a predictably huge number of websites dedicated to these, complete with pictures that suggest this isn't just a big hoax, but the Empire Strikes Back changes that may be of interest are as follows.
Firstly, many effects shots have been cleared up and specially retouched, which is arguably something that makes the film better at no cost to the "classic" feel. Lightsaber and blaster effects have been made more colourful and crisp, while hologram and ghost effects have been made less fuzzy and indistinct.
Now onto the more controversial changes, which I can't confirm but that are currently providing sleepless nights to many fans who take things a little too seriously. The voices of the Stormtroopers in all three films have reportedly been changed to fit in with Episode II, which apparently showed that all Stormtroopers are clones of Boba Fett's father and would therefore have the same voice. Boba's cool growly voice may also have been changed as a result to make him more human, which is a shame as everyone who had the action figures knows not to mess with the Fett.
The discussion between Vader and the Emperor has also (apparently, remember?) been changed to feature the Palpatine actor from the disappointing Return of the Jedi and the even more disappointing prequel trilogy, rather than the weird wrinkly monkey thing that originally featured in the scene. The Emperor's dialogue has also been changed so that it echoes Vader's immortal line towards the end of the film ("look inside yourself, you know it to be true") which kind of ruins that for me. Lucas is an idiot.
I wonder if they'll ever remedy Harrison Ford's disappearing jacket routine in the carbonite room...?
Just Like Regular Chickens
****
Written on 12.08.06
‘Eraserhead’ is director/writer David Lynch’s first film, and represents a height of strangeness that he has never again reproduced. A cult classic and labour of love, the film invites criticism as much as it does acclaim, the obsessive pet project of a film art student in pursuit of being abnormal. Although some sections rely almost entirely on the WFTSOW factor (weird for the sake of weird), there’s enough interesting and insightful material to keep dedicated viewers hooked past the end credits, and Lynch succeeds perfectly in capturing an original and specific horrific atmosphere in crisp black-and-white.
Like Stanley Kubrick’s ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ a decade earlier, Eraserhead contains very little dialogue, and scenes are extended to the point of extreme ennui. There’s a sense that Lynch would prefer to avoid such a ‘mainstream’ cinematic trait as having the characters actually speak at all, especially considering Eraserhead’s debt to silent era cinematography, but like ‘2001’ the dialogue is only there to clarify the basic plot events. All of the weird interpretative stuff is left for the audience and critics, and the entire screenplay reputedly lasts only twenty-one pages; a whole hundred less than the Hollywood standard encouraged by screenwriting manuals. Despite one heated scene in which Mary loses her temper, the conversations make for the most tedious viewing, as Lynch insists on epic pauses between the simplest of lines. I prefer all the weird stuff with pencils.
The film’s plot follows what may be the final days in the life of Henry Spencer, a timid printing worker currently ‘on vacation,’ who has a most triumphant hairstyle. Henry is called by his girlfriend Mary to come to dinner with her parents, where he learns that Mary has given birth to something or other after a bizarrely short pregnancy. The two are forced to marry by Mary’s domineering mother, and to look after the deformed creature in Henry’s flat. Whatever Lynch’s personal feelings towards children and married life, the film acts as a remarkably strong deterrent towards pursuit of either, as Henry is driven to insanity by the disturbingly persistent infant’s cries.
Eraserhead’s setting is a bleak and decadent industrial dystopia. Without the benefit of special effects in exterior scenes, Lynch relies on filming run-down areas, which proves just about adequate. More impressive is Henry’s dingy apartment block, darkened by eerie, active shadows and cursed with unpredictable electricity. By contrast, the ‘X’ family home appears outwardly unscathed by the nightmare world. This indicates something of a Christian moral on Lynch’s part, however ironic the intention, in which conjugal life is admired and rewarded, and pre-marital sex is punished.
This is certainly not a film for the masses, but it’s recognisable enough in its themes and domestic situation to be popular, especially after Lynch hit the big time with ‘The Elephant Man.’ It’s a bit of pop culture that people who like to think they are interesting or subversive will try to track down, and then decide for themselves whether they’re wasting their lives and should just get into ‘Lost’ instead. The final scenes of the film are the most surreal and disturbing, but on the whole there’s quite a nice balance between the conventional, the unsettling and the WFTSOW. The visit to the X family’s household is an example of all three: Mrs. X’s over-the-top fits don’t convince me, and when she abruptly starts to make out with Henry it becomes a little silly. By contrast, the scene with the motionless grandmother begins as something of a comedy sketch but becomes quite sinister when Mrs. X ‘helps’ the corpse to mix the salad bowl. The bleeding, dancing mini chicken carcass is somewhere in-between. Most impressive of all is the horrifying mutant baby, which must be one of the most convincing (animatronic?) monsters in cinema history.
Once you’ve interpreted the destruction of the Death Star in ‘Star Wars’ as a magnificent scene of penetration, ejaculation and fertilisation, there’s no going back. ‘Eraserhead’ contains similar imagery in its opening scene, in which Henry, in a dream-like trance, vomits an ethereal worm/sperm creature that splashes into a pool on the surface of a barren, rocky sphere, signifying Mary’s pregnancy. The worms and the ‘planet’ (as it’s referred to in the end credits) reappear later in the film, in what may be dream sequences. It’s hard to tell; when Henry’s waking world is that screwed-up in the first place, it doesn’t really matter. There’s also a nice song in the middle of the film that aims to either comfort Henry, or encourage his suicide. It’s a very open-ended film, and the director has kept tight-lipped for thirty years.
If the film’s about anything, it’s about the fear of commitment, the restrictions of married life, how to cope with the ungrateful burden of a child, romanticising the past and condemning the present, and the truth about rubber-tipped pencils. As a reward for keeping the electrified hairstyle for the five years of filming, Lynch cast Jack Nance in every film and TV project made until the actor’s murder in 1996. Eraserhead has always been popular on video, and seems to be currently between DVD releases, unavailable from online and offline retailers perhaps in anticipation of a thirtieth anniversary release next year.
Advantages: A very original film that succeeds in disturbing.
Disadvantages: Goes too far in places, and will only bore unattentive viewers.
Escape from the Planet of the Apes
The Great Space Ape Escape
****
Written on 19.04.04
The original Planet of the Apes film, while dated and a little unfeasible in places, is often hailed among the greatest science fiction movies of the last century, but possibly less well-known are its four sequels. Out of all four, only this fourth instalment, 'Escape From the Planet of the Apes,' manages to be captivating and memorable, and despite a tendency for light-hearted moments it is on the whole a sinister and moving film.
HISTORY
The 1968 Planet of the Apes film was interesting and engaging, as astronaut Taylor (Charlton Heston) and his ill-fated comrades travelled through space and time, crash-landing on a planet uncannily similar to Earth. The difference was, this planet was dominated by speaking, intelligent apes of different varieties, who hunted the mute and primitive humans for sport and scientific research.
Having befriended two pacifistic chimpanzee scientists called Cornelius and Zera, Taylor is helped in escaping to the 'Forbidden Zone' where he can live away from gorilla oppression. The ominous messages of the orangutan leader, stating that Taylor will not like what he sees, are confirmed when the ex-astronaut sees the Statue of Liberty and collapses, realising that is was Earth all along.
The second film, 'Beneath the Planet of the Apes,' was far less successful and impressive, and didn't really add anything to the established storyline: another astronaut arrives at the future Earth and experiences harsh treatment by apes before making his way into the ancient New York sewer system, now inhabited by very cheesy post-apocalyptic mutants who even more cheesily worship an A-bomb. The reappearance of Taylor ends with both humans being killed, but on his dying breath Taylor takes out his anger on the ape civilisation and detonates the doomsday weapon.
PLOT
The third film in the series opens with a shot of a helicopter and army personnel arriving on a beach, ready to greet whatever new or familiar life has crashed to Earth in a pod. No time is wasted in introducing the setting and upbeat tone of the film's beginning when the astronauts remove their helmets and reveal themselves to be damn stinking apes.
The apes, being Cornelius, Zera and their associate Dr. Milo, initially act mute in order to avoid undue attention, but their presence in a NASA spacecraft and their obvious intelligence earn them much scrutiny and investigation. When confronted with puzzles by the human psychiatrist Lewis, Zera cannot contain herself any longer and tells the man that she "loathes bananas." The so-called "apenauts" are revealed to the public in an interesting and touching interview, and then the film has begun in earnest...
STYLE
A necessary departure from the style of the previous films, this film is more interesting than it may at first appear; the first half hour is insightful in commenting on human nature, but is mainly a light-hearted look at aliens fitting in to a contemporary environment. Sound familiar? Fortunately, the "cute" gags and "she did something that we would consider unusual" scenes are tastefully done and do not detract from the storyline.
It is clear from early on that there are those who are sympathetic to the apes' plight, but also those who would rather they had not arrived from the future with their messages of evolution and recession. After the first half hour, the tone of the film becomes much darker and more adult as the real dangers present themselves. An exploration of humanity's mistrust and judgements, the film opts for a clever ending, but one that is ultimately bleak.
CHARACTERS
The look of the apes has not changed from the previous films, but the slight dodginess of make-up is soon forgotten. The portrayal of Cornelius and Zera is the highlight of the film as Roddy McDowell and Kim Hunter have a great chemistry that allows the viewer to sympathise with them, although having performed experimentation on humans, and accidentally killing their guard at one point in this film, they are far from innocent.
The sympathy is increased with Zera's pregnancy and the bias shown towards the "evil" characters, and this film isn't without its fair share of quite token players: there are the kindly man and woman scientists sympathetic to the apes who will risk their careers to help them, an advisor of the President who believes the aliens are a threat, a level-headed President (William Windom) and something of a deus ex machina, an unnecessarily complicated but impressive term used to describe a character or event at the end of a story which very conveniently provides some answers, in the animal-loving circus owner played by acclaimed actor Ricardo Montalban (who would go on to star in the next film, 'Conquest of the Planet of the Apes').
DODGY COMEDY OR POIGNANT SCI-FI?
This film manages a fine balancing act between humour and grief, and brings up some very interesting ideas. The science fiction aspect is not abandoned, and this film reveals more about the Planet of the Apes story than before; humans took apes as their pets following a plague that wiped out most domestic breeds, and ape legends speak of Caesar, the first ape ever recorded to have spoken: he told his human oppressors, "no."
Not wishing to spoil the climax of the film, but the tight and impressive script for this film deals with the notion of predetermined, unalterable fate and the idea of the paradox very well; had the ape scientists not escaped Earth prior to its destruction and accidentally travelled back in time, it seems likely that the ape revolution would never have begun.
VERDICT
This is a film that starts with a little promise, but expands to become something very enjoyable. It shows many signs of age, and is not truly original or innovative by any means, but stands out amongst the rest of the fairly mediocre 'Planet of the Apes' sequels. The performances are excellent and the film never really gets boring, coming in at a moderate 91 minutes, and will appeal to both sci-fi fans and causal viewers.
A similar film in style and appeal is the fourth Star Trek film, 'The Voyage Home' from 1986. In a similar manner to this film, Star Trek IV saw characters from the future having to interact with Americans of the late twentieth century in a somewhat silly manner, but this was also tastefully done and never became an embarrassment to watch, simply providing an excuse for casual cinema-goers to be introduced to concepts from Star Trek. Unlike Star Trek IV, viewers of 'Escape From the Planet of the Apes' should be prepared for a more heavy-hitting story and a lack of any real hope for the future; that of the film's continuity at least
'Conquest of the Planet of the Apes' is the violent and often dull portrayal of the ape revolution and "enlightenment," while the final film, 'Battle for the Planet of the Apes,' occurs early in the age of the apes, and is similarly uninteresting, but does hold some appeal. The original will always be best-remembered, but in many ways this third part stands up to more viewings over time.
G
She... She Was Knitting!
*
Written on 05.05.08
Some horror films are notoriously awful, to the point that they develop a cult following in the so-bad-it's-good genre (such as the brilliantly incompetent 'Troll 2'). Others such as 'Manos: The Hands of Fate' are just frustratingly terrible and a chore to sit through. Fortunately, Boris Pavlovsky's lesser-known 'Granny' lies firmly in the first camp, an independent horror/slasher film from 1999 starring a killer in a granny mask that tries so hard to be cool and intelligent, it goes all the way round past infinity and comes back hilarious.
Produced by the somewhat ironically titled Ambitious Productions, 'Granny' is content to occupy the already overcrowded slasher genre without making much of an impact, but still insists on its own cleverness in the form of a double-twister ending that raises as many problems as it solves. With its minimal locations, drama school acting and day-glo blood obsession, this shows all the signs of a student production, with the notable exception of unreasonably high quality film equipment that could easily be mistaken for professionalism if you really aren't paying attention.
Blame for this film's poorness can be laid equally on co-writer/co-producer/director Pavlovsky and co-writer/co-producer/actor/composer TOMI (who insists everybody spell his artistically minimal name in capital letters like that). This is evidently the only thing either of them has ever done, perhaps out of anxiety that any future project would be incapable of living up to this magnum opus - though more likely not. TOMI's synthesised theme is reminiscent of Art Zoyd's modern takes on silent film scores, and is actually quite enjoyable the first few dozen times it loops through its four-second length, but after that it displays an irritating lack of variety.
Like many slasher films, this inevitably turns into a sequence of increasingly desperate murders as the young characters are dispatched by Granny one at a time, the question being 'how' they die rather than 'if.' But being penned by a pretentious musician called TOMI, it also spends a significant portion of its hour-long playing time in deep conversations designed to explore the psyche of 1999 American youth, or something like that, carried out by amateur actors trying desperately to look like they're improvising these unlikely debates.
Fortunately, this is just as amusing as the deaths that come later, as the Pavlovsky/TOMI juggernaut disproves the myth that it's only middle-aged Hollywood screenwriters who have trouble accurately imagining what today's young people talk about when meeting up in an empty house, and the action of the film is finally precipitated by one of the guys announcing, "let's talk about our paranoias!" If it wasn't for these early scenes, the mercifully short film would seem more like an episode of 'Are You Afraid of the Dark?'
I'm not entirely sure what slasher fans expect from their preferred genre, but if it's a series of motiveless murders carried out in a range of increasingly contrived methods, Granny should satisfy your tragically low expectations, even if the tedious pace of the editing (or entire lack of it) serves to dissipate the very tension that it's attempting to create. The most offensive scene in this regard comes when one of the stereotyped girls (the conservative one, as opposed to the slut and the virgin) heads off to the bathroom to apply make-up in front of the mirror for about five whole minutes, accompanied by TOMI's inappropriately blaring score the whole time.
Despite all the attempts at making a serious and credible independent film, there are a couple of scenes that are commendably tongue-in-cheek. Granny retreating to the toilet cubicle with toilet roll in hand after over-enthusiastically knifing a girl is clearly one of the film's few intentional laughs, even if it doesn't say much for the writers' sense of humour, and one of the film's most iconic scenes comes when one of the last survivors tensely approaches the back of a chair, only to reveal Granny's painted nails reaching out... for her knitting!
This is probably the film's only real achievement, being able to poke fun at the slasher genre and showing an obvious familiarity with its conceits (or perhaps more likely, the writers watched 'Scream' and thought "we could just do that, but with a different mask so no one will notice"). But don't dismay, bad film fans: the majority of the film's humour is clearly due to incompetence and really, really bad decisions.
You can watch the official trailer on YouTube, which isn't so much a piece of promotional material as a linear summary of events that pretty much spoils every death, but nevertheless accurately features many of the film's finest moments of cinematography, including the token arrogant nerd waggling his glasses in an ominous fashion, and TOMI making an ominous plus sign at the window as his friends leave. If you really must buy it, the DVD is available from Amazon.co.uk for the tellingly low price of £3.97. The generic Granny mask itself is widely available, my friend bought one.
H
Hercules Against the Moon Men
A Career-Defining Performance from Alan Steel
*
Written on 02.11.07
Giacomo Gentilomo’s bland fantasy action film wasn’t originally about Hercules at all, but rather the similar character Maciste, popular in the Italian cinematic tradition. While the half-hearted American dub changed the character’s name to the more well-known Hercules, and the Steve Reeves-style bodybuilder in the lead role allowed himself to be billed as Alan Steel rather than Sergio Ciani for ignorant US audiences (the same way Schwarzenegger started out as “Arnold Strong” in the same role), the dub was sadly incapable of raising the film’s overall quality in any way. In fact, it seems to have made it more confusing.
Although it incorporates a degree of science fiction with its titular Moon Men (who originally came from the Moon but now live in a Greek mountain, or perhaps evolved in the mountain in the first place, I was left confused on that issue), this film is simply another hastily produced Italian flick in the so-called sword ’n’ sandal tradition a year or two before the Spaghetti Western took over as an easily duplicable money-maker in that country’s film industry. The main character is a greasy, bare-chested bodybuilder on a horse who spends most of his time throwing enemies around – which apparently counts as killing them, according to later dialogue – and as little time speaking as possible, which would thus reveal his non-existent acting skills.
Hercules/Maciste has a flimsy and inconsequential love interest in the form of Agar (Anna Maria Polani), whose father summoned the strongman to Samar to help a rising rebel force overthrow an evil, endless sacrificial rite to monsters dwelling in the nearby Mountain of Death, perpetuated by the ruling dynasty. Their current leader, the ambitious and easily duped Queen Samara (Jany Clair), has made a pact with the Moon Men to help them become the dominant force on the Earth, which they promise will be hers to rule, but the arrival of Hercules threatens to disrupt their evil plan to sacrifice the Queen’s innocent sister, Princess Billis (Delia D’Alberti).
The story is plain and about as black and white and conservatively moral as you can get, to the extent that the evil Queen wears black and her contrasting good sister wears white. The Princess also has blonde (i.e. good) hair, as opposed to the femme fatale’s nefarious dark brown (boo! hiss!) As a cheaply made film, the film appears to benefit from the production values of its many genre predecessors by borrowing or hastily redecorating sets and re-using unconvincing armour, and accordingly none of the actors have gone to the trouble of really immersing themselves in the role by slightly messing up their neatly styled sixties hair in the interests of historical accuracy.
Hercules himself looks rather silly by modern standards, wearing a pointless leather sash in a Tarzan-style sweep across his hairless, bulging, constantly polished body, and with his hair nearly trimmed into a flat top, but any film based around hand-to-hand combat between a superhuman strongman and rock monsters from the Moon benefits from a moderate suspension of disbelief. His introduction, and in fact all scenes of him riding his white (good) horse in the extensive location shots, are accompanied by an irritating screechy fanfare just in case a few slow, blind and stupid people at the back didn’t get that he was the good guy.
Leaving aside a few distracting contradictions and inconsistencies with the script that render the whole thing kind of pointless, especially the conclusion, there’s really nothing about this film that hasn’t been done to death in many far superior productions, but for that same reason it has a small degree of appeal as potential last-minute schedule filler for afternoon matinees. The violence is limited and tame, featuring no gore or blood whatsoever in the fight scenes and only a couple of on-screen deaths, as Hercules prefers to throw men over his shoulders and into barrels of water. There’s also no sexual content beyond some obvious and shallow seduction on the Queen’s part that only leads to a kiss, and although the cleavagey Princess is extremely cleavagey, there’s nothing too outrageous there. The film’s main problem lies in its terrible editing, which stretches action scenes beyond all reasonable length in an apparent goal to meet a ninety-minute deadline, leading to three scenes in particular testing the audience’s patience as Hercules wallows in a slowly filling pit of water, holds back crushing jaws of iron, and then gets lost in a sandstorm for aaaaaaaaaaages.
About the only scene that really works is Herc’s confrontation with a bear man thing underground, which actually looks quite good, and to top it all off he bends some bars to break free at the end. This is the only scene anyone should have to endure of this film, as the rest seems pretty throwaway and plot-heavy by comparison. The Moon Men themselves aren’t much of a sight, the silent minions advancing very slowly on their targets and their talkative leader not looking particularly menacing in his skull mask and silver glam rock cape, but the film at least satisfies those extremely patient viewers who sat through all ninety minutes with the promised final confrontation at the end. Needless to say, it’s an inevitable disappointment, a fact only made worse by the extended build-up.
‘Hercules Against the Moon Men,’ or whatever you want to call it in your own language, is at best a historical curiosity as a random example of the Italian mid-sixties action fantasy genre, but the mass of competition ultimately renders it pointless and obsolete. It’s not even particularly funny in the way many rubbish films unintentionally manage to be, losing its quality points through sheer tedium and lousy production rather than hilariously bad dialogue, tacky effects or wild plot developments. Seeing the camera constantly stumble around in an effort to centre its subject, and Alan Steel struggle to ride a horse with any degree of speed or practicality is more irritating than amusing, and unless you’re a real fan of the genre who can’t get enough of greased-up bodybuilders in white nappies, this film isn’t going to offer an awful lot to you. A Region 1 DVD is available, and the film is available to stream from Google video if, like me, you’re wise enough not to pay for this rubbish, but not so clever that you pass it by completely.
Advantages: It tries to have some kind of plot.
Disadvantages: A fair few.
M
We Shouldn't Have Seen the Alien
***
Written on 31.12.00
Mission to Mars starts out looking too much like Apollo 13, but soon turns into a science fiction adventure with unresalistic notions and an unconvincing plotline.
The special efects look good, but they're nothing we haven't seen before, and it does get slightly tedious to watch yet another film set "realistically into the future", predicting what life will be like in a few decades. However, there certainly isn't a lack of tension, especially in a scene orbiting Mars when a crew member finds himself floating away from his comrades and heroically pulls off his own helmet to stop his wife risking her life to try and save him.
The final scenes drag on for too long, as we find out the truth behind the aliens, but the film could have been better, in my opinion, if we had never had this scene. The alien looks very computer generated, and cannot be accepted as real to my eyes. There's also a little too much explanation, as we are given information we could have guessed, or just don't want to know. I think a mysterious ending of people walking towards a shadowy alien would have made this film better, and more memorable.
Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
Disgusting Philosophical Musical Extravaganza
****
Written on 31.07.04 [2018 update / 2000 downdate]
Monty Python’s fourth and final feature film was greeted with a fair degree of criticism by the media and cinemagoers, some finding it unnecessarily gratuitous at the expense of the humour and others feeling disappointed by the return to a sketch-based style following their 1979 hugely popular comedy epic ‘Life of Brian.’ While the Meaning of Life clearly doesn’t succeed as a motion picture in the way that ‘Life of Brian’ and ‘Monty Python and the Holy Grail’ did, it also carries with it a very relaxed attitude that suggests the Pythons knew they had made their classics and now wanted to return to more familiar territory for a final cinematic fling: this is still a far cry from the classic ‘Flying Circus’ television series however, based loosely on a musical concept and pushing the barriers of taste further than the team had previously been permitted or desired.
THE PYTHONS
As usual, every member of the Monty Python team (Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones and Michael Palin) wrote and starred in the film in a number of roles, mostly chosen according to each member’s strengths. Director Terry Jones’ housewife character was made famous in ‘Life of Brian’ and returns here, albeit as a less aggressive mother figure, John Cleese’s authority figures are better than ever and Eric Idle again plays several silly cockneys. Again. It’s great to see Graham Chapman integrating as a regular player into the sketches after his leading roles in the previous films, but Terry Gilliam’s American accent and lack of acting experience again leads to smaller screen time for the wacky animator, although he does get to manufacture some more of those classic animations to link scenes and introduce the film (not to mention the short feature presentation, explained later).
There are some excellent ensemble scenes in which every performer contributes and these are some of my favourite scenes in the film: the World War I trench birthday celebrations, the excellent Zulu war section and, of course, the strange human-headed fish that occasionally comment on the film and are indeed the instigators of the title sequence once they see their fish friend Howard being devoured:
Cleese Fish: “Makes you think dunnit?”
Palin Fish: “I mean what’s it all about?”
Chapman Fish: “Beats me.”
LIFE
‘The Meaning of Life’ is divided into seven distinct (but quite loose) parts to reflect the seven stages of man in his eternal quest for the eponymous meaning of life. From ‘The Miracle of Birth’ to ‘Death,’ the development of humans and even our relative insignificance in the grand scheme of things are discussed, which would make for quite a prophetic film if anything genuinely fascinating was revealed. Instead, the Python team provide a collection of well thought-out sketches of varying quality (some quite dull and lacking the originality of the TV series; others rating among the best the team have created) along with a fair selection of musical numbers. Following are some of the most memorable scenes:
The Crimson Permanent Assurance – a classic short film by Terry Gilliam (Time Bandits, Brazil, Twelve Monkeys) permanently tagged as the opening to this film. Aside from a brief mix with a later scene this is very different from the main film but is a great opening and I know a few people who prefer it to the main feature for its bizarre but believable fantasy world.
The Miracle of Birth – I hate the damn ‘Every Sperm is Sacred’ routine that cost a third of the film’s budget (apparently) but the birth scene and the impossible overcrowded Catholic household make a great opening to the film.
Sex Education – one of the more adult scenes in which John Cleese performs intercourse with his wife as a demonstration to his class. Thankfully they are all played by adults and aside from the obvious shock value there are some excellent lines and decisions made.
Fighting Each Other – a fun but brief scene in which Palin plays a maniacal screaming army officer is followed by a lengthy take on the Zulu wars, exaggerating the class division between officer and soldiers and leading to my favourite scene in the film as two men in a tiger skin try to explain their situation and deny stealing Eric Idle’s leg, eventually admitting “oh, a leg… there might be a leg around here somewhere, I think someone left it because they knew you were coming” when the soldiers search the thicket. Brilliantly unexplained.
Mr. Creosote – not one of my favourites, but the massively obese man played by Terry Jones who explodes when he eats too much food is clearly one of the most memorable scenes. A bit over-the-top for me though, I’m surprised that the team resorted to things like this considering their track record (the violent and bloody Python classic ‘Salad Days’ is hilarious for its unnecessary gore, but this doesn’t feel like that. The same goes for the organ donor scene, although I quite like that).
The musical numbers include the afore-mentioned ‘Every Sperm is Sacred,’ Eric Idle’s ‘Universe Song’ and title theme and the dull ‘Christmas in Heaven’ that is thankfully interrupted just prior to its conclusion by the low-key ending to the film.
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?
Based on the horrific ending of the excellent ‘Holy Grail’ where unexplained police cars halt King Arthur’s final attack, the Python team could have been expected to avoid answering the ultimate question entirely. True, the film does veer wildly away from the discussion for almost the entire duration, and the section titled ‘Part VI B: The Meaning of Life’ featuring a slightly irritating journey following Eric Idle’s French waiter from the city to the wilderness basically ends with him getting frustrated at his inadequacy and telling the audience to “f*** off!”, but Michael Palin does indeed answer the big question at the end, albeit dressed as a woman next to a flower pot with a hand in it. You have to watch the film to discover the true meaning, but now I’ve said that, please don’t rush out and buy this DVD to satiate your thirst – it’s not worth it if you don’t like the film.
SPECIAL EDITION DVD
‘The Meaning of Life’ has recently been re-released as a special edition, two disc DVD loaded with extras in a similar way to the earlier ‘Holy Grail’ release (the special edition ‘Life of Brian’ has yet to be released, despite it being introduced for Region 1 well over a year ago). I haven’t yet invested in this edition but from what I’ve read on the internet it certainly does the film justice and includes full-length deleted scenes (including ‘The Adventures of Martin Luther’ and more from the American tourist couple in their heavenly hotel), plenty of documentary and archive material and new audio commentaries – one by Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam on directing the film, the other a ‘commentary for the lonely’ in which Michael Palin watches the film in almost total silence, occasionally fidgeting in his chair or making small noise so you can imagine he’s in the room with you. Great stuff!
The special edition includes the original film as well as a director’s cut with the deleted scenes (isolated for viewing on disc two) re-inserted and is also a much clearer print than that of the first, very budget DVD release. For this reason, anyone interested in buying the Meaning of Life should consider investing in the special edition – after all, this isn’t a film you would buy if you weren’t a big fan.
VERDICT
This isn’t the best Monty Python film and, discounting their original ‘And Now For Something Completely Different’ which was a collection of reworked sketches from the TV series to sell the show to American channels, this is the least vital and enjoyable of the films. But saying that, I still really like it, and although I felt a little disappointed at some of the decisions made (especially involving the bizarrely popular ‘Mr. Creosote explodes’ section that I find quite poor apart from Cleese’s classic line “it’s only waff-er thin”) I realised I have watched this even more than ‘Life of Brian.’ Not more than ‘Holy Grail’ though, that’s the film that really gets me going.
Some of the extreme violence is unnecessary and it’s strange that it made it into the film considering the self-censoring that the team (especially the more traditional-minded Cleese) often applied to their TV series, but there’s enough variety to keep audiences interested throughout and feel intrigued about what is to come next. The visuals of this film are excellent and although it feels like a step back after the epic Life of Brian, this is essentially a film to please the fans rather than the critics. I wouldn’t recommend it as a starting point to Monty Python though, and although I’m usually very liberally minded about such matters (considering the kind of things I watched in my own childhood), this is not a film for children. They’d only laugh at Mr. Creosote anyway, the young idiots.
Advantages: Every Python on top form, Some classic scenes and visuals, They don't know much about art, but they know what they like
Disadvantages: Original DVD release is disappointing, Hit-and-miss sketches, Too extreme at points
N
The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad!
Leslie Nielsen's Movie
Written on 14.10.03 [2015 update]
*****
The Naked Gun 'trilogy' of movies, although that word hardly seems appropriate in light of the film's silliness and lack of anything epic, is one of the rare things to have come out of America that I find truly funny. The jokes are all very well written and the actors are even better, especially Leslie Nielsen, finally finding what he's best at following roles in "The Forbidden Planet"-esque sci-fi and "Murder She Wrote" programmes. His deadpan delivery of some of the lines makes for some painful laughs!
The Naked Gun films chronicle the attempts of Lieutenant Frank Drebbin to successfully solve the cases he is working on, which he somehow eventually succeeds in, against all logic. Foreign enemies, voluptuous females and accidental detours all make sure he has a very hard time getting anywhere. Priscilla Presley makes her first appearance in Frank's life here, and we also see the Police Squad gang Nordberg, the Chief whose name I forget, and the 'Q' character whose contraptions are considerably less advanced than in James Bond films, although I've never watched one.
The plot of this film is that Frank is given the responsibility of protecting the Queen when she arrives: yes it is that Queen. However, he must also attempt to solve the case that put his friend Nordberg (O. J. Simpson) in hospital, quite clearly controlled by Ricardo Montalban's character. (He is Khan in Star Trek, amongst other things). I'd recommend this movie to anyone who likes Monty Python and 'silly humour' films in that vein. The jokes are constant and varied, from lines such as: "Would you like a nightcap?" "No thanks, I don't wear them." To visual jokes such as Nordberg's chalk outline where he landed in the sea and Frank practicing 'safe sex' with a full body condom, to the Film Noir voice overs as Frank wanders the streets, ending with the punchline "...and where the hell was I?" as he looks back to the distant city and realises he's been walking in wilderness for several miles.
For fans of obvious and subtle visual humour and characters who can deliver these lines so well, Naked Gun would be recommended, especially as I find this the funniest of the three films. Leslie Nielsen is the perfect aged police investigator, just don't watch this if you feel like watching something of an epic nature (e.g. "Lord of the Rings") as you won't get that here.
Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens
A Symphony of Horrors
*****
Written on 23.03.04
Made in 1922, Nosferatu (or to use its full title, Nosferatu: Ein Symphonie des Grauens) is the most effective and chilling vampire film ever made. The antique look of the sepia film cells and the ominous lack of a voice track only adds to the impact of this great movie.
As the first silent movie I saw, and I have seen several since, the age and look of the film even made the domestic scenes at the very start quite unnerving on my first watch. I was constantly reminding myself that everyone I was looking at came from another age and would now certainly be dead. It is important at this stage that you realise I am not some aged movie critic who only appreciates films that are heaped in symbolism; I am an eighteen-year-old slacker who just spent a weekend watching the Back to the Future films with my father.
For vampire enthusiasts or people familiar with any incarnation of Dracula, the story is essentially the same; if it hadn't been, there would never have been the infamous lawsuit by Bram Stoker's widoe that led to all but one print of the film being destroyed. However, character names are changed, location is moved from London to the more effective Wisborg in Germany, and the story is adapted to suit the silent cinema.
DAS PLOT
Thomas Hutter works for a rather mad-looking estate agent called Knock, who receives a telegram written in strange symbols. He tells Hutter to pack his bags and visit Count Orlock in the distant Carpathian mountains, to arrange for the wealthy man to purchase a house in their area. Kissing his wife goodbye, Hutter travels 'far away, to the country of thieves and ghosts' and, despite warnings from an innkeeper about travelling any further, the naive and innocent Hutter heads towards a sinister coach driver that takes him to Orlock's castle...
Holding much novelty value in the modern day, the acting in Nosferatu often seems very over the top, as exaggeration was essential in those times, but the foreboding and terrifying Count Orlock played by Max Schreck (English translation, Max Terror) has remained one of the most powerful and recognisable horror characters in film history. Unlike other German expressionist films, which were largely filmed in a studio with elaborate sets, Nosferatu is primarily filmed outdoors at a number of excellent locations throughout Germany.
TAKE THOU HEED AND BE THOU WARNED - BORING DVD SECTION FOLLOWS:
For fans of the film, buying the right DVD is essential. Not meaning to criticise, although I suppose I am, the budget releases by companies such as Stonevision are the most readily available and cheap, but also result in a very poor film experience. These re-releases of silent films possess awful soundtracks, inconsistencies in brightness and film quality, and are simply black-and-white. Many also miss out a number of scenes, which is criminal for a film of the perfectionist German expressionist movement! My personal copy is the 'Special Edition' released on an American label which I imported from Amazon.com for around the equivalent of £10, and this has excellent picture quality - bear in mind that it is still taken from a very old and damaged negative - and a choice of two excellent soundtracks, an organ score and a modern orchestral and electronic score that suits surprisingly well. People with Region 2-only players, or who would prefer a British release, can find several good exampl es on websites such as Play.com. The BFI edition is reportedly superior, however there is a 2-disc set currently on sale at only £8.99 on that website which my friend owns, and which introduced me to the film, and I would also recommend.
Clearly a film of the past, Nosferatu will always remain my favourite horror film due to its believability; although the special effects are unimpressive, this is part of the film's appeal, as is the fact that it looks like it was made in the time the film is set, which is in reality roughly a century earlier. I recently watched the Jack the Rupper thriller "From Hell" and, despite fantastic sets and costumes, it was obvious that I was watching a modern film, but at least Ian Holm was in it- what a guy. Anyone put off by having to read their way through a film is also largely spared that, as the director F. W. Murnau deliberately limited the captions to those that are absolutely necessary.
If your idea of a great film moment is an exploding bridge taking down some helicopters then I support your view and suggest you finance my friend's movie idea for 'Murderocutor,' however if you prefer a slow and gradual progression through a dark plot, with some great music, this film is for you. And Cradle of Filth fans. A recent movie 'Shadow of the Vampire' took an interesting take on this film's production, as it picked up on the old rumour that star Max Schreck may have been a vampire. Despite the fact that there is tons of evidence against this, not least his roles in other prominent German films of the time, it might be quite funny, although it does have Eddie Izzard in it. Watch Nosferatu first though.
Advantages: A true classic, Not as dated as it may seem, Some DVDs have amazing quality soundtracks, special features and picture clarity
Disadvantages: Some DVDs are rubbish, Won't appeal to the masses, but I'm going to give it five stars.
O
Now You're a Man
**
Written on 07.03.06
This camp and ridiculous film from 'South Park' co-creator Trey Parker was deservedly overlooked on its initial release in 1997, but the appeal of Parker's later works soon established it as something of a cult hit. To some extent lampooning the porn film-making industry and superhero films, a fluke prediction of 21st century Hollywood's obsession with that genre, Orgazmo's main appeal is to fans of cheap, lightweight comedy films, and perhaps the whole "so-bad-it's-good" crowd.
There isn't a direct link between Orgazmo and South Park, aside from the preoccupation with sleaze and digestive processes, but that briefly phenomenally successful cartoon series clearly saw Parker finding his feet, in a format with short running times. This film sees several arbitrary and undeveloped cheap jokes stretched for far too long and never satisfactorily concluded.
Orgazmo is primarily based in a Hollywood porn studio owned by Maxxx Orbison (Dean Jacobs), a deliberately tacky bedroom set-up with easily breakable walls providing easy penetration for the film's titular superhero. The film opens in over-used and over-exaggerated metadramatic style, the audience being presented the plot of the film-with-in-the-film before the "realistic event" occurs and we realise, whoa, that was just a bunch of actors all along... but still is. Orgazmo never veers into true adult territory (explicit or mature) as all but the briefest glimpses of female nudity are obscured by enormous close-ups of male rears in one of the director's few admirable decisions, quite funny and displaying some integrity at the same time.
The main character of the film is Elder Joe Young (played by writer-director-actor Trey Parker), a typically pleasant and naïve Mormon missionary with an adoring and equally sickly fiancée (Robyn Lynne Raab) waiting to marry him on his return. After a compulsory sequence of house calls to recruit residents to the Latter Day Saints, one involving an old woman in a particularly predictable wolf-in-sheep's-clothing skit, Joe is spotted in a reluctant display of his inexplicable self defence talents by Orbison and offered $20,000 to play the lead role of Orgazmo in his latest XXX hit, which will involve a mere two days of filming. Despite being promised a "stunt cock" for the raunchy scenes, Joe has moral and religious qualms over the subject matter of the film, but eventually concedes so that his fiancée, to whom he must lie about the shoot, can have her expensive dream Temple wedding.
The bulk of the film basically sees Joe, along with his new friend and co-star Ben, aka Orgazmo's sidekick 'Choda Boy' (Dian Bachar), filming the cheesy porn action of Orgazmo and its sequel, created due to the resulting box office success. But just when the film seems to be meandering towards nowhere at all, the second, driving, pointless plot of the film takes over and adds nothing but a distraction from the events so far. The Japanese homeboy G-Fresh is enjoyably unusual in his innocent introduction, but for Joe and Ben to don their superhero apparel and fight to reclaim his sushi bar with their phallic devices like some disturbing parody of Batman and Robin could have been made more convincing and diverse.
There are a number of funny scenes throughout the film, but it doesn't hold together as a consistent and entertaining experience. Joe's guilt/lie plot is carried out predictably but not too badly (apart from the ending), and my favourite scene was when the supposedly enlightened Mormon prays to Christ for a sign that he should not go through with the movie deal. Ignoring the subsequent thunderous earthquake that wrecks his kitchen, Joe repeats: "...any sign at all."
There is an over-reliance on the audience finding sex toys amusing. Admittedly some of them are, but the principal 'Orgazmorator' weapon is used about twenty times too many. As is currently popular with shows like 'Little Britain,' the grotesque body also provides some unwholesome laughs, there is one memorable scene in particular, but on the whole this is harmless, stupid stuff. The presence of Ron Jeremy, the moustachioed porn superstar, is a nice in-joke, but very few of the characters have anything to do outside a few repeated jokes, notably the "queer" Dave (Matt Stone, the other South Park guy), the afore-mentioned G-Fresh and the enigmatic Sancho, fairly amusing in an odd way but completely dispensable.
Orgazmo is a well-liked film that knows its target audience and doesn't aspire to anything above toilet humour, but its forced reliance on action and romance plots, however farcical they may be, grounds it too much in everyday Hollywood style for whatever potential the film really had to be expanded upon. Trey Parker's earlier effort 'Cannibal the Musical' sounds more individual and original, meaning I therefore respect it to some degree no matter how crap it may be, while his later releases with Matt Stone such as 'BASEketball' pander, probably successfully, to more conventional film formats.
Orgazmo is very much a transitionary work occupying a shaky, dodgy middle ground between free expression and a desire for success and money, but it is at least noteworthy for introducing the porn jargon "DVDA" into the public domain, if little else. It's also surprisingly unquotable, the two or three lines that clearly took the most time not really being worth repeating.
R
You Know What a Cautious Fellow I Am
*****
Written on 26.10.07
‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ (not ‘Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark’ as the increasingly mad George Lucas wants us to call it – I had to get this off my chest before we could go further) is the first film in the Indiana Jones franchise which consists of two other, equally famous and only slightly less popular films; a forgettable TV series that Lucas is currently giving an even more pointless ‘Star Wars’ style makeover to; some excellent and terrible video game spin-offs, and a brand new film scheduled for release sometime next year. Like the James Bond franchise, it’s a series I oddly had no real experience with outside of a hazy childhood memory of a bloke running from a rolling boulder that could easily have been one of a billion parodies of this film’s famous early scene, but recently I was in the specific mood for watching a classic 1980s Hollywood action adventure with no pretensions or symbolism to worry about, the kind of film that even my Dad would enjoy. They really don’t come any better than this.
Set in various exotic locations in 1936, during the early, obscure period of Nazi dominance before they had all their famous hits, ‘Raiders’ was conceived and largely written by George Lucas and director Steven Spielberg during Lucas’ most prolific and impressive period between the first two Star Wars films, and intended to bring back the gritty adventurer figure in an Earth-bound plot that would allow Lucas to escape the fairy tale fantasy overload of his slightly more famous work (seriously, this guy created two of the greatest and most successful film franchises within a few years of each other – he was so damn good, it’s a tragedy that he’s become such a butthole). Indiana Jones, or ‘Indy’ as he is cutely known by his loyal sometime-sidekick played by John Rhys-Davies, is a bespectacled, besuited University lecturer by day who earns a more substantial income selling rare artefacts to prestigious museums who wisely avoid asking questions. The truth is that Jones’ day job acts more as a Clark Kent cover, at least as far as the audience is concerned, as the ‘real’ Indy is a highly skilled adventurer and tomb raider with a multi-purpose whip, rugged stubble, a hat everyone would love to wear and no glasses whatsoever.
Harrison Ford brings just enough inoffensive machismo and smarmless charm to perhaps his most famous role, far surpassing the supporting part he largely ambles through as Han Solo in Lucas’ Star Wars trilogy, and the rest of the cast is just as good. Karen Allen is great as the lead lady Marion Ravenwood, and manages to overcome the character’s clichés of being Indy’s old, burnt flame and frequent damsel-in-distress to make a memorable performance out of it. Rhys-Davies (‘Sliders,’ ‘Lord of the Rings’) provides some highly effective comic relief as Jones’ trusty sidekick Sallah in Egypt through his great delivery of well-written dialogue, rather than bumbling and falling over to make the hero look better by comparison (though the actor did allegedly defecate in his costume at one point due to food poisoning), and although all the enemy Nazis are pretty straightforward stereotypes, Ronald Lacey’s creepy Gestapo agent makes his presence felt as a serious threat throughout the film. The real villain Rene Belloq (Paul Freeman) is a convincing arch enemy for Indy who can be relied on to appear at all the least convenient moments with nefarious aplomb, even if his role is a little smaller than I expected, and there’s a great cockiness in hearing an enemy actually proclaim himself “a shadowy reflection” of our hero. Filmed on location in Tunisia and elsewhere (purporting to be Egypt), the film also boasts an enormous background cast of non-speaking extras who provide great crowded realism and also manage to be amusing in their complete indifference to the gunfights and chases going on around them, primarily acting as scenery to be toppled.
The plot itself is well conceived and easy to follow, especially as it mainly acts as a motive for Indy and his cohorts to travel across the globe getting into increasingly life-threatening situations. A fantastic opening scene sets up Jones’ profession and almost superhuman skills, acting as both a prelude and stand-alone episode in its own right, almost like the short films they used to play in cinemas before the main feature. I wouldn’t be surprised if many VHS copies of the film were worn down due to over-playing of this exciting idol-stealing sequence without bothering to watch the rest of the film which is a bit long and has boring words and stuff in it. Of course, these action junkies are wrong and quite stupid as the main plot is crammed with lengthy and inventive action scenes that see the hero plunged into various different genres of scrape, all permitted because the story itself is so compelling: the race to discover the fabled Ark of the Covenant that gave immortality and godly powers to the Hebrews in their escape from Egypt. The Dark Lord Hitler is interested in its acquisition, a scenario all the good guys (the ones without German accents or eye-patches) aren’t too keen on. Just like an episode of ‘Mission: Impossible’ or a James Bond film (I imagine), the plot is explained to the audience early on in a briefing scene so we can all enjoy the following hour and a half of twists and turns without fear of having to learn something until right at the slightly confusing finale.
Okay, so there isn’t a great deal of characterisation for Indiana after the first few scenes establish what he’s all about, and Harrison Ford’s portrayal is typically cool but impenetrable (though not to the extent of his depressing, lethargic cop in ‘Blade Runner’), and to be honest I was a little disappointed at some of the more ludicrous action scenes robbing him of much human credibility, particularly towards the end of the film where he launches a successful attack on a fleet of heavily armed Nazi vans with nothing but a white horse, and then proceeds to somehow stow away on a U-boat with only wet clothes to show for it (I was even left slightly confused as to whether he was supposed to have been outside the hull for the whole journey, presumably being able to hold his breath for a considerable time). Because of these more superhuman moments, it’s really satisfying to see him get shot in the shoulder and knocked down repeatedly by a beefy topless guy, and to be confronted with endless unplanned and highly inconvenient scenarios, especially when they involve snakes. Probably his best and funniest scene comes at the end of the opening idol sequence, where he runs screaming at his getaway plane, the pilot of which hesitates for a hilariously long time before reluctantly abandoning his fishing rod, only for Indy to be trapped with his pet snake Reggie when he finally leaps aboard. You can always be confident that Indy will never be killed (unless Lucas is planning something for the next film), but it’s likely he’ll end up battered and knackered in a hospital while the end credits play.
In terms of technicalities, there’s little to fault the film, and though the stormy sky is quite obviously bluescreened in one scene it doesn’t distract in any way, though I bet Lucas isn’t too happy with it. Spielberg’s direction is fast and exciting, not that I feel really qualified to talk about such things, but there are a couple of mistakes such as a prop rock that can clearly be seen bouncing and a tell-tale reflection revealing that the cobra leering at the actors is really behind protective glass. The score is handled by John Williams who creates something quite similar to the Star Wars themes he was producing at the same time (the similarity is particularly evident in the more mellow sections) and is perhaps a little too bombastic overall, especially with the first arrival of the Nazis that attempts to establish them as hellish demons just a little bit too emphatically, but it all suits the film nevertheless and like his slightly more famous work, helped to establish the definitive sound of jungle-based action films for ever after. Just like Lucas, it’s pretty incredible that Williams scored so many big hits in such a short space of time (he also did ‘Jaws’ and ‘Superman’ with their recognisable signature themes), and the Indiana Jones series’ memorable ‘Raiders theme’ is in no way overplayed here.
I really can’t fault this film as a perfect action movie, probably the most definitive and entertaining I’ve ever seen and certainly one I wish someone had taped off TV when I was a child. Carrying a PG certificate there’s the expected minimal use of swearing for realism (I counted one “son-of-a-b****” and one “holy s***” in case you’re interested) and nothing sexual beyond a shot of Karen Allen’s bare back as she gets changed, but there is a fair amount of violence and death, most graphic in the bar scene in Nepal, while the climax is quite laughably gruesome. Snake lovers are advised to skip over one particular moment, while a weird scene of screaming skeletons will probably scare old people and mothers rather than young viewers, who will probably love that kind of thing. I don’t think I’m being too extreme in suggesting that any parents who decide not to allow their children to watch the film, in fact anyone who has seen it and doesn’t force it on their offspring from a ripe early age, should be imprisoned for child abuse.
‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ was my embarrassingly late initiation into the Indiana Jones franchise at age 22, and leaves me hopeful that the other films will be equally enjoyable, though somehow I doubt it. It’s really impressive that George Lucas produced something so down-to-earth (comparatively) in contrast to ‘Star Wars,’ and despite being much more low-key there are still some classic signs of his handiwork, from the overlaid maps depicting Jones’ global journeys that would look really stupid in any other film, just as could be said for the wipes in Star Wars, and an ingenious Nazi monkey. This is the only film I’ve seen in a long time that I could easily watch again soon after and still enjoy, though I have to admit that there’s one thing nagging me. It’s not an original criticism or a clever point to make, but... why the hell don’t the bad guys shoot Indiana? Why do they tie him to masts and lock him in tombs for the satisfying irony? Those mad Nazis.
Advantages: Flawless adventure film.
Disadvantages: A fair amount of clichés.
S
Count Dracula Gets On the Property Ladder
**
Written on 12.10.07
As the eighth film in Hammer’s Dracula series, it would be reasonable to expect a certain drop in quality and authenticity by this point, or at the very least a drastic deviation from author Bram Stoker’s original plot. With its modern-day (1974) setting, plot points of a deadly contagion and Count Dracula wearing a business suit and calling himself D. D. Denham, and chase scenes from furry-waistcoated moustachioed bikers in sunglasses taken straight from ‘The Avengers,’ you would be fairly accurate. But it’s a Hammer film, and this means ninety minutes of classic seventies-style action, presentations of odd cults complete with the orgasmic sacrifice of a nude, and the immortal duo of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee facing each other as Van Helsing and Dracula for the third and final time.
A few lines of dialogue make it clear that this film is a rough sequel to its predecessor, the more well-known ‘Dracula A.D. 1972,’ but this is in no way required viewing in order to enjoy this (I haven’t seen it, though I’d guess it would be the slightly better of the two). After an undercover agent snaps incriminating photos of government officials attending a shady series of occult meetings, Scotland Yard Inspector Murray (Michael Coles) decides to call in his old associate Professor Van Helsing, whose family has specialised in the occult for generations... amongst other things. Van Helsing (Cushing) instantly recognises the signs of a blood cult, and fears that his old enemy Count Dracula has been reincarnated after he so definitively staked him two years earlier. Visiting an old college friend who was caught attending these sinister rituals, Van Helsing learns of a dastardly plot ordered by an unseen higher power to re-create an even more devastating strain of the Bubonic Plague that has the potential to wipe all life from the face of the Earth. But why would the Count wish for the total eradication of his only food source, unless he’s finally grown tired of the chase, the ceaseless resurrections and the typecasting...
This is quite an unusual Dracula film, in that the contemporary setting, car chases and sci-fi themes are a far cry from the company’s more well-known gothic mansions and unconvincing forests, but taken on its own merits its a reasonably enjoyable clashing and corruption of genres. The sequences involving the silent assassins are probably the worst of the whole lot, feeling very much like generic seventies spy thrillers, and it never feels like a true synthesis of gothic and modern horror; the scenes involving vampire attacks are all filmed in traditional crypt-like environments or creaking rooms that contrast strongly with the look of the rest of the film, and although I really hated the quite rubbish reveal of the shadowy D. D. Denham as Dracula (hmm, he’s got a Slavic accent, and there’s something about the repetition of the letter ‘D’ that I can’t quite put my finger on...), it almost makes up for it at the very end with some interesting, if overdone Armageddon and antichrist parallels with a rare moment of subtle symbolism in a film that otherwise credits its audience with little intelligence.
This really is a film that can be approached by anyone, whether they have previous experience with this series or the vampire myth in general, as Van Helsing talks us through the methods used to dispatch a vampire once again, and seemingly has to remind himself of these methods constantly, as demonstrated through a poorly contrived flashback at a critical moment towards the end. Rest assured that this script leaves no room for speculation beyond its own limited scope, and every reference it makes – from the various ways of dispatching the undead to the roles of minor characters – will come into play at some point. This proves particularly disappointing when it comes to ticking off the various means of executing Dracula’s female horde, who very soon lose their ability to scare after failing repeatedly to sink their teeth into anyone, and are written off completely when it’s revealed that a simple sprinkler system can lay waste to a large group (why would the Count have that installed in his coffin rooms in the first place?) Even some nice hints towards the beginning, such as the apparently blank photograph that the majority of audience members will identify as a failed attempt to capture a vampire on film, are explained in dialogue later on for slower viewers, rather than being left hauntingly unexplained and incongruous. But then, no one would claim that ‘Dracula 8’ was aiming to be taken seriously as art.
As a horror film, this entry is moderately successful and never descends intentionally into farce, despite its original working title of ‘Dracula is Dead and Well and Living in London’ which caused a fair degree of resentment and embarrassment in Lee, and the only comedic moments are its slips into (most likely unintentional) stupid dialogue: the security guard’s whispered revelation that Van Helsing should press “the secret red button” in the lift to take him right to the boss’ main office was my favourite. The finale of the film is more action-oriented than horror, as Dracula and Van Helsing face off in a burning building, and the only moments that approach creepiness are the ones rooted in Hammer’s more traditional, gothic style, with a hand-held camera following Joanna Lumley as she creeps through a crypt, and Dracula’s entirely pointless but cool introduction scene where he attacks Valerie Van Ost’s character in a creaking wooden room with crashing shutters and dry ice. There’s an impressive amount of screaming women who reeeeally screeeeam, which I assume is typical for Hammer (at least I hope so), balanced out by an equal amount of coffee drinking on the part of the men to keep up the cop side of things.
The film’s real saving grace, and perhaps the only real reason to watch, is the classic teaming of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee who are both fantastic, even if Lee seems a little unenthused to be back in the role. Cushing’s cold and utterly convincing performance of the determined Van Helsing achieves the unusual in actually making me root for the good guy, and his character’s explanations of blood rituals and the cyclical Sabbath of the Undead are told with such conviction that it’s impossible not to believe wholeheartedly in all the rubbish he’s saying, backed up with an attractive, nonsensical diagram of interconnected hoops that can similarly be taken as fact so long as you don’t allow your eyes to dwell on it for too long, or your mind to start thinking about it. Elsewhere, the presentation of the satanic ritual will probably annoy more dedicated occult fans, but it appears convincing enough on-screen and is very nicely interspersed between other scenes in the first half hour as the truth slowly comes to light. It also gets bonus points for its over-the-top symbolism of a nude young woman being doused with the blood of a cock (I meant that kind of cock – oh I see, you knew) and orgasming with increasing intensity as old men rub it over her belly, before the butch female leader stabs her in the crotch.
I could have chosen better for my introduction to Hammer’s Dracula series than this rather weak offering from fifteen years down the line, but it’s the only one of the films to have slipped into the public domain, and has been made available on numerous cheap horror collections over the years (as well as widely available on the internet). The mixed elements and styles clash more often than they compliment each other, but I found some ideas such as Dracula’s suspected ennui and death wish quite interesting, before the film failed to deliver on them in a satisfying way. Lee’s character is also fairly prominent towards the end, despite taking over an hour to utter his first line, but all things considered I’d much rather watch the two fight it out in a creepy castle instead of an unconvincing office block and plain country manor. There’s also something really unsatisfying about the ending, not only because it simply ceases after the inevitable slaying has been accomplished, but because dialogue earlier in the film makes it clear that Dracula can simply reincarnate and rise again any time Hammer fancy dragging him through his paces once again. Fortunately, Lee decided to forego the resurrection this time, and his fans can be satisfied that although this is far from a fitting swan song for the performer, at least they don’t have to sit through ‘The Legend of the Seven Golden Vampires.’
Advantages: Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee and some gratuitous sexual symbolism (unrelated).
Disadvantages: Weak incorporation of spy clichés into horror.
Welcome Death, Quoth the Rat, When the Trap Fell
****
Written on 23.11.07
Don Bluth's first animated feature since leaving the sleazy corporate tyranny of Disney behind, remains one of the most accomplished and critically acclaimed in the history of cartoon cinema, and easily upstages all of his company's subsequent productions despite the greater box office success of 'An American Tail' and 'The Land Before Time.' It was produced by Bluth's dedicated, overworked team over the course of thirty gruelling months from 1979 to 1982 as a direct rival to Disney's continuing productions, which Bluth felt were cruising comfortably along on their laurels and lacked the excitement and magic of the company's distant golden era. 'The Secret of NIMH' was created specifically to return to older, more intricate styles of animation while conversely continuing to push the format to greater extremes and innovations, and the result, while perhaps not a timeless masterpiece due to its position so far down the line, seems to have been unanimously praised as a success.
The film is adapted from Robert C. O'Brien's award-winning children's novel 'Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH' with a few customary alterations for the screen (including changing the lead character's name to the less easily mocked Mrs. Brisby), after Disney elected not to produce the same adaptation earlier in the seventies. O'Brien's story seems tailor-made to have its rights licensed out to an animation company, with its noble rodent characters, shoehorned magical overtones and marginal, annoying child characters, and the resulting script produced by Bluth and four others clearly takes its cues from the Disney tradition, thus reluctantly mirroring the company's contemporary productions - indeed, the character of Jeremy the crow, who has no real relevance to the story as it progresses apart from offering clumsy comic relief, seems fairly similar to that seagull in Disney's later success 'The Little Mermaid.' Though as you can probably tell, my long-standing hatred of Disney means I'm not familiar enough with the latter film to take this comparison any further (and even if I did like Disney, that was a girl's film anyway; sword-fighting rats is what boys like).
The story is quite interesting, and inevitably comparable to other children's novel-turned-animations 'The Animals of Farthing Wood' and 'Watership Down' in its tale of small animals struggling to adapt and survive in a world controlled by humans (and populated with the occasional predator), but it has enough original ideas of its own to stand strong and apart. Taking place entirely on a large patch of farmland, the main characters are a mix of rodents - common field mice and the more secretive and elusive rats, while featuring a couple of birds and an adversarial cat that strangely lacks the intellect and speech ability of the smaller creatures. It's great to see how the rodents have adapted the waste of human industry to form their homes and gadgets out of abandoned machinery and hollowed concrete blocks among other things, and for once there's even an unspoken arrangement of sorts between the relatively innocent farmer and the creatures of the field; although the farmer has some issues with the rats that will be explained shortly, he seems to have no problem with the other wildlife inhabiting his fields, but doesn't let its presence interfere with his farming duties. The rodents and small mammals, by consequence, are intelligent enough to have learned his farming practices, and prepare for a mass exodus each time the tractor is due to be pulled from its mothballs to plough over their homes.
What evolves into the main 'plot' of the film actually arrives rather late, and is an interesting and obviously critical exploration of scientific animal testing. The widowed Mrs. Brisby learns from the strangely advanced rats, developing their own industrial civilisation beneath the farmer's rose bush, that her late husband was one of many rodents plucked from the streets by a human organisation known as NIMH, the United States' National Institute of Mental Health, and injected with chemicals that somehow increased their intelligence to the point that they were able to lead a mass jailbreak. Now, NIMH appears to have received word of the farmer's tales of rats in his fields being able to avoid traps and are arriving to investigate, causing the rodents to join together in a journey to faraway safety, but they must also contend with rising political conflicts within their own ranks.
Perhaps the main drawback of this film is that the plot is very uneven, changing its focus every once in a while and subsequently having to rush some major elements towards a hasty conclusion in very little screen time. It initially seems to be a story entirely about the exodus of the field mice from the impending ploughing of the field, a journey complicated by the pneumonia of Mrs. Brisby's youngest son, but once Brisby begins her journey to the darker recesses of the wilderness and learns about her husband, these concerns are shifted to the background. This is relieving in a way, as it means viewers are spared a film that threatened to be based around Brisby's annoying juvenile son Martin (voiced by a prepubescent Wil Wheaton who would later star as the much-hated boy genius in 'Star Trek: The Next Generation'), but it also makes for a more episodic series of events that's a little unsatisfying. Coming off worst of all is the emergence of the evil rat opportunist Jenner, whose story is introduced and concluded far too late in the narrative to have any real impact, though it does make for a fittingly dark and violent dramatic climax, with the rain acting as textbook pathetic fallacy for any media students watching.
Of course, the most appealing and spectacular aspect of this film is its visual artistry, from the fluid animation that serves to define Bluth's style here before being replicated in all the productions that followed, to the incredible and lavish backgrounds. There is no element of laziness or haphazard production anywhere in this film's art, introducing spectacular touches such as the frequently used backlighting for magical and sunlight effects that would be ripped off in much animation hereafter. The rodents themselves are somewhat doomed to border on Disney-style caricatures, complete with illogical clothes that are even flatly stated to be impractical by characters in two scenes, but their design somehow manages to be distinctive enough to mark them out as 'trademark Don Bluth rodents,' paving the way for Feivel in the next feature, while also coming a few years before Disney's major rodent blowout in 'Basil the Great Mouse Detective' (oddly, the only Disney film I liked as a child. I must have a thing about animated mice, though only the more obscure ones obviously). I was content to spend most of the film gazing at the excellent painted backgrounds, from the beautiful sunrise and sunsets over the fields to the creepy owl's tree complete with cobwebs and terrifying tarantula. Not that I was scared by it though, I wasn't. I'm 22 after all, and it was clearly a coincidence that I accidentally knocked my drink over by accident when it appeared. I wasn't scared.
Laid over the top of this fantastic art is a fairly standard orchestral soundtrack from Jerry Goldsmith, responding logically to the fluctuating landscape and level of excitement and danger at any given time, but also repeating the main theme intermittently to the point of irritation, particularly when Paul Williams adds some terrible lyrics to it for the end credits. There's thankfully only one song incorporated into the film itself, which is great news for any Disney-haters like me who also happen to despise musicals, and this harks back once again to the early animated films of the mid-twentieth century in its lullaby-like female warble. Although this film was quite innovative on its release, I wouldn't be surprised if these nods to the old school serve to confound animation historians as to this film's age in a few centuries' time. The voice acting has some of the natural banter feel of Don Bluth's later projects, mainly due to the ever-present Dom DeLuise filling in as the comedy character, but is on the whole more traditional and less rife with the amusing, free-form banter that some of the company's later films achieved to great success, particularly the riffing between DeLuise and Burt Reynolds in the otherwise far inferior 'All Dogs Go to Heaven.' The presence of wise, mystical old figures such as Nicodemus the rat and the Great Owl allow for some great performances from crusty English actors such as Derek Jacobi, which adds a touch of class amidst the childish fantasy much as it did for George Lucas' original 'Star Wars.'
With its detailed production, independent credentials and sword-fighting rats, 'The Secret of NIMH' was destined to be a cult hit more than a box office blockbuster, but this attitude also makes it a little easy to fall into the trap of proclaiming it the best thing ever. The animation and design work are all miles ahead of anything Disney were doing around that time, especially as they mainly seemed to be focusing on live-action sci-fi like 'The Black Hole,' 'Tron' and 'Flight of the Navigator' before making their mermaid-based animation comeback at the end of the Eighties, but the plot is all a little too jumbled and uneven to stand up well to repeated viewings. The magical dues ex machina (I hope you media students are still taking notes) is far too convenient and doesn't really fit in with the earthy tone of the rest of the film, and characters are all too frequently dropped or ignored as the action comes to a head. I'd still recommend it as one of the finest animated films of the last couple of decades, certainly something that should please fans of Farthing Wood and Watership Down (though it's less graphic), but perhaps easily scoffed at by fans of Brian Jacques' 'Redwall' books, that I believe have something to do with rats fighting wars against each other or something. Alas, I'm too old to read them now.
Now that Disney is all but resigned to making tedious and repetitive computer-generated films and Don Bluth Films have been silent for the decade as Bluth concentrates on failed revivals of his brilliant 80s arcade games, it's time for another independent release with the spirit of 'NIMH' to make hand-drawn films fantastic again, and hopefully cutting out the songs while they're at it. The DVD has long been available as a budget release with only a promotional trailer tagged on, and is available from Amazon UK for a piffling £3.97. There was an inevitable straight-to-video sequel some years later that should be easy to avoid.
Advantages: Rejuvenates cartoon cinema, causing Disney to back off for a while.
Disadvantages: Uneven plot and perhaps too many similarities to archaic cartoon tradition.
Nosfera-Two
****
Written on 05.04.04
'Shadow of the Vampire' is a horror film regarding a German vampire, that takes the interesting turn of expanding on an ancient (and unfounded) view: that Max Schreck, the actor who played the eponymous vampire in the 1922 silent classic 'Nosferatu,' was himself a vampire. The film is set in Germany in 1921 and follows director Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau, his production crew and the actors from Nosferatu as they attempt to film their controversial motion picture.
NOSFERATU: BACKGROUND
In the 1910s-20s, Germany was seen as the world leader in the new industry of film-making. Silent films of the Expressionist era required the actors to exaggerate their movements and emotions in order for the story to be told in more than just words. F.W. Murnau was interested in creating a film version of Bram Stoker's novel Dracula, however involvement of Stoker's widow meant that this would not be possible; still determined to make his vampire film, Murnau simply changed the names of the characters, the location of the story, and adapted scenes to suit his vision. Following the release of the film, Stoker's estate filed a lawsuit which led to all copies of Nosferatu being destroyed, however one survived. This surviving copy has provided the template for all video, televison and DVD releases of Nosferatu to this day.
SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE: BACKGROUND
This 2000 film is both a celebration of the efforts of early film-making, as well as an attempt to create a believable tribute to the ancient film. The rumour that Max Schreck (whose name translates from German as 'Max Terror') was indeed a vampire appear quite ludicrous when he is listed as appearing in a number of other silent films of the era in different roles, however this film presents the actor in a much more believable way than would be expected.
There has also been constant talk since the 20s that actor Gustav von Wangeheim, who plays the innocent Thomas Hutter in the original film, was poorly trained and quite a bad actor, and Eddie Izzard's portrayal of a struggling actor whose only moments of glory arise from his genuine fear of Max Schreck make this film all the better.
There are also exaggerations, presumably, of Murnau being so dedicated to his art that he allows the principal cast and crew to be killed on film, while leading lady Greta Schroeder is shown to be a drug addict drama queen with aspirations of becoming a star. The quite clear lack of sexual chemistry between the actors in the original film is also explored here, however the oft-debated air of homosexuality between Gustav and Nosferatu is not. It is fortunate that the original actors and crew are not alive to press charges...
PLOT
A background knowledge of the original Nosferatu is not required as the film features several captions that explain its history, however, as a fan of that film who has seen it many times, this interesting look behind-the-scenes is all the more rewarding. It is also very satisfying to see a mixture of clip inserts from the original silent movie, such as scenery, along with newly recorded re-makes of character scenes featuring the modern actors, which manage to stay true to the original.
Murnau is travelling across Germany to the locations he has painstakingly researched for use in his film, however the actors are all told that Max Schreck, playing the vampire, will only appear in full make-up when he is required for a shot. The rest of the time, he will be staying at the remote locations in order to 'soak up the culture.' As the film progresses it is clear that Schreck is himself some form of vampire, or at least a mutant with a lust for blood that can be killed through the same methods, and despite his killing of some of the cast, the film proceeds to be made.
The final scene, in which Nosferatu is to feed off the sacrificial Ellen and then be killed by sunlight, goes ahead...
CAST
John Malkovich plays Murnau expertly, making a totally believable director who is obsessed with creating his 'science.' The other principal actor is William DaFoe, playing Schreck, whose performance is convincing, especially in his recreation of Schreck's original scenes in Nosferatu.
Eddie Izzard plays the part of the arrogant and confused Gustav von Wangeheim surprisingly well, considering he's a blue stand-up comic most of the time, while Catherine McCormack plays the part of Greta Schroeder, making the ultimate sacrifice for her art, playing the part of Ellen, a character who makes the ultimate sacrifice for love. The actors playing the production crew are also very believable as they question their sanity and Schreck's methods.
OVERALL
Anyone who has seen Nosferatu and enjoyed it should see this film, as it serves as a fitting tribute. Despite obvious inconsistencies - 'Shadow' only feratures scenes which serve its vision that Schreck was a vampire and miss out a number that could prove he was simply an actor - there is nothing herein that would serve to spoil the film. Obviously Eddie Izzard, William DaFoe and Catherine McCormack look different to the original actors, but the similarity of their costumes, make-up and the lok of their filmed scenes are a joy to behold.
The film does drag on in places, and could be seen as too arty or seperate from modern society for casual vampire fans, but it is a good film in its own right that is well thought-out, well-produced and very faithful to an old classic. Even the musical score reflects the original and contemporary scores associated with Nosferatu. This is a very good and interesting take on the vampire film format, which clearly needs to be taklen in original directions to avoid repetition, and works very well when compared to the original.
The final scenes are genuinely chilling and even the most hardened Nosferatu fan with his head firmly out of the clouds will find himself thinking, "Gustav does look a little genuinely scared of Schreck in the film doesn't he..." NOTE: Thank you to lookaroundcafe2 for recommending this film following my review of Nosferatu on DVD, I'm glad I noticed it on BBC1 last night.
Underrated Magical Fantasy
*****
Written on 26.03.04
Tim Burton's films have a reputation for featuring bizarre sets and creating a balance between truly good and evil characters. The director responsible for such films as Beetlejuice, the Nightmare Before Christmas and Batman always produces films which I find interesting to watch, even if the plot is not to my liking. With Sleepy Hollow however, the plot, characters and filming style all combine to produce a fantastic film which could be described, if films could be described as magical, as magical.
As actress Christina Ricci explains on the DVD's special features, Washington Irving's 'the Legend of Sleepy Hollow' is one of America's few fairy tales and concerns the plight of a village falling victim to a Headless Horseman. The Horseman in the film is played by Christopher Walken, veteran of a number of films including Burton's previous works, while his good 'adversary' is played excellently by Johnny Depp; a true Tim Burton film veteran who played the title role in Edward Scissorhands.
Christina Ricci, an actress who will hopefully escape one day from the 'Wednesday from the Addams Family movies' label, plays the young and innocent spellbook-dabbler Katrina Van Tassel, Miranda 'Queenie from Blackadder' Richardson plays her evil stepmother and a load of talented old men play old men. The music is all composed by Danny Elfman, a name which I cannot help but link completely with that of Tim Burton as he has been responsible for the powerful, classical themes of all the Tim Burton films I've seen; even "Mars Attacks!" from 1997.
The film's plot is that Depp's Ichabod Crane, an innovative and scientific New York constable at the end of the eighteenth century with a really great name, is sent to the town of Sleepy Hollow by Christopher Lee to investigate murders in which the victims' heads were severed clean from their bodies. Upon arriving at the town, Ichabod soon discovers that the inhabitants all firmly believe in the legend of the Headless Horseman who will come to kill one person every night until he has enough heads for his sinister purposes. Following more deaths, Ichabod enlists the help of an eager young apprentice Masbeth, whose parents were killed by the Horsemen and who is impressed by Ichabod's devices, but their investigations soon start to link to one of the village's most noteable families. And is the horseman real...? Well, after a relatively short investigation it obviously turns out that he is!
Tim Burton is a classic modern director, and if like me you're not trained in the subtleties of directing then you can appreciate the film even more after having listened to the director's commentary. Burton directed a number of scenes to reflect the atmosphere of Hammer Horror-era movies and that works really well, even though I've only seen a few of those old films. The sets are all fantastic, and really give across the feel of the film; a small town was constructed right here in Blighty for the film's exterior shots, while the lengthy wood sequences were filmed expertly inside a studio back in Yank. The fact that you really can't tell is a testament to both the film's set designers and high budget, as the 'dead' feeling couldn't have been found in any un-artificial forest. The majority of the film was shot through a blue lens to create the dark and sinister feel, while the short portions of Ichabod's tortured childhood memories are filmed in bright, dream-like colours of white and strong red. As a humorous note, all the blood in the film was required to be made bright orange as the blue filter could 'red it up,' and there's certainly a lot of blood in this film which is odd as it doesn't appear particularly gory; only in a fantasy and often darkly comedic way.
As well as the excellent look and directing of the film, special credit must be given to the actors who are fantastic. Johnny Depp plays Ichabod as a man who is stern in his principles but clearly an abject coward, although he manages to find love with Christina Ricci, another very talented actress. Christopher Walken is great as the Horseman, his contact lenses and sharp teeth really creating an unforgettable image, and the group of old men played by Michael Gambon, Jeffrey Jones and others make an enjoyable and humorous bunch; director Burton seems especially fond of their scenes. The only slight problem I have is with actor Casper Van Dien, who played the lead role in Starship Troopers; I just don't find he suits his character too well, although he is adequate.
If you have ever been put off by Sleepy Hollow's fairy tale nature or apparent childishness, there is truly none of that; this is something which I would have really liked as a child but really love as an [eighteen-year-old] adult. The film has horror - some really great and shocking scenes, most notably when the Horseman is sent to a family's home, while Ichabod's surfacing memories are also very chilling; fantasy - the notion of a horseman, witchcraft and the Western Woods are all very well realised; romance - it's obvious from the chemistry between the characters and actors that Ichabod and Katrina belong together; and humour - heads designed to spin when severed and occasional jokes such as blood squirts and Ichabod terrified of a spider under his bed prevent it from becoming too sinister. The only problems I have with the film is that the ending seems to last a lot longer than expected, taking place over a number of scenes, and this can make it a little tedious after multiple watches.
In terms of the DVD, Sleepy Hollow's animated menus are very attractive and include images and musical scores from the film. There are two interesting 'making of' documentaries, including great scenes of the decapitated heads being made and how Christopher Walken managed to ride a horse without being able to ride horses. There are also two trailers, which I always find a nice addition, cast biographies which can be useful, a photo gallery and the afore-mentioned director's commentary.
I would recommend Sleepy Hollow to anyone who hasn't seen it as, although violent and horrific in parts, it's a really enjoyable film with some classic scenes and the film's atmosphere is very involving and mystical. If you feel like watching something special at night, this is a film I'd recommend for all the family, even though it's a 15 certificate - this is only for the death and gore; there is no swearing, sex or nudity.
Advantages: Excellent actors, sets, plot and soundtrack
Disadvantages: Some scenes are less memorable
Born Again
***
Written on 20.10.00 [My Trek film thoughts 18 years later. Jesus.]
The first in the continuing line of Star Trek films has often been criticized for having a poor storyline and just being a special effects extravaganza, but I still like to watch it every so often, possibly for sentimental reasons.
The story is set two years after the end of the classic Star Trek: The Original Series and involves the USS enterprise NCC-1701 (which has been given a cinema special effects makeover to make it look less "sixties") trying to stop an invading, vast object over eighty AUs (astronomical units- the distance between Earth and the sun) in diameter eventually turning out to be an old Earth space probe, Voyager VI, launched from Earth in 1999 (well, this film was created twenty years earlier) that was found by a race of living machines (who some fans think may be the Borg from The Next Generation and Voyager, although this is not stated) and sent back to Earth, its mission garbled, to exterminate all living beings. [What a magnificent sentence.]
The story is rather poor, but there are some important and very good scenes. If you're a Star Trek fan then you'll like this film, but if you're just a person who likes to watch movies, this may not be to your taste. However, the special effects, for the most part, are exceptional by 1979 standards, and that earned the film a well-deserved award. The film was criticized, but still had a massive viewership because of it being a Star Trek film, and the seed for the successful box office hits were sown…
Advantages: A new hope for the franchise, great effects.
Disadvantages: Not as good as its successors.
The First Great Trek Film
*****
Written on 01.04.04
Following the success of the first, disappointing Star Trek movie released in 1979 it was inevitable that a second film would follow. While "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" had seemed too driven by technology and special effects at the expense of most peoples' favourite aspect of the original series, I'm talking about the characters although you may have only tuned in to see the scantily-clad alien temptresses, the second film took a completely different direction and is widely recognised as the best Star Trek film.
The Wrath of Khan was directed by Nicholas Meyer and his influence over the look and feel of the film, as well as that of the set designers, costumers and writer Harve Bennett, makes more a much more appealing and understandable future than the antiseptic chalk-toned Utopia of the previous film. Starfleet uniforms were now dark red and more military in style, while the bridge of the famous Enterprise was darker and more akin to a submarine even than in the original series. This submarine design would certainly come into use later in the film, with the sequence often described as "submarine battles in space" with Kirk against Khan in the Mutara nebula.
PLOT
The plot of Star Trek II follows on, in a way, from the original series episode "Space Seed" although as with most Star Trek films and episodes, a background knowledge is not required for the full enjoyment. In that episode, the Enterprise picked up cryogenically frozen Middle Eastern men who, it turned out, were the genetically engineered superhumans responsible for the devastating Eugenics Wars of 1992 - 1996. (I know, I can't remember them either, but Star Trek did predict that the first moon landing would be on a Wednesday in 1969 so who knows?) The leader of the soldiers, Khan Noonien Singh, was eventually banished with his crew, and a member of the Enterprise's very fickle crew who had decided she was in love with him, to Ceti Alpha V: a planet which Kirk promised would be visited periodically with supplies.
It's over fifteen years later, the year 2285 which I depressingly know without having to look it up, and the USS Reliant is investigating what it believes to be the decimated remains of Cati Alpha VI. Unfortunately for the crew, who are either killed or turbed into controllable zombies by 'ceti ells' inserted into their ears, the planet is actually Ceti Alpha V and a rather disgruntled Khan decides to take this chance to become all powerful again. When the distress call goes out that there's something afoot, the Enteprise is called out of cadet training service and back into commission, albeit with a crew made up of inexperienced cadets and obese old men called Kir, Spock, Scott, etc. The film is a quest to stop the ingenious madman from obtaining the Genesis device, a constructive device which has been developed to terraform "life from lifelessness" on a dead planet in a matter of days, but which could also be used to eradicate an entire planet of its population. There's always a snag isn't there?
CAST & CREW
The adventurous plot and bold characters made this a huge box office success to the point that even my A-Team loving Dad can remember phrases such as "Kobayashi Maru" and several story points, and finally did justice to the sixties show. As well as the return of everyone's favourite characters from the sixties show there are some interesting additions to the cast, namely Ricardo Montalban reprising his role as Khan - you may know him from "The Naked Gun" or one of the sensible films he's no doubt been in - and Kirstie Alley as the Vulcan Saavik. Kirsti Alley is best known from her role in "Cheers" and every single American film released between 1982 and 1987, excluding Star Trek III in which she was replaced by someone who fit the budget more.
As well as the afore-mentioned great sets, the special effects are excellent, especially for 1982. The phaser and photon torpedo blasts look convincing, the ever-changing transporter and warp effects look nice and there's even a section which won some kind of special effects award showcasing the potential of the Genesis device; this lengthy computer-generated scene was deemed slightly too unrealistic to feature in the actual plot and was instead shown to be a computer animation prediction. It still looks amazing though, no wonder it was repeated in the next two films. Even the musical score is fitting and enjoyable, with the regular Jerry Goldsmith replaced for some reason by James Horner. Suiting to his name he does like to ad a lot of horns, and his music for the nebula battle is great. I won't do a joke about him feeling 'horny' because... oh, I am sorry.
LEGACY
The recent Star Trek: The Next Generation feature, "Nemesis," was largely based on this film due to its success. There's the captain against an intelligent foe in command of a weapon of awesome destructive power, the death of a major character and even a battle sequence inside a nebula; I can imagine Brannon Braga or one of the less talented Trek writers remaining after the close of the excellent DS9 explaining "It's not the same, it's a green nebula this time, so it's obviously different isn't it."
Even if you despise Star Trek and hate everything that it stands for... well no, in that case you'd probably despise this film. But even if you're not a Star Trek fan, but enjoy a bit of space adventure with great characters, I would definitely recommend this film. For the fans who know it's the year 2285 without even having to research it there's a very interesting special edition DVD version out which is crammed with about a day's worth of extras so I'll certainly be buying that soon. Along with 1996's First Contact, which got me interested in Star Trek in the first place, this is my favourite Trek film. A brief summary of my opinions and general opinions on the Trek legacy:
STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (1979)
Disappointing SFX extravaganza. It won awards for its effects but it was a dull and lengthy plot with annoying sets and complete lack of character development.
STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (1982)
You didn't read my review did you?
STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK (1984)
Continuing the story in the same style this is an enjoyable film, aided by one of my favourite actors Christopher Lloyd, but not quite as compelling.
STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME (1986)
The Enterprise on Earth in the 80s. Funny and popular, but not as good a Trek film as some. You can't help but be intrigued by Spock in hippie clothes.
STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER (1989)
Directed by ego-maniac William Shatner (Kirk), this is my worst Trek film and is often regarded as boring, unimpressive and embarrassing. They go to find God. Again.
STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY (1991)
A return to grace, this was made up of all the same ingredients as Star Trek II in terms of production. Loads of Klingon action and great planets, a contender for best Trek film.
STAR TREK GENERATIONS (1994)
The first Next Generation film, Generations seems too much like an episode for it to be a successful movie. Made too soon, and the metting of Kirk and Picard isn't too great.
STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT (1996)
An action film in Earth's orbit a little bit in the future. I love this film as it sums up a lot of what Trek's about while showing a lot of Borg-blasting at the same time.
STAR TREK: INSURRECTION (1999)
Overlooked and not as good as it could have been. Picard and crew go against naughty Starfleet, but the scale isn't epic enough and there's an annoying kid.
STAR TREK: NEMESIS (2002)
Enjoyable but a blatant rip-off of Star Trek II. Showing the downfall of Star Trek since Voyager was the only show on the air, but the special effects are excellent.
The later Kirk & crew romps seem a little silly due to the crew's age but are nonetheless still (on the whole) worth watching. I personally hope that the next film will be Deep Space Nine related, but that's probably not going to happen. In 1982 the Star Trek franchise was going strong, even enough to contend with Star Wars though this was never the intention. Can't we all just get along? Possibly a message of Star Trek II, a great emotional film with something for everyone. Even if you hate Kirk and his bunch, watch it.
Star Trek III: The Search For Spock
He's Not Quite Dead
***
Written on 23.08.06 [2000 downdate]
The third Star Trek feature film picks up precisely where the second left off, and would end up as a disappointing middle section in a very loosely connected trilogy. ‘The Search for Spock’ is a victim of a cut budget and plot structure recycled verbatim from the previous film; this is likely the least disappointing of the cursed odd-numbered Star Trek films, even if its entire plot is based on ruining the dramatic finale of Star Trek II.
Like the second ‘Back to the Future’ film, the second part of this Trek ‘trilogy’ owes an awful lot to its predecessor, revisiting the same concepts but nevertheless highlighting thoughtful issues that were given only brief passing earlier. Both sequels aren’t as strong in their own respect, but form important moral centrepieces that benefit their respective trilogies as a result. They also have more cool props than their fore-runners: ‘Back to the Future Part II’ had the hoverboard and all the other futuristic stuff, while ‘The Search for Spock’ introduces the Excelsior-class starship, the mushroom-esque Spacedock and the bird-like Klingon ship, the stock footage for which would be re-used countless times in ‘The Next Generation.’ Now I’ve made that point, I can start talking about the film itself rather than trying to be clever, especially as this parallel between franchises would probably break down at the next bullet point… oh yes, both films star Christopher Lloyd too.
Following the events of Star Trek II, the badly crippled U.S.S. Enterprise plods home for repairs. Admiral Kirk (William Shatner) finds it hard to concentrate, feeling the death of his friend Captain Spock “like an open wound,” but Doctor McCoy (DeForrest Kelley) is acting even stranger, speaking in Leonard Nimoy’s voice and asking to be taken home to Vulcan. McCoy is dismissed as a fruit loop and placed in a cell once the starship reaches Earth, but a visit from Spock’s Vulcan father Sarek (Mark Lenard) convinces the formerly atheistic Kirk that Spock’s body has to be recovered from its casket, orbiting the newly-created Genesis Planet, in order to be reunited with the soul he transferred to McCoy. Unfortunately for them, travel to the Genesis Planet is highly illegal, meaning Kirk and his loyal rebels have a difficult choice to make. Meanwhile, renegade Klingon captain Kruge (Christopher Lloyd) is en route to Genesis under his ship’s cloak, intent on discovering the secrets of its ultimate weapon.
The ending of Star Trek II certainly left enough plot threads floating through the vacuum, but it was one scene in particular that clinched the deal for a direct sequel, added at the last moment once Nimoy was persuaded to return despite his character’s heroic death. Touching DeForrest Kelley’s face and asking him to “remember” was deemed vague enough to give writers creative freedom in penning what came next, and this ridiculously contrived result is about as good as can be expected. Religion never played a role in Gene Roddenberry’s universe until now, and setting it in an alien context doesn’t make the plot of “we’ve got Spock’s soul, now we have to go get his dead body and put it back in” any more credible. It is interesting to see the Genesis Planet itself, created as an accidental side effect of Khan’s attack in Star Trek II. Writers Nimoy and Harve Bennett use the planet’s rapid deterioration as an excellent metaphor for the danger posed by the good-willed Genesis Project, and this leads to some interesting character development for Kirk’s son David Marcus, even if this does lead to more ‘Wrath-of-Khan’-referencing than the casual filmgoer is prepared to take.
The film is filled with exciting visuals and some nice plot developments outside the primary ‘search for Spock’ storyline (which itself is fairly uneventful, and extremely padded out). The Klingons make their first appearance as aggressors since the original television series, and the always excellent Christopher Lloyd makes a formidable villain out of the few scenes he’s given as Kruge, despite this film being produced before canonical Klingonness had been established in the series. Kirk’s rebellion against Starfleet is far more interesting than the final showdown with Kruge, although the space fight between the two ships, and Kirk’s ingenious solution, is an excellent and memorable scene. Kruge just doesn’t hold up as an adversary so soon after Khan, and his fist-fight with Kirk over a molten sea doesn’t come close to Star Trek II’s space-submarine battle of wits, which managed to be far more effective despite Shatner and Ricardo Montalban never even appearing on screen together.
Leonard ‘I Am Not Spock’ Nimoy was baited back to the Star Trek franchise with the promise of directing the two subsequent films, and he does an acceptable job here, even if most of it involves copying what Nicholas Meyer did on the previous outing. The lack of Spock on screen is certainly felt throughout, and even McCoy is absent for much of it. This leaves Kirk with the secondary characters of Scotty and the multicultural bridge officers; after being neglected in previous films, these actors are given a couple of moments to shine, although sadly almost all of these are weak comedic scenes. Nichelle Nichols locks a guy in a closet, James Doohan grumbles about technology again, and George Takei says “don’t call me tiny.” As for Shatner himself, he’s his usual, somewhat irritating toupeed self, and adds to his exaggerated off-screen caricature when he stamps on Kruge’s head and tells him “I… have had… enough of… you.” Robin Curtis takes over Kirstie Alley’s role as Saavik and is a lot less enticing (although the adolescent Spock wouldn’t say no), but Merritt Butrick is a lot better this time round as David. Leonard Nimoy may or may not feature in the film’s conclusion – I wouldn’t want to spoil anything.
Audiences liked Spock, so his return was a necessity. It’s just a shame that this anticipated return takes an entire film to play out, although it’s preferable to Kirk waking up after a horrible nightmare and seeing Spock alive and well, and stepping out from a shower (I believe there are websites for that sort of thing). The notion that an enemy force would view the Genesis Device as the ultimate weapon for eradicating civilisations, despite its peaceful intention of creating habitable planets from barren rocks, is chilling and exciting, but was already used in Star Trek II. To repeat the same thing with a ship of Klingons rather than genetically engineered superhumans adds nothing to the experience other than to allow Marc Okrand to show off the Klingon language he was developing at the time.
‘The Search for Spock’ lies awkwardly between action, sci-fi, comedy and spirituality, and doesn’t do any of them very well. The visual effects from Industrial Light and Magic are amazing for the most part, really conveying a sense of scale between the gigantic Spacedock, the various Starfleet and Klingon ships and the planets they orbit, land on and explode around. The sets betray the film’s low budget at times, always feeling under-populated and confined and, in the case of the very obvious sound stage used for the Genesis Planet ‘exteriors,’ painfully false. If the film had been shot on location and the script almost completely rewritten, it could have been a masterpiece. Instead, it’s merely a dull middle chapter to link ‘The Wrath of Khan’ to ‘The Voyage Home,’ two much better Star Trek films.
The DVD has been re-released in two-disc collector’s edition, featuring a generous amount of interviews and commentaries. Unlike many of these re-releases, the film is exactly the same as the original DVD print, with no extended or deleted scenes re-inserted into the main feature.
Advantages: Logical continuation of the previous film with great visual effects from ILM.
Disadvantages: Doesn't say much that wasn't covered in Star Trek II.
"Could You Turn Off that Damn Noise?"
*****
Written on 20.10.00
The film that appealed to the most people, both science fiction fans and regular cinemagoers, was due in no small part to its depiction of Kirk and his 23rd. century crew trying to adjust to life in "the late twentieth century" which was supposed to be 1986, but was never actually stated. There is a lot of comedy, especially on the part of Spock, and a very good, believable storyline.
Sights such as Spock mind-melding with a humpback whale in front of a crowd of unknowing people and Scotty's attempts to use a contemporary computer are hilarious, and there's also some more romance for Kirk in the form of Doctor Gillian Taylor.
The story concerns the Cetacean Probe, a mysterious cylinder that is wreaking havoc on Earth's oceans. Kirk and his bunch of rebels hear about it en route back to Earth in their Klingon Bird-of-Prey (which McCoy has christened the H.M.S. Bounty in light of their recent mutinous actions to save Spock in Star Trek III: The Search For Spock) and Spock reasons that the probe is attempting to find humpback whales to communicate with. Since they were hunted to extinction in the twenty-first century, the Bounty slingshots around the Sun to take it back in time to 1986. Kirk and Spock attempt to procure a pair of humpback whales named George and Gracie, while Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, McCoy and Chekov look for a nuclear reactor to power the Bounty, as its dilithium crystals were burnt out during the time trip.
Eventually they return to the present with Doctor Gillian Taylor, the whales' cherished carer, and save Earth. Because of these actions their charges are taken lightly and Kirk is demoted to captain, and given command of a new Enterprise, the NCC-1701-A. They set out once again, boldly going where no man has gone before.
Advantages: Hilarious, and appealing to everyone.
Disadvantages: Not a lot of action, or special effects.
Kirk V God
*
Written on 20.07.06
If you sat patiently through the first four Star Trek films solely in the hope of seeing awe-inspiring sights like Kirk in a chequered shirt, Spock eating some baked beans and neck-pinching a horse, Scotty banging his head on the ceiling in an almost convincing way, an ageing Nichelle Nichols performing a nudie dance behind big leaves, ingenious foreshadowing of rocket boots as a subsequent plot device, a second-rate actor pretending to be Sean Connery, and God zapping lightning from His eyes… you probably would have left the cinema feeling extremely disappointed. But have no fear: Star Trek V is here! For all your overacting, franchise-embarrassing needs. You make me sick. It’s only a shame that Kirk’s pursuit by a rock monster was cut. Apparently, they couldn’t make the costume look convincing enough, because a scene like that would be quality Star Trek in all other respects.
It’s easy to dismiss Star Trek V as the worst of the profitable and popular Star Trek film series by far, and as a wholly unwatchable film in general. It just gives you so much material to work with. But for fairness’ sake, the end result of this shambles is largely due to studio interference and general bad decisions and bad luck all round. Ego-mad director William Shatner gets criticised slightly more than he is due in attempt to repeat the success of his co-star Leonard Nimoy, who did a nice job helming Star Treks III and IV.
Star Trek V is the story of a madman’s search for God. The Vulcan Sybok (Captain Spock’s brother), blessed with a unique telepathic ability, holds Federation, Klingon and Romulan delegates hostage on Nimbus III in a ploy to lure a starship which he can then steal to travel through the Great Barrier at the centre of our galaxy. Unfortunately for the holidaymaking crew of the new and not-quite-operational U.S.S. Enterprise, they are once again the only available ship to deal with the disturbance, and to play right into Sybok’s hands.
The search for God in an apparently godless Utopian future is marketed as the greatest adventure yet for the Enterprise crew, but this whole film feels like a second rate episode of the television series, especially disappointing after the high quality of its cinematic predecessors. Everything has been done before, and more impressively: the ship’s takeover, the mutual deal with Klingons, a powerful alien masquerading as God and the shock factor that other Vulcans are related to Spock. Gene Roddenberry’s atheistic universe is founded on the principle that all organised religion is detrimental to human progress and enlightenment, following his own beliefs; The Final Frontier does nothing but dance around this issue with some poor action scenes, out-of-place humour and forced attempt to regain the character dynamics of the original series.
This film does contain some particularly cringe-worthy humour from the onset, which serves to completely ruin what should have been a thoughtful, mystical and sombre tone. The success of Star Trek IV, which was occasionally funny in its ‘people of the future visit the 1980s’ plot, somehow convinced Paramount that audiences would only accept a sequel that was full of silly jokes. Thus, we have the embarrassing campfire scene in which Kirk, Spock and McCoy perform ‘Row, Row, Row Your Boat’ and Spock’s hilarious punchline: “Captain… life is not a dream.” “Go to sleep, Spock.” The most offensive scene comes when the late James ‘Scotty’ Doohan is forced to reduce his engineering genius to a bumbling, fat fool who falls over, while the triumphant rescue scene near the end is spoiled by Spock’s out-of-character quip: “please Captain, not in front of the Klingons!” Woo-hoo, what a script! If it wasn’t for all of these pointless and detracting light hearted moments, I could begin to take the predictable plot of Star Trek V a little more seriously.
Supporters of this film praise the return of the ‘power trio’ from the original series, namely the interaction of Kirk, Spock and Doctor McCoy. This featured a little in the earlier films, but for the most part the characters were separated into one-on-one discussions, nevertheless providing some great Spock and McCoy banter in Star Trek IV. The trio’s early scene in Yosemite National Park doesn’t fit comfortably into the Star Trek world, but thankfully their scenes on the Enterprise are somewhat better. As usual, Uhura, Scotty, Chekov and Sulu are all but ignored (they have always merely been supporting characters after all), but most are at least assigned tasks that are relevant to the plot.
This is arguably the only film in the franchise that plays out exactly as a TV episode would, with the ship’s crew at their correct posts and the status quo effectively being restored by the end with no lasting consequences. Whether this makes it better or worse as a film, in contrast to the ‘to be continued’ style of the successful trilogy of sorts in the three previous films, is down to the viewer’s patience.
As if all of the important aspects of the film aren't bad enough, the special effects of Star Trek V are also pretty poor. Apparently due to Industrial Light and Magic’s commitments elsewhere, we have to settle for substandard optical effects of the Great Barrier, shuttle antics and a space battle with the Klingons. The musical score is also strangely unsatisfactory, and is easily the least impressive of the franchise; Jerry Goldsmith’s fanfare-heavy theme for the first Star Trek film (re-used for the TV series Star Trek: The Next Generation) is re-used completely here for the opening titles, and the only music that stands out elsewhere is the silly 80s ‘ethnic dance’ number for Uhura’s dance. This film really doesn’t have a lot in its favour. Just imagine if Sean Connery had accepted the role he was offered to play Sybok, if he hadn’t been busy filming Indiana Jones. Just imagine if Shatner hadn’t been offered the script.
Star Trek V has long been available on video and DVD, and was recently re-released as a special edition with bonus features. Eager to repair the film’s quality and reputation, Shatner reportedly asked for the opportunity to re-cut the film, as Robert Wise was permitted for the first Star Trek picture. Shatner’s original proposal for The Final Frontier would have resulted in a much darker and less silly end result, in which all of the film’s first half would have been the same, including the rubbish mountain climbing / campfire scenes. On second thought, maybe this guy deserves everything we can throw at him.
His request was denied, leaving Star Trek V as one-star material for ever more. Kirk’s mock-prophetic justification for climbing dangerous mountains reflects the only real reason for Star Trek fans to accept this terrible film into their collection between films IV and VI: “because it’s there.” Shatner’s egotism is evident in his over-the-top acting, self-indulging rock-climbing and fist fight scenes and steadfast, rebellious dialogue with ‘the Almighty.’ It all culminates quite spectacularly at the end of the film, in Kirk’s response to McCoy’s starry-eyed question of whether God is really ‘out there.’ Shatner grins, points to his own chest and says: ‘maybe he’s right here.’
Admittedly, he then follows up with the Roddenberryesque point that God resides ‘in the human heart,’ but if your video happened to screw up at that point, it would make for a far more satisfying ending and moral. He should have been given that director’s cut.
Advantages: Um... at least we didn't get a Starfleet Academy movie?
Disadvantages: Numerous
Two Old Men Bridge the Generation Gap
**
Written on 02.08.06
‘I’ve always known… I’ll die alone,’ said James T. Kirk in the godawful fifth Star Trek film, misleadingly sub-titled ‘The Final Frontier.’ It’s probably for the best that anything and everything from that forgettable script be forgotten, and the movie be shelved for infinity along with ‘Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.’ The Star Trek movie franchise continued regardless, the U.S.S. Enterprise and most of its crew under Kirk being decommissioned in 1991, but a few of the old faces remained to pass the torch to Patrick Stewart and company in this seventh feature.
Despite being promoted HEAVILY as the bridge between the original crew and the cast of the television spin-off The Next Generation, ‘Star Trek Generations’ is almost entirely a Next Generation adventure, with three of the classic, decrepit actors squeezed in (get it? They got all fat). The first scene of the film sees William Shatner reprise his role as Kirk, along with the late James ‘Scotty’ Doohan and Walter ‘Chekov, the Russian one’ Koenig, due to the more prestigious Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley declining the walk-on roles.
Fans of The Next Generation should enjoy ‘Generations,’ but those more suited to following the film series will take a lot of convincing. This is what the historic meeting between Kirk and Patrick Stewart’s Jean-Luc Picard spectacularly fails to achieve. Generations is as rickety and unstable as Kirk’s final bridge, in traversing the reasonably enjoyable TV series and the more independent movies that followed, playing out much like an average TV episode. The effects are better, the sets more impressive and the events a little more epic, but the bright, primary-coloured uniforms and unnecessary return of villains from the TV series do little to push the films into a new, promising era.
The film begins with a history lesson, or rather a final glimpse of the 23rd century before the franchise moves well and truly into the 24th. Kirk, Scotty and Chekov are honoured guests aboard the maiden flight of the U.S.S. Enterprise-B, when the ship receives a badly timed distress call and, once again, the hi-tech but unprepared Enterprise is the only ship in range. In the process of rescuing a group of wandering aliens from a destructive but strangely compelling space anomaly, Kirk acts the part of the hero one last time and is presumed killed in the process. Jump 78 years further into the future to the holodeck of the Enterprise-D, where festivities surround Lieutenant Worf’s promotion and Picard learns the tragic news of his family’s untimely death. Data decides to use his emotion chip, with comedic results, and an aged alien scientist strikes a deal with the Klingon Duras sisters to accomplish his sophisticated and fiendish plan to lure a familiar energy ribbon to a heavily populated star system.
Generations begins the trend that would continue throughout the Next Generation films, by focusing on Picard’s butch heroism and the android Data’s quest to become more human, doing little to advance the other characters. Perhaps the most offensive part of the film comes late on with the disappointing joined forces of the two famous, elderly Enterprise captains. The tedious and pointless debate over which one was best fails spectacularly to be settled here, as neither captain does anything of worth: Picard’s strength was always shown to lie in diplomacy as a contrast to Kirk’s ‘I’m a soldier, not a diplomat’ attitude, reflecting the contrast between the two TV series’ roots in the Kennedy and Reagan eras, but there’s very little diplomacy in the fist fights with Malcolm McDowell on a rocky hilltop. Kirk’s final scene is also disappointing, as the legendary character deserved better, regardless of personal feelings towards the series or to Shatner.
There are a few positive points about this film, although many are fan-pleasers that will be of no concern to the casual viewer. There are some nice touches for fans outside the primary crossover, with Data finally achieving a greater degree of humanity, the final appearance of the Duras sisters, the final voyage of the hotel-in-space that had graced their TV screens for the previous seven years and the final piece in the Enterprise chronology with Captain John Harriman’s Enterprise-B (after the ‘C’ appeared in an episode). The TV sets are re-designed quite conspicuously for the big screen and look better than they ever did, plus there are a couple of cool new rooms that somehow failed to appear in 150+ episodes of the TV series. Not to mention the special effects which, aside from a couple of obvious re-uses from Star Trek VI, are pretty amazing.
Lazy film critics up to speed with their Trek knowledge would point to the fabled ‘odd numbered film curse’ as an easy way to explain the mediocrity of ‘Generations,’ but as usual the reasons are a little more intelligent than that. Production began before the final season of The Next Generation had even ceased, and it seems that most of the cast and crew involved still thought they were making another feature-length TV episode rather than the seventh film in a prestigious series. That’s not to mention the re-use of a re-use of a re-use of a re-use with the ‘Enterprise captain versus a madman with a fiendish scheme’ plot, which appeared in four of the previous six films. The stakes are more underwhelming than ever, amounting only to an unseen civilisation on an insignificant planet rather than the fate of the planet Earth, the Federation, the galaxy or the universe.
Patrick Stewart has a couple of touching scenes as he copes with the death of his brother and nephew, performed with the Shakespearean actor’s usual grace, and Brent Spiner handles Data’s undemanding comic relief scenes adequately. Marina Sirtis is surprisingly given more than a handful of lines as Counsellor Troi, and even an ill-fated chance to pilot the Enterprise, but Gates McFadden is once again practically invisible as Dr. Crusher. We can be thankful that her fictional son Wesley, much loathed by viewers and played by Wil Wheaton, was given a send-off a number of episodes before. Riker leads an away team, but that’s about it. Sadly William Shatner is disappointing as Kirk in this final adventure, and the banter between captains is meagre and lifeless. Special appearances by Whoopi Goldberg, who was a recurring guest star in the TV series already, and Malcolm McDowell as yet another white-haired, English-speaking villain aren’t enough to convince me that this is a worthy successor to films like ‘The Wrath of Khan,’ and a great deal of the TV episodes are better. Thankfully, the films that came after feel stronger and are more worthy of viewers’ time (odd-number-cursed inclusive).
‘Star Trek Generations’ was given a bog-standard DVD release several years ago along with seven of its movie brethren, but was recently re-released as a collector’s edition with worthwhile extras including interviews, commentaries and interesting deleted scenes, notably the excised orbital skydiving sequence that would have opened the film. This was perhaps a necessary stepping stone between the excellent ‘The Undiscovered Country’ and ‘First Contact,’ but the whole arbitrary crossover thing smells like bad fan fiction that could have been written better by anyone who wears a plastic phaser and refers to himself, or herself, as Lieutenant Commander. Let’s face it, it’s a he.
Advantages: Impressive CGI and some amazing model shots.
Disadvantages: Tedious and pointless plot, with disappointing use of the 'wow' factor.
DVD Release - Disappointing
****
Written on 09.03.03
It was seeing this film at the cinema in 1996 that first got me into Star Trek, and I soon was into it in a BIIIG way. Plenty of sci-fi action with a threatening enemy and lots of action, couldn't have been better- but this opinion will not focus on the film, which I love for both appreciative and nostalgic reasons, but on the DVD release itself, which I was a little disappointed in.
I've recently started noticing that Paramount are re-releasing the Star Trek film DVDs, they're currently up to Star Trek IV, giving me the impression that a 'Director's Cut' edition of this film, Star Trek VIII, will soon be released (soon being at least six months). Such a release would be favourable, due to the lack of extras.
There are two different trailers on the disc which I enjoy watching, one a "teaser trailer" brought out inadvisably early and featuring plenty of special effects of a much poorer quality, and of completely different subject, to those which would feature in the film (mostly taken from The Next Generation episodes, the Deep Space Nine pilot episode and the film Star Trek Generations), and a more advanced "theatrical trailer" that actually serves to show what the film is about. There are also a large variety of language options and a chapter select, but the extras end there- not even any nice animated menus.
The film itself is of pristine quality, in "anamorphic widescreen 16:9" (simply saying widescreen would be enough for me, personally), and the sound quality is excellent, I'd just expect a lot more from a DVD that would obviously have to cater for such an attention-seeking, extras-loving people as the Trekkie community. It's serving me well for watch purposes for now, but will definitely be sold again on eBay if a director's cut is released- I'd like to see this film which marked a landmark in my tastes given much more attention, especially some behind-the-scenes of which there must have been many made, I know the film was quite well received and eagerly anticipated.
Die Hard Picard 4.0
**
Written on 28.09.07
Despite the claims of its producers after the tenth Star Trek film failed to score at the box office, it was clear that ‘Star Trek Nemesis’ was never going to be the last in this mostly prestigious and highly profitable line, and now an eleventh movie (based on the original crew, but played by a different cast) is due to begin filming in November. Blame for the tenth film’s weak box office performance, grossing significantly lower than any of its nine predecessors (even the really rubbish ones), was mostly targeted at what the cast, crew and disgruntled television viewers everywhere saw as ‘an over-saturation’ of the Star Trek franchise, having run endlessly and desperately for fifteen consecutive years since ‘Star Trek: The Next Generation’ first brought Gene Roddenberry’s franchise back to the small screen, and mostly plummeting into repetitive and meaningless drivel as soon as its brightest spark ‘Deep Space Nine’ finished in 1999, leaving viewers with the unoriginal ‘Voyager’ and poorly conceived ‘Enterprise’ which ended in embarrassing cancellation. It might also have had something to do with the direct competition of the reasonably popular ‘Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers,’ ‘Die Another Day’ and ‘Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets’ opening around the same time, I couldn’t say for sure.
Fandom has long sworn by the so-called ‘odd-numbered movie curse’ for Star Trek feature films, the theory stating that, by some mysterious phenomenon probably involving subspace or thalaron radiation or other form of technobabble, each even-numbered Star Trek film is guaranteed to be excellent, while each odd-numbered film in-between is sure to be damned. It’s a fun theory, but naive and frequently incorrect (though it’s right about Star Trek V – what a load of crap), and this tenth film was widely considered to finally put an end to that curse nonsense by failing to live up to its predictions of even-numbered excellence. Always intended as the final voyage of the Next Generation crew whether it bombed at cinemas or not, it seems that ‘Nemesis’ is widely panned by fans of the series for failing to give it a proper send-off, and instead relying on publicity stunts and gimmicks unsuited to the Star Trek universe, such as a ridiculous desert buggy chase and far too much focus on shooting things. I thought I’d take quite a controversial stance on this film by not completely hating it, and struggling to the best of my objective ability to voice its defence, having just finished watching it for the first time since that disappointing night in the Crewe Apollo all those years ago.
There are indeed numerous problems with Star Trek X; for a start, it’s significantly more action-oriented than even the previous Next Generation films, and macho battles between starships and between characters comprise an unusually large portion of the screen time, seemingly around half of the entire film (though I’m sure the actual amount is slightly less). The film’s script has also been criticised for being a mere copy of the second Star Trek film, 1982’s ‘The Wrath of Khan,’ which general consensus among Trekkies and casual film fans alike judges (very accurately) to be the best in the franchise. It’s true that there are an alarming number of parallels: a dangerous human adversary, a lengthy starship battle in a nebula, homo-erotic sub-text between the main villain and his second-in-command (because it’s not enough for Hollywood villains to be English, they have to be gay as well), a potentially catastrophic ultimate weapon capable of instantly wiping out entire civilisations, a conveniently long activation period in which said weapon can be deactivated, and a necessary and noble sacrifice from a popular character at the conclusion. But this paltry list of offenses aside, ‘Nemesis’ adds a number of exciting and intriguing new elements to the Star Trek film franchise, while acting as a satisfying and thoughtful finale at the same time. Honestly.
Considering some of the major stylistic changes made by this film, and the nine-year legacy of Next Generation films taking the series increasingly away from its roots, I was pleasantly surprised at how authentically Next-Gen the film managed to be, at least for the first 12 minutes and 46 seconds. Not only are all the original main cast members present, with the exception of characters such as Tasha Yar and Dr. Pulaski whose tenure on the television show was comparatively brief, but several unexpected surprises turn up at Riker and Troi’s wedding ceremony early in the film (itself a nice, if sudden conclusion to their relationship arc) and in some of the later scenes, namely Whoopi Goldberg’s Guinan, Wil Wheaton’s much-hated Wesley Crusher (who doesn’t get any lines in the final version, but hangs around in shot near his mom the Doctor), and even Data’s pet cat Spot. Some of the series’ most effective character dynamics also make a long-awaited return, the scenes between Data and Geordi LaForge in particular (Brent Spiner and LeVar Burton) making me feel right at home in the old Enterprise again. Of course, being a stand-alone film there isn’t adequate time to focus equally on all the characters like the television series managed, especially in its later years, and ‘Nemesis’ follows the example of its three predecessors by centring primarily on lead man Patrick Stewart in his most famous role as Captain Jean-Luc Picard, with the customary secondary role for Spiner’s lovable android.
The female characters Deanna Troi and Beverley Crusher (Marina Sirtis and Gates McFadden) are largely ignored as usual, though Deanna does get a larger role in her capacity as empathic damsel-in-distress and bit-of-alright (nice to see these modern series progressing from the sexual exploitation of the 1960s), and for the second film in a row, Michael Dorn’s heroic Klingon officer Worf is largely wasted as the mere butt of badly written jokes. To the writers’ credit, they attempt to provide the Enterprise’s often overlooked first officer Will Riker (Jonathan Frakes) with a more prominent role and story arc in this final outing before he leaves to pursue an intended command of his own, and although his main action scene is largely pointless and confusing, it at least makes more sense within the context of the series than Patrick Stewart’s vest-clad ‘Die Hard Picard’ action hero scenes in the previous couple of films, which still remain to a smaller extent as the old man pilots an assortment of testosterone-fuelled (metaphorically speaking) vehicles and ships. All the performers know these roles like the ridges on their foreheads, and it’s an unadulterated delight to see them playing these famous characters for one last time to the best of their abilities. The final ingredient is the film’s necessary enemy, Picard’s titular nemesis Shinzon, who turns out rather unexpectedly to be some form of clone of the captain at a younger, more reckless age, and ultimately loyal to the cause of conquering the Federation to make his adoptive race strong. Tom Hardy’s main responsibility is to look and sound like a convincingly youthful Patrick Stewart and he does this about as well as can be expected, though his character moves on from sympathetic figure of mystery to clichéd villainous enemy commander before the film’s half-way point, and is given little to work with thereafter.
What really surprised me about this film was its focus on the Romulans, a prominent enemy power in the Star Trek universe in the original series and even more so in The Next Generation, who have nevertheless remained oddly obscure in comparison to the more famous Klingons and Borg used to pull in the viewers to previous films. Focusing and expanding on this interesting and highly secretive race is another satisfying gift to fans, as is the first ever exploration of Romulus’ sister planet Remus after it was mentioned in a passing comment in the original series episode ‘Balance of Terror’ back in the sixties. Romulan concerns shift into the background after the horrific opening scene as focus shifts to Shinzon and his Reman brothers, a ghoulish, bat-like race clearly owing to the silent classic ‘Nosferatu’ in the make-up department. Their homeworld, the twin of Romulus, is a veritable Hell of fire, darkness and thankless slave labour, and the hellish metaphor is handled slightly less clumsily than the Roman one, which bears no real relevance in the series outside the Centurions and winged helmets of the original series. There is a B-plot to this film that attempts to mirror the main events, which was largely written by Brent Spiner himself; in this, which originally serves as little more than a distraction from the Shinzon plot, a dismantled android twin of Data is located on a planet near the Romulan Neutral Zone, and after some terrible car-chase shenanigans designed to appease brainless cinemagoers and annoy Trek fans, the android is eventually re-assembled aboard the Enterprise. This plot primarily gives something for Data to do, and although it is eventually weaved fairly well into the larger story in the second half of the film, it still seems quite distracting and redundant on the whole. Earlier ‘models’ of Data had already been used in the TV series to great effect, which only makes this disappointing by comparison as well as confusing in the characters’ failure to even name-check the recurring villain Lore, who was originally found in similar circumstances and subsequently attempted to annihilate the Enterprise crew on several occasions. But then, this film wasn’t just made for the fans.
This film is a confusing mess of loyal fan service and Hollywood clichés, and this is probably its biggest failing. It was widely reported that director Stuart Baird was hired specifically to provide a new perspective on the dwindling franchise, and his inexperience with the Star Trek universe really shows. While Nicholas Meyer succeeded in a similar task with Star Trek II, Baird opts for a hugely action-oriented direction, cutting many ‘non-essential’ character scenes that can be found on the DVD extras, and are among the best written and performed. Even despite all the explosions, photon torpedo battles and random fist-fights, the film falls into the trap of featuring far too much dull, moralising conversation between the two enemies Picard and Shinzon, falling into all the usual clichéd traps to disappoint fans, and only getting in the way of the loud explosions that the rest of the audience came to see. Watching the final battle in the nebula is like watching someone play one of the Star Trek video games that similarly don’t fit into the tone of the franchise, and much of the action seems to occur purely for the sake of it, most evident in Riker’s arbitrary and dialogue-free hand-to-hand struggle with a random Reman inside the Enterprise’s service ducts towards the end. While such scenes do indeed expand the Star Trek franchise, they only make it seem more like other, more famous, and far better films. The stealthy sneaking around on Shinzon’s ship, culminating in a corridor phaser fight complete with corny “this isn’t really the time for witty banter, but we’re going to have a conversation anyway, while I score direct hits against the idiotic stormtroopers who are all useless at shooting, despite this being the precise thing they are trained to excel at” event. Just in case the Star Wars homage/theft wasn’t already obvious enough, they blow a hole in the wall and jump into it after the prisoner is rescued.
I really quite enjoyed ‘Star Trek Nemesis’ for the first 12 minutes and 46 seconds. The wedding reception was rife with cringe-worthy banter, but felt like a proper send-off for the characters about to embark on their final mission, and all the stuff with the Romulan Senata being wiped out makes for a nice shocker opening. Once everybody is aboard the Enterprise and a suitable amount of weak gags have been made at Worf’s expense, the film really captures the atmosphere of the TV show as Geordi detects an unusual positronic signal coming from a planet and the ship warps off to investigate. Picard decides to lead the away team in an uncharacteristic move, and the shuttle lands in a tense silence... then a Starfleet desert buggy leaps from its interior, and the film goes downhill instantly. The special effects and explosions are all quite good, if that’s what you enjoy about films, but there’s really very little point for anyone else to watch this, a significant and tragic mis-step in the even-numbered Star Trek film legacy (even performer LeVar Burton has gone on record as saying “it sucked”). The DVD has long been available as a budget release with some special features, but was more recently re-released as the final instalment of the often-impressive ‘Special Edition’ line, though disappointingly this only adds some interviews to the previous list of extras and doesn’t attempt to modify and improve the film by re-inserting deleted scenes as was done for the special editions of the first two Trek films, before Paramount decided to stop wasting money on such a silly idea and simply repackage their budget releases with some hastily filmed interviews and a snazzy new cover tagged on. Fans of Picard and his Enterprise crew that dominated science fiction television from the late eighties to the mid-nineties will almost certainly be disappointed by this (presumably) final chapter of its legacy, and are far better off collecting the TV series on DVD. Many of the earlier Star Trek films are well worth watching too, especially if you stick to the even numbers (though ‘The Search for Spock’ isn’t all that bad).
Advantages: Another couple of hours with Patrick Stewart and co.
Disadvantages: Wees on Gene Roddenberry's grave, then that wee is launched into space to join his celestial ashes.
T
Evil Schwarzenegger!
***
Written on 03.08.03
With the release of Terminator 3, a film which I don't really have any desire to see, I was reminded that my Dad owned the other two on video. As I've overwatched his Star Wars and Back to the Future boxsets, I thought I might as well watch the first in what is now a trilogy, which I consider better than the second.
Whether Terminator is classed as action fantasy or violent sci-fi, to me it's got to compete against the likes of the Alien films, which I greatly prefer. Although the concept of the Terminator is interesting, I am not a big fan of action films and as such most of this film I do not find too appealing.
However, there are certainly bits that I enjoyed; the mystery surrounding the two naked strangers emerging from the lightning, the tension as Schwarzenegger's character gets closer to finding the real Sarah Connor, the scenes depicting the post-apocalyptic future of 2029 and, of course, the sex scene. And while the 'stop-start animation' style movement of the frightening skeletal Terminator towards the end is done very well, I still find it looks a lot more dated than it should, from 1984- although my biggest problem is with the scenes showing the schwarzenegger 'head dummy.' I cannot help thinking that there could have been a more convincing way of seeing the Terminator pull out his dead eye, as the false head is painfully obvious, but it's just the time that's elapsed since the film came out I suppose.
I'm rarely disappointed with big, futuristic laser battles so the future scenes were particularly memorable, and I liked the purple light of the laser beams contrasting with the dark blue of the landscape. Yes, that was nice.
Overall, weak acting at times, especially near the start, but Schwarzenegger lives up to the challenge of playing the evil robot better than anyone else could have, and Linda Hamilton is excellent as Sarah Connor, but I'm not too fond of the other actors. I can see the appeal of these films, basically a relentless killing machine 'after you,' but I prefer films to be on a more epic scale, especially if they're science fiction. I definitely like this better than Terminator 2 however, as this is a chance to see evil Schwarzenegger, and I assume I'd like it more than the most recent release.
Advantages: Good idea of the future, glad the future scenes were included, Schwarzenegger and Hamilton are great
Disadvantages: Too many car chases and explosions for me
Lick My Love Pump
****
Written on 11.05.04
One of the biggest cult films of all time, the spoof "rockumentary" This is Spinal Tap seems to be remembered fondly by everyone who has sat through it, further emphasised by the 100% recommendation status here on Dooyoo.
THE TRUTH ABOUT TAP
Strangely, although this is very obviously a comedy - though all viewers would be forgiven for taking a while to realise this due to a lot of the subtle silliness - many people seem to have the impression that Spinal Tap are a real band, and this may be due in a large part to their "appearance" in a very early and much-seen episode of the Simpsons. It is also a testament to the film that, as with some recent spoof documentaries such as 'The Office' and to a lesser extent 'Operation Good Guys,' every effort is made to ensure believability. A lot of time has gone into making 'Tap's songs believable heavy metal tracks, while every actor and actress is excellent, and the untreated film quality keeps the documentary style alive right to the end.
STORY
The film opens with an introduction by film and commercial maker Martin DiBergi (Rob Reiner) on the "rockumentary" the viewer is about to witness. On the release of Tap's eighteenth album 'Smell the Glove' in 1982, and with their first US tour in six years, DiBergi "jumped at the chance" to get up close with the band during their tour. "I wanted to capture the sights, the sounds... the smells of a hard working rock band on the road, and I got that. But I got more, a lot more."
From the first interview with the band - frontman David St. Hubbins, lead guitarist Nigel Tufnel and bassist Derek Smalls (Michael McKean, Christopher Guest and Harry Shearer) with their overly-complicated band origins and history of doomed and spontaneously combusting drummers, it's clear that this band is not genuine. They aren't even genuine Englishmen, but anyone can do a mock 70s British accent (apart from Sean Connery I expect).
DiBergi and his film crew follow the band as their concerts are cancelled, initially due to "lack of advertising" or at least that's the excuse, and problems are evident as soon as it becomes clear that the album the boys are on tour to promote has not even been released due to complaints regarding the sexist nature of the cover. Continuing to tour disinterested locales in favour of an album that doesn't even exist (until the disappointing final cover is revealed at least), the band's loyalties and friendships are put to the test under extreme pressure. And then Derek removes a foil-wrapped cucumber from his trousers to break the seriousness of the moment. As a spoof documentary there is no real linear plot to speak of, although the storyline does develop right up to the conclusion that manages to be satisfying and a little pitiful. Not everything lasts forever, in fact the film itself comes in at under 90 minutes.
STYLE
Everyone who loves the film will have their favourite scenes, and along with the main storyline there are enough cuts to unrelated material to make every scene a classic. Memorable scenes include the much talked about scene with guitars ("the sustain, listen to that... well you would hear it if I was playing it") and amplifiers ("these go to eleven"), the visit to Elvis' grave that turns into a debate over what key to sing his songs in, the malfunctioning pod on stage and the show becoming a "comedy number" with a miniature monument and small dancers.
This must also be one of the most quoted films of all time, as some of the lines the cast come out with are hilarious in their idiocy. "There's such a thin line between clever and... stupid" is one that springs to mind, although the ramblings during interviews are when the chemistry is at its greatest. It is interesting to note that the main cast wrote and performed all of the songs, as well as writing the film's script which indicates that at least some will have been improvised for the camera to keep it seeming genuine.
RUNNING THEMES
DECLINE: The band's obviously decreasing popularity throughout the film is evident when their gigs are cancelled and they have to seek out less promising and reliable ventures. This is further evidenced by visual jokes; the opening scenes show stage crew setting up an enormous facsimile of a demonic skull for one of Tap's popular shows, and later in the film comes the embarrassingly funny scene involving an eighteen inch Stonehenge monument being lowered into view of a much smaller crowd, although however many of them are actually able to see this piece of "set" is unclear.
CAMARADERIE: The long-term friendship between David and Nigel is a lot more turbulent than either of them admit, and their disagreements are very reminiscent of immature teenagers at times, however Nigel's claim that they are "closer than brothers: brothers always fight" shows how close they really are when disagreements begin. The band are loyal to their music, and in some ways the viewer can feel sympathy when things aren't going well, but that wouldn't be anywhere near as funny. David's life partner Jeannine also keeps him from depression, although her suggestions for the band's Zodiac theme go down less well. The band's manager Ian Faith also reveals some of his true feelings when the band come under stress.
MUSIC: There is an impressive amount of concert 'material' shot for this film and interspersed throughout, featuring the songs "Hell Hole," "Big Bottom," "Sex Farm," "Give Me Some Money," "Stonehenge" and others. Despite Derek Smalls' claim during the credits that the band have grown to a level where they are producing sophisticated lyrics, there is very little evidence to support that!
VERDICT
'This is Spinal Tap' may seem a little dated in light of modern "mockumentaries," but the humour and the themes are as strong now as they ever were. Heavy metal was not be as powerful, popular or ludicrous as it once was, with the possible exception of The Darkness, but as a fan of some of the bands that are being respectfully mocked through the efforts of 'Tap, I feel I can relate to the film. In the modern world of reality TV shows, audiences need to watch films like 'Spinal Tap' to prove that life isn't always fair, and it's much more fun to watch people's lives fall apart than it is to watch a success, as 'I'm Alan Partridge' has also shown.
'Spinal Tap' is a very funny and original film that deserves all the credit it is given and although a little on the short side, the special edition DVD - that can be purchased for £7.99 from a number of online retailers - reportedly includes around 45 minutes of extra material that was never used, and ties in loosely with the film (but probably deserves to be left out of the edit).
Merchandise: Not Got Enough 'Tap?
Fans may also be interested in the "Reunion" concert of 1992, also available on video and DVD, which features many songs from this original film as well as some from the official album 'Break Like the Wind,' interspersed with new footage of the band revisiting some of their old haunts. And a search of eBay also shows that the film's huge popularity even led to action figures being released. I cannot really suggest you buy these.
Every Day I Go Out and I Mash People
***
Written on 05.10.07
Lloyd Kaufman’s cheesy and violent horror spoof ‘The Toxic Avenger’ was the first film produced by Troma Entertainment and remains their most popular, in a cultish, B-movie way. A daft send-up of violent vigilante films, it succeeds by balancing out the stupid humour with an equal degree of over-zealous gore and an actual plot, though this primarily involves getting the titular monster between increasingly extravagant assaults in the shortest time possible.
Weirdly, my experience with this film franchise (which has spawned comics and three increasingly unpopular sequels) began when I was about six and the short-lived spin-off cartoon ‘Toxic Crusaders’ was aired on Children’s BBC and Saturday morning shows for what seemed like far more than thirteen episodes. The premise was largely the same, which made the motions of the film enjoyable to watch in a nostalgic way sixteen years later, but it goes without saying that the film is far more violent and obscene in other ways than the seemingly harmless, environmentally-friendly cartoon series, featuring a wealth of jokes about a seemingly endless list of offensive stereotypes in the way only an 80s B-movie could get away with, from black and gay men to midgets and the blind, and prevalence of clichéd nerd, jock and corrupt government archetypes. It’s certainly not a clever film, and the few plot developments it has outside the Toxic Avenger’s vengeful rampages are taken straight from the book of formulaic film clichés. Writers Kaufman and Joe Ritter instead focus on creating some well thought-out methods of torture and execution using devices and features of each setting, which moves from an alleyway to a fast food diner and then back to the gym where it all started, and the daftness and general poor quality of the whole thing is ultimately forgivable for being so funny.
The film centres on a nerdy young man named Melvin, who works as an inept mop boy at Tromaville fitness centre and incurs the wrath of a murderous gang of jocks led by Bozo, who are shown elsewhere indulging in a game of road rage where points are allocated for killing children and people of minorities. Wanting to humiliate the mop boy, Bozo’s girlfriend Julie entices him into the pool room where he winds up wearing a frilly pink tutu and kissing a sheep, causing Melvin to run screaming from the humiliation and accidentally fall into a drum of green, bubbling toxic waste that happened to be parked outside when the van drivers randomly decided to start smoking pot. Undergoing a transformation into a hideously deformed creature of superhuman size and strength, Melvin seems compelled by an unknown force to fight crime and vanquish evil, turning up wherever sinister dealings are afoot and learning that true love really is blind, especially if your girlfriend can’t see your disgusting face.
‘The Toxic Avenger’ is so incredibly 80s that it’s a lot of fun to watch back, clearly aspiring to go above and beyond in terms of graphic and creative deaths and mutilations for video nasty fans but reigning it all in under the acceptable cloak of parody. There’s plenty of splattering from the onset, almost always involving faces and crotches, some of which is pointless and throwaway but most of which demonstrates the mutant vigilante’s apparent sense of irony and creativity when it comes to dispatching his victims. The plot attempts to moralise to a small degree, events coming to a head with the usual we-only-fear-him-because-he’s-different angle, but it’s essentially ninety minutes of mindless fun with no artistic aspirations. The transformation scene itself is always a key moment in films like this, stemming right back to the early Jekyll and Hyde films of the 20s and 30s, and it’s handled rather well, but a bit less convincing is the directors’ single attempt at being classy by withholding the monster’s face from viewers for about half the film in order to build up anticipation or something; it’s fairly pointless, and it’s a relief once this pretension over and done with. The music helps in dating the film considerably, a recurring theme being an annoying, overplayed disco style song and with some occasional use of Mussorgsky’s ‘Night on a Bare Mountain’ accompanying the mutant’s early attacks that works quite well, but only really because I love the piece. There’s also some typical violin music when the monster is sad, ahh.
Although it’s essentially a comedy, some of the more stupid humour outside of the main plot events actually goes a little too far in spoiling the experience, from scenes of the Toxic Avenger helping out the public with boy scout style good deeds to the pointless character of the Nazi police chief whose tendency to call the Mayor “mein Fuhrer – um, I mean, my Mayor” and need to stifle his salutes seem like a watered down blend of ‘Dr. Strangelove’ and ‘Allo Allo’ that serve no purpose in the film at all. There’s a lot of quite bad editing that really adds to the home-grown atmosphere of the piece, as the camera frequently cuts to shots of the performers standing in a completely different position to a moment earlier, with a corresponding tell-tale change in the background sounds. Even the Toxic Avenger’s polite, Spiderman-style voice is over-dubbed laughably and unconvincingly above his early scenes, without even bothering to get rid of the underlying grunts. The actors themselves are all clearly aware that they’re taking part in a horror send-up and are permitted to over-act to the extreme, and of course to get their breasts out if they are girls, and it’s the sort of film that would be completely ruined if a big star showed up (not that they could afford such a thing in a million years).
I’ll avoid watching any of the universally panned sequels, but ‘The Toxic Avenger’ is an enjoyable film for anyone who doesn’t mind the boundary between cinema and art being entirely non-blurred. It’s quite amateurish as the studio’s first feature-length production, and it really offers nothing to dedicated horror fans apart from some clever but at the same time rather obvious misuse of gym equipment and deep fat fryers to dispense violent justice. Fans of urban vigilantes like Batman and Spawn should find something to enjoy, and anyone who enjoyed ‘Toxic Crusaders’ owes it to themselves to see where it all began – there aren’t any sentient mops or companion heroes designed specifically with an action figure line in mind however. It was produced in 1985 and it really shows; the only real problem is that it’s disappointingly unquotable.
Advantages: Enjoyable violent spoof of 80s horror, gore and vigilante films.
Disadvantages: Quite rubbish at the same time.
V
Neapolitan Dawn
**
Written on 16.02.07
It’s hard to feel sympathy for Tom Cruise’s character in this weakly surreal, lowest-common-denominator faux-high-brow sci-fi thriller, and I’m not sure whether this was the point. From the very start, David Aames (Cruise, in crafty ‘beat Aaron Aardvark to alphabetical top spot’ manoeuvre) is revealed to be a semi-talentless yuppie born into supreme wealth and status, who relies on this, along with his good looks, to have meaningless one night stands with anyone he chooses. This is not a nice guy, clearly, but one who is somehow respected by his peers, who unbelievably fail to see the funny side in his partial disfigurement following a car crash. Even David’s best friend, whose girl he’s unashamedly set about stealing, can only wish that ‘the old David’ could come back. The David who was pretty much the same, only with a very slightly less wonky mouth and eye.
Then again, as ‘Vanilla Sky’ approaches its inevitable plot-twist conclusion, it becomes obvious that all is not what it seems… yet the character remains the same, and suddenly becomes the everyman with whom the audience is expected to sympathise in his existential plight. It’s an investment I wasn’t prepared to make, instead crossing my fingers that I would see the cocky character’s two biggest fears realised: the fear of heights, and, by extension, the fear of being splattered over a wide area. David’s superficiality may have been one of the film’s themes, but no amount of tense hesitation before he pulls the light cord can make me care whether the face in the mirror is going to be handsome or malformed, albeit disappointingly. Sadly, we’re stuck with him throughout every single scene (a necessity, once it’s revealed what’s going on).
That’s not to criticise Cruise’s acting, which is adequate, even if it didn’t blow me away. He portrays Aames in various stages of sanity, hospitality and drunkenness, and his delivery of cheesy chat-up lines has the right mix of arrogance and slight awkwardness (‘I work in a dental surgery.’ ‘Boy, do I go to the wrong dentist!’) He spends parts of the film framing the narrative from behind a latex mask, and is at his most sinister and least irritating here. The film is populated by big-name stars which will probably be viewed as a good thing, but for me is always a little distracting. Cameron Diaz is given some exciting and also quite sweet dirty talk, but this failed to hit the spot, as for me she’ll always be that blonde who made out with The Mask. Penélope Cruz doesn’t have that much to do as Sofia, David’s other woman, despite having already played the very same character in the original Spanish version of this film. The character’s best scenes are all given to Diaz as the film shifts into weird mode and those characters become jumbled. Elsewhere, Kurt Russell plays an over-sympathetic psychologist and does the best he can with the material, while the most entertaining casting decision is Timothy Spall as one of David’s loyal and well-paid assistants, though his role is largely without comic merit aside from an extreme close up of his ever-bewildered face on a webcam.
The familiar faces, flashy camera angles and sex scenes make this more approachable than the majority of films that tackle similar themes, but it’s clear once the ‘real world’ is revealed that this is pretty much the same plot that’s been done countless times before, despite setting itself up to be something quite interesting in the first few scenes. The major problem I have with the film is its patronising attitude to the audience in the final scene, in which a monotonous drone-representative-of-the-corporation type explains the last hour of the film in far more detail than is strictly necessary, and in a manner that allows the filmmakers to show off about the two or three quite clever visual jokes they inserted, rather than insert more subtle visual clues that could actually serve to encourage multiple viewings. Instead of being shown an album cover of a man and woman in brown coats walking down a road shortly before seeing Cruise and Cruz re-enact the scene in their ‘real life,’ we are explicitly told that they did so because of the scene’s similarity to said album cover (a reference that particularly annoyed me, as the characters wouldn’t see themselves from a third person camera angle anyway). It’s a bit like the similarly over-explanatory scene in ‘The Matrix Reloaded’ with the Architect, and really drains any sense of interpretation from the film, not that there was a whole lot to go with in the first place. After it finished, all I could think was that so much more could have been done with the format and the premise, and I felt let down. I may still have been thinking about the dirty talk a bit, too.
Even viewed as a pretentious film, which it really isn’t (it would have been a lot more interesting if it was), ‘Vanilla Sky’ is able to hold its own a little bit. There were limited instances of subtle foreshadowing, despite the final revelation being unprecedented by any kind of real information or clues whatsoever. My favourite came in the many instances of inappropriate music on the soundtrack, which at first appeared to be a pointless but enjoyable quirk but which is eventually hinted at in the part of the film just before the revelation, when the clever viewers suss out what’s going on about a minute before the less clever people, and feel insulted that the lower classes are pandered to by such spoon-feeding. The soundtrack itself is mainly bright and cheery in an acoustic-indie manner, but could easily have been replaced by a creative score or something and possibly improved. It works to further hide the evidence that this is partly a sci-fi film, in order for it to still seem cool. And while the car crash a quarter of the way through doesn't look that exciting or dangerous, the insane rape scene later gets it all right, and is probably the film's most powerful moment.
I was disappointed by ‘Vanilla Sky,’ but only because I was expecting something a bit more thoughtful. I’m not really sure why. There’s definitely a moral, but it’s such a watered down combination of those from ‘The Matrix’ and ‘Total Recall’ that the character’s stereotypical decision only heightened by anger. Both of those afore-mentioned films are far more deserving of your viewing time, especially ‘Total Recall,’ which keeps the themes of artificiality and freedom of choice, but adds Schwarzenegger, loads of head-shots and, of course, a mutant stripper with three breasts. Cameron Diaz is wrong; four isn’t the magic number. It is three.
Advantages: Thoughtful in places.
Disadvantages: 'Relevations' appear out of nowhere, and tie everything up a little too neatly.
All Quiet on the Western Front ****
Being John Malkovich *****
Brazil *****
Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam *
The Hunger ***
The Matrix Revolutions **
Monty Python's Life of Brian *****
My Wrongs #8245–8249 & 117 ****
