Last Blog On The Left

Listen up! One of my favorite directors is John McTiernan. Back in the day he made some pretty fantastic movies. His first film, “Nomads”, is a weird, fucked up little film starring Perce Brosnan as an anthropologist searching for an ancient tribe living in modern day L.A. After that one he made one of the all time action movie greats, “Predator”! He followed that up with directing probably the greatest action movie of all time, “Die Hard”. You see what I´m saying here? This guy had it going on… in spades! After that roll he still made some interesting films, like “The Hunt for the Red October”, “Last Action Hero” (which is a film that was way ahead of its time) and “Die Hard: With a Vengeance”. About this time McTiernan´s career started slowly burying itself. “Last Action Hero” was a flop but he bounced back to form somewhat with “The Thomas Crown Affair” (which I personally think is pretty boring) but then, he really hit rock bottom…

In 2002 he directed “Rollerball”, a remake of a film that is quite boring to be honest. The remake, where they decided to replace James Caan with Chris Klein (That´s right, the wuzzy jock from the first “American Pie”-movie!), is one of those films that is so bad that it becomes entertaining in all its surreal weirdness. McTiernan probably realized himself that this was one big pile of stinking movie-shit so he quickly released “Basic”, starring John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson. That´s right, the two fuckers from “Pulp Fiction”, together again! Man, did folks get their hopes up for this movie. Unfortunately, those hopes were crushed and stomped on like a teenager that´s being stood up on prom night´s heart. It was brutally obvious while watching that film that McTiernan still is a gifted visual artist but the script sucked donkey balls. After that, it all went to hell for McTiernan and he was sentenced to prison for hiring a weird private investigator to tap his ex-wife´s phone or some shit like that but apparently he´s out now and according to imdb he´s got three movies in different stages of production, so here´s hoping it´s not over for him yet.

But the movie I wanted to talk to you about today is a film that he released before it all went pear shaped for him, with “Basic” and that shit. It´s called “The 13^th Warrior” and it was absolutely blown to pieces by the critics when it was released back in 1999. But you know, that´s why I´m here: to make you re-evaluate these films that you thought you didn´t like! Let me help you in this mission of saving this dismissed film from obscurity!

Here´s what it´s about: Antonio Banderas plays an Arabic diplomat named Ahmed Ibn Fahdlan Ibn Al Abbas Ibn Rashid Ibn Hamad (which I am going to refer to as Ibn from here on out or else this post is going to be a mile long) who, after falling for the wrong woman, is banished from his country. Damn them women, huh? Anyway, he stumbles upon a group of Vikings, which he soon befriends. No conflicts here. One day a young boy, a messenger from the North, comes to the Vikings to ask for help. In their home country many people die because of “an evil whose name should not be pronounced“. They consult an oracle who tells them that they should send 13 warriors, but that one of them shouldn’t be a Viking. Ibn doesn´t believe that these mythical creatures from the forests really exist, so naturally he joins them, like any sane man would.

Now, I´m not saying that this is a great film but it is a hell of a lot more entertaining than you would believe by reading the reviews it got. There are however a number of things that you need to be aware of it you are going to enjoy this flick. Are you ready? Strap yourself in. We´ll break it down for you. Those things are:

1. If you thought that, for example, “Pathfinder” was a shitty film, then don´t bother with this one, ok? In “Pathfinder” it was Vikings meets Indians and in this one it´s Vikings meets Arabs, ok? So, if you thought that was a childish, stupid and boring film, fuck off! If not, “The 13^th Warrior” might just be something for you.

2. If you´re looking for a realistic film, you´re shit out of luck, ok? If you on the other hand are able to come to terms with the fact that Antonio Banderas learns another language during the course of what appears to be one single night, just by listening to others speak, then this film might just have a thing or two to offer you.

3. If you have something against sweaty men with long hair and beards, bearing names such as Hrothgar and Buliwyf, don´t bother with this one. This is one hairy movie, if you know what I mean.

If these things fit you, then you might actually be able to enjoy this movie. Now, I admit that I am a bit of a sucker for this genre. One of my favorite films as a kid was the fantastically entertaining “The Vikings” starring Kirk Douglas and Tony Curtis. I was absolutely fascinated with that movie and especially the way that the Vikings apparently drank beer. You know what I´m talking about, right? In those old movies they didn´t drink their beer (or mead or whatever they call it), they gargled it! I always found that fascinating. I mean, most of the beer ended up on the floor or on their clothes. How much beer did those vikings buy for a night of drinking and debauchery? It would appear that they weren´t very economical, wasting fine beer that way. But you know, my love for the Viking genre has never really faded, like so many other things in life, and that´s why I have a weak spot for films like this one.

The story in this one is actually a lot of fun. It´s sort of a cross between “Beowulf” and “The Seven Samurais” and at times it even manages to be quite suspenseful. The scenes where Banderas and his longhaired Viking friends are sneaking around the monster´s lair are pretty tense. It´s in scenes like this that McTiernan shines. That fucker knows how to light and stage a scene! The battle scenes are pretty impressive, as well. The best thing about them is the fact that McTiernan doesn´t skimp out on the blood. When someone gets stabbed, it´s pretty graphic so thank you very much for that, Mr. McTiernan. ´Cause let´s be honest, who the hell wants to watch a Viking movie, based on a novel called “Eaters of the Dead”, rated PG-13? The only one I can think of is Tipper Gore, that dirty whore. I sure as hell don´t!

But you know, there´s also one thing that struck me as pretty weird when I re-watched this one recently. Banderas is a pretty passive character in the film. If you think about it he´s just more along for the ride and doesn´t drive the story forward in any way. He´s basically the one who´s begging everybody to “think about what you´re doing, for the sake of Allah!” As a matter of fact, the hero of the story should be the character of Bulywuf, played by this fella named Vladimir Kulich. This makes the connection to Beowulf even clearer! It´s pretty obvious that Michael Chrichton, who wrote the novel and apparently started out as director but decide to jump ship when McTiernan stepped in, was very inspired by the tale of Beowulf & Grendel. To be honest, I can´t see any good reason why they didn´t make Belywuf the main character in the film. Maybe Banderas was already attached so they had to make the arab the lead character, I don´t know. This movie is basically re-told from an outsider´s perspective and where “Beowulf” was basically a two hour long film instructing you about the dangers of going to bed with the computer animated version of Angelina Jolie, we don´t get that non-sex propaganda here! Hell, at one time I thought that the computer animated version of the Jonas Brothers were gonna show up in “Bewoulf” and start singing about loving you forever and ever with their pink rings and what not. Fortunately, they didn´t. But in this one, the vikings do get to shag. Antonio too, if I´m not mistaken. Which is a good thing, folks! Imagine those Vikings with their temper if they weren´t allowed to blow some steam off every now and then? Things could get really ugly…

Then there´s another thing which I, as a Swede, enjoy very much about this film and that is the fact that the cast has a couple of Swedish names in it. For instance, Swedish icon Sven Wollter plays the part of King Hrothgar (the same part that Anthony Hopkin´s computer animated doppelganger played in “Beowulf”) and Maria Bonnevie plays Olga. Wollter does his usual schtick of grumbling and muttering while looking like he´s wondering what the hell is going on. It´s fun for a change to see him do this in English, surrounded by Vikings. I´m surprised that Wollter didn´t get any more international offers. I think he´d make a great Bond villain, for instance. The fact that he plays a king is somewhat funny for us swedes since Wollter is famous for his political views, which I guess could be considered to the left of the left, if you know what I mean.

There´s another couple of familiar faces in the film. For instance, the legendary Sven-Ole Thorsen shows up. He´s been in everything from the “Conan”-movies to “Mallrats” to “Gladiator”. He´s one of those faces that you recognize immediately but can´t quite place him. Oh, and in the opening scenes Omar Sharif, Dr. Zhivago himself, shows up. So, quite an eclectic cast in this one.

So there you have it! This is not a fantastic film but it sure as hell is a lot of fun. I wish that they would make more movies of this type. I´m really looking forward to Nicolas Winding Refn´s take on the genre in his upcoming “Valhalla Rising”, starring Mads Mikkelsen. If there´s any justice in the world that one is a huge success and it will kickstart a whole new wave of Vikings-engaging-in-bloody-battles-movies. That´s what the world needs now! It´s not love, like Burt Bacharach once claimed, it´s fucking Viking-movies with lots of blood and gore. Next week I promise I´m gonna check out “Outlander”, which I have laying on the shelf. It bears the fantastic tagline “Vikings VS. Aliens”! How awesome does that sound? I can´t wait to watch it.

Until then: take scare, friends…

Thomas

Today we´re not gonna be waxing deep and philosophical about the meaning of certain films and their subtexts, ok? Today I just wanna talk to you about this movie that I watched the other day that´s really quite underrated, in my humble opinion. The general opinion about this film is that it´s some kind of a turkey or disaster worthy of The Razzies, but honestly… This is a really entertaining flick! I am, of course, talking about “Waterworld”. The other day I finally got around to seeing the Extended Edition that is out on DVD and it still holds up. There seem to be this idea about this film being a huge flop, which according to my scrutinizing eye, isn´t true. The movie had a budget of 175 million dollars but still managed to bring in over 275 dollars at the box office. That´s pretty good work. So what we have here is a film that is much better than its reputation lets on.

I´m sure that you´re all familiar with the story of this one but in case you´ve spent the last 20 years being locked up in some Austrian freak´s basement or something here´s a short summary: The polar ice caps have melted, and the earth is covered by water. The remaining people travel the seas, in search of survival. Several different societies exist. The Mariner (Kevin Costner) falls from his customary and solitary existence into having to care for a woman, Helen (Jeanne Tripplehorn) and a young girl, Enola (Tina Majorino) while being pursued by the evil forces of the Deacon (Dennis Hopper).

So, what we have here is one of those ecological sci-fi-movies, right? Kinda like “Soylent Green” and “Silent Running”. I bet that Al Gore loves the shit out of this film. I´m surprised he doesn´t mention this one more often in his speeches. But then again, maybe if you wanna be taken seriously you shouldn´t run around babbling about a sci-fi movie starring Kevin Costner.

Now, I have a confession to make: I like Kevin Costner! Maybe he´s not the most versatile actor around but he´s got that old fashioned charisma thing going on, kinda like John Wayne or Gary Cooper. You know what I mean? Those guys always played the same role, basically themselves, right? That´s pretty much what Costner does, too. He´s got a certain persona that he returns to and I know that a lot of people think he´s stiff and boring and whatnot, but who the hell cares what they think. He´s done some pretty good films in his day, let´s not forget that: “Dances With Wolves”, “Silverado”, “Thirteen Days”, “JFK”, “Open Range” and “Mr. Brooks”, to name a few.

Costner actually strays somewhat from his persona in that he isn´t the usual righteous type. For the first hour and half he´s actually quite an unsympathetic character. He doesn´t care much for the little girl and at one point he tosses her into the water. Now that may be ok for you to do with your kids as a prank but this little girl can´t swim and considering the fact that they are out on the open sea, I´d say that Costner may be lacking in knowing how to best treat a child. But that´s just my opinion. Oh, and at one point he holds both Helen and Enola down and cuts off their hair. That is also something I wouldn´t recommend you trying on your loved ones. I can almost guarantee that it´ll end in a lot of shouting and tears. You know how women are. One little cut here and there and all hell breaks loose. So don´t go trying that at home, kids!

But Kevin Costner isn´t the only reason why I like “Waterworld”! This was probably the last big budget blockbuster to be produced before CGI invaded Hollywood and took control of every aspect of moviemaking. I mean, look at his fucking film! It´s an epic! Shot on water, none the less! Nowadays they´d just plant themselves in one of those big tanks and then animate the background. But not here! They really went out on the open sea for this fucker. That´s pretty impressive! Everything in this movie is huge! I´m talking about the sets, the sweeping camera movements across the horizons to the fight scenes, which are actually pretty spectacular!

You know, this film is most common described as “Mad Max on water” and that´s not an inaccurate description. It is a variation on the post-apocalyptic genre but like I mentioned earlier, there hasn´t been a world war or anything like that. Let´s just say that the fashion sense seem to be the same as in the Mad Max-movies… What is it about these people living in these post-apocalyptic worlds and their weird taste in clothes? When exactly does everyone turn into those guys that´s dancing at the Blue Oyster Bar in the “Police Academy” movies? What is it about surviving a disaster that makes you say “Fuck those goddamn jeans, man! I always hated Levi´s! From now on I´m going all leather, man!” This is something I have a hard time buying in these films. They´re always taking place in the desert too (well, except for this one, that is) so it can´t be the most comfortable thing they´re wearing. Who the hell wants to wear leather when the sun is blazing down on you? Well, I guess that´s just the way people will reason in the future. Beats the hell out of me…

But back to the actors! Costner is in pretty good company here because the villains is played by a clean-shaven, one-eyed, chain-smoking, shouting Dennis Hopper and that, ladies and gentlemen, is never a bad thing. If there´s anyone who can get away with playing over-the-top-villains like this one, it´s Dennis freakin´ Hopper! The scenes with him berating his henchmen are pretty amusing. As a matter of fact, one of his pilots is played by a then little-known Jack Black so there´s a little bonus on the side for ya. Then we have Helen and Enola´s friend, Gregor the inventor and scientist or whatever the hell he is. He´s played by Michael Jeter, who has since unfortunately passed which is a god damn shame. He was one of the better character actors and delivered some very fine performances in movies such as “The Green Mile”, “Open Range” and the severely underrated “Welcome to Collinwood”.

But I´m not gonna be draggin on for too long about this one. Hell, it´s not even a horror film! But one of the reasons why I like this film is because after many, many years of research I have come to the conclusion that this is one of the best films ever to watch when you´re suffering from an acute case of hangover! Believe me, I have devoted many man-hours to the studying of this phenomenon and there are a number of reasons why this film works so extremely well when you´re suffering from what the ancient Greeks used to call “hungover as a skunk”. Let´s break it down:

1. The movie takes place on water, which means it´s a very bright-looking film and that´s always good when you´re hung over. You don´t wanna be watching “Seven” or some other movie that´s drenched in darkness, right? What you need in this condition is a movie that´ll pick you up from the shadows.

2. The filmmakers wisely avoid a love story between Costner and Tripplehorn´s characters cause let´s be honest here: who the hell wants to watch some weepy, cliché-ridden love story when you´re riding the wave of hung over?

3. The film´s protagonist is pretty bad ass. This is absolutely essential when you´re suffering from hang over-itis. You don´t wanna be watching a hero that´s kind of wimpy, right? You want the hero to behave in the way that you thought you behaved the night before. This is of course in no way near the truth of the matter, but that´s what you wanna have yourself believing when you´re hung over.

4. It´s a pretty straight-forward old fashioned film. It moves from point A to point B without over-complicating things. It unfolds in the way you expect it to unfold, which is definitely preferable than being stuck in front of a David Lynch-film on a Sunday which reeks of hung over.

5. Big action scenes! You don´t wanna be watching some sort of chamber-drama when you´re suffering the repercussions of the night before. It is very important that you get your dose of chase-sequences and explosions.

So there you have it: five reasons why “Waterworld” is one of the greatest movies to watch when your old friend Mr. Hung Over haunts your body and mind. Take it from one who´s an authority on the subject.

Some of you out there might be wondering if there were any major changes to the extended edition I watched and I noticed many but nothing major, unfortunately. I am fairly sure that Jack Black got another scene that isn´t in the theatrical release. One thing I did like was the fact that when (SPOILER!!!) they do reach Dryland at the end, Helen and Enola is standing at the top of the cliff waving goodbye to Costner (´cause he can´t stay cause you know… he´s a man!), they notice a placque in the ground and it turns out that they are standing at what´s left of Mount Everest. I thought that was pretty cool. However, I did notice that when they arrive that Dryland looks a lot like that fucking island from the “Jurassic Park”-movies so they might be in for some pretty unpleasant surprises… but by then Costner is long gone!

One more thing! There´s something I´ve always been wondering about when it comes to this film: why the hell is everyone so fucking dirty? After all, there´s nothing but water around them and yet, these fuckers are so lazy that they can´t get around to taking a bath? It´s not like it´s a stretch for them! Just take one more step to the right and you´re in the god damn water! Christ… some people, you know? They just don´t realize the importance of personal hygiene.

That´s it for now… Stay ghoul, fuckers!

Thomas

The other day I managed to finally watch a movie that I first heard about a long, long time ago. It´s called “A Gun For Jennifer” and it was made back in 1996 and I remember first reading about it in a since long defunct Swedish movie magazine called “Shock”. As you might´ve noticed, I have a real weakness for vigilante movies. The grittier and sleazier, the better and let me tell ya, this one is pretty damn gritty´n´sleazy! This is a film that always held a particular appeal for me. You see, it was directed and written by this guy named Todd Morris and I remember he got a lot of good press back when this one made the festival rounds… and then he just vanished, apparently. He hasn´t been heard from since and upon imdb:ing his ass, it turns out that he actually has made one more flick back in 2005, called “Molotov Samba”. That makes it 9 years between “A Gun For Jennifer” and that one! Too long, in my humble opinion because after watching “A Gun For Jennifer” it is obvious that Morris is a gifted filmmaker with his heart in the right place.

“A Gun For Jennifer” wears its heart proudly on its blood soaked sleeve and it´s a worthy addition to the female vigilante genre, in the vein of such fine films as “Ms. 45” and “I Spit on your Grave”. The film opens with Jennifer (played by Deborah Twiss, who conveys a state of vulnerability and sadness all through the film) arriving in that piss-smelling, scum-filled hellhole that is New York City. She gets off the bus and hasn´t spent more than fifteen minutes in town before she is attacked by a couple of rapists in a back alley. Luckily, a shabby looking van pulls up behind them and out jumps a vigilante posse, all girls! Without much ado, they dispose of the rapists and helps Jennifer out. It turns out that these girls all work at a strip club and they have grown tired of the many unsolved rape cases that plagues the city, so they´ve decided to form their own hit squad to mete out some well deserved justice. Jennifer joins them…

We´re not talking Dostoyevsky here, ok? But this is a solid film with a basic plot. I love the way that the plot unfolds in these kinds of films: always predictable, but every film has its own little variations. It´s kinda like when you listen to some band doing a cover of your favorite song: you know that the new version isn´t gonna top the original but you know you´re at least gonna enjoy it, right?

The thing that Morris manages to get right is its locations. I can´t believe that this film was made in the 90´s! The locations are really seedy and dirty looking. This is the kind of film that couldn´t have been made with a big budget. You just know by looking at it that it was shot on the fly, guerilla-style without any permits at all and it´s all the better for it. But I was pretty surprised to see how dirty New York looks in this one. It rivals Abel Ferrara´s masterpiece “Ms. 45” when it comes to locations but that one was made back in the early 80´s so Morris´ achievement here is more admirable, I think.

The fact that it´s shot on grainy looking 16mm adds a lot of flavor and style to the film. It actually makes you forget the fact that you´re watching a film made as late as 1996. I got a real nostalgia-kick out of watching this one, remembering all those VHS tapes that you used to hunt down and when you finally got your hands on them, the quality turned out to be grainy-as-hell and out-of-focus. You know, kinda like Tarantino and Rodriguez spent millions of dollars on making their films look in “Grindhouse”, kids! Isn´t that crazy? That it took them 20 million dollars to achieve what Todd Morris probably did on a minimal part of that amount? Huh, kids? Can you believe that? It´s a fucked up world we live in.

To be perfectly honest, that “Grindhouse”-feeling that Tarantino & Rodriguez have been chasing obsessively these last couple of years is much more alive and present in “A Gun for Jennifer” and the fact that it was made circa ten years before Tarantino & Rodriguez´s effort shouldn´t be lost on any of you depraved fuckers out there. This is a forgotten classic we´re talking here. At least when it comes to the wonderful genre of pretty-ladies-wreaking-horrible-vengeance-on-men-who-are-creeps! This one should be a staple in the pantheon of female Vigilante-flicks!

I´m not saying that this is a perfect film. Not even close. One of the things that leave a lot to be desired is the acting. Like I mentioned, this is a low budget affair and with low budget affairs comes non-actors and some of the “actors” in this one are pretty awful. For instance, the opening scene and dialogue exchange between the cops examining the crime scene of the guy who has gotten his dick cut off by the girls (yes, this is that kinda film!) is horribly stilted and awkward. When the movie started with that scene I thought “Holy crap, this is what I´ve been looking forward to for nine fucking years?”

Fortunately, that changed a while into the film. But you know, there´s always a feeling of nervousness when you´re about to sit down and watch a movie that you´ve only read and heard about for many years, without actually having seen the damn thing. I know that in this day and age, it´s pretty much possible to get your hands on every damn movie ever made but there are still a couple of them out there that hasn´t been released properly. This last year I´ve managed to get my hands on a handful of these hard-to-find films: Kevin S. Tenney´s “Peacemaker” (which I had seen but couldn´t find on DVD anywhere), Sergio Martino´s “The Island of the Fishmen” and of course, this one… That´s one of my favorite things about loving movies: that sensational feeling when you finally get your hands on that elusive title that you´ve been dying to see for such a long time! There´s not that many things that can elicit such a response from my broken soul. It´s a shame it doesn´t happen that often nowadays.

Anyway, I don´t wanna sound like a whiny old man. Back to Jennifer. So what we have on our hands here, friends, is a bona fide exploitation film! Morris manages to combine politics, sex and violence in what is a down´n´dirty vigilante flick. Pretty good going, if you ask me. This movie reeks of 70´s style. I´ve already mentioned “Ms. 45” but stylistically this is equally influenced by such 70´s classics as “The French Connection” and Cassavetes´ “The Killing of a Chinese Bookie”. I can´t emphasize it enough but it really does feel like you´re watching a movie from a long gone era. A movie from a time when vigilante movies were still brutal and didn´t shy away from the sex and the violence. Sweet times!

Another thing that Morris does right is the soundtrack. The film is packed with punk songs, all with female vocals. Some of them are pretty good and some of them are pretty annoying but they all work within the context of the film. I´ve never heard any of the songs before and I guess they´re all done by some of Morris´ New York punk-friends. I kinda have this image of artists in New York City, that they´re all friendly and are constantly helping each other out. I know that that´s just bullshit, they´re probably stabbing each other in the back first chance they get but there´s a certain romantic aura that surrounds movies and music from New York City. It´s not like artists are the most selfish people around, right? They´re not ego-centrical at all, oh no! It´s like that old punk song that They Might Be Giants did a cover of: “´Cause everyone´s a friend in New York City…”

Then we have an additional bonus when it comes to “A Gun for Jennifer”: the supporting actors! Some of them are pretty awful but some of them are pretty good and some of them even went on to a bigger career. In the role “Clyde, the hick´s sidekick” we see none other than Eric Mabius. In this one he´s credited as Eric M. Mabius and I´m sure you recognize him from such shows as “Ugly Betty” (he plays her boss) or such films as “Welcome to the Dollhouse” or “The Crow: Salvation”. He´s done pretty good for himself and it´s always fun to see where actors got their start. According to the credits he has an additional role as “Bar Patron” but I missed that one.

Then we have the cops who are working the case of who´s killing these raping fuckers. Their boss is played by none other than Arthur Nascarella and even if you don´t know him by name, I am certain that you´ll recognize his face and since I am too god damn lazy to post a picture here you can just imdb him and then you´ll nod approvingly and go “Oh, it´s that guy!” He´s been in everything from “Sopranos” to “Copland” to “Running Scared”. I´m pretty fascinated by this guy. Apparently he worked as a NYC cop for many years before he turned to acting and he was one of the undercover cops who worked with the real-life Donnie Brasco, if I´m not mistaken, so this fucker´s been around the block once or twice. He´s one of those actors that command the screen and he´s got that face that you can only get from years of hard living and, probably, drinking. You know, kinda like Harry Dean Stanton. How´s that for acting lessons? Being undercover and orchestrating drug deals? Eat that, James Lipton.

Now, I may be doing you a disservice by recommending this one to you because if there are a few depraved souls out there who want to see this one, it might not be the easiest thing in the world, depending on where you call home. As far as I can tell, the only country who has released this on DVD is Germany and that´s the copy I got my sweaty hands on. It wasn´t easy, I´ll tell you that, but that´s the kind off lengths that I am willing to go to, just so that I can spare you the pain and boredom of watching this one if it turned out that it sucked. That´s just the kinda guy I am! You can thank me later. It´s a pretty lousy edition and the quality ain´t that good but like I haven´t hammered home the point enough; this is one of those films that actually benefits from the poor quality. The “Grindhouse”-feeling wouldn´t have been as apparent if it had had a pristine picture quality. In the same way that “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” benefits from the documentary-like and raspy quality of film stock, this one does, too!

You know, the film this one reminded me of is Jim Van Bebber´s gang-classic “Deadbeat at Dawn”. That´s a film that´s so drenched in sweat, piss, grainy film stock and dirty back alleys that you´re actually afraid to pick up the DVD with your bare hands, for fear of catching some kinda infectious disease. This one has that vibe going on, too! Now, granted that “Deadbeat at Dawn” has rivaling gang members fighting each other with Nunchakus but this one has lots of girls shouting obscene things at each other and telling each other to “Shut the fuck up!” at least every third minute, while castrating rapists. I think that goes a long way. Hell, one guy is even raped with a pool cue! I bet he didn´t see that coming when he went out for a night on the town that evening.

But those two films have a lot in common in that they are both obviously made by directors who have invested a lot in their films. Both Morris and Jim Van Bebber is also featured prominently in the excellent documentary “In The Belly of the Beast” which was filmed during the 1997 FantAsia Film Festival in Montreal, which was kind of a legendary year. The guests were, among others, Richard Stanley, Nacho Cerda, Van Bebber and Morris. It´s definitely worth a look if you haven´t seen it and if you appreciate these filmmakers. It´s a very candid documentary and I really recommend it.

That´s about it, friends. If you´re into for some old school vigilante-style violence, meted out by pretty ladies shouting obscene things, this is your type of film. I´m definitely gonna check out Morris´ next film, that “Molotov Tango” or whatever the hell it was called…

Take scare,

Thomas

I don´t know how up to date you guys are with the world of movies but you know, there´s a lot of stuff going on. For instance, the other day it was announced that they are to make a movie out of this graphic novel called “The Nye Incidents”, which deals with the subject of alien abduction. I haven´t that but I was pretty happy to hear about this because the writer is one weird dude I´m sure you´ve heard about at one time or another: Whitley Strieber! That´s right, he´s that author who was on every damn talk show in the world late 80´s, early 90´s and telling everyone about how he had been abducted and anally probed by real life aliens. That resulted in his book “Communion”, which later resulted in a movie starring a jittery Christopher Walken.

Now, I don´t know what to make of this guy. I can´t say that I believe him. A couple of years later this alien-craze was about to explode with “The X-Files” and god knows what and I personally think that this Strieber guy saw a great career opportunity and seized it. He exploited everyone´s fascination with the subject and I can´t really blame him for it. I was never a big fan of the book “Communion” but I really liked his earlier werewolf-story which also resulted in a movie, the Albert Finney-starring “Wolfen” so I´m not gonna question Strieber´s ability to spin a good yarn or two.

And it´s not like I´m gonna sit here and tell you that I´m not a fan of the alien abduction-genre because I am! A huge fan, as a matter of fact. I was in High School when “The X-Files” was most popular and I just ate that shit up. This has lead to a fascination with alien abductions and an unhealthy obsession with emotionally cold redheads wearing suits. Don´t ask me what the hell is up with that. I´m a broken, broken man, I guess.

Anyway, when it comes to movies dealing with this subject there hasn´t been that many great ones lately. Brian Yuzna tried his hand at the subject with “Progeny” and I guess it was an ok effort but it had that TV-series-pilot-thing going on. Recently I saw a Spanish movie called “Platillos Volante” which proudly boasted to be based on true events but I found it to be as much fun as a rectal exam. That´s why we have to go back to the good old 90´s to find a really, really good movie that deals with the phenomenon of alien abduction. The movie I´m talking about is “Fire in the Sky”.

This movie gets almost everything right, where most movies in this genre gets it wrong. Like so many other films, including “Communion”, this one claims to be based on one of those supposedly “true” stories. I don´t know what it is with this genre and “based on true events”. I wouldn´t be surprised if E.T. turned out to be based on true events, either. It seems that people aren´t capable of inventing their own alien-stories, which I find pretty weird. What the hell is going on over there in the US of A? Obviously, people are getting abducted to the left and right? Are the authorities looking into this?

Anyway, the story goes like this: Travis Walton (played by D.B. Sweeney) works as a logger in the Arizona woods. When he and his colleagues drive home after work, they encounter an UFO. For the next five days Travis disappears and his colleagues are accused of murder. When he reappears, first he didn’t remember that he was gone, but then as time goes by his memories starts resurfacing.

First of all, there are a number of really good actors in this little flick. Much better than you´d expect from a genre flick like this. D.B. Sweeney is a sympathetic actor which has you rooting for his character and his co-workers are played by Robert Patrick (you know, that running guy from “Terminator 2” and who later took over the role as David Duchovny on “The X-Files”! How´s that for destiny, huh?), Henry Thomas (who we all recognize as that little kid from “E.T”! What the hell is it with this movie? A breeding ground for actors with connections to aliens? Weird) and Peter Berg. Alright, you got me there. Berg has no connections to aliens from what I know but then again, I have no idea what that fucker does in his spare time. This is the kind of movie where these guys actually seem like they are co-workers. They seem to be genuinely worried and above all, genuinely scared and frightened of what they´ve been through. The scenes in the bar when Patrick tells the local sheriff (James Garner) what happened are very effective. Patrick and Thomas really sell the fear they are experiencing.

I think that thanks to this movie, Henry Thomas has been pretty much typecast in this exact same role ever since. When I first saw this one, way back when Pluto was still a planet (Imagine that, kids! Crazy stuff!), I wasn´t aware of the fact that the kid from E.T. has continued acting so I was pretty surprised at how good he was in this one. We´ve all seen him in various movies since then. For example, remember Mick Garris´ episode of the first season of “Masters of Horror”, called “Chocolate”? It was a pretty decent entry and Thomas played a man slowly slipping into madness and he portrayed it with the kind of twitchy fervor that a role of that kind requires. The same nervousness and mumbling and twitching is on display in “Fire in the sky”. He did a variation on the same thing in “Fever”, a pretty good noir-inspired psychological horror film from a couple of years back. So that oughtta give you an idea of how good he is at this kinda stuff. He´s definitely mastered the art of sweating profusely on film.

You know, that´s something I´ve often wondered about. There are certain actors who always seem to sweat a lot in the movies they appear in. John Goodman has to take the prize. That fucker sweats up a river in every single scene and although Henry Thomas isn´t in the same league, he´s definitely pretty damn good at it. But wouldn´t it be weird if these actors possessed some kind of weird ability to sweat on cue? Kinda like some can start crying in an instant? Wouldn´t it be weird if it turned out that they teach this in American acting schools? I mean, every god damn actor that you see on “Letterman” or “Jay Leno” apparently knows how to sing and for some insane reason tap dance, as well. What the hell is up with that? Who the hell learns how to tap dance nowadays? When do you get to use that ability? On a night out on the town? “May I have this tap dance, lady?”

I don´t think so. I bet that that is why everyone wants to show it on those damn talk shows because no one else asks them to. They have to show off and show everyone how god they are and that they´ve learned to master the ancient art of tapping with their feet. Pretty damn useless, if you ask me. Wouldn´t it be a lot more fun if David Letterman would ask John Goodman this instead:

“I understand that you have a special talent, John…?”

“That´s right, Dave. I know how to sweat… on cue!”

“That´s amazing! How did you discover this?”

“Well, Dave… It all started back in my teens when I realized I had a hormone disorder…”

“May we have a sample…?”

“Why, of course, Dave!”

And then John Goodman starts sweating like he does in “Barton Fink”! That sure beats the hell out of tap dancing, doesn´t it?

I kinda digressed there and I apologize for that. Back to the movie at hand! One of the things that I love about this film is the fact that it succeeds where so many movies of this kind have failed: it is genuinely scary! The filmmakers does one hell of a job of portraying the sheer terror one must feel when you realize that you have been kidnapped for one reason only and that is to be someone´s guinea pig. I don´t know about you but I wouldn´t appreciate it very much at all. I´ve felt like a guinea pig at many times in my life and I don´t recommend it. But no matter how humiliated I might´ve felt it´s nothing compared to how this Walton fella must´ve felt. D.B. Sweeney captures that feeling pretty damn good.

Listen, when it comes to these supposedly “true” stories of alien abductions, I don´t know what to believe. To be honest, I don´t think that they have actually taken place. I just don´t see how this could have been going on for so many years without being exposed on a grander scale, ok? But then again, I´m not completely sure. After all, what the hell do I know about the universe? And if there are another species out there, observing us you can bet your ass that they would wanna examine us, right? So for all I know, this kinda things could have happened and that´s what makes the concept so frightening! We don´t know if the events occurred but if they did, it´s pretty damn scary.

I can honestly say that being probed and poked at is not my idea of a good time. You see, many years ago I had my appendix removed. The removal in itself was alright because by then I was sedated with some top notch drugs so that was all good. But the horrible and humiliating process that lead up to that was everything but fun. I´m gonna get real up close and personal here so if there´s anyone out there who doesn´t want part of my explicit details better skip the nest paragraph or two. Pour yourself a drink and lean a little bit closer and I´ll tell you all about it…

You see, I had to be fisted… Not by the North Star or by the Fury but by the damn doctor that examined me! Well, strictly speaking he didn´t exactly “fist” me, I guess it was just a finger or two but it felt like he had his whole arm inside me. That was easily one of the most bizarre things I´ve ever been through and believe me, I´ve had my fair share of strangeness in this life. That´s apparently how you examine if there´s anything wrong with your appendix: you do it via the asshole! What is it with these god damn doctors and their obsession with assholes? You can´t go to the doctor without taking your pants off. It doesn´t matter if it´s a headache you´re suffering from: “The pants come off, son! No use in fighting or bitching about it. Off with ´em!”

Imagine that young medical student in the middle of his education who realizes that he wants to devote his whole life to assholes. I wonder how that conversation goes:

“Hey, fellas… I´ve been thinking. Surgery is all fine and interesting but I´ve made a decision: I want to devote the rest of my life to exploring and examining the human anus… I know, I know, you´re gonna try to talk me out of it but hear me out: nothing about the human body holds such allure to me as the anus! It´s a labyrinth of possibilities! From now on I will be known as “Ass-man”!”

Crazy fuckers, those doctors! Oh, and guess what name of the doctor that examined me was? Dr. Brown! Swear to God, I´m not kidding here. I was fisted by Dr. Brown! And weirdly enough, two weeks later he appeared on the Swedish edition of “Jeopardy!” and all I could think of was that “one of those fingers that´s pushing the buttons have been inside me!” True story, folks!

I don´t know why I have such a problem in sticking to the subject here but maybe that´s just as well because the less you know about this film, the better and more rewarding it is. It is a great, little film with fine performances and rich on atmosphere and mood. Seek this one, citizens!

Now, get on with your lives and stop thinking about my asshole…

Take scare,

Thomas

Apparently Guy Ritchie is making some kind of mega budget Sherlock Holmes film now, starring Robert Downey, JR and Jude Law. I´m sure that that will be a very entertaining flick but I can tell you this much: It´s not gonna beat “Murder by Decree”, starring Christopher Plummer as Sherlock Holmes and James Mason as Dr. Watson. You know why? ´Cause it´s fricking amazing, that´s why! A couple of years back, Johnny Depp starred in a film about the Jack the Ripper-case called “From Hell”, remember that one? That was a very good film, at least in my humble opinion. But if you imagine that film, made in the 70´s and instead of having Inspector Abberline (which was the name of Depp´s character) as the lead character, you´d instead have Sherlock Holmes, then the end result would look something like this forgotten classic!

This one was directed by Bob Clark, the guy behind “Deathdream”, “Black Christmas” and “Porky´s”. Now, there´s no nudity in this film so don´t go expecting a full-frontal extravaganza like the shower scenes from “Porky´s”, ok? This film is on a whole ´nother level.

The story is basically the same as in “From Hell”: Sherlock Holmes is drawn into the case of Jack the Ripper who is killing prostitutes in London’s East End. Assisted by Dr. Watson, and using information provided by a renowned psychic, Robert Lees (a bug-eyed Donald Sutherland), Holmes finds that the murders may have its roots in a Royal indiscretion and that a cover-up is being managed by politicians at the highest level, all of whom happen to be Masons. Homes races to save the life of Annie Crook (Geneviéve Bujold) who has been forcibly incarcerated in an insane asylum and that of her friend Mary Kelly (Susan Clark), in whom she has entrusted her secret.

Pretty much identical to “From Hell”, right? But why wasn´t there any mention of this one when that film was released back in 2001? Beats me! I remember talking about this film back at the time but this is a pretty much forgotten film. I remember seeing this on TV and it scared the shit out of me. I´ll admit that it doesn´t exactly scare me witless when I watch it nowadays but it does a pretty good job.

No matter how much I enjoyed “From Hell”, there is one thing that makes this the superior film: the fog! I don´t know how they did it back then but the fog in those old Hammer films and this one always looked amazing! Nowadays they´d probably just CGI the fucking fog all over place and be over and done with it. Well, there´s nothing like that old thick fog that Dracula used to run around inside, I´ll tell you that much. It´s the same here in the scenes from Whitechapel, when Jack is roaming the streets.

There´s not a lot of violence in this one. If I remember correctly there´s one single scene and by today´s standards it´s pretty tame. It´s nothing to get you riled up over. This film doesn´t have any elaborate traps strapped to people´s mouths that´ll cut their head in two if they fail to dig out the key from their own asshole within 30 seconds. Nothing like that at all. But what it does have is a fantastic score and when I re-watched this one a couple of months back, I was struck by the fact it´s still possible to scare someone the old-fashioned way: by creating a great atmosphere and score! I´m telling ya, the scenes with Jack´s carriage coming down the street in slow motion, through the fog, still gets me. And since director Clark isn´t exactly a new hand at creating suspense, he brings back that old trick that he basically created with “Black Christmas”: the POV-shot from the murderer´s angle. And it works like a charm!

When I was a kid, I was a huge fan of Sherlock Holmes. I read the stories like I was obsessed and I followed the TV show, starring Jeremy Brett, religiously. I loved that show and I thought that Brett was amazing as Holmes. Despite this and the place that the TV show holds in my heart, I have to say that Christopher Plummer is the best Holmes to grace the silver screen yet. Unlike almost any other actor that has portrayed him, he downplays him. He doesn´t sneer and he doesn´t shout out his solutions like a meth-addicted maniac (although Holmes is addicted to cocaine in the books, but that´s another story). He´s a pretty down to earth-fella in Plummer´s guise, which also makes him one of the more sympathetic Holmes I´ve seen.

James Mason was another favorite of mine when I was a kid, thanks to my unhealthy obsession with “20,000 Leagues under the Sea”, where he played Captain Nemo. He makes for a perfect Watson here, as well. One thing I´ve always been bothered with when it comes to Sherlock Holmes-movies is the fact that Watson is mostly portrayed as a bumbling fool. That´s not how I imagine him and that´s not how Mason plays him. I think that Mason would´ve been incapable of ever portraying a bumbling fool. Everything the man says sounds like Shakespeare, and in this film Mason is pretty much Holmes´ equal. Mason´s Watson isn´t afraid to resort to fisticuffs to get some answers out of someone. I hope that Ritchie remembers this while shooting the new take on Holmes & Watson. Bring on the violence! Just watch the final fight in this film. That´s the way I want my Holmes.

Another thing I´ve always felt that has been bothering me is the fact that when most actors portray Holmes they tend to play him like some kinda aloof, distant fella that doesn´t seem to have anything but contempt for other people. Plummer avoids this, wisely. This may be the only Holmes I´ve seen that seem to genuinely care for the victims. Just watch the scenes with Plummer and Bujold & Clarke. Those two ladies are a hell of a lot more believable as prostitutes than Heather Graham ever was in “From Hell”.

I have to digress here, sorry about that but what the hell were the Hughes brothers thinking when they cast Heather Graham in that role? Which one of the brothers got to decide that? The one that did should have to give up his casting-decisions on their next film, as a penalty. I´m not saying that she´s a bad actress, although she did fall into the much-feared “bad accent-trap” that all actors should try to avoid. Her English accent was pretty damn awful. But that´s not the worst. The worst thing about casting her was the fact that all the other ladies that played the prostitutes looked pretty realistic. I can imagine that that was how a prostitute in London looked back in the day: bad hair, dirty clothes, bad teeth and not particularly attractive.

Let´s face it, these ladies didn´t get into the world´s oldest profession because of their stunning good looks, ok? So all the other ladies look pretty down-on-their-luck, ok? And in strolls Mary Kelley, as played by Heather Graham, with dark red, flowing hair and pale skin and big blue eyes. Unless she decided to start working the streets just the night before, she´s done a helluva job keeping herself fit. Hell, she should be charging the other girls for tips on managing your personal hygiene. But the weird thing is that she doesn´t seem to have that many more customers than the other prostitutes? What the hell is up with that? What kind of weird people were walking the streets of London back then? I can assure you that if I was that kinda man that thought that it´s ok to purchase sex (I guarantee you that I am not), I would´ve taken my business to Heather Graham, ok? Hell, Johnny Depp is one good looking fucker and even he falls in love with her, for chrissakes! That´s gotta tell you something, right? We´re not talking about a toothless old lady here. She´s quite the looker. It´s also weird that she seems to be on such good terms with the other prostitutes. Why aren´t they jealous of her? Cause she doesn´t get that many more customers, right? What the hell was up with prostitution back then? The uglier you were, the more customers you got?

I bet you never thought about that, did ya? That´s alright, you can thank me later.

But back to “Murder by Decree” again. Sorry about my rambling there. So like I said, Geneviéve Bujold is a much more suitable actress in a role of this kind that Heather Graham. I wouldn´t go so far as to say that a love story develops between her and Holmes but there´s definitely emotions. Holmes feels compassion for her and that whole aspect of the story is quite moving, believe it or not.

When Holmes starts unraveling the mystery that is Jack the Ripper he of course discovers that this conspiracy reaches higher in England´s aristocracy than they would´ve ever suspected. But you see, director Clark actually manages to exploit this in a way that the Hughes brothers didn´t. The story becomes as much about corruption versus decency as it is about Jack the Ripper killing prostitutes and that´s one of the things that makes this film so great! You gotta try to stay decent and do the right thing, kids! At the end Holmes does a speech that could´ve easily been awkward but Plummer makes it work and when the film ends, you walk away from it with a feeling of social pathos. Now, that´s quite a feat for a god damn Sherlock Holmes movie about Jack the Ripper! The fact that the real crime is that we do not care about the poor and weak in our society is pretty heavy stuff. Well done, filmmakers!

I hope to hell that Downey, JR allows his Holmes to have this kind of conscience and be as outraged as Plummer ´s take on him, is. The thing I like about Plummer here is that he has just the right amount of brooding, while acting. He´s that kinda actor, that you can see that he´s always thinking. There´s a lot going on and it works very well for this character.

And speaking about that Christopher Plummer guy, is he the oldest actor ever who´ve made a comeback? Think about it: at the end of the 90´s no one cared about him or knew if he was alive or if he was mummified or whatever. The only roles he got was in a bunch of TV movies and crappy straight-to-DVD-horror movies. Then he got a role in Michael Mann´s “Insider” and things started to look brighter. In 2003 he did “Cold Creek Manor” which was fairly high profile and I remember watching it (it sucked!) and thinking “By the hammer of Thor, that´s Christopher Plummer! In a beard and looking all ragged!” (Yes, it sounds like that when I think). After that film the old dude has been in just about every film produced: Oliver Stone´s “Alexander”, Terence Malick´s “The New World”, “National Treasure”, “Syriana” and Spike Lee´s “Inside Man”. That´s pretty well done for an eighty year old guy! I bet I´ll be wearing a diaper when I´m his age. But he decides to make a comeback and be in high budget movies to the left and right, instead. Pretty impressive, Christopher. But then again, when you get old you start relying on your kids more and more, right? And do you know who Christopher Plummer´s daughter is? I´ll tell ya: Amanda fucking Plummer! Honey bunny from the opening scene of “Pulp Fiction“! I think she seems pretty weird, to say the least so I can´t blame porr old Christopher for refusing to grow old. That´s probably why he keeps working like a madman. He´s probably scared to death of spending time with her.

But I guess that´s about it. So if you´re in for some studio-produced fog, cobblestones that run red with the blood of prostitutes and lots of men with moustaches and higly impresive sideburns smoking pipes, you should definitely check this one out! It´s a pretty damn good flick.

Take scare,

Thomas