You're a Big Boy Now.

Review #2560: You're a Big Boy Now.

Cast: 

Elizabeth Hartman (Barbara Darling), Peter Kastner (Bernard Chanticleer), Geraldine Page (Margery Chanticleer), Rip Torn (I.H. Chanticleer), Tony Bill (Raef del Grado), Julie Harris (Miss Nora Thing), Karen Black (Amy Partlett), Dolph Sweet (Patrolman Francis Graf), Michael Dunn (Richard Mudd), and Michael O'Sullivan (Kurt Doughty) Directed by Francis Ford Coppola (#592 - Dementia 13, #1139 - Supernova, #1460 - Apocalypse Now, #1469 - The Outsiders, #1502 - Bram Stoker's Dracula)

Review:

"You're a Big Boy Now is a flashy movie to some extent. I have since been more subtle than that. But flashy films do attract attention, and that was what I wanted to do when I was making my first film for a studio."

Maybe I haven't been fair to Francis Ford Coppola. The story goes that Coppola wrote a screenplay when working for Seven Arts that was a different take on the "coming of age" movie that was based on the David Benedictus novel You're a Big Boy Now. Coppola had the novel brought to his attention by Tony Bill (incidentally, he wanted to play the lead but also suggested Peter Kastner, because of what he saw in Nobody Waved Good-bye [1964]). He optioned the novel and changed the setting from London to New York City (going from shoe clerk to library assistant) while at the same time working with Gore Vidal on the screenplay for Is Paris Burning? [1966]. Seven Arts, asserting that Coppola's writing of the script on their time meant that they owned it, eventually came to a deal with him that would pay Coppola $8,000 to direct with a 29-day shooting schedule; he used the resulting movie as his thesis at UCLA for his Master of Fine Arts degree. Made on a budget that eventually rose to around $1 million around various locations in New York, the film was not a major success at the time, although it apparently broke even when it was sold to television.* Coppola worked with Warner Bros.-Seven Arts for his next two films with Finian's Rainbow (1968) and The Rain People (1969).

I could not help but think about The Gr-no, wait, not really. Actually, I couldn't get Dementia 13 out of my head when I thought about Coppola and the youthful energy of trying to make a go at filmmaking on a tight schedule and why it felt so much more interesting in that film than with this brash, messy, and altogether curious studio movie. And I then guess someone would compare it to The Graduate, which also was a coming-of-age movie with a young man and the alienation of his parents' generation that was released the following year*. And then I think about the lead character and wonder to myself: why do I hate this little bastard at times? Yes, there are a few hang-ups that actually do prove amusing, but there were almost as many times where I felt the strange desire to wish that Mr. Chanticleer took a nice smack upside on the head, funny as he might be. But you can at least say it is curious enough to free-form its way through an odyssey of someone learning to get a clue in the swinging era of what 1966 surely looked like (complete with peep shows, oddly placed signs*, and, well, pretzels). Amidst the consternation that one might have for some of these ridiculously repressed people, filled with frustrations at times, is an array of interesting performances. Sentimentally, Torn is the one I spring to first (much like oldie songs, I don't have many new favorites), and he actually is pretty funny here as a befuddled parent who thinks they know best in running their son basically like they were a business, complete with their varied responses to the women around them (staid wives, or messing around in a vault with odd books, you get the idea). The journey to get to the inevitable is fairly tolerable in seeing some of the hang-ups play out on screen, whether that involves a man-hating Hartman (to a point*) or the obvious cool loyalty in Black (making her screen debut) or Page in a role that probably could be defined as an amusing "shrew". At least it ends with a chase scene to help crash things down to some sort of reality (namely realizing what really matters between odd duck family and friends). You get a few interesting camera tricks, a few interesting moments looking at a New York movie with a worthy enough soundtrack involving the Lovin' Spoonful. As a whole, it is a strange little time capsule of an older time filled with a few interesting visuals, here-and-there jokes and a general vibe fit for hang-ups and hanger-ons that might be up your alley.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*I'll be honest, I haven't thought about The Graduate much since I saw it exactly one time...12 years ago. Strange that I didn't feel like strangling Dustin Hoffman's character nearly as much as the one presented here. 

*I couldn't find a direct source, but Coppola stated that his film was definitely influenced by Richard Lester's A Hard Day's Night (1964), as opposed to The Knack... and How to Get It (1965), which was released a few months before Big Boy. Of course, I wish for a direct quote because Coppola also apparently said he hated the movie.

*One sign has the N-word in it that naturally the lead character reads out loud, and no the word is not naive.

*Also, this may come as a surprise, but the Hartman character is depicted as a man-hating narcissist that was shaped by their molestation as a youth that saw them get revenge in a way that totally makes sense: stealing his wooden leg!

A Gunfight.

Review #1716: A Gunfight. 

Cast: 

Kirk Douglas (Will Tenneray), Johnny Cash (Abe Cross), Jane Alexander (Nora Tenneray), Karen Black (Jenny Sims), Keith Carradine (Young Gunfighter), Dana Elcar (Marv), Raf Vallone (Francisco Alvarez), Eric Douglas (Bud Tenneray), Robert J. Wilke (Marshal Tom Cater), and Paul Lambert (Ed Fleury) Directed by Lamont Johnson. 

Review: 

Sure, there are two interesting things to note about this movie. For one, this was funded by the Jicarilla Apache Tribe, of which most live in the state of New Mexico that have a significant portion of their income come from oil and gas wells. It was documented at the time as one of the first movies entirely funded by Native Americans, and it is perhaps ironic since it is a Western without any Native Americans. Of course, the other thing is that it features legendary singer Johnny Cash in an acting role. It was actually his third appearance in a motion picture, having starred in Five Minutes to Live (1961) and being featured as himself in The Road to Nashville (1967); of course, there was also the The Johnny Cash Show (1969-71), which had an episode featuring him with Douglas (who at the time of filming was approaching 55). This movie was released 50 years ago today, one that was made for $2 million while distributed to limited audiences by Paramount Pictures (at least, that is what one assumes, since there aren't that many contemporary reviews for it and you likely had never heard of it until today).

So yes, here we are with a movie that certainly tries to be offbeat and interesting in the differences from the usual expectations of a Western...in that the gunfighters seek the opportunity to make money to fight, as opposed to some sort of simmering difference between them, and they even arrange to duke it out in an arena fit for bull-fighting (get it?). 88 minutes take up time for what is meant to be an interesting look upon the dark side of folks with a lust to see people kill for sport. Of course, it also thinks it is clever by having more than just a swift finish at the arena with an imagined sequence at the end, so here we are. Boy, what a mediocre movie. The movie was written by Harold Jack Bloom (also a co-producer), best known for his work in television alongside his work on The Naked Spur (1953) and You Only Live Twice (1967). For his part, Johnson was also pretty familiar with Westerns from his TV work on stuff such as Have Gun - Will Travel along with a plethora of TV movie work that was fairly noted by audiences. Honestly, if you want a movie that shows the price of a killer trying to live with himself after a killing, you might as well just stick with Shane (1953). A Gunfight manages to be as generic as the title, one that is even bereft of the quality of oddness that could be possible with a Western meant to draw on weirdos wanting to see people kill each other. I have seen and heard more interesting moments come from people trying to justify a bizarre sports opinion than anything that comes from this movie, really. Ideally, one could do with just Cash and Douglas. A character study movie with just them might have worked if it was a more limited cast, since each are decent here. Cash never seems to be outmatched, collected in his weary pauses that looks for a different time than the one he is set upon - i.e. this isn't a star vehicle or a gimmick. Douglas simmers just as well like an opportunist ready for the big moment with confidence (granted, it is hard to top stuff with Douglas when Lonely Are the Brave (1962) exists). It takes quite a bit of time to see them meet, and it is probably an odd sign that there is nothing more interesting at any point before or after than when they meet and talk to each other (this includes the gunfight), since they play off each other with neat banter that at the very least makes this look like something more than just "uh huh, next." Well, that's not quite true, because Carradine is technically a curious and brash presence to see for like five minutes. Everyone else though is pretty much exactly what you might see coming, from the doting presences of the people close to the lead performers to the side folks, et cetera, et cetera. You might get more insight into the curiosity of folks wanting to see blood drawn at a horror convention. Honestly, by the time it lumbers to the fight, the interest is fairly mild as to just which choice the movie goes with...and yes, the fight is swiftly accomplished before being followed by imagination. I suppose it is meant to show the perspective of how neither gunfighter really wins despite being alive - uh huh, sure. You might as well just have them shoot to kill simultaneously if you want to pull a cheap message, particularly since I really care more about the idea of bringing interesting presences together rather than the usual Western stuff (i.e. a movie with presences doesn't mean one wants something with ego). Sure, the genre was still going okay in the 1970s, but this was the year of different types of Westerns like Billy Jack and McCabe & Mrs. Miller to grab the attention of audiences, and A Gunfight just doesn't have the confidence required to really make a meaningful statement that counts. Despite having Cash and Douglas, it proves to be just too average everywhere else and thus flops out in the overall end game - it might be a curiosity, but folks will find a movie with the bare minimum of filling rather than a show to look for.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Airport 1975.

Review #1675: Airport 1975.

Cast: 

Charlton Heston (Captain Alan Murdock), Karen Black (Chief-Stewardess Nancy Pryor), George Kennedy (Joe Patroni), Efrem Zimbalist Jr. (Captain Stacy), Gloria Swanson (Herself), Susan Clark (Helen Patroni), Helen Reddy (Sister Ruth), Linda Blair (Janice Abbott), Dana Andrews (Scott Freeman), Myrna Loy (Mrs. Devaney), Sid Caesar (Barney), Roy Thinnes (First Officer Urias), Ed Nelson (Maj. Alexander), Nancy Olson (Mrs. Abbott), Larry Storch (Glenn Purcell), Martha Scott (Sister Beatrice), Norman Fell (Bill), Jerry Stiller (Sam), and Conrad Janis (Arnie) Directed by Jack Smight.

Review: 

There are quite a few times that you see a sequel to a movie and wonder why there was a second one to begin with. Unfortunately, you know, and I know, the reason that there exists a sequel like Airport 1975 (1974): money. People really couldn't get enough of big stars to go with airplanes in trouble, complete with a title that I suppose was made to sound like it came from the future. It appears that the budget was reduced in the four years since the last film in 1970 (from ten to three million), but this one also managed to make over $100 million, and one can only wonder how rentals would go for this fellow turkey. To be fair, one probably can't blame Jack Smight for his direction here. He did his work in both television and film (starting with the former since its golden age in the 1950s), and this was the eleventh of seventeen films that he would direct from 1964 to 1989, with Harper (1966) generally being the one that stands out among his work. I'm sure you might remember Airplane! (1980) when it comes to its take on the disaster genre...and those little gags that might seem familiar to those who have seen both films, what with a kid that is awaiting a transplant as soon as they make an airplane trip (complete with a doctor calling beforehand to make sure they aren't startled), and a singing nun that plays to the kid. Now, technically Reddy was qualified to sing, because she was actually a singer (with one newspaper outlet describing her as the "Queen of '70s Pop", after all)...so keep that in mind in trying to figure out which one is a parody. That 1980 film also had Ethel Merman in a cameo appearance, while this feature has Gloria Swanson playing herself (if you really want to stretch this around into an oblong circle, Linda Harrison accompanies her...while using a second name as "Augusta Summerland"...yes). I am not playing you for a bit, because Airport 1975 actually features Dana Andrews in a brief appearance, and Andrews had starred in Zero Hour! (1957), which Arthur Hailey had adapted from his teleplay a few years prior while eventually writing the novel Airport...and Airplane! would lift lines from said movie. At least one will get to see the pair of Heston and Kennedy again, because they had co-starred in another disaster film with Earthquake (1974), which was also done by Universal Studios.

So yes, there are a few strange folks present here, whether that means a trio of odd drunks overshadowed by Myrna Loy playing a more eccentric drunk...or Swanson, who had apparently wrote all of her lines. Strangely enough, this may actually be better than the original film, mostly because of one thing: it manages to be so cheesy that it nearly defies reason. It is so self-serious at the weirdest times that one wonders how exactly this was the only film credit for screenplay man Don Ingalls, who specialized in television from Have Gun - Will Travel to Fantasy Island. It sometimes feel like a script that mutated from the bins of television hokum and engulfed any famous person they could find, who I hope managed to enjoy the monetary benefits of this sham spectacle. Heston is technically the star, in that he gets to ham the screen up from moment to moment while doing the bare minimum in charisma and minimal plane involvement. One wonders if he was worn out from the aforementioned film about the earthquake. Kennedy blusters through some shouting in a performance that is probably degraded from what one saw in the first film, although it can be said that in the earlier movie he was more of a helpful highlight (since if you remember, the airplane trouble was somewhere sidelined behind lots of gobbledygook about affairs and the airplane industry). Ah, but the real presence is Black, making her shift into commercial work after a string of noted supporting roles. While it isn't a great performance by any means, I'm sure I wouldn't fare much better at fumbling with the controls and not collapsing into panic with trying to fly a plane over mountains (the attempts at chemistry with Heston is a different story), although older fans might recognize that this isn't the first movie where a flight attendant is shown taking a plane to safety (Julie (1956) starred Doris Day in a noir, of all things). Zimbalist plays the unfortunate pilot that gets to spend half his time on a couch with his eyes closed to makeup, so there is that. Swanson, making her final film appearance before her death in 1983, certainly had to have a fine time here, since I imagine a role spent mostly in a chair talking about oneself would make anyone proud. It isn't exactly a parody of herself, but one can still keep their eyes open to wonder how this "interesting" pairing of famed star to alleged disaster movie came to be. Others have the energy of a broomstick when it comes to really sticking out, most notably with a bored-looking Andrews, or a bedridden Blair, or an oddly complacent Caesar to go with Storch (who might as well have been chosen out of a hat), and it is Loy who really seems to stand out best when it comes to pairing eccentricity to the level of cheese needed. At least there is some sort of inherent danger present here, since the chances of even one important character biting the dust is at 1% rather than the level done from the first film, although it hasn't meant the movie has increased its levels of thrill from before. One wonders exactly how the other two Airport movies turn out in raising (or keeping) the standards of disaster movie excitement, really. Airport 1975 (1974) isn't really an accomplishment in anything, but technically being better than its predecessor in being less boring has to account for something. If one desires a movie packed with ridicule and name actors, one might not go wrong here.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

House of 1000 Corpses.

Review #1590: House of 1000 Corpses.

Cast: 

Sid Haig (Captain Spaulding), Bill Moseley (Otis), Sheri Moon Zombie (Baby), Karen Black (Mother Firefly), Chris Hardwick (Jerry Goldsmith), Erin Daniels (Denise Willis), Jennifer Jostyn (Mary Knowles), Rainn Wilson (Bill Hudley), Walton Goggins (Steve Naish), Tom Towles (Deputy George Wydell), Matthew McGrory (Tiny), Robert Allen Mukes (Rufus), Dennis Fimple (Grandpa Hugo), Harrison Young (Don Willis), William Bassett (Sheriff Frank Huston), Irwin Keyes (Ravelli), and Michael J. Pollard (Stucky) Written and Directed by Rob Zombie (#743 - Halloween (2007))

Review: 

"The first film I directed, which people seems to love, is just a calamitous mess. Well, when it came out it seemed like everyone hated it. Now everyone acts like it’s beloved in some way. All I see is flaw, upon flaw, upon flaw… upon flaw.”

Sure, there have been quite a few directors that came across film after having made a name for themselves with another form of media. But how many were musician-turned-directors? Rob Zombie (born Robert Cummings) is one such director. He grew up with an three-pronged fantasy of being like Alice Cooper, Steven Spielberg and Stan Lee, having grown up with an interest in horror as a young child, noting the boom of horror in the late 1960s with media that ranged from The Munsters to magazines like Famous Monsters, although other favorites later included Dawn of the Dead (1978) and Westerns. The Massachusetts native attended both the Pratt Institute and the Parsons School of Design for a time before coming up with the idea for what became the band White Zombie in 1985, which he co-founded with Sean Yseult. Alongside others in the band, they contributed four albums over the next thirteen years, eventually finding recognition for their heavy metal sound, with Zombie directing the music videos. His first album after going solo was influenced by classic horror films (complete with some songs having samples and quotes from his favorites) while also doing work for various media (including animation for Beavis and Butt-Head Do America in 1996). He expressed an interest in directing in 1997, with an actual plan to have him write and direct a sequel to The Crow (set in 2037, I kid you not) before it was shelved. He worked with Universal Studios in designing a haunted maze attraction in 1999, and it was its success that led to them wanting to work with him on a film (thought of on the spot while designing another attraction), which he started directing in 2000. The resulting film did not please Universal, who shelved it in fears of receiving a NC-17 rating due to its violence (an Adults Only rating, as if Universal decided releasing a violent horror film was suddenly too much) before Lionsgate Films eventually signed on to release it, with this serving as the first of so far seven theatrical films directed and written by Zombie.

One can see the influence of films such as The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) and Spider Baby (1968) while also seeing the drive-in qualities that make a gritty and weird experience. Is it for everyone? You best believe it isn't for everyone, because for some it will feel tedious even at 89 minutes for where it wants to go in the art of the grotesque, a film that seems constricted by its influences to be anything more original. On the other hand, there are arguments to be made in favor of Zombie and his direction (alongside co-contribution to the music with Scott Humphrey) when it comes to his mix of horror and dark humor with ghoulish charm, which is why it has proved to have a cult following (alongside two sequels released in 2005 and 2019). I can firmly state that while it may not be exactly as well-developed as something like say Motel Hell (1980), I found enjoyment with its vision of macabre thrill and a fairly consistent cast to make it a worthwhile effort. I found it to be pretty enjoyable, in the sense that it made a madhouse worth investing time to look into without being driven senseless into gore without something to go along with it, even if it isn't exactly the most subtle horror film (its setting of the 1970s is believable to those who want to pretend it looks like that era). To start off, one goes with the first focus-point in Haig, the actor-turned-hypnotherapist-turned actor again (going from blaxploitation and heavy roles to horror). He mainly has three scenes to highlight, but he sure makes them ones to enjoy in ghoulish curiosity, amusing but effective in keeping you on your toes (he, alongside Moseley and S.Zombie, would feature in both sequels). Mosley (best known for his role in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986) alongside other cult horror films) proves just as fiendish in grabbing attention to creep on one's shoulders, demented but useful to what is needed from him. S.Zombie (a dance choreographer and fashion designer that has featured in each of her husband's films) does fine with providing wicked allure for what is needed here, wrapped in terror just like the others that holds well with other fellow familiar actors in horror, such as the case with Black (long noted for work in independent films alongside horror fare), soothing but just as out there with the other members of family creeps (one that seems reminiscent of the Mansion family, what with Zombie inspired by recordings of them for the rants presented here). The other side of the action is the doomed travelers, which is mostly amusing to think back to the faces that eventually found prominence beyond horror, which involves Wilson, eventual star of The Office (2005) and Hardwick, comedian and podcast host (if one is into that sort of thing...no comment). They, alongside Daniels and Jostyn are just fine, in a room temperature kind of charm. I mean, we're watching a haunted ride of ghoulish people that murder people, the least one can do is make sure we aren't taken out of the experience with some jarring seriousness or bland set-ups for body counts. In that sense, I found it to be just enough to win out in the end, despite my reservations about its unwieldy consistency, which may seem like an excuse for Zombie to show off with references or in its weird cuts to those who desire more. It is exactly the kind of weird drive-in charm that makes Zombie an interesting face in horror cinema, one with a passion for the genre that yearns to creep its viewers out to their enjoyment (whether squeamish or not). It's a love it or hate it kind of movie - and I'm just fine with what it is.

Well, it's November 7th. I'm glad to have reached just as many films done in the week following Halloween as it was for the year before with five, and I hope you enjoyed Halloween: The Week After Part II. You can always throw suggestions in for horror films to be done any time of the year, but it is fun to make time for ones to really highlight in the month of fear alongside my personal extension week - enjoy the fun. There may or may not be another themed week coming up before the year ends, so stay tuned.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Easy Rider.

Review #1430: Easy Rider.

Cast: 
Peter Fonda (Wyatt), Dennis Hopper (Billy), Jack Nicholson (George Hanson), featuring Phil Spector (Connection), Warren Finnerty (Rancher), Luke Askew (Stranger on highway), Luana Anders (Lisa), Sabrina Scharf (Sarah), Robert Walker Jr (Jack), Hayward Robillard (Cat Man), Arnold Hess Jr (Deputy), Toni Basil (Mary), Karen Black (Karen), with David C. Billodeau and Johnny David (Pickup Truck drivers) Directed by Dennis Hopper.

Review: 
"I am just a middle-class farm boy from Dodge City and my grandparents were wheat farmers. I thought painting, acting, directing and photography was all part of being an artist. I have made my money that way. And I have had some fun. It's not been a bad life." - Dennis Hopper

If one ever needed a time capsule of 1969 that would encapsulate a journey filled with wanderers that look for America and find something beyond their wildest dreams, I would say Easy Rider is that kind of fitting movie. It is a road film like no other, one that represented a high point of the New Hollywood era that would be characterized by films with directors that were given the tools to try and express something different from the studio-dominated directed films of the past. Every few decades have their share of directors that come through the ranks to forge their place with iconic films or presences, and this applies just as much for stars as well. Fonda was already a counterculture icon to some for films such as The Wild Angels (1966) and this picture, and he found inspiration from seeing a still of himself in the former film to make a sort of modern Western with bikers travelling across the country. Hopper, who had made a name for himself as a method actor with a combative personality on film and television (which led to him turning to photography) was called by Fonda to see about trying to make that idea into a film. Hopper and Fonda wrote the film with novelist and Dr. Strangelove co-writer Terry Southern, while Hopper directed, and Fonda produced it. One shouldn't forget Nicholson in all of this, as he had collaborated with Hopper and Fonda previously with his written script for Roger Corman's LSD film The Trip. The credit for who did what when it came to writing is a bit murky, since one can see a good deal of improvisation among a thin story and attempts by Hopper and Fonda to downplay Southern's role in the film. Instead of a music score, the soundtrack is comprised of songs from noted artists and bands such as The Byrds, Steppenwolf, and The Jimi Hendrix Experience, with the licensing for the songs costing around a million dollars (which was larger than the filming budget of over $300,000).

This is a film with its own kind of freedom to move around with its main duo on its own terms that is wild at heart with a power that still has an appeal after all these years, for better or worse. 1969 and 2020 are two completely different years in terms of communication and other various things, but it isn't too hard to still see a commonality in one's search for their own kind of freedom and the problems that can come from it, where the clash of cultures never really did end with the 1960s - it has merely amplified in the prevailing years. What does it really mean to be free?  Through their travels, Hopper and Fonda find themselves in the presence of farmers, hippies, rough locals, and one strange trip in Mardi Gras that make quite an interesting portrait of the times in all of its hopes, dreams, and ultimately anguish, complete with them and Nicholson getting high on marijuana on camera. Fonda makes for a solid performance, not needing to say too much until the trip sequence that gives him room to show a tortured spirit within the guise of freedom (notably, Hopper convinced a reluctant Fonda to talk to the statue as if it was his mother, who had died when he was 10). Hopper makes a subdued but worthwhile misfit to accompany Fonda and make a film with frenzied interest both in the film and outside it. He reportedly had proposed doing a four hour cut that had extended sequences along with extensive use of flash-forward that would insert scenes from later parts of the film into a current scene. Nicholson, who had toiled in low budget roles for over a decade, does a tremendous job with the time he is given as an outsider with spirit and conviction in whatever he does and says on screen, whether that means hitching a ride with a football helmet or talking a theory about aliens among us. In the end, the swift and sudden climax makes for a thoughtful conclusion to a film that travels to being itself with no sense of trying to be something it isn't, appealing to an audience that had seen plenty of events and furor in the sixties that linger in our consciousness now without seeming played out or something to poke at. One gets a feel for the road without being overwhelmed by it all. The jump cuts alongside the carefree camera movements and natural lighting make for an experience worth 95 minutes. As one probably already knows, this was a tremendous hit for Columbia Pictures (at one point, an executive apparently stated that while he didn't know what it meant, it would "make a fuck of a lot of money."), and others would follow in its wake with their own kind of free-spirited and free-willing technique that makes for a worthwhile legacy for a film that is an interesting worthwhile time. It isn't perfect by any means, but it is certainly deserving of a place in the mentions of the films of the 1960s as a sign of the times for present and future in more ways than one.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.