1994 Oliver Stoned movie
Rating: 16/20
Plot: Mickey and Mallory haven't enjoyed the easiest lives. None of that matters, however, after they meet and fall in love. They marry and take a romantic road trip for their honeymoon.
This is one of those movies like Team America: World Police, Pirates of the Caribbean, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, The Happening, The Life Aquatic, and Punch Drunk Love, the type of movie that I really like but have to answer a scrunched-up face asking, "What? You like that movie?" whenever I mention it. It's wildly imperfect. And Oliver Stone takes so many chances and dicks around so much that it winds up looking, at times, like the cinematic equivalent to vomit. But I really like what this movie says (about society's sick attachment to violence, the way the media feeds that monkey, our willingness to consume crap, the power of love) and I have to respect a movie that takes these kind of chances. When I saw this in the theater, it was so unlike anything I had ever seen. Tinted film, cameras askew, distorting faces, psychedelic imagery, grotesque visuals piled on top of grotesque visuals, the ornery and almost irrational switching from different color film to black and white and back again, headache-inducing tomfoolery. I was mesmerized then and still am when I watch this one. It's completely over the top, but it needs to be over the top. From the beginning bit of darker-than-darkly comic ultraviolence that introduces the two killers to the scenes with Mallory's family and her abusive father (genius casting of Rodney Dangerfield) that parodies a situational comedy complete with canned laughter to the amazingly ludicrous prison escape, it's impossible to take your eyes off the screen. Is it too much for most people? I'd have trouble arguing that it's not excessive. There's far too much going on in scenes. It's an assault on the senses. Your poor inebriated eyes want to separate to watch what's going on in different parts of the screen. Your ears are attacked by what sounds like multiple songs being played at once (which is what literally is happening at one point). Speaking of the soundtrack, it's just as uneven as the movie, but there are some really interesting choices, and this was my introduction to Leonard Cohen. If I remember correctly, Trent Reznor had something to do with the soundtrack. The performances are nearly perfect from top to bottom. I remember how shocked I was seeing Woody Harrelson who I only knew as Woody from Cheers. Nothing will make me like Juliette Lewis, but I can't think of anybody else who could have been as effective as Mallory. Tom Sizemore injects just the right amount of creep to his performance, and Robert Downey Jr. out Geraldoes Geraldo. And Tommy Lee Jones' performance as the warden just might be one of my favorite performances ever. It's one of those complete transformations and so over the top. Jones is constantly threatening to cross what must be a really thin line between mad genius and what-the-heck-is-this-over-acting-bozo-doing territory. The actors really look like they're having a blast making this movie. So much of Natural Born Killers is just plain wrong, and while I'd never blame anybody for not liking it, I can't help digging it. Definitely the feel-good movie of 1994!
Please use the comment feature below to ask "What? You like this movie?" and tell me how it makes you think of the words "cinematic vomit" when you think about it.
6 comments:
Haven't seen this since the theatre... being meaning to see how it looks now...
I just remember wow, if this doesn't win the oscar for best editing then... and not completing my thought... still find the woody harrelson casting was really weird and anyone else could have made this a completely different movie..
Is Stone making a valid comment about the exploitation of violence by the media, or is he the perfect example of the media exploiting violence to make a buck? Since his history does not exactly sceam "integrity", I have a hard time giving him bonus points for daring. Watching this film is simply depressing, and trying to pick through this for kernals of quality or deep thought is like picking through your dog's shit to try to find your wife's ring that he ate.
I get why you like it, but I think Stone could have made his points without making this such a horrific piece of cultural pornography. A 10.
winter, it's been 15 years, man! I was wondering if you'd seen this under the influence of something...I don't imagine that would be a good idea at all.
So, cory...did you like this movie or not? I enjoyed reading the dog shit analogy and love the words "horrific piece of cultural pornography."
And am I the only one who didn't know that Tarantino was involved with this? I must have known that at some point, but I apparently forgot it.
Another one I need to see again is 'U Turn' which I remember really liking when I saw it but now remember nothing about it. Should I wait until I can make it out to the great Northwest again so we three can watch it together?
Seeing how it was 1994 i'm sure a little doobowski was involved...
man, Jacob's Ladder scared the hell out of me in the theatre because of the wacky tobacky, as did Inland Empire... which I enjoyed a hell of a lot more on rewatch with a straight brain.
i think i can live w/out ever seeing U turn...
One of the garbage movies of the 1990's that has not only not aged well, but was total crap when it came out.
Look...the emperor has no clothes. Lets make a movie about how the media exploits things. WOW. Talk about a grandiose plan. How do we do this? We make the most exploitive, poorly put together piece of crap out there, insert a media character, and have that character think the violence all around him is a good thing, cause it gets him ratings.
Yeah, surgery with a sledgehammer.
Oliver Stone is the absolute worst person to make any social commentary, because he has no idea how to do it without flat out screaming what he thinks is wrong.
Its a dumb movie....made by a very dumb man, that is not worth anyones time to see.
I suppose that's a valid opinion.
I have to disagree about this being a waste of anyone's time though. That's got to be up to the person watching it, right?
How is this poorly assembled? I'm asking that because I think it's the only valid argument you're making here. Garbage, crap, dumb? Throwing that sort of language out almost makes it seem like you're flat out screaming what you think is wrong.
Post a Comment