What Is It?

2005 movie

Rating: n/r (Mark: n/r)

Plot: A snail murderer wrestles with himself.

According to the credits, "This film has not advocated the assassination of Steven Spielberg in any way."

My brother and I made the trip to Bloomington to see Crispin Glover again. He showed us slideshow versions of eight of his novels, showed this first movie of the "It" trilogy, and then verbosely sort-of answered some questions. He had a beard this time.

I love this man. I really do. I have a feeling that people think I'm just joking around when I go on and on about him, but I think he's a borderline genius and one of the most interesting of Hollywood people. Having said that, his performance in this is about the worst part of the movie. He and his hair (or possibly wig) are distracting, and being distracting in a movie like this is an impressive feat. So what kind of movie is this? It's oddball avant-garde, cheap but fanciful and full of ideas, and a lot of people are going to find it downright offensive. It takes place, from what I can tell, on at least three levels of consciousness, years before Leo and his special effects team did it in Inception. The cast is made up mostly of unintelligible actors who have Down's Syndrome. There are references to Shirley Temple and Nazis, sometimes at the same time. There are cheap puppet shows. One character, the one who tells us that he's Michael Jackson, is in blackface. One scene right after Crispin Glover's character--either Dueling Demi-God Auteur or The Young Inner Psyche and Id since he plays both--floats in with what has to be one of the best special effects I've ever seen features a Cabbage Patch Kid, the playing of a song that uses the no-no n-word and is mostly about how black people smell, and a naked black woman in a monkey mask manually pleasuring Steven C. Stewart, the guy with severe Cerebral Palsy who wrote and starred in the second film of the "It" trilogy. Yep, that's the kind of movie this is, and if you're not in the right place mentally to see any of that, you should stay away. As I've mentioned many times on this blog, I like my avant-garde or experimental films best when they're a little goofy or at least humorous, and I did find parts of this really funny although I stifled laughter because I didn't know how the woman sitting next to me felt about the whole thing. I mean, I already came in with the guy who had smelly hair, so I already had one strike against me.

I can't pretend to know exactly what this is (pun, I guess, intended) or what Glover is wanting to say, but it's a movie that sticks with you and makes you think which is one of the director's intended goals. It's far from a perfect movie and, in fact, appears to have been filmed in Crispin Glover's backyard or basement, but at the same time, it is unique and almost pretty special. My brother and I are refusing to rate the thing because we're a couple sissies. I neglected to ask everybody else in the theater.

By the way, this is now easily at the top of my list of "Best Shirley Temple Movies" right ahead of The Littlest Rebel.

FDR: American Badass!

2012 historical comedy

Rating: 7/20

Plot: Roosevelt fights Nazi werewolves, straight from the history books.

This movie has its moments, and Brian Bostwick and Ray Wise are good as the titular president and MacArthur respectively. Unfortunately, this thing is just so cheap. And I mean "cheap" in every single sense of the word. The effects are cheap--CGI explosions that I bet my son could make and pasted-on werewolf fur. The humor is cheap, a lot of dick jokes and polio jokes that are the sort of thing I hate the television show Family Guy for. And cheap puns. Marco Polio and a play on "debriefing" somebody. This was written by the guy behind that wiffleball movie  I watched earlier this year. Ross Patterson is his name, and he has a small part in this one, too. I think this guy's got some potential as both an actor and a writer, but he's got to learn to channel things and probably mature a bit. He's probably a little too South Park-inspired for his own good. He could also, of course, use a little more money to work with. There's a whole lot of ugliness here, definitely more than laughs. One scene probably typifies this most:

FDR has just had an affair in which his mistress squirted ketchup and mustard on his "tiny little polio legs" because, I guess, they resemble hot dogs. Eleanor pops in and says, "What the shit?" There's a bit of an argument which ends in Eleanor saying, "Tell them a rainbow took a shit on your legs." Now, I could be completely wrong. That might be historically accurate. Or it could just be completely tasteless. Either way, it makes me wonder why I watched this.

Captain America: The First Avenger

2011 history lesson

Rating: 15/20

Plot: It's the exact same plot as this movie actually.

Either I'm in a really good mood or Captain America: Full Sequence is the best of these pre-Avengers Marvel movies. As always, I went into this knowing nothing of the titular superhero. Like the rest of these superhero movies, this does a fine job of explaining Captain America's origins. It's a lot like the other superhero origin stories, but I really like how the protagonist becomes no more than a goofy propaganda symbol before he runs off doing remarkable things. And the makers of this really nail it with the stage shows and posters and things. They also nail 1940's America which looks stylized and cool, straight out of a comic maybe. The bad guys are the same ones in Raiders of the Lost Ark, Nazis with an interest in the occult, although there could have been a better bad guy than Red Skull Man. The special effects are mostly fine although there is a scene where Captain America, right after he gets his powers and starts dressing like a flag, runs in a way that makes Superman's running in the original Christopher Reeve movie look normal. It's the newly-Superheroed Rubbery Blubbery Leg Syndrome, I guess. I don't know much about Chris Evans, the guy who plays Mr. America here, but he also played Fire Man in the Fantastic Four movie. I'll have to watch that one, I suppose, just in case they're in the Avengers movie. Speaking of those guys. Fire Man, The Rock, Ice Surfer. Who else is there? But I digress. I liked Chris Evans as the hero here. I also liked Tommy Lee Jones who seems to do his best work when grumpy. This is the type of movie that a true patriot, such as myself, would have trouble not enjoying. I mean, watching this red white and blue guy sneaking around in such a dopey superhero costume with the most conspicuous prop ever? What's not to like there? How come I didn't read about any of this in my 8th grade American history class?

I was pretty sure that this contained some inaccuracies and thought I'd do a bit of research to get things right and not offend comic book aficionados who might stumble in and read this. So I looked up the bad guy's name. Red Skull really was his name! I just have to assume I'm right about the rest of this stuff, too.

Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid

1982 comedy

Rating: 13/20

Plot: A woman believes the death of her father, a noted scientist and cheesemaker, was murder and hires shamus Rigby Reardon for the case. He uncovers a bunch of mysterious goings-on, some which even make a little sense.

I have mixed feelings about this one because although director Carl Reiner has created it with a good understanding of the films he's spoofing and it really is a clever idea, it's just not very funny at all. The title is actually one of the funniest things about the movie, and I would definitely put this more in the "cute" or "clever" category than "hysterical." The dialogue that is created with characters from classic noir, Marlowe included, makes sense most of the time, but it just isn't funny. Aside from Bogart in, I think, three different movies, this plunders scenes from movies with shane-movies favorite Vincent Price, Charles Laughton, Cary Grant, Ingrid Bergman, Veronica Lake, Bette Davis, Alan Ladd, Barbara Stanwyck, Ray Milland, Ava Gardner, and Burt Lancaster. It's a clever idea even if none of it made me laugh. The best thing about it is how Edith Head, in what was apparently her final film, matched the costumes in this to the originals. I watched this while in the middle of a reading of Raymond Chandler's The Big Sleep, and I appreciated the nod to some of the language of that, especially the oft-goofy figurative language used by that author. Of course, I got the biggest kick out of the line "Start the whoopie machine" which I'm going to now preface all of my love-making, assuming I ever have sexual intercourse again, with. I also appreciated the allusion to my birthplace of Terre Haute, Indiana. Steve Martin poked fun at Terre Haute back in the day, but I can forgive him for that. He's really good as the centerpiece for this typically confusing noirish tale. His performance has just the right mix of goof and straight, and he's got the right face and build for a noir detective.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to start the whoopie machine. (Note: I am not really about to have sexual intercourse.)

Eating Raoul

1982 black comedy

Rating: 13/20

Plot: A boring and seemingly asexual married couple need some money to open up their dream restaurant. When they accidentally kill a swinger with a frying pan and find a wad of cash in his wallet, they get an idea to do that for a living. A friendly dominatrix and the titular swindler help them with their business.

There's a parade of perverts in this movie and think you've seen it all until the door swings open to reveal none other than Billy Curtis--my favorite little fellow--with a dog and a very funny voice. I'm sure this wasn't his proudest moment. Then again, the guy played Mayor McCheese, so maybe vanity wasn't a big deal for him. Paul Bartel, one of Corman's buddies, directed and starred in this. He looks a lot like Chris Elliott, something that probably made me like his character more. As a writer/director, it doesn't seem like Bartel's had a lot of interaction with actual people because the dialogue is awkward and silly. Maybe it's intentional. He gives it this off-50's sitcom texture with some corny music, the couple sleeping in a pair of twin-sized beds, and this general prosaic feeling. It reminds me in tone of Parents with a dash of A Bucket of Blood but it's too silly and not clever enough. I did pick up a line that I will likely use if I ever have sexual relations again: "Look out! Here comes the duke now!" Oh, and this is only the second movie that I'm aware of that uses the word "pendejo" (Do you know the other?), a word I used in class the other day and immediately regretted it since my Spanish-speaking students ooooh'd like I had just cursed. Anyway, this movie gets a big bonus point boost for the Billy Curtis cameo, but it's otherwise kind of a one-gag movie that in the end seems like just one huge joke with a punchline that's given away in the title. Should I have typed "spoiler alert" before telling you that?

The Producers

1968 comedy

Rating: 16/20

Plot: An accountant and a theater promoter come up with a can't-miss plan to swindle their way into riches by getting people to invest in a show guaranteed to be a flop--Springtime for Hitler. The plan does not go as expected.

It's Gene Wilder in the Unhinged Character Hollering Competition of his life! Good ol' Gene can get frantic, upset, and angry with the best of them, but flabby Zero Mostel as the producer and unlikely ladies' man, Kenneth Mars as the play's writer, and Dick Shawn as the titular dictator in the musical-within-a-movie all give him a run for his money. Watch Wilder going bonkers over his blue blanket, however, and you'll want to hand him an award of some kind. There are some classic moments and a lot of stuff that seems dated, but it's hard for me to see a room full of Hitlers practicing their saluting and not want to laugh. And remember, the fuhrer never said baby. That's all I have to say about this movie.

Dead Snow

2009 Nazi zombie movie

Rating: 11/20

Plot: Some medical students go on holiday (isn't that what it's called over there) to a cabin out in the middle of Norwayere. That last word is a portmanteau word--Norway and nowhere. I think I did a good job with it. Expect more portmanteau words as my confidence builds. A mysterious stranger stops by, warns them about Nazis, and then leaves. Then, as expected, Nazi zombies.

I think this will satisfy your desires if you get a hankerin' for some Nazi zombie action. I guess that's a sub-genre--Nazi zombie movies. I think I've only seen one other (Shock Waves), but it wouldn't shock wave me to learn that there were dozens more of these. I was just happy to see Norway again to be honest, but there's enough in this movie to keep it fun enough. It's not for the squeamish, however. Most of the movie is red blood and wrinkled gray on white snow, and there are some scenes where you get more red than gray or white. And disembodied body parts. And scenes where guys stitch up wounds in their necks while blood gloriously and noisily continues to spurt out. This alludes to Evil Dead, Brain Dead, Friday the 13th, Indiana Jones, and April Fools Day in ways that might be fun to fans of those films. It's also got a contender for line of the year when the stranger says, "If you stand with your intestines in your hand, will you know what to do?" Speaking of intestines, Nazi zombies seem to like them. The screenwriters must like them, too. Lots of intestine action, but nobody gets choked with his own intestines. I think I have a label for that. I'm not sure how I liked how these zombies moved. What I really didn't like about this were the clashing tones. This went from deadly serious with mutilation and head squishing to, after a pause, a terrible and ill-timed joke that made things too goofy, even for a Nazi zombie movie. I also hated the big scary music that was used throughout this thing. Sure, the big scary music probably made me jump a few times, but it was a detriment to the overall tone of the movie. This is good in chunks (pun probably intended), but it's a little uneven and just seemed to be missing something.

Watch on the Rhine

1943 movie

Rating: 15/20

Plot: Sara's been in away in Europe for eighteen years, presumably because her mother is really annoying. While away, she meets a troublemaker named Kurt and has three children who prove that "annoying" is something that runs in the family. They arrive in Washington for a visit, and a Romanian house guest, a guy who's staying with Sara's mother only because he knows there wouldn't be much of a movie without him, learns some of the family's secrets. He attempts to extract money. Oh, Bodo!

It's always interesting to me to see movies like this out of their context. It's a movie about Nazis and WWII, but it really only touches on the historical stuff lightly, and its themes of dedication, sacrifice, and tough decision making are still relevant today. Unfortunately, this is bogged down by what feel like 1940's movie cliches. You get that oh-no-she-didn't stock mother character used for comic effect. Her loud utterances probably had 1943 audiences' sides splitting. You get dialogue that feels painstakingly written, stagy. You get a romantic subplot tossed in, probably to add a bit of light to an otherwise dark ending. But really, the characters of David and Anise just aren't necessary in this thing. A rousing patriotic score that's just a little too much. And Watch on the Rhine has my biggest pet peeve of all--bad child acting! Now if it was just Joshua, the firstborn who speaks in this terrible accent, I could probably tolerate it. And the middle child, a daughter, is just a girl and doesn't get too many lines anyway. But the third child is intolerable. And his name is Bodo! Bodo! How director Herman Shumlin didn't recognize that Bodo, played by Julia Roberts' brother actually, just wasn't working is beyond me. Seems like a good director would have had Bodo fall off the train early in the movie.

Sara: Honey, have you seen Bodo?
Kurt: Yeah, Bodo fell off the train about a half hour ago.
Sara: What? And you didn't tell me about it? Aren't you concerned?
Kurt: C'mon, Sara. You've met Bodo.
Sara: You've got a good point there, Kurt.
Joshua: Mother? Father? We shall be ever so happy now that Bodo is no longer with us.
Kurt: Shut your pie hold, Joshua, or you're going to be the next to "fall" off this train.

Since Herman Shumlin wasn't able to recognize that Bodo didn't work, he was only allowed to direct one other movie, the only Hollywood director ever to be blacklisted because of a Bodo. Now Oscar-winner Paul Lukas is really good. His quiet brilliance emanates and actually makes Bette Davis into a better actress. He's got this quiet strength, this unspoken but palpable fatigue, and eventually a powerful resolution that makes him heroic in an unflashy way. There's no way this guy would have a child like Bodo. Bette Davis, sure, but not Paul Lukas.

Lifeboat

1944 Hitchcock movie

Rating: 16/20

Plot: A black guy, a nerdy guy, a guy who likes dancing, a guy who doesn't like to wear a shirt, a snobbish socialite, a young woman, and maybe a couple people I've forgotten about survive the sinking of their ship. Tension mounts when they pick up one of the Germans who torpedoed their ship. They debate what to do with their "prisoner" but soon realize they may have to rely on his expertise to save them from their predicament.

I was skimming a trivia page for Lifeboat and came across this nugget: Members of the crew noticed that Tallulah Bankhead was performing sans underwear and brought the issue to Uncle Alfred's attention. Hitchcock answered, probably while chewing on marbles, "I don't know if this is a matter for the costume department, makeup, or hairdressing." I told my wife this, and she asked (with that scrunched-up face she makes some times), "Are you putting that in the blog?" I said, "Of course!" She suggested I start writing cleaner and "get rid of the randiness." So that brings us to the first shane-movies poll of 2011! Please leave your answer(s) in the comments. Do you:

A) want less randiness
B) want a lot less randiness
C) want more randiness
D) want a whole lot more randiness, randiness of Mary Poppins proportions!
E) want nothing but randiness
F) want no randiness at all
G) want the exact same amount of randiness
H) want the same amount of randiness but desire some diversity in the randiness
I) have no problems with randiness as long as it's not too gross or read too close to dinner time
J) have problems even remembering any shane-movies randiness in previous entries
K) have no problem with randiness as long as it's in an entry about randy old Uncle Alfred's movies
L) just want me to write about the movies and not go on and on about randiness
M) want this to be the randiest blog in the history of the Internet
N) think I should start having give-aways like some blogs my wife reads


Quick note: Two movies in a row to start this year with a compound word for a title. Although I'm not sure Timecrimes is a real word.

The movie? Well, John Steinbeck wrote it, based on Hitchcock's idea, and Hitchcock directed it. For a 40's movie that takes place entirely in a boat (Hitchcock experimenting again with a one-setting movie), it sure manages to seem realistic. I like that Hitchcock wasn't afraid to take a tense situation and throw in some comic moments. There are a lot of characters for one lifeboat, and I wish they could have been developed more. This is the type of movie that forces the viewer to put themselves in the situation of its characters and imagine making the same choices though, and it is a story more about the situation than the individuals involved. I really liked Walter Slezak as the enigmatic German, always calculating and with motivations that don't entirely make sense to me. Odd ending, one that made me wonder if Hitchcock was messing with me. Speaking of the director, you've got to look close for his trademark cameo, but it's a clever one.