Reflections of Evil

2002 movie

Rating: 16/20

Plot: A bulbous guy named Bob unsuccessfully sells watches on the street and frequently engages in shouting matches with fellow pedestrians. He wanders a sort of purgatory. Meanwhile, his sister Julie, a girl who died from a drug overdose a long time ago, searches for him in an attempt to save him from a sugar addiction.

Damon Packard wrote, directed, and starred in this stunningly original piece that I'd like to label "outsider art" if it wasn't so aware. If I understand the story correctly, Packard spent an inheritance to make this movie which I think is about Hollywood, Hollywood's affect on our psyches, human beings' inabilities to get along with each other, human beings' inabilities to get along with themselves, overindulgence, paranoia, the role that media plays in our lives, and probably countless other things; made about 25,000 dvd copies; and sent them to celebrities. It reminds me of what the Residents did with their "Santa Dog" single although if Packard sent one of these to Richard Nixon, he was probably too late.  Their reactions were collected on his website which doesn't seem to exist anymore. Unfortunately, I can't find any of those. The movie is a real treat for oddballs like me with the right sensibilities. It's a collision of nightmarish, horrifying imagery and hilarity that you don't see much outside of David Lynch's stuff. Things start with low-budget shots of a wandering spirit in a ghostly-white nightgown, shots ultra-eerie or mysterious because they are low-budget ones. The after-school special music gives this a weird 70's vibe. Then, the onslaught begins. Off sound-effects, voices obvious and comically dubbed with actors who had no idea that they were actors in a movie, an extended vomiting scene that is probably about six times longer than it actually needs to be, warping effects, characters shouting like they have Tourette's, sound effects from other worlds, drug-dazed horrors. The style's unique, and the results are very funny while managing to seep into your skin a little and reach parts of the soul that you're not usually aware of when watching a movie. There's a redundancy to the proceedings and a cheap experimental flavor that will turn off most people who like "real" movies. I want to make it clear that this is not a movie for everybody, but more adventurous cinephiles will discover a lot of beauty in all this ugliness. I know nothing about Damon Packard, and this is the only movie of his that I've seen. I suspect he's a very cynical individual, but he finds some humor in all these aspects of society that he doesn't like very much. A lot of the voices put to some of these "characters" made me laugh, and I loved one of his sister's lines: [Spoiler Alert!] "You died on the E.T. Adventure in 1984 from a sugar overdose." The hilarious behind-the-scenes reenactment of what seems to be a Steven Spielberg shoot also made me laugh, almost uncontrollably. Best of all? Amidst a lot of chaos filmed (illegally) at Universal Studios: A Klaus Kinski ride. Just let those three words sink in a little bit. Klaus Kinski ride. Just thinking about it makes me want to throw a monkey across the room.

Spanking the Monkey

1994 movie that doesn't even have a monkey

Rating: 10/20

Plot: Some kid with 90s hair has an internship all set up but instead has to go back home to take care of his recently-injured mother because his dad is a traveling salesman. The dog keeps distracting him while he's trying to masturbate, and he's not having much luck at all with the neighbor gal. Luckily for him, his mother's a lot of fun to hang out with.

The box, imdb.com, and the above poster make this seem like it's supposed to be a comedy. It was definitely more disturbing than funny, and the indie-film quality somehow succeeded in making it all seem much, much creepier than it was supposed to be. There's a big shocking payoff in the late-middle part of the movie, and although I liked how it was filmed--well, maybe it should have been a lot less tasteful--when it happened, it really doesn't inspire anything but shrugs. The actors all perform as if they're either really sleepy or maybe hypnotized. Scenes with main character Raymond's friends not only seemed extraneous but interrupted the storytelling. This movie seemed much longer than it actually was. It's really unfortunate that there wasn't a monkey in this movie.

Christmas on Mars

2008 psychedelic Christmas movie

Rating: 10/20

Plot: A space station floats above Mars on Christmas Eve. Things aren't going well on the space station--supplies are running low, morale is low, there's a bit of cabin fever, and the guy hired to dress up as Santa Claus has gone crazy and committed suicide. They take on a guest, a mute alien, and try to avoid catastrophe.

To say this isn't for everybody is an understatement. It'll attract a certain crowd though--people with a good supply of hallucinogens and holiday cheer. I was impressed with the shoestring budget set design. This was made over an eight year period in the backyard of Flaming Lips' frontman Wayne Coyne. It's definitely a case where the creative minds involve manage to overcome the problem of limited finances to put together some visuals that are really cool. A lot of the sets were put together seemingly with dollar store purchases and household appliances. The pacing is very deliberate, the story is freaky, and the effects are trippy-dippy. Shades of Solaris are within, but this reminded me a whole lot of The American Astronaut and Dark Star. With some Eraserhead mixed in. And maybe a pinch of It's a Wonderful Life. Some of this was pretty funny and a lot of this was really pretty, but there was really nothing to latch on to. The acting is also about as bad as acting gets, and the characters don't have enough substance to make them matter. The dialogue is really poorly written, clunky and unnatural. There are definitely way too many words in this; it would have been a lot better if it had as many as 2001. This is a movie that is fun because it doesn't take itself seriously at all while at the same time being a movie that would have benefited from taking itself a little more seriously.

Bonus points awarded for a scene with a marching band that had female genitalia for heads.

Slacker

1991 movie

Rating: 17/20

Plot: A day in the life of Austin's lunatic fringe. Should Have Stayed at Bus Station, Grocery Grabber of Death's Bounty, Hit-and-Run Son, Espresso Czar/Masonic Malcontent, Dostoyevsky Wannabe, Been on the Moon Since the 50's, Tura Satana Look-Alike, Comb Game and Sadistic Comb Game Players, Pap Smear Pusher, Sidewalk Psychic, Happy-Go-Lucky Guy, Traumatized Yacht Owner, Recluse in Bathrobe, Guy Who Tosses Typewriter, 'Conspiracy A-Go-Go' Author, Hitchiker Awaiting 'True Call,' Old Anarchist, Teacup Sculpter, Scooby Doo Philosopher, Papa Smurf, Bike Rider with Nice Shoes, Handstamping Arm Licker, Dairy Queen Photographer, Old Man Recording Thoughts, Day Tripper, and dozens of others wander, interact, and philosophize.

This movie has such a unique rhythm and flow that I'll admit isn't for everybody, but if you just allow yourself to float with the current, it's a treat. Definitely an experience as the rules of cinema are completely trashed. It's metaphysical comic pages, sleepy koans, and scrambled haiku, and you can wait for a central character, search for a central theme, or try to follow a plot, but it ain't gonna happen. Ideas, ideas, ideas! They come in sketches and jabs, and I'm not really sure they all fit together and add up to anything, but that's not the point. I think this works as one of the most insightful and humorous glimpses at the minds of human beings in film history. Linklater's camera is a completely objective one, and the characters stick around until they're finished sticking around and then wander out of the motion picture never to be seen again. The approach--filming snippets of characters and then passing the baton to another character or set of characters who have wandered on screen--never gets tiresome, but I sort of wish it was all real time. There's some amazing acting considering nobody in the film is an actor, and the dialogue, on which the actors collaborated, just seems fresh and is quotable and humorous. What's really cool about the movie is that you could close your eyes, reach in and grab a random character, and probably find enough in that character to make devote ninety minutes to. Slacker is probably too weird to be an instant classic or a voice for Generation X or anything like that, but I can't imagine many people watching this and not enjoying at least parts of it. Different viewers will definitely feel connected to different scenes and have different favorite characters. This is also the type of movie that will change every time you see it.

Great World of Sound

2007 dramedy

Rating: 14/20

Plot: Martin gets a job as a music producer, a sort-of talent scout in charge of locating prospective artists and getting them to fork over some money in exchange for some time in the studio. If it sounds like a shady operation, that's because it is. Clarence, a father of six, is simultaneously hired and trained by Shank (yeah, that sounds like the name of an honest businessman) and becomes Martin's partner. They travel to Birmingham, Louisville, Nashville, and Indianapolis to discover new talents, and even though they make a pretty good team, Martin's conscience starts to get in the way.

I spent much of the movie wondering how the scenes with the "try-outs" (there are lots of them, maybe even too many) looked so natural. I'm guessing the performances were real and the lines from the two leads were improvised. At least two of the auditions had to be written and staged, but the others were surely from actual aspiring musicians/singers who answered some sort of ad. Lots of subtle humor in this, but there's also a heart to the film. As the drama unfolds, it's almost impossible not to empathize with Martin as he struggles with his new job and his relationships. The movie's far from perfect and really falls apart at the end, but I do like the actors who play Martin and especially Clarence a lot and think it's a promising start to Craig Zobel's career as a filmmaker. Unlike with Brown Bunny, I didn't recognize Indianapolis in this one.

Killer of Sheep

1977 urban drama

Rating: 16/20

Plot: An African American family (once known as a black family) fights against dissatisfaction and negative influences in 1970's Los Angeles.

An independent strike against blaxploitation, Killer of Sheep boasts a complete lack of anything even remotely fancy (or even professional). Almost entirely style free in a way that makes it all seem stylish, director Burnett filmed this as his thesis using unprofessional actors and a loose, episodic structure. The result is realistic, not realistic in that Hollywood way where there's ultimately redemption or an ultra-sad scene at the end but closer to a kind of photorealism. It's not a documentary, but it really might as well be. Some troubling scenes depict meanness, ennui, laze, and the unbearable heaviness of a decaying life--brother and dog-faced sister, numerous slaughterhouse scenes, depressingly dropped engines. I love the implied connections between what the kids are doing (throwing rocks at each other, dangerously leaping from building to building, tossing dirt on clean clothes seconds after hung on a clothesline) and the actions of the adults. There's a harsh poetry to this movie that allows you to ignore the rough and scarred exterior (it's got to be one of the cheapest movies ever made), including an "actress" who gives what is without a doubt the worst performance ever. A murky and honest slice of life that I think I like more the more I think about it.

White man, rarely jumping:

Zen Noir

2004 murder mystery

Rating: 7/20

Plot: A nameless detective still mourning the loss of his wife gets a phone call about a murder taking place at a temple. He eventually locates a Buddhist temple only to find that those within are really uncooperative. They tease him with tea and keep waving oranges at him. As he struggles to get details about the case, he begins to unravel personal mysteries. He also falls for a bald woman.

Points for effort, I guess. The cross-pollination of noir film elements with Eastern philosophy is something that could have possibly worked well. Unfortunately, I don't think the noir or the Zen was done particularly well. I'm not 100% sure of the intent, but I don't think this was supposed to badly parody both of them. The whole movie, which seemed twice as long as it actually was, had the appearance of one really long joke that doesn't end up having a punchline. There are moments, but the bulk of the film's just little jokey sketches or random philosophical moments that don't add up to anything substantial. Like Zen slapstick mixed with Hallmark philosophy directed by somebody who wants to be the next David Lynch and create the next Full House at the same time. Artificial, unfinished, ugly, nauseating, and pretentious. My one hand was definitely not clapping. Heck, I almost walked out of my living room halfway through this one.

Enlightened:

Blast of Silence

1961 crime drama

Rating: 16/20

Plot: A hit man is born. He leaves Cleveland for a job in New York during the Christmas season because, as we all know, that is the most ironic time of the year to be hired to kill somebody. After finishing some preliminary stalking (and sulking), he's left with nothing to do but wander the streets and go to really lame parties with squares where he's forced into competitions involving pushing peanuts across the room with his nose. He tries to get some and fails. Circumstances cause him to rethink his life and occupation.

Very solid, stylish hit man story with a noir-ish elements and cheap but very good direction. I'm not generally a fan of narration (Sunset Boulevard being an exception because the narrator has died), but this one uses a second-person point of view that gets you inside the head of the protagonist. That and the fact that the protagonist is in every single scene drags you along through the melancholy streets of the big city and forces you to descend into hell right along with him. A good tight script reminiscent of a really watered-down Sin City. The opening and closing shots are really powerful, bookending the succinct tragedy in between. Life, we're reminded, isn't very good. And by the way, that scene with the peanut race is one of the silliest missteps I've ever seen in a movie. What the hell?

Here I am with my trigger thumb:

Faces

1968 drama

Rating: 16/20

Plot: Wealthy married couple Richard and Jeanie laugh and gossip and laugh and tease and laugh and don't laugh. Richard falls for a prostitute, and after Jeanie fails to laugh at his lame jokes, announces that he wants a divorce. Jeanie goes clubbing with her other middle-aged friends and seduced by a younger man named Chet. Drunken stupors and much tomfoolery abound as lives threaten to fall completely apart.

I really thought I was going to have trouble getting through this after the first thirty minutes. Indeed, there are moments when scenes or conversations in this almost entirely dialogue-driven drama seem like they're going on far too long. When I really think about it though, any word taken out of this would disrupt the ultra-real and exceptionally natural tension created in these extended moments between the characters. Words pile upon words until a single line (always a single line) is just too much for a character to take. Snap! This acting is among the best I've ever seen, and the way Cassavetes shoots close-ups of the characters' faces, it forces you to concentrate to the point where it feels like you're about to see their souls. I've not seen anything else like this; in description, it doesn't seem like there's enough to sustain interest, but the characters become so real and the tension created is so dense that it's impossible not to let the thing absorb you. It feels almost like a play, but one where you get to leave your seat and walk around on stage and stroke the characters. The final shots involving a staircase are so lackadaisically moving. Gripping stuff.

Recommended (director, at least) by Winter Rates.

Here I am watching one of the five Cassavetes movie included in a box set:

Buffalo 66

1998 dramatic comedy

Rating: 16/20

Plot: Billy Brown, an exceptional bowler with a pair of fancy red shoes, makes an ill-advised bet on a Superbowl game and loses money he doesn't actually have. To pay off the debt, he pleads guilty to a crime he didn't commit and spends five years in the slammer. Upon his release, he decides to see his folks, and he kidnaps a young dance student to pose as his wife to take to their house. They're impressed! His real plans for the evening, however, involve murder-suicide as he plots to shoot the field goal kicker who ruined his life.

With only one exception, movies with bowling can't be bad. Another one-man show (Gallo stars, scores, and directs), at least partially autobiographical. Not sure which part that would be though. I was surprised at how emotionally connected I was despite really hating the protagonist for the first half of the movie. That protagonist turned out to be such a complex figure, however, and in the end was almost impossible not to like. I especially liked Christina Ricci in this (especially in a scene involving one of those novelty picture-taking booths), and I don't normally like her too much. To me, this had a Jarmusch feel, especially in the dialogue and in the unnatural ways that almost all of the characters (all but the doughnut guy) act, but that might just be because of similar budgets. Nearly teared up.

Note: 2nd best 1998 movie that Ben Gazzara acted in.

Here I am, reminiscing about the time when I nearly bowled a perfect game but ended up with a score of 136 instead:

The Edukators

2004

Rating: 11/20

Plot: Three pretentious revolutionaries show their disgust for capitalism by breaking into the homes of the rich, rearranging all of the furniture and decor without stealing anything, and leaving a note saying "Your days of plenty are numbered." Their relationships become strained when one break-in leads to a kidnapping.

Aside from misspelling the title of the movie, this started out fine with security shots of one of those horrible rich family's homes before the aforementioned horrible rich family arrives home to discover that their stuff has been shuffled. The interior shots of staked chairs and porcelain figurines in the toilet, almost like dadaist art, are funny. From there, unfortunately, it's downhill. A bloated movie with dialogue that felt like it was being delivered from a pulpit instead of from characters in a film. I enjoyed the parts of the movie that were about the relationships of the three characters, even when those become a bit convoluted, but all the "We say we want a revolution, well, you know, we all want to change the world" stuff was pretty draining. None of the characters grew on me although I did think two of them were really attractive. The direction was too modern and too sure of itself, but there's some beautiful nature happening (and it's shot very well) when they retreat to one of the character's uncle's cabins. With a softer hand, this could have bordered on great.

Note: Apparently an American remake of this is planned.

I survived an unfortunate spoon-to-the-eye mishap and made it to the end of this lengthy film:

Sure Fire

1993 Independent movie directed by Jon Jost


Rating: 13/20


Plot: A businessman has big plans to get folks to move from hectic California and Arizona big city lives to the calming comforts of Southern Utah. He talks a lot. Then his friends and family have extended monologues and dialogues. There's a hunting trip, and things happen. Bible verses flash across the screen. A child jumps on a trampoline, and there are trees.


The main problem with stylistic films like this one, especially low-budget stylistic films, is that if the audience is annoyed by the style, nothing in it will seem to work. And Sure Fire is almost jarringly stylistic. There are really really long dialogues and monologues (I think...other characters are present, but it seems as if the characters are thinking outloud) and sustained shots of the Utah landscape and of roads. The dialogue which drives the character development is shot strangely--a patient camera focuses on unflinching characters as they have extended, mostly one-sided conversations. It's weird, and along with the minimal guitar score and stark setting create a foreboding, haunting mood.


I enjoyed Tom Blair's intense performance as Wes, the entrepreneur at the center of the movie, and the director's ability to create such a powerful mood with subtle tricks, a camera, a sound guy, and snippets of detached dialogue that seemingly had little to do with anything. However, the plot seems to slip into a forced denouement that I had trouble buying and the storytelling made it difficult to make personal connection. It was an 83 minute movie that should have been like a haiku--every word and shot vital to the story. Instead, about half of the film was disposable, and although it's poetic and uncomfortable and moody and occasionally beautiful, it never really works completely.

Here I am watching Sure Fire in my bed: