Yup, still fun, and quite a good premise, if a little dated effects wise, and occasional shonky acting.
But ye Gods! ...Look at that cast!!!
(I got, what I assume to be the first issue of this on DVD from Amazon second hand, and it is not the greatest print, and while the aspect ratio is given as 4:3 on the packaging, it was still a little squashed in the preview page when I ripped it in Handbrake... went to 5:4 or thereabouts to rectify it.)
It does reek of: film-makers who know what they are doing, but are on a very limited budget, in terms of production design, sets, and affects... But overcome this by use of carefully selected locations, use of lighting to create mood and atmosphere, using the camera well, and most tellingly, the: "Don't show too much of the creature" choice, which works well, as even when you do finally see it, it is fleetingly, and selectively shot (Great, in that they basically borrowed the design wholesale from Alien's Xenomorph)
But a very short hour and a half movie, that jumps straight in to the action, wasting no time with set-up, electing instead, to tell bits and pieces of back story as it goes.
...And so it is, we jump straight in with Rutger Hauer's broken obsessive hard-bitten loose cannon cop going into a nightclub to stop an apparently deranged serial killer from striking again - one that he has been tracking ever since the killer murdered his partner.
Regarded as a nutcase in his police department, he is saddled with an Academic type, fresh faced policeman as partner, who shadows him as he hunts down the maniac in question.
...So you have the old stereotype maverick cop with a past, joined by the stereotypical nerd as great juxtaposition of character types, for stereotypical "odd couple" buddy cop set up.
It transpires that the killer may not be entirely human, but rather something (inexplicably, and unexplained) thrown up from the largely flooded London city scape, submerged (quite astute in the foresight here, given when the movie was made!) in the risings from the sewers.
It's incredible how many people you know and recognise in this, given how cheap the production seems, and maybe the climax is let down somewhat by some less than spectacular effects, but it is short-ish, rattles along for the most part at a very brisk tempo until then.
...And with a quite light and snappy use of humorous dialogue (A little overdone at times, and preposterous) and script writing, makes for a fairly enjoyable hour and a half for those who like fairly cheapo sci-fi / horror flicks.
I like to find these titles on DVD when I can, in the charity shop...
(Although I have caved in a little recently and got a couple of titles used and cheap from Amazon, which I haven't seen in donkey's ear, and which I will be writing something about when I have set aside some time to watch: Slipstream, and Split Second (Rutger one).
All I remember is the quite sparky, energetic vibe around Billy Crystal and Gregory Hines, but with a dramatic climax, and good atmosphere to it.
Rated 9/10A very tough watch, and not one to watch for enjoyment, or entertainment's sake, but a very important film to see, concerning the issues of rape, and in particular, being believed within the justice system.
The rape scene itself is very difficult to look at - be warned.
In fact, take away the light, bubbly, witty satire of Mean Girls, and instead, go angsty, a whole lot darker, and disturbed, and you essentially have the same story...
New girl at school falls in with three friends in their own clique, in who's company she at first finds comradeship, before they become the enemy, from who's company she must seek to extricate herself, for the sake of self preservation.
Indeed, the more I think of it, the more remarkably similar the story seems!
(Surely Tina Fey and Co. were merely "Inspired" by this?)
And aside from the witchy business, replacing the mall-Barbie aesthetic, and better clothes in place of the festival of valley girl chic, there is not much here to choose between them.
(If, indeed, you see a difference in the first place :)
But this film also oozes nineties feel movie too, in how it looks, acts and moves.
A well chosen soundtrack of passable covers of well known classic songs (Some surprisingly good choices too!)
Slotted nicely into the kind of vibe of the time that gave us movies like The Faculty, and the Almost-Eventually-Final Destination- franchise.... thing.
Having not seen it in a good few years, I wondered how well it would hold up, and pleased to say it fairs quite well, albeit the darker elements / themes of the story seem more prominent now to me (perhaps, more relevant than ever?), and it is a very enjoyable movie.
Would good for fans of Mean Girls, goths, and also fans of nineties movies in general.
Not seen this almost totally forgotten gem in ages (probably since the time of release), but would like to, as my memory of it is as one of the most materially and visually stunning and at the same time, disturbing movies I've seen.
(I still have the bit with the horse in dreamworld burned into my brain!)
Probably time for this to get some love and appreciation again?
Rated 9/10Turns out they do make 'em like this anymore!
Good heavens!
(Thought I) after having watched this:
"Film-makers are actually still capable of making a real movie!"
For this is nothing less than a work of cinematic art... From the incredible cinematography, the sublime soundtrack mix of easy, lo-fi jazz and cello based classical mood pieces, through the tight an thoughtful stage-play style screenplay, with excellent dialogue delivered very naturalistically by the entire Oscar worthy cast, right down to the subtle camera movements, editing, and the need not to smash the audience over the head with statements about society or as a platform for "activism", despite it's subject matter.
It assumes an intelligence in the viewer, and a certain familiarity with it's themes, but concentrates entirely on the characters, and their interactions, which conspire to create the story:
Here, the story of a young woman who has become pregnant by her childhood sweetheart, and the family drama that ensues when her own family must be informed, as well as her boyfriend's family.
This though, is further complicated by the fact that the boyfriend has been convicted on the suspicion of rape, so she is coping with all this, as the film follows her through a chronological narrative, interspersed with flash backs, all expertly interwoven in a wonderful, seamless mosaic.
The civil rights issues, only serve as a backdrop against which the personal, and very human drama takes place. We can see the issues at hand, and don't need a neon sign style expositions of them, instead, they have bearing only in how they affect the two young lovers, and their soon to be family.
The whole thing just tells this personal tale, as a portrait of the two, and specifically, from her point of view, as the brief overlaid narrations she provides tie the thing together, as the whole movie moves as one perfectly realised whole, gently, easily, and artfully through this juncture of their lives.
I've already used the words: Art, and artful. but could also use the words: Beautiful, poetic, balanced, poignant, thought-provoking, tender, sensitive (at times funny), as well as tragic, sad, and sombre.
Rated 7/10Wow, and indeed, at the same time.... Oh no.
Having mentioned just the other day, how The Matrix sequels really annoyed my by being split on a cliff hanger... this does exactly the same!
Except, with respect, it was marketed this way from the outset, so I knew it was coming.
(Glad I didn't watch it in the cinema for this reason, therefore - I really do resent it, cinema not being the place for TV soap style cliff-hangers in my opinion: "Tune in next year to find out what happens next...." Grrrrrrrr)
But also, I see what they did with this, in order to up the ante: as if the first film was akin to a comic book, excellently paced, well tied up, and perfectly self-contained, this has ambitions to be the equivalent of a graphic novel, in terms of scope, and scale, and so requires the two parts.
That said, the action is frantic, and a blizzard of new characters, action and... stuff, happens all at once, a lot more hectic than the original, so that it's difficult to keep up with, and then you have these other, dramatic moments that, in direct contrast to this, grind proceedings almost to a halt - the personal dramatic moments go on too long - dramatic pauses etc,
Some scenes, and indeed, the art-work / production design are a clear step up even from the original (did not think that was possible!), but this is altogether a more "involved" affair, whereas the casual viewer can enjoy the first, this goes a little bit more into comic fan "lore" land, which may lose a lot of this audience.
If you are into it to this degree, you'll probably like this even more, but if, like me, you are only a casual comic book movie fan, but more of a general movie fan, this won't be as good as the original... just by a shade or two.
The first, beyond the comic book nature of the film, was just good movie making, and story telling in general, this lacks somewhat in this regard, and so is more of a Comic-Con fanbase movie.
But, I will dutifully await the next one, I suppose, and resign myself to the fact that, along with this, and Everything Everywhere, All At Once, this is how movie are going to be from now on, rather than a fresh, exciting, and original experiment, everyone is going to jump on this band wagon, of nutty, frenetic story splat, story telling, which will inevitably become the contrary: Same-y, bland, and unoriginal.
But this was enjoyable, and worth watching for all that.
There are two basic associations to be made in connection with this movie, in order to convey what it is about:
One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, and A Clockwork Orange.
(Not bad company to keep, I'd say!)
But this is basically a three man stage play (with a couple of other peripheral characters), about a troubled soldier, who gets arrested for acting on his mental disturbances, one night, and finds himself farmed off to a country mansion to be experimented on by a Doctor, in order to "fix" him, under the auspices of the military, as part of an experimental project.
He is interred with an equally troubled room mate: also ex-soldier: Ronny Cox...
(Who's wild, brash, charismatic character basically steals the show)
And it's essentially a "talky" movie, which feels like it exists somewhere between the flower power sixties and the seventies, in terms of tone, and subject.
The obvious theme is a direct allusion to the Nazi experimental programmes, and the ideas of free will, and person-hood.
There's a disturbing rape scene, the consequence of the situation acting on Cox's already disturbed mind, but thankfully, this calls things for what they are, which contrary to modern popular belief, doesn't fall into that idea that people back then didn't realize what things were, or think of them other than the crimes they are - "It was a different time..." etc.
...No. this is proof to the contrary.
A weird, sixties "Groovy" soundtrack tune at the beginning, and a little later, quite an intriguing Tangerine Dream style tune... But other than this, it is a fairly flat out, stage play style drama, rather than a "movie", so to speak.
The three central actors here all give very strong performances, that essentially carry the show:
Joss Ackland's doctor, and the two inmates: Walken and Cox.
The only other point of note is the many names this seems to go by for some reason:
As mentioned in notes, as well as: The Happiness Cage, and as the title screen shows: The Mind Snatchers, it also seems to go by just: Mind Snatchers, and indeed, on the packaging of the DVD I watched this from: Mind Snatcher.
Still can't adequately explain just how pissed off I was at the end of this in the cinema, seeing the words:
"To be concluded" on the screen!
What!!!
(thinks I):
"...is this a F*&£ing tv show!?!"
I just paid full price for a cinema ticket, and you can't even bring this "movie" to anything like a self contained conclusion, even if you have another instalment in mind?
Bad film-making!
So now I'm having to "tune in next week" after this cliff-hanger for yet another full price cinema ticket top find out what happens... a disturbing trend to set, I thought.
Also explains why this, and the cartoonish over indulgent next one largely suck... and further pale in comparison to the first / original movie, which is brilliant.
This would have been better on TV, not the cinema screen.
There was always something bleak and forbidding about this movie, that put me off watching it from the moment of it's release; Aware of course, of all the buzz and hype surrounding it since that time, I still couldn't get myself into wanting to watch it, as it seemed like a drab, pretentious, arty Merchant / Ivory piece, except set in some miserable wasteland.
...Still, thirty years later, the right mood finally stuck, and I thought: "Why the hell not?"
(I was at a loose end, and it was either this, or the prospect of watching some of those awful housewife "humans" on tv, so I rolled the dice)
Very glad I did, as it seems, to some extent, the promotion and ads mis-sell it somewhat, giving the kind of impressions I stated above....
...Instead, I found this to be quite a magical movie - not sure if I'd go so far as to call it one of those "Magical Realism" stories, but it does have very quirky elements, and a slight tone that could come from a Grimm fairy tale, and plays out like a parable of yore.
What it's a parable of (And I think I still need some getting of my head around, and into it yet), is a woman's voice; That is, more accurately rendered, the voice of woman, and the personal empowerment that proceeds from that, as seen through the eyes of a particular woman.
Opening with Holly Hunter's: Ada, having been married to a man the other side of the world, In New Zealand, and essentially "mailed off" to him on on a long sea voyage, with her daughter from a previous partnership, she carries with this most precious, and personal object - her piano - to express herself, or better yet, communicate with herself...
(In the sense, that her playing of the piano is a sort of personal communion between her and her own soul)
...In a world where she, being woman in this time, is not master of her own destiny.
For she is also mute, as the voice of a child, which is her own internal voice, states in a brief voice over at beginning (and end) informs us is for no real biological or physical reason yet at the same time, not really a matter of choice... she just is.
Her daughter interprets for her, when not at the Piano, which, being left on the harsh weathered beach at their arrival, seems to be, of course, a symbol of her current state - the men refuse to help her take it to her new home.
Of course, her new "master" / husband, in the shape of Sam Neil's: Stewart is a very uptight guy with a very conventionally colonial sense of Victorian propriety, and won't have it in the house, it seems, but agrees to swap it with Harvey Keitel's: Baines, a subordinate "Scottish" (his accent is pretty ropey, alas :) servant of his, who brings it in to his own home, with the intention of drawing Ada over, and perhaps getting to know her a little better than he oughta - crumbs.
A very sensitive, and soft seduction then ensues by degrees, and of course you feel this moving inexorably towards a tragic conclusion, the unempowered / unheard woman caught between her duties to her Husband, and the man she comes to love.
There will be tears before bed-time.
All of which, as I said, could be a very melodramatic, grim story in the telling, especially, as the underlying theme is fundamentally, of course, feminist story, which could get very... er,,, over earnest, and so forth, but, I must repeat: In giving just the right amount of fairy-tale and a sense of the magical, in being framed as a parable, it all actually adds up to a very engaging, engrossing, watch - compulsive viewing, with a wonderful slightly magical air.
Really enjoyed it actually... and would probably watch it again, as it certainly makes you think about the underlying meanings to the symbolic aspects of the movie, and what they say about the world.
At the time, it felt way off the map in terms of future predictions, as, having no existing tech that could make anything like this remotely possible (V.R. being a blisteringly new concept), and so, firmly in the fantastical, and therefore, nonsensical end of sci-fi - odd.
And the visuals were at the still early stages of CGI (proper - not counting visual "effects" and simple block rendered graphics such as Tron), so the CGI animation has really badly dated now.
However, the underlying story, written by Stephen King, holds up, probably even more as time goes by:
Modern Techy equivalent of "mad scientist" type Pierce Brosnan, fumbles around the mind of local simpleton (And Lawnmower Man) Jeff Fahey' Jobe, as he navigates his brain in a virtual reality space, and jiggers, pokes, and prods with it through this method, in order to see if he can make Jobe smarter, by reconfiguring his noodle.
He does.
...He regrets it.
Though not a fan of such suggestions, this could probably do with a remake, bringing to bear all that has been learned since, technology wise, as well as in terms of brain science :)
(Sorry for using such big wordy speakage from thew world of frowny thinkery!)
Still has it's own charms, and points of interest, in spite of everything.
Another movie that would serve very well as a double header with this movie, of about the same time was one I recall with a young Russell Crowe, and Denzel Washington, called: Virtuosity.
Rated 5/10Escape from New York is, of course, a timeless classic. This, however, is a cheap looking and feeling "Hollywood" version of a John Carpenter film.
Like John Carpenter, minus the Carpenter-isms.
Clunky, paint by numbers cash in on Escape from New York's cult status.
Rated 7/10Firmly in the "Guilty Pleasure" category for me...
..The absolute apex of over the top Eighties-max action / comedy star vehicle era.
Corny, cheesy, Crash, Bang, Wallop, lots of ridiculous action sequences, with improbable technology (The car :)...
Cheesy eighties action one liners (looking back, quite psychotic given you've just killed somebody, that you deliver a punch-line! :)...
Jack Pallance doing his ultimate bad-guy thing, (James Hong is in it too, as a minor baddie), Brion James giving a truly terrible performance as a "cockney" villain (but it is magnificent in it's awfulness!), Terry Hatcher, because... well, why not?!!!, and all redeemed by the presence of the man... the dude... that is: Kurt Russell.
I skipped school with some chums to see this at the cinema.
Pleased to report that all said teenagers went home happy :)
...A blockbuster rental on release for me on a slow week, and pretty much forgotten now, but it is, as I recall, another based on a Philip K. Dick short story, and of course, starring Peter Weller, so both of those things to recommend it.
I'd like to see it again now, to see if it is as good as I remember.
As I recall it, two warring factions of humans on another planet, have fought each other to stand still, and have abandoned some place or other, but left automated killing machines like mines all over the place, and Weller and co. are sent to investigate a mystery without getting minced in the process.
It's like a Phantasm crossed with a low budget pre-cursor to Starship Troopers, minus the Verhoven "humour".
I think I may have attempted to start watching Doom, but got bored, as it was a "Hollywood" idea of what a game conversion should be / star vehicle.
(to be honest, I haven't played a video game though, since PS1 days... it all started to get too: "real" looking, whereas I preferred the charm of low-bit graphics games, that looked like games, and didn't try to look real-world-y. - Original GTA was hillarious and cartoonish... later ones self indulgent and disturbing incel fodder to me... do not understand modern gaming culture at all, and have no desire to do so either! :)
In fact, there's plenty of other movies and other stuff that could be mentioned in attempting to convey a sense of, and characterise this absolutely batshit crazy movie... so here goes:
It's like a live action, first person shooter sci-fi video game (the gimmick), which moves frenetically with the adrenalin charge of Crank, with a dash of Robocop (has a very strong whiff of Verhoven style humour), emitting a Saw like grim / gross graphic disturbing horror aesthetic, along with a Grand Theft Auto style irreverent humour, and all mixed up in a live action manga blender, to produce a nutty, almost relentless John Wick style smoothie.
Phew!
...And believe me... "Phew!" is is how you feel after watching this absolute banger of a movie.
It's taken me almost two years to get around to watching this, on account of I didn't have a blu-ray player, buy found the blu-ray disc at a bootfair last year (I am both cheap... and poor, and if I wasn't poor, I'd still be cheap! :) - finally found a player in the charity shop few weeks back for £2, and set it up, and watched last night - yay!
...During this time, I'd read many a disparaging review that seemed merely to dismiss this as a novelty item, based on the one gimmick, it ostensibly has: The first person shooter, video game idea, which many surely had thought to try sooner or later, but maybe abandoned it themselves due to it being a pretty thin idea on it's own (A fact that critics seemed to hone in on), which you would soon get tired of.
And they are right.
Except, this has a whole lot more going for it, which seems to have been overlooked, or ignored...
...Principally, it's the humour that sells the idea, and keeps the show on the road, as it has a razor-wire sharp sense of humour, manifest in the gags, both spoken and visual, which even some of the camera movements are funny, in the context of what's being shown on screen, which is mostly horrific, but even that somehow is hilarious - perhaps because it is so over the top, as to be the blackest slap-stick violence you've ever seen.
(Basically, every one of the most awful things a person could do to another is done in this movie, and rather than baulk at it - you find yourself erupting with laughter - it ain't right, and I ain't proud of m'self for it, but damn it's funny!)
The Sharlto Copley show
Then there's the real feature of the movie, given that you never see Henry, from the outside, or hear him speak, even...
(Bit like that old Judge Dredd thing of never showing him without the helmet)
...It's up to the other actors, and their characters to convey a sense of Henry by virtue of their relationship to him, which they do with aplomb... none more so than Sharlto Copley, who plays many variations of a character named Jimmy (It becomes clear later why), and is clearly having the time of his life. The guy is known for his somewhat outrageous portrayals in things like District 9, and even the A-Team movie, but here you get Copley-max, hamming it up in his many cartoonish cockney character versions which, if you struggle to key into at first, you will find hilarious pretty soon in. He basically steals the show here, and is performance, coupled with those other comic aspects, makes this a brilliant watch.
I can, on reflection, see why initial critic reactions may have been negative for another reason too:
As I have found myself, that the old "Cam-corder", "Found-footage" style of movie, as if from first person point of view, when presented on the big screen of the cinema, can be more effective at immersing you in the world than any amount of CGI, chilling, in the case of Blair Witch Project, I felt, but Nauseating, and even mildly Traumatising in the case of Cloverfield, but this uses an almost fish eye style camera (only slightly curved at the edges, so not over done), which when coupled with the frenetic pace of the action, and the wild camera movements, even so well considered, and used as here, may be somewhat vomit inducing at the cinema.
But on a home cinema, or the TV in your living room, it's just about right, I'd say, and you can better appreciate the action.
The story (yup, there's actually a story here, which is slightly overwhelmed by the action) is actually a good one too, with a few nice twisty turns in there, and even sci-fi concepts of it's own that are interesting ideas in themselves.
This, overall, is a great, switch the mind off, Saturday night rollercoaster that you go in one end of, get mercilessly chewed up in, and spat out the other end of with a big fat smile on your face, and no sense of the time having passed at all since you started watching.
From the infamous, and brilliant film-making duo: Jeunet And Caro, who brought us the strange and brutally wonderful: Delicatessen, and later the almost perfect fantastical French rom-com: Amelie, and indeed the wildly under-rated, and nutty: Micmacs...
(Although I'm not sure if both of them were involved in this last one)
...Comes this wildly imaginative, beautifully shot (as usual) brothers Grimm style fairy-tale of man who cannot dream, and so recruits his less ciriminally mastermind-ish cloned brothers to venture forth, from their adapted oil-rig-ish home, to the mainland, in order to steal lost and abandoned children (orphans, and street urchins and such), to be taken back to their lair, in order to be hooked up to him while he sleeps, so that their dreams may be his for the experiencing.
One such kidnap-ee, is young girl Miette's even younger brother: "Little brother", whom she sets out to find, and recover, with the help of simple ex-circus strong-man: "One", from the clutches of this evil enterprise.
This has quite astonishing set pieces, especially the one on the pier, with the boat, where a cain of extraordinary events escalates to an incredible climax, having been initiated by the intervention of a trained assassin flea!
There's a mysterious man in a submarine, biding his time apart from, and beneath the city, in it's river ways, a pair of evil conjoined twins, and indeed, a large talking brain in a tank.
...Everything your average movie-lover craves! :)
The look and style will obviously be familiar those who appreciated these aspects of Amelie, but there's also an incredible blend of evocative yesteryear circus stylings and characteristics, science fiction, and antique, turn of last century Paris... and all wrapped up, of course, in this very strong Fairy-tale story and vibe.
The opening dream sequence alone is one of the most visually incredible renditions of a dream (that rapidly sours into a nightmare) you will ever have seen on screen... so much so, you begin to feel a little woozy and uncertain yourself, just watching it!
It was quite a big deal on release, as I recall, although I didn't see it until, I think 97, at Glastonbury festival on the cinema there, and it seems to have been largely forgotten, which is an incredible shame, as this is an absolute masterpiece of imaginative story-telling, as well as being one of the most sumptuous, brilliantly shot movies of the nineties, and a truly unique experience.
The more I think about it, the more I think this movie could benefit from a re-cut, and restructure...
...If you did away with the chapter headings, re-dispersed some of the earlier and later scenes elsewhere, so as to create a mystery / reveal element into it, in such a way as you were not really sure what was going on until something revealed earlier in it's present form was shown later, I think this would sharpen up the story-telling, bring focus to it, centre the movie around Vince Vaughn big performance, and also make the other two primary characters more impactful.
As it is, I think director Clark Duke has been a little too slavish to the Tarantino style, at the expense of something great entirely of his own.
Having not seen this, more or less, since the year of it's release, my memory was more than a little hazy of it, I just remember being engrossed in it...
(And if I'm honest, more than a little taken with the elfin pixie girl Elodie Bouchez, which may have caused my still young brain to block out most of the other substance of the movie :)
((Got tired of waiting for this to turn up in a charity shop or boot fair, so bought a used DVD copy from amazon for a couple of quid - the extravagance! :))
...It's a fairly straight up character study of two girls, on perhaps the lowest rungs of the social / economic ladder who meet, become friends, and then move in together, in an apartment owned by A mother and daughter who are both in a coma, after a car crash... So they are basically house-sitting / squatting, here, while aimlessly drifting through life, from job to job... and so forth.
However, although it seems, from the outset, that Marie is the more "put-together" of the two, with Isa being a little bit more flaky, and "loose leaf", as the story goes, it becomes apparent that Isa is more able to accept the circumstances in which they find themselves, and is the more adaptable, as Marie, it seems, has more aspirational ideas of what her life should be, when she hooks up with a young, rich asshole of a guy, in whom she sees the opportunity, for that "dream-life" of hers to become a reality (more so, than any particular fancy for him, as a person).
...Needless to say, she becomes a tad obsessive about him, as all her hopes are invested in him, to the extent that she is willing to overlook almost every horrible thing about him, and how he treats her, and this, in turn, causes great friction in the once fun relationship she has with Isa... This, you feel, may end in tears.
Meanwhile, Isa seems to be getting along fairly nicely, circumstances notwithstanding, and having paid a visit to the hospital, to see the young girl in the coma, to sit with her, she discovers her diary, and it can almost be said she begins to develop some kind of bond or relationship with the girl she has never met in the waking world.
So it seems, on re-watching, and reflection to be about the expectations we have of life, what it should be, and what you are prepared to accept in it's stead - how adaptable you are in your mindset.
But my residual impressions still hold true...
(Now unblinkered by the absence of youthful hormones smashing through my tiny younger head!)
...A thoroughly engrossing, sad but intimate tale of two young girls, who each dream of other things in life, just not necessarily the same things, or in the same way.
While this is perhaps, not the most gross, or horrific movie to look at, compared to others, it has a uniquely disturbing nightmare quality, which most closely approximates the experience of a sweat inducing, nocturnal hallucination that we all know... more than any other film I can think of.
It does it by virtue of a mood, a tone, the grimy, dingy looking cinematography, and some disturbing, horrific concepts shown through the images, rather than what the images themselves show... And what really underscores that nightmare, is the concept that, while most of us get to wake up, and shake it off, poor Jacob lives it in his waking world... all the time.
For Jacob, an ex Vietnam vet, mourning the loss of his son, finds things around him in his world, by degrees, turning very peculiar, and terrifying.
But it's not a simple horror movie, there is a purpose to the horror, as this is one man's journey through a kind of purgatory instead of hell.
For this reason, once the film is done, is feels like it has a redemptive quality; Even, a grace to it, which prompts you to reconsider, in this context, all that you have just seen in the foregoing events.
Although not a movie I'd put on for giggles, or fun, by any stretch of the imagination, I always found it strangely compelling, and needful, back in the day, to re-watch my old VHS copy, as a kind of catharsis / therapy for myself.
In fact, I wonder what an actual therapist / psychiatrist / psychologist might make of this, not least, in how closely it might resemble a genuine psychosis, or schizophrenic state...
...Not entirely sure if it would, in such a scenario, be considered advisable or not for anyone suffering from such a condition to watch it... could be, according to the new-speak: triggering.
But still, as a movie, masterfully done, and a perfectly executed, finely balanced redemptive nightmare movie.
Largely, an attempt at a kind of Tarantino movie (Chapter headings, among other indicators) - crossed with a languid, quirky indie flick aesthetic... Which proves to be too grand in it's production for the latter, but too light for the former.
It feels flat, for the most part, and the first section, around Hemsworth and Clark Duke's characters feels tacked on to the Vince Vaughn character section, although they both, eventually converge at the end.
Which is the first real issues with it... there's a "break in play" section later in the movie, where the story telling goes back in time to tell a tale about a couple of other characters, And I found this confusing, as I wasn't aware of an earlier section of the movie being set later than the last
(if you get my drift) until this happened. The Chronology of a bit of back story is not well integrated, or explained.
So structural story issues, and tonal issues (trying to be two types of movie at the same time, and drifting a little into neither and nothing-ness in this regard).
Two hapless nowhere bods becoming embroiled in a down-south drug ring, headed by Vince Vaughn's: "Frog", get stuck in some low level drug ring limbo, while things go wrong around them, jeopardising both their position in this organisation, as well as their lives.
The movie sprawls a bit, goes nowhere fast really, and is a bit disjointed.
However, there are elements of this that make it very worth watching:
Each of the characters, and each of the actors playing them, work very well: Hemsworth is much better than I thought he could be, Duke does his character very convincingly, as does Eden Brolin (yup, a Brolin family member) who seems to me to be a great actress in the making - she's got bags of charisma, very watchable presence - got real potential!... But I don't buy the pairing of these actors, or the characters they play, in that I can't imagine any of these three really having anything to do with each other in reality.
(I have done myself a favour by neglecting to remember John Malkovich is in this movie, because his role / performance = Jeepers! :(
But there's one real ace up this movie's sleeve:
Vince Vaughn.
Holy Mackerel, what a great performance!
Neither a fan, nor... "not a fan", I have to say, he is absolutely mesmerising here, playing a rather callous, cold, low level drug kingpin, of the "legend in his own backyard - population: 5" variety, but it's a very subtle, very understated performance giving just an occasional glimpse, or sense of a broken, and breaking, vulnerable man within.
If you could jettison the other story threads, enlarge his role, and make it about him, this would really be a great movie, as Vaughn can carry it, and hold the room. So much so, that you could probably drop his performance here into a Godfather / Goodfellas scale of story, and it would be equally at home... not out of place at all.
This is Vince Vaughn's movie, and he steals the whole show.