Sucker Punch (2011)

The Movie: A young girl who we will know only as Baby Doll (the adorable and hot Emily Browning from Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events) is placed by her abusive stepfather in a psychiatric institution so that he can get rid of her and get a hold of her inheritance. Poor Baby Doll has already had to cope with her stepfather, her mother’s death, and the death of her little sister as well; but much worse is in store for her. It turns out the institution is actually a cabaret, which is in turn a front for a brothel. Owned by the sleazy Blue (Oscar Isaac), the girls are trained by Vera Gorski (the sexy Carla Gugino of Watchmen and Sin City) and then exploited to make Blue money. Baby Doll’s stepfather paid Blue specifically to make her disappear, so she faces a particularly dire fate in only five days.

Baby Doll escapes into a series of fantasy realms where a wise old man (Scott Glenn) gives her the means to escape. To do it, she has to get a hold of five items. Four other girls; Sweet Pea (Abby Cornish), her little sister Rocket (the versatile Jena Malone), Blondie (the gorgeous Vanessa Hudgens of the High School Musical Movies), and Amber (Jamie Chung), agree to help her in the hopes that they can escape as well. But the hurdles for the five girls succeeding start to mount, even as the lines between fantasy and reality start to blur. Can they succeed?

The Review: I present another first for this blog; this is the first time I went to an in-theater movie with the intent of reviewing it. Sucker Punch came to my attention mainly due to the conflicting opinions about it. All the critics seem to hate this movie, while several friends have raved to me about how great it is. I became curious to see it for myself and maybe throw my own two cents into the mix. So what’s my verdict? Well, if I had to sum up Sucker Punch in one word I would say this; it’s a mess. Sucker Punch is a bizarre, surreal, schizophrenic, anachronistic mess of a movie that spends a very large portion of its running time looking like the fever dreams of a highly caffeinated fan boy with severe A.D.D. That’s not to say, however, that it’s an entirely unentertaining mess.

I will start with the cast, since they are probably the best part of the movie. Browning works as the protagonist. Her facial expressions alone convey far more than words ever could. Cornish is also good; she gives us a convincing and fully fleshed-out human being of a character with all the good and bad that entails.

Jenna Malone is one of those actors who I regularly see in a lot of movies, but have trouble recognizing because she gets so deeply into her roles. In fact, in Sucker Punch I was only able to pick her out through process of elimination; I knew she played one of the protagonists and was able to rule out all the others. This is a good thing, by the way. I find that my favorite actors tend to be the ones who are able to get so far into their roles that it’s hard to remember we’re watching them and not their character. It’s easy to see why Malone has had so many roles up to this point, and I hope she gets many, many more.

Isaac does a good job of providing us with a villain who is slimy, sadistic; and who ultimately we love to hate. Gugino also gives us a convincing character. All Hudgens provides to this movie is screen presence, but as the script really doesn’t give her much to work with, it’s probably less her fault than it could be. Chung doesn’t even provide that, pretty much only being eye candy. I’m not familiar with her, so she might have some acting talent; it’s just not visible in this movie.

One of the critic’s major complaints about Sucker Punch is that it’s sleazy and exploitative. I’m on the fence with this one. The outfits the ladies wear aren’t that bad, I see far more revealing outfits weekly at the local YMCA. Although I must confess, being big on bellies and thighs, I can’t help but enjoy the outfits Browning wears during the fantasy sequences.

However, there is a, ever so slight, attempt at sleaze. It’s not much, and this is where my conflict lies. If you’re going to make a piece of sleaze, then by all means do it. But follow through; don’t chicken out at the last minute. I have a problem with the movies that try to create “safe sleaze;” you can have sleazy, or you can have safe, but you can’t have both. In fact, I find the hypocrisy of those kinds of movies far more disturbing than the blatantly honest sleaze pieces. However, there are far worse offenders in this than Sucker Punch. There’s just enough to touch on the subject, and that’s about it.

The fantasy sequences make some great stand-alone set pieces. They’re obviously CGI, but some of them still look amazing. My favorite is the anachronistic WW1 battlefield with its zeppelins and clockwork Germans. There are also some interesting little surreal touches, such as the bunny-faced mech Amber pilots in the WW1 scene. On the downside, I really don’t like the style of combat most action movies use these days; with the camera shaking and then suddenly turning away just as the character strikes a blow. The use of that technique definitely lessens my enjoyment.

Finally, I would say that Sucker Punch’s biggest failing is that it tries to do way too much at once. The themes are all legitimate ones that have worked well for other movies: finding strength in unexpected places; using fantasy to escape from and/or deal with an unpleasant reality; the thin, blurry line between fantasy and reality; gaining strength from a position of helplessness. I have seen all of these themes done and done well in other movies. However, while they are present in Sucker Punch, they tend to get lost beneath everything else.

Watching this movie, one gets the impression that Zack Snyder, who both wrote and directed it, had no idea where he wanted to go or what he wanted to do. It seems like Snyder had some disparate ideas for scenes and storylines, and tried to mix them all together into one movie. As a result, it can be hard to make sense of what’s going on. There are so many different layers of fantasy, reality and delusion blurring together that by the time of the “big reveal” at the end, said reveal loses a lot of its effect because you’re still trying to make sense of everything else you just saw. Individually, some of Sucker Punch’s components work very well. However, the resulting mess is unable to rise above the sum of its parts.

So in conclusion, Sucker Punch is a mess, but not an entirely unentertaining one. While the movie doesn’t work as a whole, there are several independent parts of it that are worth seeing. Yes, I’m well aware that I am damning this movie with faint praise. However, you have to admit, it’s far more generous than many of the other reviewers are willing to be.

Flesh Gordon (1974)

The Movie: The Earth is, as the esteemed scientist Professor Gordon (John Hoyt) puts it, in big trouble. A sex ray beamed from space has been striking the Earth, causing all struck by it to engage in unrestrained sexual orgies. Civilization can’t survive when the president of the U.S. neglects his duties to lock himself in the bathroom with the vice president, or the world’s pre-eminent scientist is distracted because he found his wife in bed with the garbage man. Fortunately, Flesh (Jason Williams), the professor’s son, has located the planet the beam is coming from; and he is returning from playing ice hockey for the U.S. in Tibet to help find a solution.

Meanwhile, as Flesh flies home from Tibet he meets Dale Ardor (Suzanne Fields), who we automatically know will be “the Girl” for Flesh. Unfortunately, trouble strikes almost immediately as the sex ray hits the plane in mid-air. The pilots decide they would rather join the on-board orgy than handle the controls (that innuendo was not intentional, I swear), and when they and the passengers go down, so does the plane (okay, that one was). Fortunately, Flesh and Dale are able to bail out. Even better, they happen to land outside the home of Dr. Flexi Jerkoff (Joseph Hudgens), an old friend of Flesh’s father and a brilliant scientist. Jerkoff has also been investigating the sex ray, and he has built a spaceship to take him to its source. Our three heroes set off for the planet Porno to put a stop to the ray.

Unfortunately, their plans to save the Earth put them afoul of Porno’s ruler, the evil Emperor Wang the Perverted (William Hunt). Even with the aid of the outlaw (and flamboyantly gay) Prince Precious (Lance Larson), true heir to the throne of Porno, our heroes’ task will not be easy. Penisaurs, lesbian amazons, hermaphrodite gladiators, Wang’s cannon-fodder troops and deathtraps, and the Great God Porno; all stand between our heroes and victory. Will Dr. Jerkoff figure out how to use the Power Pasties to end the threat of Wang and his sex ray? Will Dale be able to avoid being molested by everyone but the men she wants to molest her? Can Flesh keep his pants on long enough to save the Earth?

The Review:

“Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Sex madness perils planet! Hey, scram you horny joiks!" -Paperboy

For my current offering, I present one of my truly guilty pleasures. By that, I mean that I feel extremely guilty about the fact that I enjoy this movie; or at least, some people feel that I should. Now, I’m not all that big on porn movies. Mostly this is due to my attitude toward the two main elements that people go to these movies for. After a certain double date in high school I came to the conclusion that when it comes to sex, any sex; if it doesn’t involve me, I’m not interested. Now I have since seen some stuff out of curiosity (“oh, so that’s how that would work”), but I have mostly retained that attitude. For me, with the very rare exception, watching other people screw is at worst kind of repulsive, and at best rather dull.

As for the other main element, I must confess that I am something of a connoisseur of the female form and its infinite variations. However, I don’t care how good looking the women in question are or how much we get to see of them; if a movie doesn’t have more to offer I lose interest quickly. Admittedly it doesn’t have to be much more, and I do enjoy female nudity in my movies; but it’s really not worthwhile when that’s all the movie in question has to offer.

Flesh Gordon is one of the only three pornographic movies (the others being Deep Throat and Behind the Green Door, which I have yet to get my hands on) that are widely recognized as classics in and of themselves. There is a reason for this; Flesh Gordon actually works as a movie, not just as a vehicle for vicarious sexual shenanigans. It is obvious that a lot of effort went into this film, and one also gets the impression that somebody had a lot of fun making it.

Flesh Gordon is a spoof of the old Flash Gordon serials of the 1930s. One of the main reasons that it works is because it is exactly what a spoof or a parody should be. Flesh Gordon sticks very close to the original that it is parodying, only tweaking it a bit so that the elements used are slanted to their most ridiculous extremes and/or to be sexual. All of the major (and the majority of the minor) plot points are nothing that, at their core, you wouldn’t find in this parody’s model. A handsome, square-jawed hero; a hapless damsel; and a brilliant but slightly unhinged scientist travel to another planet to stop a threat to Earth. Once there, they have to deal with monsters, death traps, and an evil supervillain with powerful super-science at his disposal. The only real differences are that the threat to Earth is an aphrodisiac ray, the monsters are, among other things, penisauri, and the villain is more blatantly sex-obsessed than his models from the pulps and serials.

Unfortunately, that accuracy is applied to the character of our heroes as well. I say unfortunately, because as characters the heroes in this genre tended to be uniformly bland. Flesh is pretty much your standard square-jawed, upstanding fighter, defined wholly by the fact that he’s tall, strong, handsome, and every female he encounters inexplicably lusts after him on first glance. The movie does something clever with that last one, in the scene where Flesh, Dale and Jerkoff first meet Prince Precious. When the obviously gay Precious first beholds the heroic Flesh, he follows the exact same script the majority of the female characters do in reaction to him. We even get a glimpse of the two enjoying a “romantic” (i.e. blatantly sexual) interlude together.

The character of Dale has the same problem. Like her sisters in the serials she is basically a dumb bimbo whose only purpose is to serve as eye candy, be constantly rescued by the hero from being molested by everyone and his brother, and be forced into marriage to the villain. Albeit, in that last one the heroine is usually the one who wears the wedding dress. Also, even when Dale in Flesh Gordon is completely nude (which she is for much of the running time), she’s still not wearing much less than her models from the pulps did.

Another way in which Flesh Gordon adheres to the original, and does it extremely well, is in the look and the setting. With the exception of obvious little tweaks (such as the heroes’ very penis-shaped rocket ship, or the strategically placed drills on Wang’s robots), the settings and props look exactly like they came out of an old Flash Gordon serial. They are all amazing; which isn’t too surprising considering they were put together by some of the best sci-fi effects people of the time. The scene where the swan-shaped airship of Amora, Queen of Darkness (Mycle Brandy) flies across the night sky is just beautiful.

The same thing can be said of most of the stop-motion creatures in the movie as well. There is this one metallic insect–thing that’s just amazing. Best of all is probably the Great God Porno. The model would make Ray Harryhousen himself proud, its movements and facial expressions have personality in and of themselves. Combined with the voice and script they give it, it is both beautiful and very perversely hysterical.

The final strength Flesh Gordon has is its humor. This is a seriously funny movie with some really good, if perverse and often juvenile, jokes. Despite what you may think, they’re not all (or even mostly), sexual. There are plenty of bad ones, of course, but there are enough good ones that you forget about them rather quickly. From the Volkswagen key used to start the heroes’ rocket, to Wang’s various titles (“Your Impotenance” and “Your Assholiness” are my personal favorites), to how Jerkoff escapes from Wang’s lab to the Great God Porno; if you aren’t laughing at some point during this movie, you don’t have a sense of humor. What’s more, unlike some other movies of this type, there is no mean-spiritedness whatsoever.

Finally, I must address the pornographic elements; since this is, after all, a porno. My copy of Flesh Gordon, which is supposed to be the “re-edited, uncensored” version, mostly has softcore elements. However, I have heard that this movie was originally shot with hardcore scenes, but the director was forced to edit them out before the movie was released. I actually think the movie is all the better for it. While nudity abounds and there are plenty of softcore scenes, I get the impression that the pornographic elements were back-burnered in favor of the story; that the makers of this movie seemed to be more concerned about having fun spoofing Flash Gordon than they are about making pornography. I could be wrong; but even if you don’t care for pornography there are plenty of other things to be enjoyed about Flesh Gordon.

So in conclusion; Flesh Gordon is crude, perverse, twisted and juvenile. It has its frequent moments of cleverness, and very well done settings and props. In short, I find it to be a lot of fun, even if it is a porno. There is plenty to enjoy even for people who aren’t into pornography. I thoroughly enjoy this movie; and while I’m probably going to Hell for that and other reasons, I understand that all the best people are going to be joining me there anyway. If you have a really warped sense of humor and aren’t easily offended, this one is definitely worth a viewing.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988)

The Movie: Hollywood, 1947; cartoon characters, called toons, live in a nearby place called Toontown and act out cartoons in the same way human actors act out movies. Cartoon producer R. K. Maroon (Alan Tilvern, in his last role) is having problems with one of his top celebrities. Roger Rabbit (voice of Charles Fleischer) keeps flubbing his part, and Maroon is convinced that it’s because he is too distracted by his wife, Jessica (voice of Kathleen Turner). Maroon hires detective Eddie Valiant (Bob Hoskins, who was also Smee in Hook and Mario in the Super Mario Brothers live action movie) to obtain some incriminating pictures of Jessica so he can prove to Roger she’s bad news.

Eddie has a history. He and his brother used to be the top cops in Toontown, renowned for their competence and nobility. Unfortunately, all that changed when one malicious toon killed Eddie’s brother by dropping a piano on him. Now, Eddie refuses to go near Toontown and has as little to do with toons as he is able. Unfortunately, due to his depression and alcoholism he is down on his luck, so he has no choice but to take Maroon’s money. He gets some compromising pictures of Jessica with Marvin Acme (Stubby Kaye), the prankster-like owner of the Acme Corporation, and Roger is suitably upset. It all goes downhill when Eddie finds out the next day that someone murdered Acme by dropping a safe on his head, and all clues seem to point to Roger as the culprit.

Eddie starts to have his doubts when he meets Judge Doom (Christopher Lloyd, probably best known for his role in the Back to the Future movies), the sadistic lawman determined to bring Roger to justice. Doom has done the impossible, he has discovered the recipe for a substance called the Dip, which can destroy toons. Combined with Doom’s sadistic weasel henchmen, Roger looks screwed.

Eddie discovers that Acme’s will was missing, and that the will was the most probable motive for his murder. Against his will, Eddie is dragged right into the middle of it when Roger himself comes to his office and claims that he was framed. Pursued by Doom and his weasels, Eddie must find the will, and soon, or it will be the end not only of Roger, but of all of Toontown as well.

The Review:

“Is that a rabbit in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?”
-Dolores

Like many other people, I saw Who Framed Roger Rabbit at a fairly young age. Then I didn’t see it again until college; my school had a few regular events that showed interesting movies. Admittedly, at the time it didn’t make a big impression on me. However, my mind was mostly focused toward other issues; specifically the issues that led to me obtaining the coveted title of Nine-Fingered Menace. In the past two or three weeks Who Framed Roger Rabbit came up on my Netflix queue and I sat down to watch it again. I was surprised to find one burning question lodged in my mind for nearly the entire movie: “how the hell did I manage to miss all of this?”

Who Framed Roger Rabbit works on many levels due to the simple fact that it is one of those movies where multiple levels of stuff are happening. While I haven’t really been able to test it, I’m sure you could go through the movie many times and each time notice something you didn’t catch on an earlier screening. There are numerous cartoon characters, both well known and obscure, from Disney, Warner Brothers and probably a few other sources as well, constantly carrying out their business in the background and foreground. The same goes with the live extras. Even some of the major characters can sometimes be glimpsed in the background while the one or two of the others are doing something unrelated in the fore.

And there are plenty of other details as well. There are odd, risqué little messages on men’s room walls (“for a good time call Allyson Wonderland”) and in other obscure locations; such as the oven Roger gets roasted in during the cartoon he films at the very beginning of the movie being of the “HotterNelle” brand. There are also lots of little cultural references. Roger Rabbit is at its core a noir, and it somehow manages to shoehorn in almost every trope of the genre.

Finally, there is a practice, as old as animation itself, where the animators slip in risqué details that you won’t notice because they go by too fast. It’s not done so much anymore, because with DVDs you can play the scenes frame by frame and catch them easily. I have only heard of one or two of these details in this movie, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there were more. I can attest that the rumors involving a scene of Jessica Rabbit are true.

That’s it for the small details; the big ones are just as impressive. One thing that caught my notice was the relationship between Roger and Jessica Rabbit. Jessica is the personification of what 99.99999999+% of us heterosexual males fantasize about, but know in our heart of hearts we’re never going to get. Roger, on the other hand, is the exact opposite not only of Jessica, but of the kind of man we’d expect to see with someone like Jessica. He’s short, he’s goofy, he’s spastic, obnoxious and socially awkward. In other words, he’s us to some extent.

And yet, the really odd thing is that while everything about Jessica screams femme fatale, she is obsessively in love with only one man, Roger. She has no interest in any other man; she doesn’t even pretend to seduce Eddy to get him to help like her character type would in any other film; she just asks for his help and drags him along. It’s clear that none of the human characters understand what she sees in Roger, but it’s also clear that it’s not just Jessica. Early on Betty Boop makes an appearance, and when identifying Roger’s wife for Eddie she expresses some envy that it was Jessica who landed Roger. Obviously this is wish fulfillment; but for us dreamers at least, it gives us a small ray of hope.

For my next analysis, I must offer a minor spoiler alert, because I’m going to have to reveal the villain’s plan. It’s not a major spoiler; even if you haven’t seen this movie, if you possess even the smallest fraction of the intelligence I’m convinced my readers have, you will already have connected most of the dots by the big reveal. Still, if haven’t seen this movie and spoilers still bother you, skip ahead HERE.

Still there? Okay, what I find most notable about Doom’s ultimate evil plan is that it is based on a historical event. Basically, he wants to wipe out Toontown in order to build a freeway; and among other things he has bought the streetcar line so that he can dismantle it. Beginning in the 1930s, General Motors and some of the other major automobile companies started buying out streetcars and other public transportation in America’s cities in order to dismantle them, so that people would depend on their products instead. It wasn’t 100% successful, but it’s why these kinds of systems are so rare these days.

The world Doom describes that he is trying to bring forth; one of isolation, cheap, disposable commercialism and instant not-so gratifying gratification; is of course our present day society. What I find so perversely ironic about this coming from the villain is that Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a Disney flick, and Walt Disney himself was one of the main architects of our commercialist society. I don’t know if the screenwriter was conscious of it or not, but there is definitely some subversion here.

End Spoiler Alert

One final thing I should bring up is that despite the ad campaign around it, Who Framed Roger Rabbit is not a kids’ movie. My parents wouldn’t let me or my siblings watch it for years, and I’m now in a position to see why. First of all, there are a lot of adult elements here, most of which would go right over the heads of younger viewers. There are also a few rather disturbing elements as well. I’m rather jaded about what I see in my movies at this point, but the scene where Doom first uses the Dip still bothers me.

Overall, Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a fun, well made movie. It has a great cast, great special effects, and a good storyline. It works well as both a noir and a rather perverse little comedy. If you haven’t seen it in a while, definitely worth a rewatch. Just be sure to keep your eyes open for the not so obvious details.

My Super Ex-Girlfriend (2006)

The Movie: Matt Saunders (Luke Wilson) is your average nice guy living in New York City. His problem is that he’s not great with women. He’s desperately in love with his best friend and coworker Hannah (Anna Faris, of May and the Scary Movie franchise). However, she’s dating an underwear model, so he figures he doesn’t have a chance. Worse, he has a knack for getting involved with crazy women; and his last relationship has him scared to date six months later.

Matt’s problems really begin when his friend Vaughn (Rainn Wilson, no relationship it seems) convinces him to approach a woman on the subway. Despite himself, Matt does wind up impressing her, and he and Jenny Johnson (Uma Thurman of Kill Bill and the Adventures of Baron Munchausen) start dating. Matt has some misgivings at first, thinking she seems like some of the other crazy women he’s been involved with, but for a while it doesn’t go too badly.

Things start to change after a run in with super villain Professor Bedlam (comedian Eddie Izzard), and Matt finds out who his girlfriend really is. He’s been dating G-Girl, the local superhero. Worse, Matt’s initial impression about her was correct; Jenny is insecure, jealous, manipulative and unstable.

When Matt has enough of it and breaks up with her, things get really bad. Jenny is determined to make him pay for breaking her heart. You think psycho exes are bad? Imagine a psycho ex who is capable of putting your car into orbit, or hurling a shark through your window…

The Review:

“Wow, no woman’s ever done that to me; and I am a dick.”
-Vaughn

I would like to begin by wishing my readers (all four or five of you) a happy Valentines’ Day. In recognition of the holiday, and to show my views on it, I have two reviews; this one, and Humanoids from the Deep.

Admittedly, My Super Ex-Girlfriend is not a great movie. It’s not a bad movie (those who say it is have no idea how bad movies can get), but it definitely could have been better. However, I have an affection for it nonetheless. I can cite three reasons for this. The first one is probably the circumstances surrounding the first time I watched it. I had wanted to see it for a while, and one night I rented it along with the movie May. After watching both movies I suddenly realized two things; it was about two weeks since I had broken up with my ex, and I had just rented and watched two movies featuring a break-up that went catastrophically wrong. I cannot help but wonder if it truly was a coincidence, or if there was something going on in my subconscious. Admittedly, both movies also star Anna Faris; but since I was unaware of it at the time I’m pretty sure that was a coincidence.

My second reason for liking this movie, and my reason for wanting to see it ever since I first saw the previews, is its handling of Jenny aka G-Girl. I have long had a problem with the character of Superman, he’s too perfect. Not only is he practically unstoppable physically, he is completely incorruptible psychologically and morally. Aside from his allergy to a rare mineral, he pretty much has no flaws whatsoever.

With the exception of her gender, G-Girl is Superman. Physically, she has all of his powers and abilities. However, psychologically she is Superman as I am sure he would really turn out. While having those kinds of powers would seem fun, they would also serve to separate their recipient from the rest of humanity. Even before Jenny got her powers she was socially awkward, and they have further served to isolate her. As a result, she is insecure, having very little ability to actually socialize with the people around her. Each mistake she makes in that regard reinforces her sense of isolation and insecurity in a vicious cycle, making her unstable.

Kudos are due to Uma Thurman and the makers of this movie for G-Girl. She is convincingly dangerous and scary, but at the same time she is sympathetic as well. I have actually known some people like Jenny in my life, sometimes even felt like her myself. The only difference being G-Girl is a lot worse on account of her being able to throw a car when she has a temper tantrum.

The third reason I like this movie despite its flaws is my identification with Matt Saunders. I, myself, have long had a knack for attracting crazy women; at least, crazier than usual. Yes, I did just say women are crazy. Men are equally crazy and, while I have yet to meet any hermaphrodites, I would bet anything they are no less psychologically messed up. To be human (and, I’m beginning to suspect, sentient) is to be insane, screwed up and damaged to some extent. It’s just that for some reason I seem to attract the women who are more blatantly so than usual.

Admittedly, Luke Wilson’s performance as Matt isn’t particularly memorable, either as really good or really bad. However, he plays the part adequately. The role itself, though, is very convincing. Matt is a more or less decent guy who is just trying to do the right thing, but who keeps winding up with the wrong type of woman. This is the hook that keeps me engaged in the film despite its other flaws; I know all too well what it’s like when the ones you want always seem just out of reach, while the ones who want you always seem hazardous to your health.

So those are the good points, what are the bad? Well, a lot of the attempts at humor fall flat. The movie provides not one, but two sources of odious comedy relief. There’s Matt’s uptight boss, Carla (Wanda Sykes), who is convinced that he’s some kind of sex fiend and constantly on the lookout for a reason to bust him. Then there’s Vaughn who is a sex fiend, and an asshole to boot. Both actors obviously have some talent, but their parts really don’t provide them much to work with and they tend to come off as painfully unfunny.

As a whole the movie is well shot and blocked. The special effects are good, and they are actually directed by the story instead of the other way around. I also love the animation during the ending credits, although I make a point of muting it because the song played is so insipid.

As a whole, I would say that My Super Ex-Girlfriend is a decent movie. It’s far from great, but it is fun and it handles well several issues I can relate to. What can I say? I like it, whether or not anyone else does.

Humanoids From the Deep (1980)

The Movie: A small fishing town is having problems; namely, it’s getting harder and harder to find any fish. This is impacting the local economy and therefore bad all around. There is some hope, the corporation Canco wants to set up a cannery in town; and in return promises needed jobs as well as a refurbishing of the fish population. Of course, this is met enthusiastically by most of the town, especially by the fisherman Hank Slattery (Vic Morrow from 1990 Bronx Warriors).

But one of the citizens is completely opposed: Johnny Eagle (Anthony Penya), our local Indian/Native American. Johnny is convinced that the cannery will only make things worse, and he’s determined to prevent it from being built. This puts him at odds with Hank, who is determined to prevent Johnny from spoiling the business deal.

And there have been strange happenings around as of late to ramp up Hank’s hatred and paranoia. Happenings such as a fishing boat mysteriously blowing up with all on board, or all of the dogs near the water (except, ironically, Johnny’s) getting mysteriously killed one night. Hank is convinced that Johnny is doing this in order to sabotage the cannery deal, and he and his redneck thugs are resolute that he learns a lesson.

Fortunately, Johnny has some friends in Jim Hill (Doug McClure) and his brother, Tommy (Breck Costin). Jim is in favor of the cannery, but he’s also an intelligent and reasonable man. He’s seen enough of the events himself to determine that a lone saboteur would be unlikely to accomplish it all. Besides, Johnny would rather fight Canco through the legal system.

With all the political games going on, nobody notices the monstrous fish-mutants that are really behind the problems. Not only are they killing dogs and attacking boats, they also attack some couples who happen to be on the beach by themselves. The men are killed gruesomely, of course, but the women are in for a worse fate.

The answers lie with Doctor Susan Drake (Ann Turkel), the Canco scientist who has come with its representatives. Remember how Canco promised to refurbish the fish population? Well their solution was a genetic treatment Doctor Drake developed. Unfortunately, some of the treated salmon were accidently released. It turns out that they were eaten by coelacanths (consistently mispronounced ko-al-i-canth instead of see-la-canth throughout the movie), and the genetic treatment kick started their evolution. The result is the creatures that have been causing the trouble, and a subconscious desire to evolve further has invested them with the desire to mate with human women. Unfortunately, by the time our heroes discover it the town’s annual Salmon Festival is underway, and it provides the fish men with plenty of walking targets…

The Review:

In most ways, Humanoids from the Deep is an exploitation film pure and simple. There’s the impossible science and the caricatures, the extensive gore and nudity, the rubber suited monsters at the center of the mess. In fact, Humanoids somehow manages to shoehorn in almost every B-movie trope of the previous few decades.

At the same time, there are a lot of little touches that help it rise a little above the status of just another piece of sleazy trash. A large part of it was probably due to how it was put together. The original director Roger Corman hired was Barbara Peeter, who put together a serious, non-exploitative take on the script. However, after it was filmed Corman determined that it lacked what the intended audience desired; namely, gratuitous gore and female nudity. He brought in director James Sbardellati, later to direct Deathstalker, to shoot the more exploitation friendly elements.

The end result is not a schizophrenic mess, as one might expect, but a competent blending of the two approaches. On the serious side, the characters aren’t all one-dimensional cutouts. There is actually some fairly thoughtful interaction between them. Our main hero, Jim, is actually for the cannery, but he is not going to allow opposing opinions to be beaten down. What’s more, he is willing to keep an open enough mind about the subject that he immediately takes notice when something isn’t right.

The conflict between Johnny and Hank is also a little bit more nuanced than it might be. Hank is the spitting image of a lot of public figures I have born witness to. Likewise, having lived in small towns a large portion of my life, I can say that this movie nails small-town politics near perfectly. However, while Hank is obviously an antagonist and an asshole, he’s not irredeemable. He and Johnny wind up working together to save some kids in the climactic attack on the Salmon Festival. What’s more, in another thoughtful touch Johnny winds up saving Hank’s life, and Hank is clearly conflicted over being at the mercy of the man who he’s been persecuting, not to mention Johnny’s willingness to do the right thing regardless.

On the exploitation side of things; there’s some decent stuff too. As another reviewer points out, it’s doubtful that it’s a coincidence that a single movie can incorporate all of the B-movie tropes it does and still maintain a brisk 82-minute running time. Not only that, but there are a lot of fun little touches throughout. As an example, one of my favorites is two of the victims; a couple in a tent on the beach. The guy is using a ventriloquist dummy to seduce his girlfriend, I kid you not, and succeeding. Not only that, but the dummy is funny as all hell.

Humanoids from the Deep has been facing charges of misogyny since it came out. I can see where one would get that impression, but I don’t believe this is the case. If nothing else, it features some rather strong, competent female characters. Jim’s wife Carol (Cindy Weintraub) certainly does an extremely good job at fighting off the fishmen attacking her and her toddler son. Or, in another one of my favorite parts there is Sandy, aka Miss Salmon (Linda Shayne, who later went on to direct, herself). On the one hand she initially seems like just another beauty queen bimbo. Then there’s the obvious jiggle factor when one of the humanoids chases her; she’s only wearing a skimpy bikini, and she gets her top torn off. However, when she is cornered, her reaction is to pick up a rock and apply it to her attacker’s skull. And she wins, too.

I only have two things about this movie that bother me. First is the rapes. On the one hand, the guys in the rubber suits make it look just ridiculous enough that it’s not as unpleasant as it could be; but the scenes are still a bit graphic and rape always bothers me. The other is the killing of the dogs. Admittedly, it’s not at all graphic, but I really don’t like it when animals get killed in these movies. Even (maybe I should say especially) when I’m actively hoping for all of the human characters to meet gruesome deaths, I really don’t like it when animals get killed, whether or not it actually shows it. What’s that? Misanthropic? Moi? Well, maybe just a little.

In the end, I would say that Humanoids from the Deep is a well made, if sleazy, little B-movie with just enough brains to raise it above being merely that. If nothing else it’s good, cheap sleazy fun; and sometimes that’s all we’re after.

Night of the Creeps (1986)

The Movie: We start out aboard an alien spaceship, where one baby-like alien is being chased by two others. When the pursuers are locked out of the corridor their prey escaped to, one emphasizes to the other that the experiment in the capsule he was carrying must not get off the ship. Unfortunately, he takes it to the airlock and it does just that.

The experiment winds up on a certain blue planet that should be very familiar to all of us. Specifically, it lands just outside Corman College in 1959. There, a sorority girl is about to go on her first date with a guy who she hopes will be her new boyfriend. Unfortunately, the evening goes even worse than you could normally expect a date to go. First, the beat cop who interrupts the couple on lovers’ lane to warn them about the escaped ax-wielding psycho turns out to be her recently dumped ex. Then when they see something fall out of the sky in the woods, the boyfriend goes to investigate, leaving her in the car by the road. Loverboy is attacked by slug things that come out of the alien capsule. The girl, meanwhile, meets the escaped psycho and gets the ax.

Twenty-seven years later, on the same campus, we meet best friends Chris (Jason Lively) and J.C. (Steve Marshall). Chris sees and immediately falls in love with the beautiful Cynthia Cronenberg (Jill Whitlow), but is too terrified to approach her. Fortunately for him, J.C. has no such reservations. J.C. is a paraplegic chronic smart-ass, and he’s well aware he’s never going to get laid anytime soon; so he figures he should help his best friend in that regard instead.

Chris gets it into his head that the only way Cynthia will give him the time of day is if he pledges a fraternity. Unfortunately, frat president Brad (Allan Kayser), who unbeknownst to the boys is also Cynthia’s boyfriend, has no intention of pledging them. Still, since they’re kind enough to present themselves for some humiliation, he feels he should give it to them. They are told to steal a corpse from the school’s medical center and leave it on the doorstep of a rival fraternity.

Searching for a corpse, the boys stumble across a top-secret cryogenics facility. They take the body out of the device, but unfortunately it turns out to be Loverboy from the beginning of the movie. When he moves, they freak out and run like hell, so they miss him killing the grad student who attends the facility.

The cop called to the scene is Ray Cameron (the prolific Tom Atkins) who, by a really nasty coincidence, turns out to be the jilted ex of the girl we saw axed in the first scene, and the first person to find her remains. Loverboy, meanwhile, turns up outside of Cynthia’s window, so she gets to not only see the corpse move, but also to see the head explode in a shower of slugs. Having dumped Brad for being an asshole (considering the kind of woman she turns out to be, you have to wonder what took her so long), she turns to Chris and J.C. for support. It looks like Chris might have that shot at the woman of his dreams after all.

Of course, it’s not that easy. The alien slugs infest all the bodies they can get, animating them and in turn causing them to infest the living. Cameron has some demons from his past that literally aren’t going to stay buried. Finally, the whole mess cumulates when a bus crash results in a horde of slug-infested zombie frat-boys….

The Review:

“I personally would rather have my brains invaded by creatures from outer space than pledge a fraternity.”
-J.C.

As I mentioned in my review of Re-animator, creating a successful horror comedy presents a very difficult balance. If you lean too far in either direction you either wind up with a bad, tasteless (and not in the desirable way) attempt at comedy or a weak, half-assed horror movie. Also, if you’re not careful about how you balance the humor and horror elements, they can cancel each other out. Either way, the outcome is rarely entertaining.

However, every so often somebody is able to strike that precarious balance. Night of the Creeps is one of those rare attempts at a horror comedy that actually manages to get it right. For the most part, it is just a plain fun movie to watch. The humor, while often twisted, mostly works; only occasionally aging badly or falling flat. On the other hand, while Night of the Creeps mainly operates in the spirit of good, though usually perverse, fun; it does have teeth and doesn’t hesitate to use them.

On the fun side of the equation, Night of the Creeps has all the beloved staples we expect from our B-movies. The very beginning has some goofy alien costumes, and the rest of the film contains obviously low budget, yet still good and effective, special effects. We have likeable heroes, villains we love to hate, and gratuitous boob shots.

The humor can be hit or miss, but for the most part it works. J.C. and Detective Cameron get all the best lines, and they deliver them well. Where it misses is in the culture references, such as how almost everyone is named after B or horror movie directors.

As for the horror side, when Night of the Creeps gets dark it really gets dark. Things happen to characters we are led to like and care about; even when other movies of this sort would lead us to believe that some of said characters are off limits. Also, the character of Detective Cameron is one of the really bleak points. On the one hand, Atkins plays the character well, making him believable as an exasperating but likeable curmudgeon. He also provides a large portion of the humor. On the other hand, as the movie goes on we get to see how damaged an individual Cameron really is, and the situation with the alien slugs really isn’t helping him with that any.

One final issue of import is the ending. Night of the Creeps actually has two endings; the one that the moviemakers originally intended, and the theatrical ending that the studio made them use instead. For the longest time the theatrical ending was the only one I was able to see, as it was the one on the VHS tapes that were available to me. However, with the recent release on DVD (I snapped up my special edition copy as soon as I could get my hands on it), we are provided with a cut that has the original ending; although the theatrical one is apparently provided as a special feature.

I won’t spoil the endings for you, but I will offer this critique. The theatrical ending is your typical horror movie kicker ending that pops up out of nowhere. It’s not bad, but it’s not great and is something of a disappointment compared to the rest of the film. The original fits in much better, and is also much more ambivalent. You can probably guess which one I prefer.

So in conclusion, Night of the Creeps is a fun, well made little classic of a B horror movie. The acting and writing are good and the special effects, while obviously low budget, are equally well done. It’s also one of the few attempts at a horror comedy I’ve seen that gets it right; the humor mostly works and it’s fun, but the movie also has some rather nasty teeth. Definitely a must see for the B-horror aficionado.

Nomads (1986)

The Movie: Dr. Eileen Flax (Lesley-Anne Down) has just moved to Los Angeles from Boston; and she already faces a life-changing case at the hospital where she works. Late one night a bloody, raving derelict (Pierce Brosnan of Lawnmower Man and the late ‘90s James Bond movies) is brought into ER. He loudly rants nonstop in French, so nobody is able to communicate with or make any sense of him. However, when Flax steps in to check on him; he lunges at her, whispers something in her ear and dies.

Dr. Flax starts having spells of disorientation, sometimes passing out. During these spells she finds herself reliving the man’s last memories. It turns out that the raving derelict was Professor Jean Charles Pommier, a respected professor of anthropology who has spent the last ten years living with various primitive groups. He has only been in L.A. a week, where he and his wife, Nikki (Anna Maria Monticelli; and might I add, a redhead who speaks French! Sigh!), have moved to rejoin civilization. Unfortunately, the prospect of a normal, pedestrian life is already making him bored and restless. But that’s nothing compared to what he’s about to discover.

There is a gang of toughs that vandalizes the couple’s new house nightly. Pommier is overcome with curiosity about them, especially after he discovers a makeshift shrine in the garage. Following and observing them, he discovers that they lead a primitive, nomadic existence; not much different from the people he’s been studying for the last decade. But there is much more.

The Inuit have a legend about the Einwetok (pronounced in-oo-wad), evil nomadic spirits who regularly take the form of humans. They are attracted to sites of tragedy and violence, and they bring madness and destruction to those unfortunate enough to cross their path. Well, it turns out that the Pommiers’ new house is the site of a gruesome murder. Worse, now that the spirits are aware of Pommier, he finds himself hounded; and slowly drawn into another world entirely….

The Review:

“You just look too closely. Most people are luckier; they don’t know that a certain percentage of what they see is not there.”

Nomads is an interesting little horror movie. Admittedly, it is flawed and only a partial success. However, as I have mentioned several times in my reviews of Jean Rollin’s movies, even a partial success can be pretty damn good; sometimes even head and shoulders above typical mainstream genre fare.

With its horror elements, Nomads hits it perfectly. It is a very atmospheric film; one that does a very good job at conveying the sensation of a world that isn’t our own, but that at the same time isn’t as separate from our world as we would like it to be. The horror is mostly hinted at, with just enough glimpses and concrete information to convey the gravity of the threat, but with just enough left to the imagination to make you wonder.

The nomads themselves are very well done. Considering that they include pop stars of the time such as Adam Ant and Josie Cotton, this is especially impressive. The standout for me is Mary Woronov, long my all-time favorite actress (although Brigitte Lahaie is a very close second); who conveys the impression that we’re not looking at a woman, but some inhuman predator in a woman costume. The nomads don’t make any noise (except for one who occasionally lets off an evil chuckle), but through body language and facial expressions they are pretty convincing as individuals who aren’t human; all appearances aside.

Another standout cast member is the ever wonderful Francis Bay, who appears as a creepy blind nun with an undisclosed connection to the evil spirits. Brosnan himself does a good job, more or less convincing in his role. The rest of the cast does adequately at absolute worst.

The final major positive element about this movie that I find worth mentioning is the soundtrack. Bill Conti and Ted Nugent put together three rock songs that are played throughout the film, and Nugent even played guitar for them. Now, I’ve never cared much for Ted Nugent, either as a musician or a human being; but I must admit that the man has talent. The songs really convey the atmosphere of the nomad’s lifestyle and habitat. I just wish it was available on an album.

So with all of these good points, what is the problem with Nomads? I would say that it is one thing; Doctor Eileen Flax. Nothing wrong with Ms. Down’s performance, I think she does well; it’s just that the character herself really doesn’t fit into the movie. Nomads is Pommier’s story, it’s about his decent into this other world and his own damnation. And as it’s about him, we really don’t need Flax.

The connection between the two characters is somewhat spurious, there’s no real in-movie explanation for how he transfers his memories to her. It’s pretty obvious that her entire inclusion in the movie is to provide a set-up for the twist at the end. Admittedly, the twist works. It is somewhat shocking, yet it does flow organically from hints provided earlier in the movie. However, there are plenty ways it could have been done without having to add an unneeded character and her back-story to the film.

So in conclusion, Nomads is a decent, though flawed, little horror movie. It handles its horror through hints and leaving much to the imagination, and does it well. The one downside is that the wraparound plot is unneeded and detracts from the rest of the film. Still, as a whole, Nomads does a great job of conveying the impression of something that lies just beyond the everyday world we take for granted.