The 80’s may eventually become known as decade of the teen movie. There were so many and 98% of them were crude, moronic, and forgettable. However this disarming film, a product of John Hughes, is a winner. It’s a simple story that manages to bring out the universal truths of that age in a seamless manner. Its best asset is its ability to show how all those things that are considered insignificant to others is a big deal to teens. The film may be best suited for adults who can look back on that period with a mature perspective and a wry sense of wit as well as nostalgic to those who were adolescents when the film came out.
The film stands out from the rest in other ways too. First is the fact that the majority of the cast actually look the age they are playing and resemble the physical awkwardness. Other teen movies always seem to have pretty models and chiseled faced guys who look older than they should. The kids here also don’t have that annoying smugness. The filmmakers approach it with the idea that behind all that crudeness it is still an innocent time. It’s also nice to see parents and teens getting along and not constantly at odds. The late night talk between Ringwald and her father (Paul Dooley) is quite touching.
The film has some really funny moments. The destruction of a nice suburban home during a wild teen party is fun. Hall’s ‘official’ unveiling of Ringwald’s panties to a group of awed freshman is also memorable.
Ringwald is perfect in the starring role as she was sixteen at the time and seems to embody the character. You hardly see the acting. Hall was also a good choice as the male geek. He certainly has the scrawny physique of a typical freshman as well as the outrageous persona that he creates to help compensate for it. It is also interesting that at times he shows some mature sensibilities, which is a good example of how adolescence can be a mixture of different traits. The adult cast is great as well especially the veteran character actors who play the grandparents.
This film borders on being a minor classic even though there are a few drawbacks. One is the ending sequence where Ringwald’s older sister, who is also the bride, starts to behave erratically, which becomes comic overkill. The picture worked better when it stuck with Ringwald and her high school experiences exclusively. The film also has a few too many neat wrap-ups. The worst being when the hottest girl in the senior class falls in love with Hall, which was too much of a stretch. The music score gets heavy-handed at times especially when it’s used to accentuate a comic moment. There are also a few too many unnecessary sound effects.
John and Joan Cusack can be seen in small roles with John looking very young. Jami Gertz can be seen quickly as a drunken party guest. Also Blanche Baker, who plays Ringwald’s older sister, is the real life daughter of actress Carroll Baker.
My Rating: 7 out of 10
Released: May 4, 1984
Runtime: 1Hour 33Minutes
Rated: PG
Director: John Hughes
Studio: Universal
Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video
Due to the recent release of the remake of this film I decided it would be a good time to review the original. One thing that has always surprised me about this movie is the fact that out of all the 80’s movies out there why this one would remain such a perennial hit to the point of remaking it even though the cold war has technically long been over has always been a bit of a mystery. I know the ladies at my office are young and don’t know many old movies, but for whatever reason they are familiar with this one, which kind of compelled to check it out.
I remember when the film came out many liberals complained that this could never happen and tried to boycott it much like they did with the ‘Amerika’ mini-series that came out a few years later and dealt with the same plot. My position on the matter remains the same, which is freedom of speech comes first and if someone wants to make a movie about a Soviet invasion more power to them and if they want to make a movie about Sweden invading us then they can do that too.
Now with that said I still felt it seemed farfetched. The explanation for how the Soviets were able to invade us so very easily and quickly is spotty, but I guess if you are going to enjoy the film then you’re going to have to overlook it.
The plot consists of soviet troops parachuting out of the sky and shooting up a classroom before taking over the rest of the small Colorado town. A group of teens manage to escape and hide out in the nearby mountains. Eventually they start to wage guerrilla warfare against the invading troops and name themselves the ‘Wolverines’.
I liked the way the teens are portrayed. They are not just a bunch of spoiled, superficial suburban kids concerned with being hip and trendy and talking in some irritating slang. Instead they seem very much like young men growing into being real men. The fact that there are a few casualties and that they change and become hardened by what they go through makes it all the more authentic. I also liked that the two young women they pick up along the way end up fighting and shooting up the bad guys just as well as the males.
Patrick Swayze does a terrific job as the group’s leader. He makes a strong presence and I wished the movie had focused more on him. It is fun seeing Charlie Sheen looking very boyish and older actor Harry Dean Stanton has a good bit as the father of one of the boys who is now imprisoned in a labor camp and instructing them on how to toughen up.
My favorite performance though was Lea Thompson. She is real young and cute. I loved her volatile temper, her willingness to use a rifle without hesitation, and her infatuation with Andy Tanner (Powers Boothe) a much older man who joins them.
I liked that the point-of-view is exclusively with the kids. There is no attempt to show things from the Communist side, or even try to humanize them at least not until the very, very end. They are portrayed as monstrous and evil lining up civilians and savagely shooting them. If there is anything that can resonate with the masses it is emotionalism and this film keys in on it well and I think that is why it has remained a hit. It becomes like a David and Goliath story with the teens showing up the evil empire and disrupting their plans. I found myself rooting for them even though I kept wondering how they were able to find all that ammunition that they use as well as the warheads.
Action wise it is pretty good. It starts from the very beginning and doesn’t let up. In fact this film was in The Guinness Book of World Records at the time for having the most violent acts of any movie. The film averages 134 violent acts per hour and 2.23 per minute. I enjoyed that the special effects are all real and none of this computerized crap like you see today, which to me still looks phony and makes movies seem too much like a video game.
After about the first hour the movie started to drag and I kept looking at my watch wondering when it would be over. The ending had some satisfying elements as they attack the building housing all the leaders of the invasion, but it is not enough. If you take away the novelty of the Communist invasion then this thing is really just a standard action flick that is no better or worse than the thousands of others out there. The only reason to watch this is to compare it to the remake, or vice-versa.
My Rating: 5 out of 10
Released: August 10, 1984
Runtime: 1Hour 53Minutes
Rated PG-13 (The First movie ever to have this rating)
Director: John Milius
Studio: MGM/UA
Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video
John Ebony (David Hemmings) leaves his job in advertising to follow his dream of becoming a school teacher. He gets a job at an all-boys private school in rural England replacing a teacher who died accidently by falling off a cliff. His pupils soon tell him that they were the ones who killed the teacher and they will do the same to him if he doesn’t do as they say. John can’t find anyone who believes him even his own wife Sylvia (Caroline Seymour) laughs it off. Soon John finds himself a virtual prisoner of his own students and forced to follow their dictates while he tries to figure out who the ringleader is and bring them to justice.
Director John Mackenzie does a terrific job of building the tension slowly. The film works at a deliberate pace allowing the viewer to see things from John’s point-view-of. The slower pace keeps things realistic and therefore more effective. Geoffrey Unswoth’s cinematography is vivid. I loved the way the steep cliffs are captured at the beginning and a camera is thrown off the cliff making the viewer feel like the victim as they see the landscape swirling on screen before completely submerging in water. A nightmare sequence where John dreams of being accosted by the boys in much the same way as his predecessor is visually exciting. The on-location shooting at an actual private boy’s school in Wales only helps to add to the authenticity.
The students themselves are quite effective and much better than their counterparts in the similar Child’s Play where they came off as too robotic. Here they have more diverse personalities. Their snarky behavior and the taunting both to their weaker peers and to John was so on-target that it made me feel like I was right back in high school. Their polite and formal facades are a thin veil to their sinister side that becomes increasingly more apparent as the film goes on. The pinnacle comes when they lock Sylvia in a darkened gymnasium and threaten to gang rape her. The lighting, done exclusively with flashlights and the frenzied action make this a memorably creepy moment.
John makes for a solid protagonist. The viewer can feel and understand his unique quandary and the character is believable enough to help make the movie engrossing from beginning to end. My only quibble would be near the end when the boys ask him to come with them to look for one of the students that have disappeared and he agrees. I thought this was a little hard to believe as it was right after they had tried to attack his wife and the search was being done near the cliffs, which would put John at a vulnerable risk.
The twist at the end is a bit of a surprise and is overall satisfying. Despite what is stated in the review in Leonard Maltin’s ‘Movie and Video Guide’ there is no revelation of any kind after the closing credits. I have seen this film now twice from two different sources and both times the only thing that comes after the credits is the Paramount logo.
If you are looking for a review about the Chucky doll then you will have to wait as that will come at a later time. This is the first film to use that title and it is based on the Broadway play by Robert Marasco who in turn based it loosely on an early Ingmar Bergman movie called Torment. The story deals with an exclusive all-boys school where bizarre unexplained random acts of violence begin to occur between groups of students. New teacher Paul Reis (Beau Bridges) becomes determined to unravel the mystery and begins to suspect that it may have something to do with a long running feud between two of the school’s older instructors Joseph Dobbs (Robert Preston) and Jerome Malley (James Mason)
The film opens right away with a nice creepy tone and a foreboding score that immediately got me wrapped up into it. The dark, shadowy lighting of the interiors helped accentuate the sinister feel. It is also great to have the film shot in an actual boy’s school instead of building sets to recreate the look. Just hearing the floorboards creak underneath the feet of the actors as they walk around helps to create an already strong atmosphere.
Mason is terrific. I think it is impossible for the man to ever give a weak performance even if the script itself is poor. He is captivating every time he is on the screen and his ability to display wide ranging emotions without flaw never ceases to amaze me. Everything always seems to come so naturally with this man in all of his performances that you never see the acting, or technique behind it. It is a shame this movie is so obscure because watching his performance alone makes the film worth seeing and the desperate, lonely character that he plays is interesting in its own right.
Preston doesn’t seem as strong. He is a good actor at times, but not for this type of part and having him wearing a moustache doesn’t help. Supposedly the part was originally intended for Marlon Brando, who would have been more interesting, but he ended up backing out.
Bridges is okay as the protagonist, but he has played the role of a wide-eyed idealist coming into an ugly situation while oblivious to all of the dark aspects a little too often making it an annoying caricature.
The movie fails in the fact that it cannot hold the tension and there are too many talky scenes with little action in-between. The students come off as robotic like and the scenes involving them attacking another student inside a gymnasium looks staged and rehearsed. Director Sidney Lumet would have done better had he used a hand-held camera and gotten right in the middle of the fray making it seem more spontaneous and vivid.
I also had a hard time believing that so many students could get effectively brain washed and sworn to secrecy. I could buy maybe a few, but having so many seemed implausible and ruined the film for me. However, the explanation for the cause to the violence is an original one that I wouldn’t have thought up myself. Also, the surprise twist at the very end is kind of cool.
A similar film to this one entitled Unman, Wittering, and Zigothat also came out in the 70’s and dealt with murder at an all-boys private school will be reviewed next Friday and fares a bit better.
On Halloween night in 1963 6 year old Michael Myers stabs to death his older sister Judith. He is taken away to a mental institution, but fifteen years later he escapes and comes back to his hometown of Haddonfield to stalk three teenage women (Jamie Lee Curtis, Nancy Loomis, P.J. Soles) on Halloween night.
I first saw this film 25 years ago when I was in College and thought it was cool, but now on my second viewing I’m not quite as impressed. There are still some good things about it, but also in my opinion some glaring loopholes. I’ll start with the things I liked.
Cinematically it is a well mounted thriller. The lighting is perfect. The dark shadowy interiors create the feeling of menace and the little light that is shown has a bluish tone and resembles authentic moonlight. The music by director John Carpenter is distinct and has an effective up-tempo beat almost like a warning siren. The editing and pacing is great. It builds the tension nicely and has some creepy imagery.
One of the scenes I always found to be the creepiest is when Tommy, the young boy that the Curtis character is babysitting, sees from across the street Michael carrying one of his dead victims from the car to the house. In fact all the long shots showing Michael are the most effective. Somehow it was a combination not only of the way the actor walked in the costume, but his mask as well, which was apparently a William Shatner Captain Kirk mask that was painted all white.
The fact that there is never any reason given for why Michael became the way he did is also good. There are many similar true-life crimes where even after the murderer is interviewed by the psychiatrists they still can’t always come up with a satisfying explanation. Movies that try to show the reason behind why the bad guy becomes murderous usually end up being contrived and clichéd.
The three actresses looked too old for teenagers and in the case of both Loomis and Soles where already in their late twenties. Loomis though is kind of funny in her part especially with the way she interacts with Lindsey (Kyle Richards) the young girl that she is babysitting. Curtis is good and although I respect her right to going natural with the gray hair that she now sports I still felt she was at her most attractive when she had the long red hair like she has here.
On the negative side there seemed to be too many story elements that didn’t make sense. For instance Michael is institutionalized when he is six and then escapes fifteen years later and is able to miraculously drive a car even though he was never trained. The book version of the movie explains this anomaly by stating that when Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasance) would take Michael to sanity hearings over the years that Michael would watch very closely how Loomis operated the vehicle and thus ‘learned’ how to drive, but that still doesn’t make sense because watching how something is done and then finally doing it yourself are two completely different things. Besides if watching how somebody drives where enough then every child who watched his parents drive could learn it and there would be no need for driving schools. Also, Michael escapes from the asylum without any explanation, which seemed way too convenient.
When Dr. Loomis shows up in town and tells the sheriff (Charles Cyphers) that there may be an escaped mental patient in the vicinity the sheriff comes up with the logical step of warning everybody about it, but Loomis disagrees and his reasoning is ridiculous. Also, when Laurie (Curtis) gets a call from Lynda (Soles) that sounds like she is being murdered Laurie doesn’t do the most sensible thing and that is to call the police and let them investigate it. Instead she decides to go over to the home in the middle of the night and investigate it herself, which not only needlessly puts her in a dangerous position, but also leaves the two kids that she is supposed to be watching home alone in bed, which is something a good babysitter should never do.
I also had some problems with the setting itself. Now of course the town of Haddonfield is fictitious, but the state of Illinois isn’t. It is situated right in the middle of the Midwest and there are no palm trees anywhere within its borders and yet I spotted a few lining the streets especially near the beginning when Laurie is seen walking home from school. I didn’t buy into the idea that the Meyers house would stand vacant for 15 years either. There are a lot of homes that have murders committed in them that do not remain abandoned, or considered ‘haunted’. In some cases the original house is torn down and a new one is built in its place such as the infamous John Wayne Gacy house in Des Plaines, Illinois, which is now being occupied by a new family. The neighborhood in the film looks nice and well-kept. The other homeowners wouldn’t stand for a building being abandoned for that long as it brings down the property values.
When I first saw this movie I got a real kick out of the part where Michael kills a man and then hangs him by a knife on a wall and stares at the corpse in a child-like way. However, on second viewing I don’t think the blade of the knife would have been long enough, or strong enough to go through a man’s body as well as a wooden door.
The opening sequence where we see Michael killing his sister from his perspective didn’t completely work with me either. I liked the idea of seeing the action through the two eye holes of the mask that Michael was wearing, but I think if someone is stabbing someone else that they would be looking at what they are doing, but instead the eye holes remain fixated on the sister’s face during the stabbing that is being done on the lower parts of her body, which looked stilted and unrealistic.
Now, I know this movie has a large legion of fans and some may take umbrage to my negative points, but hey, I take my film criticism seriously and feel I need to say it the way I see it. That is not to say that I ‘hated’ the movie either. I still liked it overall, but when given the issues that I described above I can only give it 6 points.
A gruesome murder is committed during a graduation dance in 1945. Now, thirty-five years later, the town decides to hold another one and soon the gruesome murders start back up.
The film does have an unusual opening for a slasher film, which consists of actual newsreel footage from World War II. It also nicely recreates a 1940’s dance scene. The presence of veteran’s Farley Granger and Lawrence Tierney help a little, but not much. Neither is seen a whole lot and in the case of Tierney isn’t even given a single line of dialogue. Bill Nunnery comes off best in his brief appearance as a lazy and apathetic hotel clerk. There is also a good moment of juxtaposition featuring the girls dressing up for the dance while cutting away to show the killer dressing up to kill them.
However, the movie is incredibly boring and redundant. There seems to be no point to the murders from before and why it was even put in seems ridiculous. The teen characters are one-dimensional and useless. The scenes that are supposed to be intense and scary become excessively dragged out until they become dull. The much ballyhooed special effects by Tom Savini don’t seem all that gruesome. The killings are pretty much standard stuff with most consisting of just a quick slash to the victim’s throat and then cutting away. The only decent one involves the death of a nude shower victim via a pitchfork. One particular killing seemed hard to believe if not completely impossible. It involved the killer putting a large knife all the way through the top of the victim’s skull and then out the bottom of his jaw with just one swoop. Then somehow the killer is able to easily take this same knife all the way back out, clean if off, and use it on his next victim. The girls are decent looking, but there needed to be a lot more nudity to make it worthwhile.
Despite attaining a cult following I found the film to be unimaginative and formulaic. The killings are boring and there isn’t one single scare or fright in it.
My Rating: 2 out of 10
Released: November 6, 1981
Runtime: 1Hour 29Minutes
Rated R
Director: Joseph Zito
Studio: Sandhurst
Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video
Due to football season starting on Wednesday I have decided to incorporate a football themed movie for today’s 80’s movie review. It is story about a divorced mother of two (Goldie Hawn), who coaches a high school girl’s track team, but decides she wants to live out her dreams by coaching football instead. Unfortunately the only football job she can find is with a losing boys’ team in a tough inner-city high school.
This is a very uninspired, by the numbers ‘feel good’ sports movie. There actually seems to be more drama than comedy and what little comedy you get really isn’t very funny. Having a woman coach a boy’s football team would be enough of a challenge, but forcing her to do it in a tough inner-city school seems unnecessary. The players are one-dimensional and uninteresting. Even Hawn’s character is dull although Hawn herself is still engaging. The climactic game sequence is so predictable and full of clichés that it becomes almost excruciating to sit through. The film is also plagued by having that annoying 80’s music sound.
On the plus side I found it fun to watch Wesley Snipes and Woody Harrelson in their film debuts. It is also great to see Nipsey Russell although they don’t give him enough to do. He looks like he was only 38 even though, at the time, he was actually 68! Thad Thacker who is very large physically is amusing and the only interesting player on the whole team. His acting is nothing exceptional, but his ‘con-man’ routine has its moments. Actor James Keach, who plays the stereotypical ‘jerky’ ex-husband, ends up giving a surprisingly sturdy performance.
Overall the film is dull and predictable and hardly good for even a few cheap laughs. Why some people think this is so funny is beyond me because everything that is done here has been done better somewhere else.
Marty McFly (Michael J. Fox), Dr. Emmett Brown (Christopher Lloyd) and his girlfriend Jennifer Parker (Elisabeth Shue) use the DeLorean to travel 30 years into the future to help save their future son who is in trouble with the law. There Marty meets an older version of Biff (Thomas J. Wilson) who overhears about the time machine. He decides to take a discarded sports almanac listing all the scores for the past five decades and steals the machine and uses it to go back to the year 1955. The older Biff then meets up with his younger version and hands him the almanac telling him that he can bet on every winning team in every sport and make a fortune, which he does. This then changes the course of history drastically and it is up to Marty and the Dr. to go back to the 50’s and try and stop the transaction between the two Biffs from happening.
Like with the first film, I found the plot to be inventive and creative. Writer/director Robert Zemeckis has thought everything through and keeps the twists and turns coming at a fast pace making it virtually impossible to predict where it is going. Yet the story is complex and some may say convoluted. The idea of going back to the 50’s makes it seem almost like a retread of the first film. The characters even meet their counterparts going through the same scenes from the first, which ends up only tarnishing the original. Outside of the scenes from the future this film lacks the lightheartedness and fun of the first. The tone is much darker and the Biff character as well as his grandson Griff, which Marty meets in the future, are boring one-dimensional bad guys that are given too much screen time.
My favorite part is at the beginning. The flying cars and the space highway with similar road signs that you would see on a regularly highway is well done. I got a kick out of the Nike sneakers that can tie themselves and the coat that talks, can change shape to fit any size, and even dry itself off when wet. Marty’s trip to an 80’s café is fun and if you look closely you will see a young Elijah Wood in a brief part. The futuristic Texaco gas station and the movie marquee advertising ‘Jaws 19’ because this time ‘it’s really, REALLY personal’ is funny as is the holographic shark that jumps from the ad and scares Marty. Of course, as of this writing, we are now only three years away from the actual 2015 and it is safe to say that they got it all wrong, but it’s still interesting to see how they envisioned it. My only objection would be the clothing styles worn by the people that look like clown outfits, which may have been subtle satire, but I’m not sure.
I did feel the reason for them traveling to the future proved to be a loophole. In every other scene Emmett is always preaching about never trying to alter the regular course of events because this could cause unforeseen cataclysmic problems, so why then change his philosophy here? The reasoning given is sloppy and slapdash.
I did like that Marty turns out to be just a regular middle-aged suburbanite and not the famous rich rocker he dreamed of as the odds probably could have predicted. Fox is amusing as the older Marty and the make-up job is impressive for the way they get his perpetually boyish face to age.
Crispin Glover is certainly missed. He was unable to come to an agreement on the salary and thus turned down reprising the role of George McFly. A likeness of his image was used and he sued them for it and I say good for him.
Elisabeth Shue appears as Jennifer filling in for Claudia Wells who played the part in the first one, but then dropped out of acting to care for her sick mother. Shue has certainly grown into being a fine and respected actress, but here she is wasted. She does little except show facial expressions that are constantly perplexed and nervous, which eventually becomes laughable. The scene where Emmett and Marty decide to allow Elisabeth to lie sleeping amidst a pile of trash while they go off and do something else seemed questionable.
Had the film stayed in the future it would have been more enjoyable. I still found it to be entertaining, but it is easy to see why this entry is generally considered the weakest of the series. I was rather put off to see previews of Part III shown at the end, which made it seem like this whole thing was just an excuse to sell the audience on seeing the next one, which artistically isn’t a good precedent to set.
My Rating: 6 out of 10
Released: November 22, 1989
Runtime: 1Hour 48Minutes
Rated PG
Director: Robert Zemeckis
Studio: Universal
Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray (25th Anniversary Trilogy)
Marty McFly (Michael J. Fox) is a 17 year old videotaping his older friend Dr. Emmett Brown (Christopher Lloyd) who is planning on entering a time machine he has invented and going thirty years into the future. Just when he is about to enter the vehicle some angry Libyan nationalists with rifles appear who are upset that Emmett took plutonium from them under deceptive means. To escape the bullets Marty jumps into the machine, which is a DeLorean car, and goes back to the year 1955. Here he bumps into his father George (Crispin Glover) who is now a teenager himself and Marty inadvertently stops him from meeting his mother Lorraine (Lea Thompson) thus putting his entire existence into jeopardy. Marty must find a way to get them together while also working with Emmett on getting him back to the 80’s.
The concept is original and creative. Director Robert Zemeckis has every plot point and tangent covered. Just when you think you have a handle on it he throws in another twist that makes it even more interesting. It moves at a fast pace and a perfect blend of action and comedy. The dialogue is endlessly amusing as it takes full-advantage of the ironic scenarios and the special effects are good. The music, especially the song ‘The Power of Love’ by Huey Lewis and the News is rousing and Huey even appears in a brief cameo as a nerdy talent judge. There are a lot of great scenes that are both funny and exciting.
Fox is terrific in the lead although Eric Stoltz was cast in the part originally, but fired after four weeks of shooting. Fox is far better as he displays an intelligence and restraint that most other teen stars don’t have. His mannerisms are a plus and the way his voice reaches a high pitch whenever he is nervous is funny.
Crispin Glover is always interesting. He has such an eccentric personality and acting style that he makes every film that he is in better. However, in the early scenes he doesn’t look middle-aged and more like a skinny teenager with horn rimmed glasses.
I had the same issue with Christopher Lloyd only in reverse. Of course he is perfect for the role. His bulging eyes almost make it seem like he was born to play the part of a mad scientist. I was however surprised that no noticeable attempts were made to make him look younger when Marty meets him in the 50’s. I expected the character to be young and just starting out, but instead he already seemed established and living in a nice house making me wonder who was paying him to tinker around his home all day on his experiments?
Lea Thompson is not completely convincing as a mature woman during the first part and she looks very uncomfortable under all the heavy make-up. However, she is certainly cute in the scenes where she is younger.
In the complaint department I do have a few. First all the characters that Marty meets during his time in the 50’s seem excessively dopey. The film is too entrenched with an 80’s mindset. The 50’s is portrayed as a quaint bygone era with no relevance. There is too much of a ‘we’ve come a long way baby’ mentality and the 80’s played-up as being way ‘cooler’ than the 50’s even though some people may disagree. It would have been nice had there been a broader, transcendent approach to the story that would have been able to compare and poke fun of each era equally instead of just dumping on the 50’s like it was a joke.
The climatic sequence in which Emmett tries to connect a wire from a clock tower, which is set to be struck by lightning, to the DeLorean, so Marty can use the electricity to propel the vehicle back to the present gets overplayed. I don’t mind some unexpected mishaps to happen, but Zemeckis becomes obsessed with throwing in every type of calamity possible every few seconds until it becomes tiring and annoying. It got to the point where I just wanted the damn scene to end not so much because I cared anymore about Marty’s fate, but more because my ‘tension meter’ had become exhausted.
SPOILER ALERT
My third and final grievance has to do with the very end when Marty returns to the present and finds that his father has turned into a much more confident and successful man then he had originally been at the beginning. This is because due to Marty’s meddling during his time in the 50’s, George ended up confronting Biff (Thomas F. Wilson) his lifelong nemesis and knocking him out with one punch, which gave George a new found sense of confidence. This also turned Biff from a bully into a patsy and thirty years later we see him as George’s mindless assistant. Now this twist may initially sound funny, but after a second when you really think about it, the humor is lost because it has absolutely no bearing in reality. No bully is going to take on a meek role for the rest of his life simply because some scrawny guy was able to knock him out with a lucky punch. If anything Biff would have become obsessed with getting back at him and even challenging George to another fight and not giving up until they did so. Or after graduation, he would have simply left that hick town and gone on with his life and leaving that embarrassing and isolated incident far behind him. Sometimes irony can be great and I usually do love it, but too much of anything is never good and at certain points this film seems to get to that level. Also, for such an otherwise clever film you would have thought that they could have come up with a more creative name than Biff for the bully.
My Rating: 7 out of 10
Released: July 3, 1985
Runtime: 1Hour 56Minutes
Rated PG
Director: Robert Zemeckis
Studio: Universal
Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray (25th Anniversary Trilogy)
TeenagerLane Meyer (John Cusack) is obsessed with his girlfriend Beth (Amanda Wyss) and has pictures of her plastered all over the walls of his bedroom and even on the hangers in his closet, but she ends up dumping him for a more popular guy. Lane falls into despair and tries to kill himself, but when that fails he decides to try and win her back by challenging her new boyfriend to a daring ski race down a dangerous slope.
The film has a free form style that is initially fresh and funny. Director Savage Steve Holland is a noted animator and the segment where a cartoon monster eats up Beth’s new boyfriend is engaging as is the claymation sequence involving a singing/dancing hamburger and his lady fries. The script is devoid of the crude humor, derivative sex and foul language that permeated the other teen comedies from the 80’s, which is nice. The adults here are not played as stupid, overly authoritative jerks, which was another common trend in teen comedies, but instead, at least in the case of Lane’s dad Al (David Ogden Stiers) a very rational and intelligent man who ended up being my favorite character. The scenes inside the school and in the cafeteria look authentic because real teenagers were used for the supporting cast and they weren’t all good looking models. The casting director keenly puts in a wide assortment of body types and faces just like you would see walking down the hallways of any high school.
The supporting cast is excellent and to some extent outshines Cusack who seems a bit aloof. I was especially impressed with Curtis Armstrong as Lane’s cocaine obsessed friend Charles who sports the perfect teen grunge look and was already in his 30’s when he played the part even though you would never have guessed it. It was a lot of fun seeing Kim Darby in a very atypical role as Lane’s ditzy mother Jenny. My image of her as the strong-willed Mattie Ross in the original True Grit is so thoroughly etched in my mind that it is hard to imagine her in any other type of role, but the change of pace here does her well. Wyss and Diane Franklin, who plays Lane’s new girlfriend Monique, are both pleasing on the eyes.
Some of the humor is funny, but tends to become increasingly unfunny as the film progresses. Call me nitpicky, but a lot of the jokes do not hold-up under the scrutiny of even the most basic of logic. For instance Al gets out of bed early in the morning to open up his garage door to try and save the one remaining window on it that hasn’t been destroyed by the delivery boy who has a propensity to hurl newspapers through them, but wouldn’t a normal person have cancelled the subscription when this continued to happen, or sued the newspaper delivery service, or the boy’s parents? Also, it didn’t make sense for the newspaper boy to come after Lane for his money when the subscription was most assuredly under Al’s name and he was the one with a job. There is another segment involving Lane driving in a car and becoming so upset by the fact that every station on the radio is playing a break-up song that he tears it from the dashboard and throws it out the car window when simply turning it off would have been much easier. The running gag involving Jenny’s wacky new dinner recipes becomes stupid and exaggerated.
The climatic ski sequence is ruined by the fact that the viewer has already seen several characters ski down the same slope already, so by the time we get to the scene it becomes redundant. The songs used on the soundtrack are flat and it is easy to see why none of them charted.
I know when this film came out in 1985 I refused to go see it because I wasn’t going to watch any film directed by a man with the first name of Savage, which to me seemed like a name for someone who is a goofy self-promoter and not a serious filmmaker. Now, after having finally seen the film I can safely say that my initial feelings were correct. This is not a movie, but more a compilation of gags. The plot and characters are shallow to the extreme and the story goes nowhere and lacks any type of momentum, or pace. As a teen comedy this thing ranks poorly because it is just an empty, vapid excuse for director Holland to show off his nifty animation skills and nothing more.
Scopophilia 