Friedkin Fest '08

On Friday, I'll be debuting a new feature on the blog called Friedkin Friday, where I gaze back at some of the truly exceptional cinematic work of William Friedkin, an Oscar-winning director who happens to be one of my favorites. In particular, I'll be looking at some of Friedkin's more controversial, lesser-known works (in other words, not The Exorcist or The French Connection, at least to start). So I'm headed towards the likes of Sorcerer (1977), Cruising (1980), To Live and Die in L.A. (1985), Rampage (1988) and Jade (1995), specifically.

In fact, I'll be kicking off Friedkin Friday with a review of the notorious Cruising, a much-reviled film about an undercover cop (Al Pacino) frequenting the Big Apple's gay leather bars (of the pre-AIDS era) in search of a serial killer. If you haven't seen the film yet, queue it, watch it and get on board. Seriously, I'd love to have the readership here join me in gazing back at Friedkin's impressive, controversial and colorful film oeuvre, so pick up any of these titles and start thinking about what makes a Friedkin film unique or special.

I know that for me, I appreciate the almost documentary-style approach Friedkin adopts in key scenes. Remember Regan's visit to the hospital in The Exorcist? Or the close-up montage of the counterfeiting process in To Live and Die in L.A.? The attention to detail is amazing; as is the feeling "you are there."

Also, Friedkin boasts the nickname "Hurricane Billy," and this is appropriate since his films do frequently hit you like a hurricane, especially in the meticulously-constructed action sequences. The sheer audacity, complexity, and pace of the highway car chase in To Live and Die in L.A. pops to mind, but I could be making the same claim for The French Connection.

I also appreciate Friedkin's attention to detail and accuracy, whether he's making a film about counterfeiting or the leather fetish scene. He's remarkable at capturing the vibe of a place: a city, a night-club, Iraq even. Furthermore, Friedkin's films feature a deep-seated sense of moral ambiguity (some might say cynicism or pessimism) that I find fascinating to watch (and again, that may go back to his history as a documentarian).

What leaps to mind when you think of a Friedkin film? I'd love to see your comments. But definitely tune in here Friday for a review of Cruising.

CULT MOVIE REVIEW: Quest for Fire (1982)

I ordered this Jean-Jacques Annaud classic from Netflix last week to wash away the funk left by Roland Emmerich's silly and lugubrious 10,000 BC, and I'm glad I did.

This is how a prehistoric film should be done; no question about it. This is an exciting, action-packed adventure with memorable characters and an inspiring message about human nature.

I've admired Quest for Fire ever since I saw it in the theater back in 1982, but it's good to know for certain that the movie holds up well even after twenty-five years. This is a film that is authentically epic in scale (like 10,000 BC sought to be); one that attempts accuracy in the language of its cave-man protagonists (grunts and groans all the way around...); but which also isn't historically inaccurate in a way that makes you laugh or wince. The cave-men here don't wander into Giza and find the pyramids under construction. Thankfully.

Thematically, Quest for Fire -- based on the novel by J.H. Rasny - offers a unique narrative and commentary about man's unique capacity to change (I was going to say his ability to "evolve"); to adapt to new technologies and new developments in his always-difficult existence. That life, as we see here, was nasty, brutish and short.

Set some "80,000 years ago," this "science fantasy adventure" (as it was billed in the original theatrical trailer) specifically concerns the primitive Ulam tribe. Annaud's observant camera introduces us to this Cro-Magnon clan and the rhythms of primitive life, and it almost feels like we're watching a documentary for the first fifteen minutes or so. We see the tribes' people sleep (together, in a large communal cave), share a meal, even mate (there's precious little romance in this quick act...), and, finally, tend to their fire.

That last bit is especially important. The Ulam lack the capacity to make the fire for themselves, so they have assigned a Fire Keeper or guardian to keep a small flame eternally lit. Why? Fire ("the great mystery" according to the film's opening card), is the one thing that keeps the tribe alive. It provides warmth; light, and the means to cook food. Without it, the Ulam would descend into darkness, cold and despair. Yet they don't understand fire. It's a thing to be captured; to be found. To be sought.

Then, one day, the lurking Wagabu (a tribe of primitive homo erectus) launch a surprise attack on the Ulam, and it's like a Stone Age 9/11 or Pearl Harbor. The sanctuary of the Ulam cave is breached. Men are killed (in extremely violent and bloody fashion) and women are dragged away. And the sacred fire is nearly extinguished. The Fire Keeper manages to keep the flame lit for a short time, but soon it winks out, leaving the Ulam tribe -- now wandering in a primordial, misty bog --- little hope for continued survival. Accordingly, three of the best warriors in the tribe, Naoh (Everett McGill), Amoukar (Ron Perlman) and Gaw (Nameer El-Kadi) are tasked with a seemingly-impossible mission: to find fire and bring it back to the tribe.

The quest begins, and on this incredible odyssey across a wild landscape, the three men encounter sabre-toothed tigers (which chase them up a tree...), mastodons, and other terrors of the Paleolithic Age. In the film's most frightening scene, the Ulam triumvirate confronts the Kzamm, a neanderthal tribe of cannibals. Our heroes attempt to steal fire from these monstrous, hulking creatures, but it's a botched attempt.

Still, during the struggle, Naoh and the others manage to free Ika (Rae Dawn Chong), a beautiful female of the advanced Ivaka tribe. Adorned solely in body paint (otherwise totally nude), Ika is resourceful, bright and one of us...a homo sapien. She introduces the Ulam warriors to the concept of laughter (not to mention the wonders of the missionary position...), and soon becomes the team's most valuable player; at least until, homesick, she decides to return to her tribe. Heartbroken by her departure, a smitten Naoh follows Ika back to her people, and after a series of ritual humiliations (including public sex with a line-up of very obese women...), is introduced to a world of new technology. The Ivaka, you see, can make fire. It is an art they teach Naoh. Also, the Ivaka can craft arrows, make pottery and build free-standing shelters. It's a brave new world.

After some time living happily as an Ivaka, Naoh is coerced by Amoukar and Gaw to return to their people. Ika, who has fallen in love with Naoh, goes with them on the trip. In the end, Naoh vanquishes a rival in his clan, and Ika teaches the Ulam to make fire. No longer is it "magic;" something beyond the grasp of their understanding. Now it is simply...a tool.

The last scene of the film, a beautifully staged, evocative medium shot, reveals a pregnant Ika cradled tenderly in Naoh's strong arms, as they look skyward expectantly, bathed in moonlight. The next generation will be one born with the knowledge to make fire; to build shelter; to carry light spears/arrows. Mankind has taken a big step forward and we have witnessed the journey.

Even today, the human animal gets a lot of things wrong, no question. We pollute our environment and we wage war, specifically. But Quest for Fire reminds the viewer that the human experience is always evolving; that a new technology could be invented or discovered, one that makes our struggle for immortality that much closer to reality; that makes our burdens that much lighter. You can watch, in Quest for Fire, how Naoh integrates new weapons, new science, into his primitive life...and is the better for it.

This theme got me thinking about my own relatively uneventful life, and I realized suddenly that twenty years ago, I had never logged on the Internet, blogged a post, written an e-mail or used a cell phone. And ten years before that, I had never sent a fax. Just in the span of my adult life-time, the way I "live" has changed radically. I guess I'm like Naoh after a fashion (we all are...). In just the span of this film, the dark, mysterious world of the Ulam becomes significantly brighter because of interaction with the Ivaka and their technology.

This is nothing less than the story of the entire human experience: the great and unending quest to make our lives less uncomfortable; less difficult. I don't use the word "comfortable" lightly. I don't mean that we're lazy. I mean that the flow of human history is to make survival (and our children's survival) less a risk and more a guarantee: with science, with technology, and hopefully with wisdom. That's why it hurts me so much to see the anti-intellectual, anti-science nuts gaining so much traction in this country's discourse today. If man had let superstition win out in the prehistoric past....we never would have survived. We never would have learned to make fire. We would have died out in that swamp.

The march of progress, however, isn't always great or easy for everyone. The Fire Keeper in Quest for Fire, for instance, is out of a job in the Ulam Tribe, his skills no longer needed. This may be the first case of downsizing in history...

I also find it immensely interesting that it is a woman who - basically - brings civilization to Naoh's people in this film. She teaches Naoh how to make love as well as make fire. And, watching the final scenes of the film, you have to countenance the idea that she also teaches him the critical (and in my experience, female...) quality of patience. Where - I wonder - would mankind be without womankind?

Visually arresting, and loaded with gory action sequences, Quest for Fire is a fascinating adventure that considers with great verisimilitude "what might have been" in our long ago past. The shots that book-end the film: nearly identical pans across a desolate dark valley lit by a single fire, serve to remind us how hard our journey has been; that mankind's survival over the ages is not a miracle; not a gift from non-existent deities. But rather the result of our own resourcefulness and ingenuity in the face of a harsh and dark environment. Don't praise God. Don't praise fire. Or magic. Praise the human spirit. It got us where we are today.

Theme Song of the Week # 20: Run Joe Run (1974)

CULT MOVIE REVIEW: Tarzan The Ape Man (1981)

"We're here for your pleasure. Not ours," states Bo Derek (as prim and proper Jane Parker), in her husband (John Derek's) sexual-skewing interpretation of the Tarzan mythos, Tarzan The Ape Man (1981).

Naturally, she's talking about the reasons why women are put on this Earth (for men's pleasure; not their own...), but she might as well be discussing the reasons this film looks the way it does. It was produced -- seemingly -- entirely for male consumption and pleasure. After all, the film is a lingering, loving tribute not to Edgar Rice Burroughs' seemingly immortal jungle man character, but to Derek's legendary and statuesque, perfectly-sculpted body and her character's tantalizing sense of sexual "innocence."

I realize the purists (and just about everybody else...) hated Tarzan the Ape Man when it was released back in the early 1980s, but I have to tell you: it's an absolute riot, and thoroughly entertaining (if not always intentionally so...). The basic idea of this "re-imagination" (before the term re-imagination was even a glint in Tim Burton's eye...), is a depiction of the Tarzan story re-framed and re-parsed from Jane's naive perspective; and as a sort of soft-core travelogue across gorgeous, picturesque, wild Africa.

Accordingly, the film's photography (of bodies and exterior locations...) is never less than beautiful (some might say stunning), and there's no studio fakery to break the illusion of a sojourn into the bush, so-to-speak. In terms of bad movie history, the torch of bad-actors starring in soft-porn genre films is passed from John Phillip Law (Barbarella), playing a photographer named Holt, to chiseled Miles O'Keeffe, portraying Tarzan. That baton-passing alone is a cinematic milestone, I'd estimate.

Richard Harris (who also starred with Bo Derek in Orca back in the disco decade), plays Jane's father in this version of Tarzan, and he takes his performance waaaay over-the-top. Mr. James Parker is a central character in the screenplay, however, which concerns Jane's journey of self-discovery. Yes, she must select one of the two Alpha males in her life: either bad old Dad or hunky, heroic Tarzan. Since this battle of the -- ahem -- larger-than-life men is the crucible of the narrative, both male characters are depicted by director John Derek in - how shall I say this? -- distinctly phallic terms.

For instance, Mr. Parker informs Jane that her mother almost died "during conception." You read that right. Not child-birth, mind you, but conception. That means...in the act of love-making. "I held her too long; I loved her too hard," he explains regretfully, providing way too much information about a scene I don't want to envision. Jeez.

Later, Holt (a milquetoast) explains to Jane that it takes a very "big" (!) man -- her father -- to go into wild Africa in search of a mythical inland sea, which is tucked secretly away behind a giant stone protrusion in the land, an outcropping of insurmountable rock that Bo and the others must scale. Uh huh.

Finally, there's an absolutely incredible, shameless, downright brazen composition in which Harris is seen to be polishing a large chrome cannon (placed in the frame around his crotch level). The cannon, not surprisingly, is pointed due north. When Bo Derek approaches Harris and his gleaming cannon, she arrives from the submissive position in the frame, from below...studying the shining cannon wide-eyed...

Even Richard Harris (who regrettably plays his first scene without pants...) and his silver cannon, however, can't compete with Tarzan in the phallus department. The Ape Man (always wearing a tiny loin cloth...) reveals his worthiness by freeing Bo not just from another phallic symbol, a gigantic boa constrictor, but by rescuing her from a deflowering at the --errh-- hand of a semi-retarded savage local who had planned to make Jane his bride.

The set-pieces in Tarzan The Ape Man are not really what you would expect of a Tarzan movie; confirming the fact that this movie is really about sex, not adventure. The few action sequences are filmed in agonizing slow-motion and look more like coitus than combat. Take the snake scene: it's an over-long montage in slow-motion photography, with close-ups of Bo and Miles writhing, gasping and twisting in muddy water. Foreplay never looked so great. But it takes too long...you want to get to the main event.

There's also an incredible scene in the middle of the film, one set at an "inland ocean" in which Jane decides - out of the blue - to take a bath. Yes! We are then treated to a lingering scene of Bo Derek swimming in a shiny blue sea; the waves lapping against her supple, gorgeous flesh. She poses in the sand, her clothes clinging transparently to her flesh. It's quite intoxicating...until a wandering lion shows up. Tarzan shows up too, and a love story (of sorts) commences.

Harris, who actually gets to voice a line of dialogue I've always wanted to say to my wife ("I wallow in me. I enjoy every syllable I say."), soon confronts daughter Jane over her new interest in the hunky ape man. "Do you understand what he wants?" He asks.

Yeah Dad, I think she understands.

Later, Tarzan abducts Jane and one of his chimpanzee entourage tosses her a banana at a well-timed moment. Clutching the banana close to her mouth, doe-eyed Jane says the words we've longed to hear from her. "I'm still a virgin." She then adds "I don't know whether that's good or bad..." (Hmmm, I'm thinking...good!). Tantalizingly, Jane sucks a little on the banana...

Whew!

Later in a film that feels like all promises and no delivery, Jane teaches Tarzan to smile. She puts her fingers to his lips. He responds in kind. Then, as if he was born to it, Tarzan reaches quickly under Jane's (see-through) shirt and begins to vigorously massage her nipples. At this point in the film, Kathryn looked at me, and said "what is it with men? Why do you men automatically go for the breasts?" I won't repeat my answer here. But it was good.

The film climaxes (if you'll pardon my choice of phrase), with Bo Derek topless again, covered head-to-toe in glistening white paint; rescued in the nick of time by Tarzan from the Special Ed Savage. As for poor Daddy, he's finally undone by the King of Phallic Symbols: gored by an elephant tusk. As he dies, he continues to blabber endlessly. "Your life is going to be a marvelous adventure," old Dad says to his daughter, just as she is about go off and be deflowered by Tarzan.

I'll say...

Then, as the end credits roll, we are treated to the oddest threesome in cinema history. Tarzan, Jane and an eager orangutan frolic and wrestle at length, their limbs and bodies intertwined.

Well, whatever floats your banana, Tarzan.

TRAILER

Comic Book Flashback # 11: Logan's Run #4: "Dread Sanctuary!"

In early 1977, Marvel Comics offered "the official adaptation" of Logan's Run, the hit science fiction movie starring Michael York and Jenny Agutter.

As you no doubt recall, Logan's Run concerned a futuristic City of Domes which was a virtual paradise...except citizens were not permitted to live past their thirtieth birthdays. This comic-book adaptation split the movie's sprawling narrative into five issues authored by David Kraft and drawn by artist George Perez (based on the screenplay by David Zelag Goodman).

My favorite issue of the bunch is April 1977's action-packed number #4, "Dread Sanctuary" which finds an on-the-run Logan 5 and his sexy companion Jessica leaving the City of Domes proper and stumbling upon the "eternal ice world" of the mad robot called Box. As it turns out, Box is a bit of a sculptor in his spare time despite his mechanical nature, and he wishes to forge (out of ice..._ an artistic representation of Logan and Jessica that he believes will prove his enduring "masterpiece."

While Box sculpts away, Jessica and Logan - still in search of Sanctuary - stumble upon a colossal ice cavern where all previous runners from the city have been frozen and trapped: entombed in the ice where they are now stored as food for the city's young denizens. "It's my job to store fish, and plankton, greens and protein from the sea," explains the chrome Box, "So I store them here. It's my job."

Logan and Jessica, now wearing "primitive" animal furs, quickly realize they must battle Box or face the same fate as the other unlucky runners. Fortunately, Logan is still armed with his Sandman handgun, and the war is joined. Box is destroyed (or mostly destroyed, anyway...) and Logan and Jessica flee the cave...only to see the sun for the very first time; and to feel the welcome warmth of it as well.

Logan and Jessica begin wandering the outdoor wasteland. "They have no specific destination...only a renewed zest for life, a developing affection for each other and a shared determination to eventually find the elusive Sancturary. They are open to new experiences, to new feelings..."

With Jenny Agutter at my side, I'd likely be open to new experiences and new feelings too. But I kid Logan's Run.

Before long, the runners stumble upon the ruins of Washington D.C. (particularly the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument), and make contact with a strange old man (in the movie, Peter Ustinov). But before these former-inhabitants of the Dome City can learn what it means to "grow old," Logan's Sandman pursuer, Francis, shows up to "terminate" them. The final chapter: End Run!

I guess I enjoy this chapter of the Logan's Run comic the most, because it encompasses some of my favorite scenes from the movie. Jenny Agutter in a barely-concealing fur wrap; Jenny Agutter wet in the water of the Potomoc; Jenny Agutter...

Umm, where was I?

Oh yeah, so this part of the story is my favorite because it reveals (some) of the mystery of what lurks beyond the City of Domes. As a kid, I was terrified of the deep-voiced Box (Rosco Lee Browne), a character depicted here -- in author William Nolan's words to me a few years ago -- as something like "a walking vanity table." I was also thrilled with the special effects depiction (mostly impressive matte paintings) of abandoned Washington D.C., with all of our national monuments overgrown with vines. These scenes of our society -- left behind and forgotten -- stuck with my young mind.

Thinking about these moments again just makes me want to watch (and review) the film here on the blog. It's been a while since I saw the movie, but it's one of my all-time favorites. I was thrilled, a few months ago, to work a Logan's Run reference into the final episode of The House Between's season three. Now if I could only get Jenny Agutter to cameo...

NeuRODic Notions Reviews The House Between.

Money Quote:

"It’s an amateur production that has been so successful that I believe it’s been nominated for a genre award or two in the past, and is now in its third season.

I only recently discovered the show and have noticed the rapid improvement of acting and production quality as the series progresses. It’s a low-budget labour of love, but a well written thriller.."

Read the rest of the post here.

Sy Fy Radio Interview

Hey everyone, you can check out my guest appearance last night on Sy Fy Radio at the show's archives here. I had a wonderful time with Michael and Marx, and the show was a lot of fun. The chat room was great too...I made some new friends, I hope.

Check it out if you get a chance. There are some spoilers for Season Three...particularly the first episode, "Devoured."

TEASER!

John on Sy Fy Radio Tonight!

Don't forget: I'm on Sy Fy Radio tonight at 10:00 pm EST with host Michael Hinman to discuss The House Between.

We'll be talking about the Sy Fy Genre Award nomination for Best Web Production, the upcoming third season (SPOILERS!) and much, much more.

You can call in to the show, so don't be shy if you have any questions about the house at the end of the universe, the stories set there, or the denizens.

See you there!

CULT MOVIE REVIEW: Journey to the Center of the Earth (1959)

Released nearly fifty years ago, Henry Levin's Journey to the Center of the Earth (based on the Jules Verne novel) is a classic. It's a sprawling, colorful, dynamic, "big" entertainment; the likes of which are no longer made in Hollywood. This movie is truly the whole enchilada: loaded to the brim with action, humor, romance, thrills, special effects and even...Pat Boone's singing (!).

Impressively, none of the various shifts in mode seem out-of-place or jarring in this decades-old adventure tale. I don't want to sound old and stupid or anything if I can possibly avoid it, but this is actually a movie the whole family CAN enjoy, but in a good way; not a vanilla or insipid way. I suspect this is because the film came out well-before "genre fans" were designated as such. The film's purpose is to entertain a wide (but educated...) audience, but it has no need to pander to any certain sect (except, perhaps, the Verne purists). Expectations for a film like this were far different a half-century ago. (Could you imagine Shia La Beouf stopping for a musical interlude in Indy 4? Hugh Jackman pausing for a little tap dance in X3: The Last Stand?)

You are likely familiar with the narrative here, as it has been adapted to film and television many times and in many ways. You might remember the Emo Philips version from the late 1980s (though I hope not...); or the new 3-D model playing in theaters now, or perhaps even the Filmation animated series from the late 1960s. Although I haven't seen the Brendan Fraser version yet, it's highly likely that this 1959 incarnation remains the rolls-royce of Journey adaptations; though I'd be happy to be proven wrong. (Anyone? Anyone?)

Regardless, the story follows Professor Oliver Lindbrook (James Mason) as he leads a pioneering expedition from a craggy volcano-top in Iceland to the very center of the Earth itself. His team includes his horny young assistant Alec (Boone, before he started appearing in anti-abortion films...), a muscular Swede named Hans (Peter Ronson), the lovely widow Goteburg (a smoking hot Arlene Dahl), and...a brave little duck named Gertrude.

The trip to the center of the Earth is a dangerous one for the Lindenbrook Expedition. For one thing, the team is shadowed by the evil Count Saknussem (Thayer David). For another, the group must deal with (in order): high ledges, rock falls, flash floods, giant mushrooms (!), a clutch of hungry Dimetrodons, an underground ocean (replete with magnetic whirlpools), another giant lizard that inhabits the ruins of Atlantis, and - finally - a roller-coaster ride up a volcanic chimney (with hot lava nipping at their backsides).

I hasten to add, all of these events are depicted brilliantly and imaginatively; with both superb actual locations (Carlsbad Caverns) as well as highly creative -- and massive - sets filling in for the fantastical subterranean domain. I was particularly impressed with many of the special effects/optical composites, which have stood the test of time remarkably well. Just look, for instance at the amazing "rock bridge" Alec traverses; or some of the long-shot integrations of the cast with giant lizards. It's all remarkably good stuff.

I also discovered with some interest that there are at least two moments here that appear lifted from Journey to the Center of the Earth and inserted into Raiders of the Lost Ark (admittedly a pastiche of films such as Journey). The first such moment involves a ray of sunlight pinpointing the opening in a rock wall to show the travelers the way to start the journey (operating on the same principle as the Staff of Ra). The second moment involves a large circular boulder being shaken loose in a cavern and rolling relentlessly towards the protagonists as they run for their lives. Interesting, no? Everything old is new again; then old again, I guess.

Thematically, I appreciate how the film dramatizes the notion that "the spirit of man cannot be stopped." Journey captures beautifully and poetically the glory and wonder of exploring a terrain never before broached. "Why does man freeze to death trying to reach the north pole?" one character asks rhetorically in the film, and it was at that moment I realized how much I truly love this film (a love I have carried since very early childhood). This story calls to the same human impulse to explore as the original Star Trek: to go where none have gone before. I dug that as a kid, and I dig it now. I wish there were more of it in the cinema and television of today.

Viewing this old favorite in mid-2008, I realize a film with these qualities simply not be made in this fashion today. The sexual politics are antique (though amusing); the first hour of the film plays much of the drama for laughs (particularly a scene in which Gertrude is thought to be "speaking" in Morse Code") and all the danger/terror is strictly "tolerable." In other words, the family nature of the film precludes the creatures from The Descent (2006) attacking. All these qualities are fine with me, but they don't seem timely or commercial in today's environment. That's why I'm curious to see the new version that was released last weekend. I suspect it will be "darker," more focused, shorter (this film runs two-hours and twelve-minutes), bloodier and all-together more grown-up than this classic version.

That's okay. I'll introduce Joel to the tale with this version. The one I grew up with...