Review #598: 'Mannequin' (1987)

If I were ever to be truly embarrassed about any of my entries into the Childhood Memories Project, it would be this simply disastrous excuse of a movie. It was shown mid-afternoon in the early days of Channel 5 one day, and my granddad thought to record it for me, along with another bizarre and semi-obscure entry into the 1980's comedy genre, FEDS (1988). I can't remember if I even liked the film, but I remember watching it repeatedly. Maybe I was drawn to the simple-minded and childish comedy, played out over some extremely dodgy 80's electro-pop. Or perhaps it was Kim Cattrall, looking beautiful before she starred as upper-class slut Samantha in Sex in the City (1998-2004), stirring some pre-pubescent feelings inside of me. I like to think the latter is true.

Ancient Egyptian princess Emmy (Cattrall) hides from her mother who wants her to marry against her will. After praying to the Gods for rescue, she in transported through time on a quest for true love. Meanwhile, young mannequin-manufacturer Jonathan Switcher (Andrew McCarthy) is sacked for taking too long on the job, he drifts between jobs while trying to keep his demanding girlfriend Roxie (Carole Davis) happy. One night he spots his greatest mannequin creation - in the image of Emmy - in the window of the failing Prince & Company, ran by Claire Timkin (Estelle Getty) and the slimy Richards (James Spader). After saving Claire from a bizarre accident, he is given a job as a stock boy. One night, Emmy comes to life and enchants Jonathan, inspiring him to create a window display that attracts a large audience.

I don't really know how to write a serious review of Mannequin after just typing that plot synopsis. The bull-shit story and lack of any remote explanation aside, the film is nothing but clichéd, childish humour, and a fairytale romance aimed at mentally numb teenage girls. The truly creepy idea that Jonathan is in love with a plastic mannequin is simply justified by his outlandish co-worker Hollywood (Meshach Taylor) being 'weirder'. He is gay and camp, after all! There is also a gaping plot-hole that begs that question as to why Jonathan doesn't just take the mannequin home with him, therefore ruling out the need to sneak around under the nose of psychopathic security man Felix (G.W. Bailey) and his dog Rambo. It would have also been a reason to avoid 90 minutes (and hours of my childhood!) of sheer drivel.


Directed by: Michael Gottlieb
Starring: Andrew McCarthy, Kim Cattrall, Estelle Getty, James Spader, G.W. Bailey
Country: USA

Rating: *

Tom Gillespie

"Henson: The Felt Magician"

Having been born in the mid-1970's, I was introduced at a very early age to the eccentric, colourful Muppet characters that frequently occupied the television screen through Sesame Street (1969 - Present) and The Muppet Show (1976 - 1981). It would be safe to say that I was slightly obsessed with these elaborate sock puppets, but I also became aware at an early age of the driving force behind these endearing creations, Jim Henson. Although he used puppets simply as a way to get into the burgeoning medium of television, throughout his career he would revolutionise puppetry, innovating the performance-based art form, and developing a style that would transfer to the cinema screen in a variety of ways. He pushed himself and the medium into a formula that was fantastic, anarchic, satirical and self-reflexive, but that also radiated a wholesome and sweet outlook, with a value system that at times seems naive, but imagines a world in peace.

During the early 1950's, Henson, a shy, softly spoken young man still in high school, took up hand puppetry as a means of getting work on the local Washington DC television network. Puppetry on children's morning television was very common at the time, but largely the medium had never really been explored before on TV or in the cinema. The films of German animator/puppeteer Lotte Reiniger (The Adventures of Prince Achmed (1926) and the many traditional fairy tale films) used the simple silhouette puppets against lit backdrops which were some of the first puppet-oriented moving images. Before television puppets were largely seen in vaudeville in the form of ventriloquists dummy's, or on the seaside with Punch and Judy. Stage work would use walls in which the puppets perform from behind, but what Henson saw with television (and later film) was that the frame of the screen/camera could represent that wall, freeing the puppet performer. By 1955 Henson was given his own five minute slot on late-night television. He created the satirical Sam & Friends, which played with the form of television, often using the then contemporary comedic style of "sick" humour (incomparable from today's darker comedy, but nonetheless funny).

Sam & Friends ran for several years and saw the introduction of Henson's most iconic character, Kermit (the Frog was added later).  Whilst the programme gathered a cult following in the Washington DC area, Henson felt that his creations (the Muppet, Inc company was formed in 1958) could expand and appeal to larger audiences. Under the newly formed company, Henson could use his puppets for television commercials, and therefore bring in money for other, more innovative projects. During the 1960's the Muppets would make appearances on TV specials, variety shows and talk shows such as The Ed Sullivan Show, and his name and artistry started to become recognisable to the general population.  What this period fundamentally resulted in was Henson's reputation as a master craftsman. His dedication to the art form was unsurpassed, using the simple tools of foam rubber and cloth, and the subtle movements of hand and fingers, he (along with his Muppeteer colleagues) developed a style of puppeteering that gave such a range of emotions. This talent inevitably led to him being brought into a new, experimental form of television aimed at pre-schoolers.

With an idea to revolutionise young children's television, The Children's Television Workshop, with producer Joan Ganz Cooney heading, had the idea of teaching toddlers simple letters and numbers in the same format that commercials use to sell products. It was a clever idea, but the show required something else, and the decision was to use puppets. However, if they were unable to get Henson to provide the performers and his own puppet creations, they would not do it at all - this shows how significant his work was in the industry. In 1969 Sesame Street first aired and whilst the educational "adverts" were successful and memorable, it was the Muppet characters that raised the profile of the show, elevating it to international acclaim. Like so many of his creations, the Muppet characters occupying the magical, but very real urban environment of the street, are incredibly enduring. From the naive, awkward Big Bird, the miserable Oscar the Grouch, the clumsy Grover, these characters are embedded deeply into the global consciousness, instantly recognisable to practically every human on the planet. That's quite an achievement in itself. But to Henson, this format was too marginalised, too specialised. He felt that the Muppet creations could bridge the gap between young and old, and wanted to transfer puppet performance to prime-time television.

After taking his Muppet variety format to all of the American television networks who flatly rejected the idea, preferring to think that puppets were exclusively for children. Even after some sketches on the first season of the now world famous comedy show, Saturday Night Live in 1975 and '76, Henson's unique brand of comedy was not considered by executives (traditionally known as money-men as opposed to creatives). This was until British film and television producer, (Lord) Lou Grade, who supported and funded what would become the hugely successful The Muppet Show that ran for five years. It gave Kermit the Frog, Rowlf the Dog (who had been previously used in commercials and in sketches on The Jimmy Dean Show), and all the newly created Muppets (you probably know most of them: Fozzie Bear, Miss Piggy, Gonzo, Scooter, Animal, et al), international recognition, and literally became household names.

The show was a brickolage of ideas and concepts. It has references to old vaudeville theatre, it is charming but anarchic. It is proper, chaotic variety, and including special guests was a clever way to keep the show fresh. The Muppet Show looked to the past, but also had a contemporary feel, the progressive, hippie-like band, Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, were perfect facsimiles of the extravagant rock shows of the time, with such groups as Yes or Pink Floyd. It was a perfect package that had the desired effect of working on a number of levels, much like the films of Pixar have done over the last couple of decades. The show displayed a verve for slapstick humour, but balanced this with wit, and often innuendo. Like the characters on Sesame Street, these characters are enduring, because they are so well developed, and allowed to develop their own idiosyncrasies. The relationships with the characters were so important. Without them, along with the subtle movements of the puppeteers hand movements, it would not work.

It would be impossible to write something about Jim Henson without including his working associate, Frank Oz. Working together since the early 1960's, their relationship and their own characters could be seen in the characters they played together. Some of the most memorable relationships are Henson and Oz: Ernie and Bert, Kermit and Miss Piggy. As performer and Puppet manipulator, Oz was incredible. Henson himself called Oz the best Puppeteer in the business. He brought a feminine tenacity to Miss Piggy, a naive, vulnerable charm to Fozzie, and a primal, guttural angst to the drummer based on Keith Moon, Animal. Their combined talents and ambition would lead them to transfer their puppet ingenuity to the medium of film. Their first use of film came in 1979 when they released the first film to feature The Muppets. At the time this was a bit of a gamble. The Muppets work well on television, and perform well with humans in a studio, but would the transition from the false setting of a set to real world surrounding work?

The Muppet Movie (1979) showed that puppets were a believable possibility on film. Henson made some innovations on the film also, including a wondrous technical achievement involving Kermit riding a bicycle. The nature of cinema, with its use of editing, Henson could create different mechanical puppets that could perform a particular function in a scene. These progressions in special effects continued through the following two Muppet films (The Great Muppet Caper (1981) and The Muppets Take Manhatten (1984)) that Henson was involved in. But it was a film that Frank Oz was involved in that showed that a puppet character could work in a believable, human-led film. After turning down an offer to work on The Empire Strikes Back (1980), Henson told George Lucas that he should ask Oz. Frank's Yoda puppet was thoroughly accepted, and was a successful film character, and Henson, never missing the chance to evolve his chosen art form, took on a monumental challenge. What became The Dark Crystal (1982) was the first film to use an all-puppet cast.

The fantasy film was a prevailing genre after the business changing success of Star Wars (1977), so in hindsight it was inevitable that Henson could utilise this trend and create a unique world that would illustrate his themes, philosophies and ideologies. Collaborating with British illustrator and conceptual designer, Brian Froud, The Dark Crystal was a visual feast, and no doubt a designers dream project. It was a Tolkien-esque fantasy world with the quintessential themes of mysticism and spirituality. Like all of Henson's projects, Crystal was filled with innovations in puppetry and special effects. Whilst the film was not a huge success (financially at least), Henson wanted to further explore fantasy landscapes, archetypes and characters again with the more playful, and comedic Labyrinth (1986) who's screenplay was written by ex-Python Terry Jones. Clearly enjoying the creation of other worlds, Henson would later return to fantasy on the television series The StoryTeller (1988), which again delved into mythology, fairy tales and folklore to create a lush series of episodes introduced by John Hurt.

Most famous for his Muppet creations, Henson shows further complexity in the form of two particular, non-puppet films that he produced and directed in the 1960's. The first, Time Piece (1965), which was nominated for an Oscar, was a short experimental film starring Henson as a man running from time, and the various obstacles that get in his way. More interestingly to the oeuvre of his career, and the themes that run through his work, was a tele-play for the hour-long show, Experiment in Television, The Cube (1969). The Cube was a kind of avant-garde concept, Kafka-esque in the frustration of a character trapped in a cube, having various members of society play games or invade his personal space. The film shows an acute awareness and fear or paranoia about the societal structures surrounding us. It is self-reflexive, like much of Henson's work, his characters are always aware that they do not occupy the real-world, but are in fact, in the case of The Cube, in a Tele-Play. The film is not perfect, and has faults. But in its essence, the themes are strong, and thought provoking. That's the genius of Henson. Even in the later, "fluffy" (on the surface at least) concepts, his ideas and view of the world is there.

With Henson's themes of anti-establishment, and his awareness of the political and social problems in the world, he also perpetuates his ideologies. The Muppets have strong values to communicate to the viewer. Underneath the crazy, satirical, anarchic mannerisms of puppets, is a heart that is so sweet and innocent. Henson appeared like a hippie, the bushy beard and calm exterior. When he proposed the idea for the television series Fraggle Rock (1983 - 1987), he simply said, "We should create a children's show that brings peace to the world". It's a beautiful statement; naive, but to the point. This seems to have been his way. He was creative, and understood the complexities of humanity, but he also had a pure, almost innocent side that strived to communicate a beautiful exploration on the nature of love and community. The Muppets were dysfunctional, but gathered round the driving force of Kermit (i.e. Henson). The signature song of Henson's alter-ego, Kermit, is an incredible song about race and belonging. Bein' Green speaks of Kermit's dismay at being the colour "of so many ordinary things." It is such a simple piece, but incredibly powerful - particularly in the performance Kermit had with Ray Charles.

It was a sad day in May 1990 when I heard the news of Henson's early death (he was only 53). I secretly lamented (I was fourteen and was unwilling to express myself socially). Fortunately, the characters he left behind could exist beyond him. He left behind a legacy, including companies Muppets, Inc and The Jim Henson Creature Workshop. These companies still exist. Like so many other film franchises, The Walt Disney Company owns the rights to the Muppet characters, but in 2011 the new Muppet film, The Muppets, showed that the generation that grew up with them, were willing and able to continue the characters with a similar sense of humour as their creator, certainly the film was more successful than some of the appalling films produced in the 1990's. The child inside me continues to be endeared by the Muppets, still enjoy the beauty and imagination of The Dark Crystal, and wished he'd tried to become a puppeteer. As Henson has said about his early career, he thought that using puppets in TV would combine his great loves in life which was film , television and art. The technical achievements are great, but absolute to this is the creativity and character, but also the sweetness and optimism of the work. So I'll end as The Muppet Movie did, with a song. Kermit: "Life's like a movie, write your own ending. Keep Believing. Keep pretending. We done just what we set out to do. Thanks to the lovers, the dreamers, and you."

Marc Ivamy

Review #575: 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' (1984)

By 1983 the horror sub-genre of slasher films were dwindling, offering largely imitations of the hugely successful Friday the 13th series (in 1984 Friday had it's 'Final Chapter' that proved to be eventually false), with films such as Curtains, The Forest or Sleepaway Camp. Whilst the majority of these films expressed the vapid nature of teenagers as throwaway avatars for murder, they continued with the conventions set out by John Carpenter's Halloween (1978), but added very little in originality or invention. Of course, Wes Craven's A Nightmare on Elm Street was not the first slasher to involve a supernatural villain - Uli Lommel's ridiculous The Boogeyman (1980) - along with Halloween's Michael Myers - had utilised these elements before, but Craven's nightmare hook turned what could have been a standard early-'80's horror film into something quite original and filled with socio-political ideas.

Wes Craven at this point in his career had made the notorious (and still quite shocking) debut, The Last House on the Left (1972), the mediocre, yet well known The Hills Have Eyes (1977) and the failed mystery, Deadly Blessing (1981) - amongst other inferior projects. He had yet to display his intelligent subversion of horror conventions that are now well known though the Scream franchise (1996 - 2011), but within the foundation of his slasher screenplay, was a concept inspired by a real-life mystery that he embellished, creating what is now an icon of the genre. Craven read in the newspapers about a young Asian boy who was fearful of sleep, telling his parents that someone was after him in his dreams. One night his physician father gave him sleeping pills, and the boy violently died in his sleep. So, what if there was someone attempting to kill a group of teenagers in their sleep? Well, it would surely make for an interesting narrative, and one that would equally be frightening, smart and original.

On the surface, Nightmare is a straight forward story about revenge. Krueger hunts the teenage children of the parents who had burned him alive. A child molester and killer (the molestation angle was diluted for the film due to the McMartin pre-school trial that was breaking in the media at the time), Krueger had escaped imprisonment due to a technicality, so the parents of Springwood created a vigilante mob to track him down and deal out justice on their own terms. As Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) and her friends begin to describe the razor-fingered, red-and-green-sweater-wearing figure invading their dreams, the conspiracy surrounding him, and the secrecy kept by the parents begins to unravel. Elm Street is a place where the parents (or the forefathers of the United States) hide the sins of the "father" from the younger generation. Like the omni-present rise of a new conservatism in Reagan-era politics, America desperately felt the need to hide the fundamental violence that created the nation.

In this context, Krueger represents America's violent past, from the decimation of native Indians, through the depravity of civil war, to the embarrassment of the failed war in Vietnam. Reagan wanted to present the nation as a clean-cut, progressive society, and with the religious right now on his side (before 1980, state and religion were separated by the constitution, until Republicans realised the number of voters that could be gained by "preaching" god and country into their policies). In the first real introduction of Krueger proper in the film, the young Tina (Amanda Wyss) stands in an alleyway, and he enters at the other side, his Fedora hat in silhouette, he stands like a figure from the old western frontier, the music suggests the genre conventions of a John Ford film. But this is an outlaw figure twisted to reveal to the youth of the '80's that they are no longer able to believe the lies and deceits of parent and government. But Krueger is also a spectre of the past, who will correct the wrongs by eliminating the future, tearing apart the fabric of the fallacy created to whitewash any infractions of history.

Aside from subtextual concepts that run through the film, there is ample room for inventive, bloody deaths. The supernatural infuses the script and lets fantasy become overindulged. From the horrific death of Tina, whose body, slashed with the finger knives, is dragged onto the ceiling where she screams for life, to Johnny Depp's screen debut, where his body is pulled into his bed, gushing out blood at an impossible rate, the bloodletting is both horrifying and informatively original. In Nancy we have the standard final girl of the sub-genre, but she is far more intelligent than previous girls. Langenkamp portrays the strong-willed female with confidence. But fundamentally, unlike films such as Friday the 13th or Halloween, the "monster" seems to have purpose, his vengeance almost justified by the legality of his murder; legitimised by a troubled past. In a way, Krueger looks over the teenagers, like the incredibly effective scene where his claws and face push through the wall above the sleeping Nancy, he peeks into the wrong bedroom, but he wants to expose the fabrication of history.

I first saw A Nightmare on Elm Street on video in 1985 (a friends brother rented it for us - I was 9), and it was one of the first modern horror films I was introduced to. To be honest it was a bit of a revelation, and I can easily state that it probably changed my life, in the sense that I saw a film that played with film form, and presented the concept and atmosphere of a dream/nightmare in such a primal and effective way. It is certainly a film that has stayed in my sub-conscious ever since. The impact of the film, and its central, monstrous conceit (Krueger), has been watered down with seven inferior sequels (which will be reviewed on The Wrath of Blog over the next few months), and has therefore lost the thing that made it work on so many levels. But, watching this film as a stand alone narrative, it still has a powerful, deeply disturbing idea - we all sleep, we all dream. What if that activity that we all need to survive could kill you? The only real failure of this first movie is the multiple, farcical endings that time has been unkind to. It seems that director and producer, Robert Shaye, were unable to agree on a suitable end, but resolved to use them all. But it is still a film of interesting beauty and mood, and a film that I will no doubt return to in the future.


Directed by: Wes Craven
Starring: John Saxon, Ronee Blakley, Heather Langenkamp, Johnny Depp, Robert Englund
Country: USA

Rating: ****

Marc Ivamy

Review #509: 'Halloween III: Season of the Witch' (1982)

After the mediocre sequel to John Carpenter's 1978 original, which continued the story of Michael Myers, treading over similar ground, like so many of it's imitators at the time, Carpenter and writing/producing partner Debra Hill would only get involved with a second sequel if it could be a separate story to the already tired Myers slasher. Originally, they had the idea to continue with a feature approach to the Twilight Zone formula of anthology narratives, and these would be set around the themes of the holiday season of its title. The original screenplay was written by British writer, and creator of Quatermass (as well as the haunting The Stone Tape (1973) and the BBC adaptation of Nineteen Eighty-Four (1954) amongst others), but Dino De Laurentiis (one of the films producers) felt that the film required more horrific, contemporary gore scenes. Subsequently, after many alterations, Kneale removed his name from the project.

As it is, the film is incredibly flawed, but has some very interesting notions within it. It was a brave choice to use the Halloween name for something completely different; as I have stated before, the commercial horror fan is a fickle species, and the habit of formula is expected. The third Halloween brings a nefarious plot to destroy the people who celebrate the corporate, consumerist aspects of the holiday; "...the strange custom of having your children wear masks and go out begging for candy," is the indictment of a society that has lost spiritual meaning, forgetting the ritualistic foundations of hallows eve, focusing only on consumption and dressing in costumes. In the opening scene, an old man runs in horror grasping a Halloween mask. Being admitted to a hospital, a suited man (nondescript and corporate) enters and kills him, then burns himself alive in the car park. The mystery is set up, and Dr. Challis (Tom Atkins) and Ellie Grimbridge (Stacey Nelkin) - daughter of the old man), trace the movements of the father, leading them to the Silver Shamrock factory, manufacturer of popular masks.

Set in remote, small town Santa Mira, California (a reference to 1956's Invasion of the Body Snatchers), the ludicrous conspiracy to kill all who watch a television signal that triggers a gruesome death for the wearers of the masks, raises many fundamental contradictions and inconsistencies to the film. It throws in elements from others films, particularly with its allusions to ...Body Snatchers, such as the pointless plot about replacing people with robots - Cochran is a master magician, creating mechanical drones. The evil plan is ultimately unbalanced and ridiculous - what is the purpose of killing the general public, and what purpose would there be in replacing them with robots? Tom Atkins basically reprises his role from The Fog (1980), with Nelkin replacing Jaime Leigh Curtis, and O'Herlihy plays the standard bond-like villain, always happy to tell the protagonist the details of the plan, for the purpose of exposition.

Although the film has it many issues, I have fond memories of the film growing up. A brave attempt to move away from the franchise formula, and an interesting attempt to create a mystical story, and a criticism of modern America's obsession with consumerism, and which also manages to stereotype the Irish. The music, from John Carpenter and Alan Howarth, brings the film into the same atmosphere as the previous films, and also signal a relationship to Carpenter's other projects of the time, and adds to the overall menace that is there in the film. With some advanced gore scenes, the film is in context to the time of production, but whilst I do have affection for the film, I would have preferred to see Kneales version, a script that he himself has said was "one of the best I've ever written." And remember, like it goes incessantly in the Silver Shamrock television commercials, I ad lib: "nineteen more days to Halloween..."


Directed by: Tommy Lee Wallace
Starring: Tom Atkins, Stacey Nelkin, Dan O'Herlihy
Country: USA

Rating: ***

Marc Ivamy

Review #503: 'Little Shop of Horrors' (1986)

Based on the off-Broadway musical by Howard Ashman, which was based on Roger Corman's 1960 film that was apparently shot in two days, Little Shop of Horrors sees lonely plant shop worker Seymour Krelborn (Rick Moranis) discovers a strange venus fly-trap-alike plant while wandering uptown. With the shop failing and facing a possible sacking from owner Mushnik (Vincent Gardenia), Seymour tries the plant in the shop window to instant success. He names the plant Audrey II, a dedication to his squeaky-voiced love Audrey (Ellen Greene) who is in an abusive relationship with sadistic dentist Orin (Steve Martin). Not knowing how to feed his new sensation, Seymour accidentally cuts his finger one day, and discovers that Audrey II has a lust for blood. With his fingers drying up, and Audrey II becoming bigger every day, Seymour must resort to other means to find fresh blood.

Like most straight men of my age, I don't tend to warm to musicals. There are, of course, some greats in the genre - Gold Diggers of 1933 (1933), Singin' in the Rain (1952), West Side Story (1959) - but I usually find them to be three hours of singing and dancing based around a simple concept or plot. The genre has seen its fair share of oddball productions, and Little Shop of Horrors is one of these - one part a loveable homage to B-movies and the work of the likes of Roger Corman, and one part an impressive musical, featuring some very catchy numbers and staying true to the ideals and traditions of the genre. The film is also surprisingly (and therefore pleasantly) dark, featuring axe mutilation, domestic violence, dental torture, and a sadomasochistic patient.

Of all the cameos that pop up, Bill Murray's (as you would expect) is the most memorable. Taking over from Jack Nicholson's baby-faced role in Corman's original, he becomes visibly sexually aroused while Orin ploughs through his draw of many horrific-looking dental instruments to create a hilarious and quite edgy scene, given its PG rating. John Candy, James Belushi (taking over from an unfortunately axed Paul Dooley after the climax had to be-shot due to negative test screenings while Dooley was unavailable), and Christopher Guest are less successful. But Steve Martin manages to steal the film even from the fantastic Levi Stubbs, who voices Audrey II, playing the ridiculously over-the-top, motorbike-riding, gas-addicted Orin, whose musical number is the best in the film (the part in which he punches the nurse in the face had me giggling). It's a nice reminder of how Martin used to be one the most watchable comedians of his day. This is the Martin of The Man With two Brains (1983) and Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid (1982), before he became the go-to guy for middle-class suburban dads in those wretched American family movies.

I've yet to see the original ending (also the ending of the off-Broadway musical), which was seen as too nihilistic and satirical for test screening audiences. I have read what the other ending is though, and sounds far more memorable than the rather simplistic one that was re-shot (it was preferred by director Frank Oz and practically everyone else involved in making the film), but it isn't the first, and certainly won't be the last time a mainstream audience would hide behind their hands in the wake of watching something a bit different. This film was one of my favourites as a kid (my brother said that I used to sing and dance around the house to the opening song - a claim I staunchly deny!), and watching it as a 27 year old, I can appreciate it as a B-movie fan, something that obviously flew over my head as a child. It eclipses Corman's cheap-as-chips original, and is ultimately a rather trashy, silly, but undeniably fun experience.


Directed by: Frank Oz
Starring: Rick Moranis, Ellen Greene, Vincent Gardenia, Steve Martin, Bill Murray, James Belushi, Christopher Guest, John Candy
Country: USA

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #439: 'When the Wind Blows' (1986)

Once upon a time the United Kingdom had a television station that broadcast and produced some of the most intelligent, innovative, and interesting film and television - both fiction, and non-fiction. In 1981 Channel Four began broadcasting, and showed the best of world cinema, subversive documentaries and fictions, and even funded some of the most experimental animations of the time. Whilst this is hard to believe in this day and age, when this particular channel broadcasts some of the most bile-inducing, inane programming - essentially pumping sewage into Britain's homes (Big Brother, Supernanny, How Clean is Your House et al), - but it genuinely did (honestly!). I remember fondly their late night showcase for avant-garde world animation, Four-mation (where I was also first introduced to the subversive work of Jan Svankmajer), which also showed the best of new British animation.

Channel Four's 1982 Christmas programming was delighted with an adaptation of Raymond Briggs's The Snowman, with its kid-friendly story of a snowman come-to-life. (Consequently, The Snowman has been shown every Christmas eve since 1982). Briggs was a well respected children's author, who had also written both 'Father Christmas' and the famous 'Fungus the Bogeyman'. In 1982 Briggs published something altogether different. 'When the Wind Blows' used the same graphic novel, illustrative technique to tell the story of a retired couple, Jim and Hilda Bloggs, living in isolation in rural England, dutifully following ludicrous government issue pamphlets, offering advice on how to "survive" a nuclear attack. When this attack becomes imminent, they construct a shelter out of their own doors, paint the windows white, and even climb into paper sacks. Laughably, the pamphlets used in the film were actual official guidelines sent out to British homes in the 1970's (the UK equivalent of "duck and cover").

Whilst not a cheerful story, it was inevitable that this should get green-lit for film production, and director Jimmy T. Murakami (who had previously directed Battle Beyond the Stars (1980), and also the most interesting, and visually innovative section of 1981's Heavy Metal), came on board - with his Japanese roots, he was no doubt attracted to the film for it's anti-nuclear sentiments. The animation in the film has several innovative tricks - it mixes live action objects with the traditional cell animation - giving it a quite unique visual look. After the bomb is dropped we witness the deterioration of this lovable couple - who's naivety, and charming banter are a delight throughout. Veteran actors John Mills and Peggy Ashcroft provide the voices, and give the film real gravitas, and lends the characters their easy, ineffectual magnetism.

The films conclusion should leave anyone in tears, and along with Roger Waters's haunting soundtrack, David Bowie also provides the theme song. This is essential, if somewhat alarming, and tragic film making, and one that will stay with you for a very long time. I first saw this when it was broadcast in 1986, and I have never forgotten its impact, and I still believe that this was one of the things that gave me my view of anti institution, and mistrust of any government authority. And whilst western governments and media outlets aren't reporting on nuclear threats the threat is still a very real one. However, after the fall of Soviet communism in the early 1990's meant that the authorities had to create a new dominant fear to control the masses (a necessary evil), and that of course became Middle-Eastern terrorism.


Directed by: Jimmy T. Murakami
Voices: Peggy Ashcroft, John Mills, Robin Houston
Country: UK

Rating: *****

Marc Ivamy

Review #433: 'Clue' (1985)

When movies start turning to board games for inspiration, it's time to start worrying. Although to state that this is now the case is a massive exaggeration, this year saw the release of Battleship, obviously based on the classic 'hit' or 'miss' two-player game. It reminded me of this 1985 oddity, which I had recorded from TV as a child and naturally watched it to death, though I remembered little to nothing about it, other than it starred Tim Curry and Christopher Lloyd. Based on the board game Clue (or Cluedo to us Brits and probably everyone else outside of America), it tells the story of a group of misfits with a lot to hide arriving at a remote mansion, with butler Wadsworth (Curry) playing the host and guide.

The group consists of Mrs. Peacock (Eileen Brennan), Mrs. White (Madeline Kahn), Professor Plum (Lloyd), Mr. Green (Michael McKean), Colonel Mustard (Martin Mull) and Miss Scarlet (Lesley Ann Warren), who after eating dinner are ushered into the rest area to meet their blackmailer, Mr Boddy (Lee Ving). They are each handed one of the trademark weapons (revolver, wrench, rope et al), but when the lights go out, a gunshot rings out and Mr. Boddy (get it now? Har har!) lies apparently dead but with no bullet wound. Soon, the group of dashing about the house as bodies pile up and more questions are raised.

Yes, this is admittedly a slim plot, with very little going on to justify 90 minute running time, but it remains amusing enough throughout to avoid being a total disaster. The climax sees three different endings played out with Wadsworth offering three explanations and offering three different murderers. During its theatrical run, the film offered one of these three different endings depending on which cinema who would unfortunate enough to be in. This is a nice idea, which makes it a slight shame it tanked and failed to earn back its budget. But the cast is surprisingly good for such a forgettable film, with Curry offering plenty of energy, and Madeline Kahn being as brilliant as she always tends to be. Better than it has the right to be, but still offering relatively little in terms of humour and set-pieces.


Directed by: Jonathan Lynn
Starring: Tim Curry, Eileen Brennan, Madeline Kahn, Christopher Lloyd, Michael McKean, Martin Mull, Lesley Ann Warren
Country: USA

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #431: 'BMX Bandits' (1983)

No childhood is complete without a fantastically expensive and frivolous fad, and the BMX bike was one such item - and one which I could even take part in (skateboarding was definitely not for me, as I was incapable of standing on one). Who would have thought that Australia, and the king of ozploitation cinema Brian Trenchard-Smith, would produce the movie to capture the zeitgeist of the colourful bicycles. I first saw this film in 1984 at a film club (basically a small room with a projector and screen, filled with us poor kids, whose parents wanted us out of the house).

Three kids, Goose (James Lugton), P.J. (Angelo D'Angelo), and Judy (Nicole Kidman), spend their summer holidays riding around on their bikes, attempting to get into mischief. They stumble across a box containing walkie-talkies (that's massive pre-mobile phone, communication boxes), that belong to a gang of bank robbers. Once the criminals (crims to use the colloquial term) discover that these pesky kids have "stolen" the items, a hapless pair (Whitey (David Argue) and Moustache (John Ley)), chase the trio around the seaside town, with comic effect.

Of course this is a silly film, it is completely unadulterated fun, and doesn't have the ubiquitous saccharine kids of an American "kids" film, and do not fall prey to the kind of posh-kids found in Enid Blyton's Famous Five stories. The young cast never become annoying, and hold the film together throughout. This is how us kids spent our summer holidays back in the day. Nowadays, children miss out on this sense of freedom, and completely lose out on creating mischief, as parents fear "stranger danger" which has been perpetuated by our "objective" media (thanks for that!). I'm going to end on an appeal: Parents out there, let your kids run free, let them get into trouble whilst cycling with friends in a summer sense of autonomy - if you don't believe me when I state that this will enrich your children, then watch this film and see what happens.


Directed by: Brian Trenchard-Smith
Starring: David Argue, John Ley, Nicole Kidman, Angelo D'Angelo, James Lugton
Country: Australia

Rating: ***

Marc Ivamy

Review #387: 'Suburban Commando' (1991)

During the early 1990's (when I was just a young 'un), I grew up amidst the colossal popularity of the WWF and its host of superstars. The likes of Hulk Hogan, The Undertaker, Bret 'The Hitman' Hart and Ultimate Warrior were household names amongst snotty nosed kids such as myself. The idea of burly men dressing up in spandex pretending to hit each other never really appealed to me (I was too busy mentally scarring my young brain watching the likes of Watership Down (1978) for all that), yet I still found myself buying the action figures and playing the computer games. Naturally, the success of wrestling during that era led to many of its stars taking the next step into movies, rather than playing to a live crowd in a ring. Unfortunately, due to the obvious limitations of their acting abilities, they found themselves primarily in kids' movies, and this monstrosity is probably, and tragically, one of the best remembered.

Space warrior Shep Ramsey (Hulk Hogan) escapes from an enemy ship after seeing his commander killed at the hands of intergalactic villain General Suitor (William Ball). Due to his failure on the mission, he is sent on vacation to rest and re-charge, and he is forced to crash-land on Earth after destroying his controls. Shep ends up staying with strapped-for-cash Charlie Wilcox (Christopher Lloyd) and his family, and naturally, the two learn many life lessons from each other. Only two bounty hunters (one played by fellow WWF star The Undertaker) are in pursuit of Shep, and Charlie unwittingly finds himself caught up in an intergalactic battle. 

Even as a kid I found this film to be a steaming pile of turd, but still found myself drawn to it for some reason. Upon re-watching it, my memories were confirmed, and discovered that this is indeed awful, and would attract flies if left out in the open. The opening 45 minutes are so are just a bunch of small-scale set-pieces that highlight Shep's physical superiority over the Earthlings, that are neither funny, sweet or original. The main problem with the film is that it simply defies logic and thought, I mean, how would a space warrior who deals with hi-tech gadgetry and space-ships on a daily basis be so confused into thinking a video game he's playing is really happening? "I hate Earthlings!", Shep repeatedly tells us. Strange that, given that he looks and acts like one, speaks English, and even has an American name. Bull-shit on a large scale, only slightly redeeming itself with the presence of Christopher Lloyd. People will say that maybe I should just take the film what it is, but I will argue and say that I am - a fucking catastrophe. 

Directed by: Burt Kennedy

Starring: Hulk Hogan, Christopher Lloyd, Shelley Duvall, Larry Miller

Country: USA

Rating: *

Tom Gillespie

Review #338: 'Masters of the Universe' (1987)

During the 1980's the world of advertising and general marketing took on an all invasive, sinister tone. After the success of the Star Wars toy line from Kenner, the industry began a series of fantasy toy lines that used the 30 minute Saturday morning cartoon as an advertising tool. This led to famous toy's/cartoons such as Tranformers, Thundercats et al (there are way too many to list in this review). I believe the first of these was the He-Man and the Masters of the Universe, which hawked a band of sword-and-sandal-like fantasy characters, in a world called Eternia.

The cartoon and toy line were incredibly successful, and whilst as an adult, my cynical side sees the enormity of this exploitative marketing, as a child I was totally sucked in. With the unbridled achievement of cynical marketing, it was only a matter of time before the Hollywood machine would take the buff character of He-man and immortalise the cunt on screen.

The 1980's also saw an increase of over sized muscle-men on the big screen. This was of course reflective of Reagan's politics of big-is-good etcetera. So with such a low-rent project, the film needed a pretty low-rent, muscular "actor". I'm guessing that even Schwarzenegger and Stallone were too good for this film, as the actor chosen to play the homo-erotic, buff-dunce He-man was Dolph Lundgren, another of the increasingly large action stars of the decade.

The story involves a set of keys that can open a portal to other worlds/dimensions, and He-man's evil foe, Skeletor (Frank Langela) obviously wants the set. During a battle in Snake mountain, the hero's are forced to go through a portal where they find themselves in contemporary America, and take on the help of a native, Julie (Courtney Cox).

This derivative, insipid film is just awful. The action is more than likely placed in a Earth-bound setting for budgetary reasons. And to be fair, even if this was not the case, it would probably be just as shit. I did see this at the cinema at the time, and probably liked it. But seeing this as an adult just makes me realise that there was an abundance of genuinely awful movies in the decade of greed.


Directed by: Gary Goddard
Starring: Dolph Lundgren, Frank Langella, Meg Foster, Billy Barty, Courtney Cox
Country: USA

Rating: *

Marc Ivamy

Review #335: 'Last Action Hero' (1993)

When young Danny Madigan (Austin O'Brien) is given a magic movie ticket by friendly cinema owner Nick (Robert Prosky) at an advance screening of new action movie Jack Slater IV, he is magically transported into the movie and into the car of supercop Jack Slater (Arnold Schwarzenegger). Danny starts to inform Slater about who the bad guys are after seeing them on screen, and the two are paired up as a mismatched investigative duo by Slater's screaming boss. Glass-eyed bad guy Mr. Benedict (Charles Dance) manages to get his hands on the magic ticket, and escapes into the real world, where he finds things are much easier for the bad guys. Slater must leave his action movie cliche of a world where he is nigh on invincible behind, and enter one where things are slightly more difficult.

Last Action Hero had one of the most expensive and turbulent page-to-screen stories in recent cinema history. Originally written as a self-mocking action movie that embraced the cliches of the genre, that was also a proper action movie in its own right. After an unexpected bidding war, the young scribes Zak Penn and Adam Leff were shocked to find that Arnold Schwarzenegger had taken a personal interest in it (the original hero name was Arno Slater). This was to be the turning point. Arnie saw the potential for a franchise as a kid's film and immediately wanted to tone down the violence, so Penn and Leff were fired, and genre legend Shane Black was hired to spruce up the script. Things changed yet again when director John McTiernan was brought in, and, due to the success of his previous films, was given full control.

A few script re-writes, firings, and storm-outs later, the film was shot and ready to hit the market. A toy franchise and a ridiculously expensive and calamitous advertising campaign (they paid half a million dollars to have the film's name on a NASA rocket, only to have the launched delayed till long after the film's release) were put into motion, and the film's release date was announced for the week after Jurassic Park's. Last Action Hero had disastrous test screenings, but the release date was not changed, and naturally, Jurassic Park stormed the box-office and merchandising range, and Last Action Hero was revealed to be an over-ambitious, confused dud of a movie. However, the legend is rather cruel on Schwarzenegger's biggest flop, as although it is a gigantic mess, it has plenty of interesting ideas than are unfortunately spewed out onto the film in ungraceful belches.

The biggest problem is that it doesn't know what kind of film it is. At its heart, its a kid's film, complete with annoying mop-haired child, a kindly old man, magic tickets and, um, a cartoon cat. Yet on its surface, its a rather uninspired action film that is actually rather violent and, once in the real world, is quite grim. The film never seems to know whether it wants to homage, spoof or simply in-joke. The movie world it creates is itself confused - while it has some funny touches such as the police line pairing together various mismatched partners - it also has women walking around in sexy, futuristic costumes, and the aforementioned cartoon cat called Whiskers (voiced by Danny DeVito). Seriously, whose idea was that? I've never seen a cartoon cat in a live-action action movie!

However, the sheer mess that is the complete film does prove Last Action Hero to be a curious little oddity. There have been much finer examples of action-movie send-ups, namely in Shane Black's own excellent Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (2005), so perhaps the producers weren't ready back in 1993 to take on such an ambitious project. Arnie is pleasantly game for sending himself up, and Charles Dance chews the screen with his gloriously hammy British bad guy. But Last Action Hero will ultimately always be a reminder of how the Hollywood system to suck up an interesting maverick project, fuck it over a few times, and bundle it over the finishing line with such unbelievable inefficiency. I did love it as a kid, however.


Directed by: John McTiernan
Starring: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Austin O'Brien, Charles Dance, Robert Prosky, F. Murray Abraham, Anthony Quinn
Country: USA

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #312: 'WarGames' (1983)

In the 1980's, the realisation that computers will soon play an extremely important role in everyday life was becoming more and more evident. This idea was treated with excitement, curiosity, and fear - people genuinely did not know how powerful they would become, but they were certainly fearful of it. Cinema explored this fear in successful films such as The Terminator (1984), which depicted a future where humans were locked into a battle with robots, and Tron (1982), in which a character is sucked into a game where he is forced to battle with the computer to survive. Never had the capabilities of computers been so realistically portrayed than in WarGames, a film that introduced the world to home computers, hacking, and how humanity can be replaced by machines (as well as the idea that nuclear destruction is still a threat).

When two missile controllers fail to launch a missile during a test launch due to uncertainty, government bigwig McKittrick (Dabney Coleman) introduces his superiors to WOPR (War Operation Plan Response), a giant super-computer that repeatedly plays games with itself to generate stats and results of possible nuclear war outcomes. The operation is given the go-ahead, and workers find themselves replaced by this metallic super-brain, that will deal with any potential nuclear threat to the US. High school punk David (Matthew Broderick) is a highly intelligent computer-obsessive who uses his hacking skills to change his grades on his high school system. When he learns that a company is releasing new breakthrough games in California, he scans the area for computers in order to hack into their mainframe. He stumbles upon a computer that lists many strange war games, including 'Global Thermonuclear War'. He begins a game, choosing to be Russia, but unbeknownst to him, he is actually playing WOPR who is playing the game for real. Soon David is brought in by the FBI who suspect him of working with the Russians, while the threat of global nuclear destruction lingers as WOPR carries on playing the 'game'.

I viewed this film quite often when I was a child as I owned the VHS, but admittedly the film went over my head somewhat and I found it quite boring. Watching it now, I was shocked to find out this is a very good film, and it makes for a gripping adult thriller, while maintaining that 1980's kids-film-feel. The technical aspects shown on screen are extremely well-researched, and David's hacking activities make for exciting and interesting viewing. It's also fascinating to see the early giant, clunky computers of the 1980's and an early portrayal of the Internet. Overall, this is a highly entertaining thriller that is well acted, scripted and filmed (and even received three Academy Award nominations), and has plenty of those nostalgic qualities for us children of the 80's.


Directed by: John Badham
Starring: Matthew Broderick, Dabney Coleman, Ally Sheedy, John Wood
Country: USA

Rating: ****

Tom Gillespie

Review #311: 'Invaders from Mars' (1953)

It has been well documented that 1950's science fiction was a reflection of the fears of Communist infiltration of the American way: political difference was something (and still is) that creates gung-ho attitudes towards outside elements - something that the USofA is incapable of accepting, just look at the travesty of the Vietnam war. Invaders from Mars is no different to this trend of political allegory - and was also another way for film makers to make statements about the country that they were living in; through the use of allegory, and using the very visually stunning and populist genre of science fiction.

Young David MacLean (generic 1950's freckly kid, Jimmy Hunt), witnesses what he believes to be a flying saucer land underground at the back of his home. On reporting this to his father, George (Leif Erickson) he decides to investigate the area. What transpires is that people are being sucked into a hole in the sand, and implanted with mind control devices. So, the minds of the local population slowly become slaves to the "martian" ideals, and a bid to stop the production of the atom bomb, which is being developed in the local area. David, being of sound scientific processes, notices the difference in behaviour in his parents, and tries to warn the townsfolk. The nuclear family is destroyed by the alien infiltration, which is precisely what the American people/government believed would occur if Communist ideologies were to get to the American people.

William Cameron Menzies was a production/art director on such classics as Gone with the Wind (1939), and also had uncredited director duties on The Thief of Bagdad (1940), and Duel in the Sun (1946). His eye for detail within the frame is highly evident in this classic of '50's sci-fi. Considering this was a B-movie, that had an incredibly low budget, the visuals of the film, whilst often simple, are absolutely triumphant. OK, so the "martian" silly green furry costumes are laughable, but this does not hinder the enjoyment of the piece, and I hold it in high regard, along with other classics of the decade, such as The War of the Worlds (1953), The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951), and Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956).


Directed by: William Cameron Menzies
Starring: Helena Carter, Arthur Franz, Jimmy Hunt, Leif Erickson
Country: USA

Rating: ****

Marc Ivamy

Review #300: 'Robocop' (1987)

In theory, and from it's ridiculous title, Robocop is an incredibly silly film. The crime ridden streets of Detroit in the not-too-distant future, get a futuristic superhero, a knight in shining armour, from an omnipotent corporation OPC, to protect them from the criminals. However, what we actually get is a very emotional human story, along with some incredibly sharp satire.

Murphy (Peter Weller), a police officer, is killed whilst on a mission with his new partner, Lewis (Nancy Allen). OCP (after a failed attempt at a robot-police programme) commissioned the Robocop program, and Murphy becomes the candidate. His memory is supposed to have been erased by the corporation however, he is reminded by Lewis of his identity. He pieces together the criminals that gunned him down after an incident with Emil (Paul McCrane), and uncovers the criminal machinations of corrupt, corporate business.

As all good science fiction should, Robocop is partially allegorical of the times it was made in. In business, greed, power and wealth dominated (as highlighted in more explicit terms in another film of the same year, Oliver Stones Wall Street, where "greed is good"). Here, violence and deceit are the tactics used to make it in the cut-throat business world. Miguel Ferrer's young, ambitious Bob Morton, and the older rival, Ronny Cox's Dick Jones, battle with each other to get their individual police-robot project's into production. Corruption was also an all pervading element of '80's business (something that was not new of course, we can go back in American history and find many corrupt governments and institutions, Tammany in New York is one example), and we see here the corporate elite working with the criminal underworld.

The excesses of the 1980's greed is permeated within the excesses on screen. Violence is strong, yet comical at times. but it is always over the top. In an early scene, Dick Jones presents his product robot police officer, ED-209, a hulking, malevolent monster. In demonstration, ED-209 malfunctions and shoots an executive hundreds of times, to the point of joke. When Murphy is gunned down, we see his hand explode. Of course this reveals a corporate paranoia underneath some of the movies of the 80's. Each decades science fiction needs paranoia: In the 1950's and 60's it was communism and the nuclear bomb: in the 1970's and 80's it was political and corporate.

The film is injected with some spot-on satirical humour. Adverts are seen throughout, further exacerbating the excesses of American culture at the time. We see commercials selling over-sized, gas guzzling automobiles (6000 SUX), replacement hearts (this clearly to alleviate the excesses on the body caused in the 80's), and a board game of the Battleship-kind (Nuke-Em). These along with the narrative create an almost perfect package. Directed by European Paul Verhoeven who epitomises the concept that the best way for America to hold a mirror up to itself, is to get outsiders to produce something that reflects the madness that was 1980's, Reagan-era, excess and greed. Not only does it offer a commentary, the humanistic, philosophical nature of the soul, is a strong (if often used) theme.

Quite horrifically however, the film manifested into something terrible. I'm not talking about the sequels. The film was to be marketed for children, in the form of a cartoon series, and the inevitable action figures et al. So, like Gremlins (1984), this more "adult" fantasy, marketeers still had the moral sense (sic) to market violence to children - how lovely!


Directed by: Paul Verhoeven
Starring: Peter Weller, Nancy Allen, Dan O'Herlihy, Ronny Cox, Kurtwood Smith
Country: USA

Rating: ****

Marc Ivamy