Hanky Panky (1982)

hanky panky poster

About thirty minutes into Hanky Panky a film that stars Gene Wilder and Gilda Radner, I turned to my wife and said, “I thought this movie would be a lot wackier.” Up until that point, it is a fairly straightforward thriller. It does get a little bit zany once Gilda shows up, but it never quite figures out how to balance the thriller aspects of the film with its comedy.

Wilder plays Michael Jordon, a guy-next-door architect who jumps into a cab that is already occupied by Janet Dunn (Kathleen Quinlin. Despite her obviously being distraught Michael aggressively flirts with her. As an audience, we know that she is being chased by unknown assailants for unknown reasons. Looking about, not knowing if she’s managed to lose her attackers, she puts something into a package and addresses it. Michael, trying to be chivalrous I guess, takes the package and drops it in the mailbox.

The bad guys witness this and figure Michael knows what’s going on. They kill her and attack him asking him where she mailed the package to. He escapes and we’re treated to a cross-country chase. Along the way, he meets Kate Hellman (Radner) who may not be what she claims to be.

There is a lot of North By Northwest DNA living inside Hanky Panky what with an average man getting caught up in incredible events, and being chased by assailants across the USA (this film begins in New York City and concludes at the Grand Canyon). But though I do love both Wilder and Radner they are not Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint, and Sidney Poitier (who directed) is not even close to Alfred Hitchcock (at least when it comes to directing.)

Which brings me to the comedy. For a film like this to work the comedy has to come naturally from the characters and the situation. It needs to come organically out of the story. While the movie doesn’t necessarily have to be completely realistic, it needs to at least have the facade of realism. The comedy in Hanky Panky is too farcical, it feels like it comes straight out of vaudeville.

Two examples

Michael and Kate have to rush out of his apartment during one scene. He is still in his bathrobe so they slip into a theater and steal a magician’s tuxedo. Later they get onto a bus. When the driver asks for exact change Michael pulls out some coins from the tuxedo pocket only to have them explode in his hand. He then tries to exchange a dollar bill for some coins and when he jerks his hand forward a bouquet of flowers pops out. This causes a sneezing fit to which Kate tries to hand him a handkerchief from his chest pocket. It is a never-ending handkerchief.

Later Michael and Kate are on a small helicopter. The pilot (Pat Corley) mentions he’s not feeling well and then proceeds to belch. A lot. He belches for several minutes, over and over. It is as if Mr. Corley decided to see how long he could let the gag continue until they made him stop. Wilder and Radner are clearly enjoying it as they keep breaking character and cracking up. I suspect Sidney Poitier also thought it was hilarious and just couldn’t help but keep the entire thing in the movie.

Both of these scenes are actually funny, more or less. I chuckled. My wife just guffawed when I was talking about it. But they don’t fit in with the rest of the movie. That scene with the helicopter – Michael and Kate are running for their lives. As the pilot is belching he’s flying is erratic and they nearly crash. So much of the film is very serious, and then there are these random moments of utter silliness. Those two tones crash into each other in incredibly distracting ways.

The serious thriller aspects of the film worked better for me than the comedy. They are still second-rate Hitchcock, but still relatively enjoyable. Wilder and Radner were incredibly talented comedic talents and I’ve enjoyed them both in other things, but they are utterly wasted in this film.

Criterion’s Release of After Hours Is the Pick of the Week

after hours criterion

I first started writing these picks of the week a little over ten years ago. A lot has changed in the home video market in those years. Streaming did exist but it was still early days. Blu-rays had been out for a few years, but DVDs were the most popular option. 4K wasn’t even on the map. Choosing the week’s pick was fairly easy. I mostly voted for the best film. If the release had lots of extras or some cool packaging then all the better, but I mostly picked movies that I liked and were finally getting a release on home video.

These days, things are complicated. Whereas ten years ago almost every film that made it to theaters got a home video release (usually a few months after it left theaters) now many major movies don’t even make it to the theater. Netflix, Amazon, Apple, and other streamers regularly release movies straight to their services, bypassing movie theaters altogether. And since the major streaming services want you to subscribe to them there is no reason for them to release their movies on any other format. Why spend the money on a Blu-ray release when what you really want is for people to subscribe to your service for another month?

At the same time, lots of companies have sprung up over the last decade that specialize in releasing movies on physical media. Criterion, Arrow Video, Synapse, and Kino Lorber to name but just a few, all specialize in physical media. Most of the movies are for what you might call niche markets. Criterion deals with arthouse and classic movies, Arrow and Synapse specialize in the low-budget genre movie market. Etc. They often release their films with cleaned-up audio and video, loads of extras including audio commentaries and behind-the-scenes features, and even include cool booklets with essays on the film, posters, lobby cards, and other collectibles.

Beyond these Boutique Blu-rays labels, everybody is getting into 4K, the super high definition format, not to mention all sorts of special editions and exclusive releases to places like Target and Best Buy.

What I’m saying is that the decision on what to pick each week has gotten complicated. It can no longer be just based on the film itself, but you have to factor in the bit rates, special features, and how many other releases that particular film has received. I will admit that I don’t own a 4K player and my interest in that format is pretty small. Put me in a showroom and I will do the appropriate “oohs” and “ahs” over how incredible a 4K film looks, but at home, I just don’t care that much. I still watch terrible-looking prints of old and obscure movies and I just don’t care that much about super high-quality images. Especially if that means I have to not only buy a new, expensive player, but I have to rebuy many of the films I already own. I’ll mention a 4K release if I think it merits it, but I am not going to do so just because a film receives a 4K release.

Personally, I also tend to not pick the biggest movies coming out on any given week. Anybody who cares already knows that Avatar or the latest Marvel movie is coming out. I’ll give those movies a mention in my articles, but I’m going to rarely pick them. I like to pick something a little more obscure, something that deserves a little attention. But I also try to avoid picking the same type of releases each week. It would be easy just to pick whatever Criterion is putting out each week because I pretty much love everything they do. But that seems boring. Speaking of which I’m nearly a thousand words in so I must be boring everybody by now.

After Hours is a marvelous movie by Martin Scorsese. It came out in 1985 which is smack dab in the middle of what many people consider to be a low period for the famed director. I love pretty much everything he’s ever done and this one is no different. It stars Griffin Dunne as a man with a boring life who ventures to downtown Manhattan to hook up with a beautiful woman and has one crazy adventure after another. Criterion has given it a 4K upgrade and their usual treatment in terms of excellent extras.

Also out this week that looks interesting

Beau is Afraid: With Hereditary and Midsommer director Ari Aster has cemented himself as one of our modern masters of horror. His latest stars Joaquin Phoenix as a mild-mannered man confronting his darkest fear as he embarks on a Kafkaesque adventure home.

Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret.: Based upon the beloved book by Judy Blume this film adaptation got a lot of surprisingly great reviews and more or less bombed at the box office. I never did read the book (it is about a young, teenage girl dealing with young, teenage girl problems so I wasn’t really the target demographic) but I have a lot of friends who loved it when they were growing up. My own daughter is the perfect age for both the book and the movie so I suspect we’ll be watching it soon.

Scream VI: I recently watched all of the Scream films in order so that I could come to this new one pumped and primed. It was both a blessing and a curse to watch them all so close together. It helped me to see all the connections the films make with each other and helped smooth out some of the rougher spots. But it also let me see just how far this series has fallen. The original Scream was so good because it made fun of the slew of generic slasher films that were being churned out through the last 1980s while also being a great example of what the best of those films could be. Scream VI isn’t at all bad, but it feels very much like those generic films the original was making fun of.

The Watermelon Woman: Criterion is releasing this romantic comedy about a black lesbian woman who is trying to make a film about a Black actress known for playing the stereotypical “Mammy” roles in the 1930s. Criterion says it is a pioneering film in queer cinema and I always take their word for it.

Doctor Who: Jon Pertwee Complete Season Three: As I’ve stated many times I’m a big fan of Doctor Who. Over the last few years, they’ve been releasing these really wonderful full seasons of the classic series on Blu-ray chock full of extras and special features. Pertwee is one of my favorite Doctors and while I believe I’ve seen all the stories from this season (Day of the Daleks, The Curse of Peladon, The Sea Devils, The Mutants, and The Time Monster) I couldn’t tell you a thing about them. But I’m already excited to watch them again.

The Burning: Shout Factory is releasing this “classic” 1980s horror film about a camp prank that goes horribly wrong leaving a man disfigured who returns years later to enact his vengeance, with a new 4K scan and lots of extras.

Film Noir: The Dark Side of Cinema XV: (Man Afraid / The Girl in the Kremlin / The Tattered Dress): I love these Kino Lorber releases of obscure film noirs. Sadly, they did not send me a review copy of this set, but I’ll likely buy it sometime anyway.

Johanna Enlists: One of the amazing things about this new resurgence of boutique Blu-ray labels is how they are finding some really old films, cleaning them up, and giving them a proper release. This drama starring Mary Pickford was originally released in 1918. I’m guessing it has been released on home video before, but likely from a terrible print with absolutely no care given to it.

Outland (1981)

outland poster

It has been a lot of fun working through my life in movies. That sounds wrong. These movies actually have no connection with my life, my one rule is that I’ve never seen them. I should say I’m having fun watching movies from all the years I’ve been alive in chronological order. But that’s a mouthful, I really do need to find some snappy title for this feature that will easily describe what I’m doing.

The one rule is that each movie has to have never been seen by me before. But that’s not always easy to follow. I keep track of what I watch through Letterboxd, but it isn’t always accurate. Sometimes I forget to log a movie. And for movies, I watched before Letterboxd existed, before even IMDB existed, well those are hard to track. Who can remember all the films they watched when they were a kid? Sometimes I watch a movie I think I’ve seen before only to find absolutely none of it ringing any memory bells. Other times I start a movie that I think is new to me and realize that I have actually seen it before.

Outland is a film I thought I had never seen. But after I watched it the other day, I discovered that I had actually logged it on Letterboxd. But there wasn’t a single scene, a single image that was familiar to me. The logging was dated before Letterboxd existed which means I found it at some point, thought I had seen it, and guessed when that might have been. So, I really have no idea whether or not I had actually seen it before. Maybe I did and have forgotten the film altogether, or maybe I just thought I had and logged it.

Either way, I’m counting it for this silly little endeavor of mine.

Outland is a space western. It’s basically High Noon (1952) in space. Sean Connery plays Federal Marshal William O’Niel who has been assigned to a tiny mining outpost on Jupiter’s moon, IO. He quickly becomes concerned with the number of workers who seem to be going crazy and committing suicide. Everybody else, including the operations doctor, Marian Lazarus (Frances Sternhagen) chalk it up to the poor living conditions on the station and the utter isolation. But O’Neil figures it is happening way too often for it to just be bouts or stir craziness.

Eventually, he discovers an illegal drug trade. A synthetic stimulant is being brought in and given to the workers to increase production. Use it enough and you eventually go psychotic. O’Neil tries to put a stop to it, but naturally, he comes up against the Company (who don’t officially approve of the use of the drug, but sure do like the boost in productivity).

There is a lot of Alien (1979) DNA in Outland, especially in the rugged, lived-in quality of the outpost, and the blue-collar nature of the people. Outland is rough and dirty, and the workers are tough and rowdy. They live in small spaces, their beds stacked one on top of the other with little privacy afforded to them. In contrast, O’Neil and the other high administrative positions live in comparatively fancy quarters with plenty of space and luxury. Also as in Alien, the real villain of the film is the faceless corporation, always putting profit above human lives.

It isn’t nearly as good as Alien. Director Peter Hyams doesn’t have nearly the skill or artistry of Ridley Scott. The script (also by Hyams) isn’t as tight either. But the world that he has created is really quite something, and Sean Connery gives one of his finer performances.

9 To 5 (1980)

9 to 5 movie poster

I really should come up with a catchy name for this series (the one where I’m watching one movie from every year that I’ve been alive, in chronological order), but I can’t think of anything. I’ve been using a website/app called Track to help me finds movies to watch for this series. Basically, I use it to sort movies by year and then scroll down through that list until I find something that both looks interesting and that I haven’t seen. They automatically sort their movies by some sort of popularity rating so I usually have to scroll down for a bit before I find films that I haven’t seen before. After that I’ve generally been able to find something interesting, some film I’ve been meaning to watch, and plug it in.

For whatever reason, I really struggled to find something for 1980. I’ve seen a lot of films from that year and the ones I haven’t mostly looked uninteresting. It didn’t help that my wife was hanging out in the living room where I was preparing to watch a film. She wasn’t necessarily looking to watch a movie with me, she was doing some hand-sewing and that’s just where she was sitting. But that did mean she would be there with me as I watched a movie, which means that she would not be interested in me watching certain types of films, like horror.

Eventually, I landed on 9 to 5, and it turns out I rather liked it. It is a film that I was very aware of growing up, but for one reason or another, I never sat down and watched it. I was only four years old when it came out so I clearly wasn’t going to see it in the theater, or really even be aware of its existence. I’m thinking it must have played regularly on some cable TV stations throughout the 1980s because I really do have strong memories of knowing about it. Certainly, I loved the Dolly Parton song. I figure a movie about three working women fighting against their sexist boss had little appeal to me as a young teenager. Then, later, when something like that might have appealed to me a little more, the movie had lost its cultural cache. It isn’t a film you really hear about anymore.

So, Dolly Parton, Lily Tomlin, and Jane Fonda play the three working girls. They are employed at some giant conglomerate with thousands of employees. Their boss is played by Dabney Coleman. He is a sexist pig. He constantly makes advances toward his secretary (Parton) or positions himself to look down her top. He steals ideas from Tomlin’s character and presents them as his own, all the while passing her up for promotions (and giving less experienced men the jobs). Fonda is a recently divorced housewife who has just gotten a job in the secretarial pool. Coleman hardly gives her a glance.

For the first act things are played pretty straight with these women being mistreated on the job and having no real recourse to put things straight. Then things go really sideways and they find themselves back at Fonda’s house drinking themselves silly, smoking a little pot, and dreaming of what they’d really like to do to the boss.

From here the film turns into a straight-up farce. We are treated to three very silly fantasy sequences showing what the ladies would like to do to the boss. Then they kidnap him and take over the company (they pretend the boss is still working by conveniently having him step out of the office whenever anyone needs to see him and forging his signature on lots of company memos).

It is all pretty ridiculous and silly, and sometimes quite funny. My wife really seemed to enjoy herself, while I mostly just lightly chuckled. It is very much a movie of its time and it is interesting to think about how different films of different eras handle things like sexism in the workplace.

I have a hard time with big, broad comedy and that’s mostly what you get here. The three leads are very good (this was Dolly’s first big chance to show she had acting chops and she nails it). Dabney Coleman is great as the guy you love to hate. Again, my wife laughed herself silly, and I’m sure many others did as well. It was a big hit when it came out. I’m just weird when it comes to comedy.

The Friday Night Horror Movie: The Whip and the Body (1963)

the whip and the body

At an isolated castle in the 19th Century, on some isolated European coast, Kurt (Christopher Lee), the prodigal son returns. There is no fatted calf for this son though, as his father (Gustavo De Nardo) is unwilling to forgive his many trespasses. The most treacherous of which was seducing the maid’s daughter and then leaving her, causing her to commit suicide in his wake.

The maid, Giorgia (Harriet Medin) has vowed her revenge a hundred times over, and there is no lost blood between him and his younger brother Cristiano (Tony Kendall). Thus when Kurt turns up murdered, there are plenty of suspects.

Nevenka (Daliah Lavi) who had been engaged to Kurt before the whole maid’s daughter incident occurred, and is now married to Cristiano, begins seeing visions of Kurt whenever she turns. When more bodies start to drop the rest of the family begins to wonder if he hasn’t returned from the grave to seek his revenge.

Mario Bava was one of the great Italian horror directors. He was a pioneer of gothic horror and his film Blood and Black Lace (1964) is often credited as the first Giallo film ever made. Bava began his career in special effects, working his way into cinematography before finally directing. His films are noted for their visual beauty and style. When not shooting in stark black and white he made bold use of color.

The Whip and the Body makes great use of its gothic setting and tropes. The design of the castle in which most of the film takes place is as haunting as it is beautiful. The film is simply bathed in purples. It makes use of greens and reds, but bold purple permeates every shot.

As the title implies the sex gets a bit kinky, surprisingly so for a film made in 1963. Nevenka, who in most aspects of her life has to be subservient to the men in her life, takes control of her own sexuality. She hands Kurt a whip more than once and writhes in passion as he uses it on her. She married Christiano, because that’s what she was suppossed to do, but it is Kurt she truly loves. It is Kurt she continues to long for and envision even after his death (Or did he fake that? Or has his ghost returned from the dead? The film has fun toying with those ideas).

I’m making it sound more exciting than it is. The Whip and the Body is more of a gothic romance/drama than a horror. There is a lot of talking and passionate declarations. Too much for my taste, if I’m being honest. But it is so beautiful to look at, I never much minded.

Mad Max (1979)

mad max poster

I’ve watched the Mad Max series kind of backward. I saw Fury Road (2015) in the theaters, and really quite loved it, while also noting its utter ridiculousness. Then I watched Mad Max 2 (1981) a couple of months ago and followed it up pretty quickly with Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985). Truth is I had always heard that the first Mad Max film wasn’t all that good and that’s why I skipped it. Until now.

The film is quite a bit different than its sequels. Whereas they are set in a post-apocalyptic world in which society has completely broken down, in this one society seems to be mostly intact. For sure some things are broken, but it feels more in line with similar films from the era in which urban crime is high and the police seem helpless to fix it.

Mel Gibson stars as Max Rockatansky, an Australian police officer who is decidedly not the super awesome butt kicker he is in the sequels. Well, sort of not. In a pretty great opening sequence, some crazy bikers are being chased by Max’s fellow officer. They create all sorts of havoc until Max is called in and chases them down. But after that scene we find Max to be a gentle family man with a wife and small child. He takes them to the countryside and they have a nice holiday.

Of course, things eventually turn bad and Max becomes the man we’ve come to know and love in those later films. But it does take a while to get there. I feel like watching this series out of order was actually helpful. Had I watched the first one first I might not have gotten around to watching the sequels. But by watching the original after I had seen all the sequels, the original film now feels like an origin story, a prequel. And as such, while still not as good as any of the sequels, it fills in some character details and lets me know how Max became Mad Max.

There are some pretty spectacular car crashes, made even more incredibly realizing they all had to be done in one take as the tiny budget wouldn’t have allowed for more.

So, yeah, this feels like a warm-up for what is to come. Consider it practice for the terrible beauty of Mad Max 2 and Fury Road. Or look at it like a full-length DVD extra origin story.

Tintin Double Feature Is the Pick of the Week

tintin

I remembered to write my Pick of the Week column this week for Cinema Sentries and then I totally forgot to link to it here. So, I’m a few days late, but I think you will forgive me.

Since the Fourth of July fell on Tuesday this year (which is when most Blu-rays are released) the powers that be decided that nobody will be buying movies this week and so the release schedule is pretty wimpy. But there is a Tintin double feature out and that’s what I picked. You can read all about it here.