Film Review: The Bubble (dir by Judd Apatow)

Posted on April 1, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Meh.

The Bubble is the latest film from Judd Apatow. Taking place during the first year of the COVID pandemic, it follows a small group of actors as they attempt to make the sixth installment of the Cliff Beasts franchise. The spoiled, pampered, and pretentious actors find themselves isolated, not allowed to go anywhere other than the set or the hotel. The film becomes a disaster as the actors are driven mad by all the rules and the inconvenience that comes along with trying to make a film in the middle of the global pandemic. When the studio hires a security team to keep anyone from escaping, things get only dumber.

Even by the standards of what we’ve come to expect from Judd Apatow, The Bubble is a notably messy and self-indulgent film. It’s a bit of a shame really because there’s much about the Pandemic that not only deserves to be satirized but also needs to be satirized. For much of society, satire will be an important step on the road back to sanity. Unfortunately, the humor in The Bubble often falls flat because Apatow doesn’t seem to really be sure what his main target is. Is he targeting COVID hysteria? Is he targeting the pampered rich people who treated the pandemic like a two-year vacation while people who actually lived paycheck-to-paycheck were risking their health just so they could pay their bills? Is he targeting bad action movies or pretentious indie directors or actors who think that the world revolves around them? When Maude Apatow shows up as a TikTok star who has been given a role because she has 2,000,000 followers, is Apatow aiming at the shallowness of social media or is he poking fun at the older generation that can’t understand the kids and their wild and wacky ways? Apatow seems to be going after everything and everyone but, at the same time, he also expects us to care about these characters when they start demanding to be allowed to leave the set.

The film’s action doesn’t really follow any sort of real storyline. Instead, it feels like a collection of skits, all piled on top of each other and all dragging on for a bit too long. Though The Bubble is shorter than the average Apatow film, it’s still over two hours long. After the first hour, the film suddenly becomes obsessed with random dance scenes. Usually, I love random dance scenes but, in this case, there’s really no humor or point to them beyond saying, “Wow, these people suck at dancing.” It’s funny the first time but, by the fourth time, it starts to feel a bit lazy. The film is like the improv student who, instead of building on the situation and working with his scene partners, just shouts out whatever pops into his head and begs the audience for a laugh. The film does end on what would be a clever touch if not for the fact that it’s all pretty much lifted from the final scenes of Tropic Thunder.

Lest anyone think that I’m totally trashing the film, I did chuckle a few times. There’s a recurring bit with Kate McKinnon’s studio exec constantly being at either the beach or on safari. That made me laugh. And Keegan-Michael Key, as an actor who has written a spiritual guide, delivers the majority of his lines with just the right amount of self-importance. For the most part, though, The Bubble falls flat. This is not the Netflix film to watch this weekend.

Film Review: Windfall (dir by Charlie McDowell)

Posted on March 29, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

I really hate home invasion movies.

Seriously, it’s always the same thing. Some mysterious stranger breaks into an empty house and hangs out for a few days, trying on clothes and smoking cigars and drinking whatever’s available in the refrigerator. Eventually, the couple who own the house comes home. They get held hostage. The stranger wastes a lot of time trying to be intimidating. The husband always tries too hard to take control of the situation. The wife tries to keep everyone calm. The stranger is poor. The husband is rich. The stranger and the wife form a connection. Secrets are revealed. Blah blah blah.

Don’t get me wrong. There have been a few good home invasion movies. There are some directors who can pull it off and make a film compelling despite telling an overly familiar story. Ruggero Deodato brought some life to the genre, with a little help from David Hess and Giovanni Lombardo Radice, in The House At The Edge of the Park. For the most part, though, the home invasion genre has led to some of the stagiest and most dramatically inert films ever made.

Consider Windfall, which premiered on Netflix earlier this month. Starring Jason Segel, Lily Collins, and Jesse Plemons, the film has a talented cast. It’s directed by Charlie McDowell, who previously made a very intriguing film called The One I Love. Like Windfall, The One I Love was largely confined to one location but, unlike Windfall, McDowell still managed to use that location to craft an intelligent and compelling film that never felt stagey. The house in which Windfall takes place is lovely to look at. The film has many of the ingredients to be a success but it doesn’t have a particularly clever or even interesting script and, as such, it falls flat.

Segel, Collins, and Plemons play three characters who aren’t actually given names. Segel plays the home invader, who is credited as being “Nobody.” Plemons is the CEO, a billionaire who is responsible for putting people out of work and who makes his employee signs NDAs. Collins in the Wife, who is secretly taking birth control pills. Segel may be a criminal but he’s not a very good criminal, as becomes clear as he continually finds himself being manipulated by his hostages. Plemons is selfish and never stop talking down to Segel, even when the latter is pointing a gun at him. Collins claims that she works very hard at running a charity that her husband set up but it’s obvious that she and and her husband have a strained relationship, even before Segel shows up. There’s a few heavy-handed attempts at social relevance, with Segel and Plemons debating whether or not Plemons deserves to be a billionaire. The film ends with a twist that Godard or Bunuel could have pulled off but here, it just falls flat. The action is just too predictable and dramatically inert for Windfall to be anything more than a movie about three talented performers acting up a storm while trying to bring three boring characters to life.

Windfall is a very much a film of its time, both in its focus on inequality and it’s minimalist style. Like Malcolm and Marie, it’s the type of one-location, small crew film production that was popular at the height of the COVID pandemic and the CEO and his wife heading to their vacation home to hide out from the world will undoubtedly remind some viewers of the wealthy people who were able to isolate themselves during the early part of the pandemic. So, the film has some historical value if not much dramatic value. In the end, Windfall serves as a reminder that, when combined with Malcolm and Marie, Netflix has pretty much cornered the market on pretentious, one-location films.

Hot Lead (1951, directed by Stuart Gilmore)

Posted on March 28, 2022 by Jedadiah Leland

In this B-western programmer, Dave Collins (Ross Elliott) has just been released from prison. Because he knows how to operate a telegraph, outlaw Turk Thorne (John Dehner) tries to force Dave to get a job at a local telegraph office so that Turk can use his skills to rob a train.

Despite wanting to go straight, Dave also doesn’t want to get full of hot lead. He rides into town and gets a job at the ranch owned by Gail Martin (Joan Dixon). He is befriended by Gail’s two ranchhands, serious cowboy Tim Holt (played, believe it or not, by Tim Holt) and his comedy relief sidekick, Chito Rafferty (Richard Martin). Tim and Chito want revenge on Turk for killing one of their friends during a previous train robbery. Working with Dave, they set a trap for Turk and his gang. Meanwhile, Dave falls in love with Gail.

Hot Lead was one of the last of the 46 B-westerns that Tim Holt made for RKO Pictures. Holt started out playing the type of prototypical happy, go-lucky cowboys who were popular in the 1930s. At that time, he was unique as one of the few western stars to not play a continuing character who was named after him. While the studios promoted other western stars as essentially playing themselves, Tim Holt was promoted as being a serious actor. Holt’s films were popular with audiences but his career was put on hold while he served in World War II. Post-war, Holt played characters who were far more world-weary than his earlier cowboys and he also started to play characters who were specifically named “Tim Holt.”

Even though most of Holt’s later films were uneven in quality, Hot Lead is one of the better examples of the genre. Whether happy or serious, Tim Holt was always a convincing cowboy and he brings his natural gravitas to the role, playing his character as being the type of serious and no-nonsense cowboy that anyone would want in their corner. John Dehner was always a good villain and Ross Elliott is equally good as the man struggling not to go back to his old ways. The action scenes and the gunfights are well-directed and the story even carries an important message about giving people second chances. Not bad for a B-western!

Oscar Counter-Programming: Llamageddon (dir by Howie Dewin)

Posted on March 27, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

On a distant planet, the Llamas march through the desert, their eyes glowing red and their hearts full of murder. One of the Llamas (played, according to the credits, by Louie the Llama) ends up in a trailer that turns out to be a spaceship. And when that trailer gets off course and crashes onto Earth, it’s time for a Llamageddon!

A nice couple in the country spot the Llama standing on the edge of their property. It must belong to the neighbors, they say. They consider chasing the Llama back to its home but they decided not to. After all, it’s about rain and who wants to chase a wet Llama in the rain? Not me!

Later that night, the Llama claims its first two victims.

Well, you can see where this is going, right?

After the funeral of that nice couple, their children decide to throw a party at the house. They call their friends and their friends bring beer, weed, and a lot of attitude. However, the Llama brings the horror. It turns out that the Llama can not only stomp you to death but it can also shoot red laser beams out of its eyes. Soon, the party is in chaos as person after person falls victim to the Llamageddon….

(And one poor soul actually turns into Llama which is horrific in theory but kind of cute to watch.)

Llamageddon is a film from 2015 and it has a running time of 69 minutes. (“Nice,” someone out there is saying.) Considering that the end credits are padded with a rap and also a fast-forwarded presentation of the film that the viewer has just watched, I’m going to guess that running time was deliberate. And actually, I respect that. Llamageddon is a film that knows exactly what it is and it has a sense of humor about its very existence. It’s a film that fully embraces the silliness of it all.

So, look …. I could sit here and I could go on and on about the acting and deliberately cheap special effects and the way that the film hints that even the cutest of animals can actually be deadly and dangerous but here is what you need to know.

It’s about a Llama from space and the Llama has the power to blow people up.

In other words, this is a film that was made for a very select audience of people who are amused by the idea of killer space llamas. I happen to be one of those people so I enjoyed the film. I respected the fact that the filmmakers stuck with their silly idea and they didn’t try to fool the viewers into thinking that the film was meant to be anything more than what it was.

Will you enjoy Llamageddon? Well, like I said, it’s only 69 minutes and it’s specifically made for people who laugh out loud at the term “space llama.” If, like me, you’re one of those people, check it out. It’s on Prime and Tubi and if you’re currently watching the Oscars but you’re desperate for some counter-programming, you can watch it right now with the knowledge that the movie will end before the Academy Awards.

West Side Story (dir. by Steven Spielberg)

Posted on March 26, 2022 by Leonard Wilson

Although it lacks an Overture and an Intermission, Steven Spielberg’s rendition of 1961’s West Side Story flows well and does the story justice. Remakes are tricky things, you know. Stay too close to the source material and you end up with the line for line, shot for shot weirdness of Gus Van Zant’s Psycho. Stray too far from it and you discover something experimental and head scratching, like Luca Guadagnino’s Suspiria. West Side Story is in the middle of it all. It’s the same story you know and love, just taken from some new angles. I just wish the supporting cast hadn’t overshadowed the leads. My Aunt was a huge fan of the original, and I like to think she might have appreciated this one. It was worth catching it on the big screen back in December, and as of this writing, West Side Story is now available on Disney Plus and other streaming networks.

West Side Story is basically Romeo and Juliet, with two rival gangs (the Jets and the Sharks), fighting for territory in a battered New York City. When Tony (Ansel Elgort) meets Maria (Rachel Zegler), sparks fly between them, but it sets the stage for a dangerous confrontation between both gangs.

West Side Story marks another Spielberg production that doesn’t have John Williams at his side. While it saddens me that the two aren’t working together (and let’s face it, having just celebrated his 90th Birthday, Williams has easily earned a well deserved rest), the music for the film is in great hands. Originally composed by Leonard Bernstein and Stephen Sondheim, the music was handled by David Newman (Serenity) this time around, at Williams’ recommendation. One thing to learn here if you’re new to movies – David Newman is part of the Newman family of musicians that includes Thomas Newman (Wall-E, The Shawshank Redemption and just about any film Sam Mendes made), Randy Newman (Toy Story), and Alfred Newman, who created that 20th Century Fox fanfare you used to hear when watching Star Wars. Things remain mostly unchanged for the songs that were in the 1961 original, but there’s one additional piece (at least to me, anyway). “Somewhere” is sung by Rita Moreno’s character, rather than the leads. Not every song is exactly the same as the original (and it really shouldn’t be), but it’s very close. The only quirk I really had was for my favorite song, “Officer Krupke”, which changes things up just a little. It should be noted that everyone on screen is signing here, whereas in the original, it was mainly George Chakiris and Russ Tamblyn who sung their own parts (something I only learned just now in writing about this). I loved the whole element with Riff getting whacked over the head with the newspaper. Every other song has some magic to it, and with Janusz Kaminski as Spielberg’s Director of Photography, there are some fantastic uses of the camera in many shots. Guillermo Del Toro recently raved about the dance sequence, and it’s a great sequence. Sometimes, it’s also the subtle moments. My favorite comes in “A Boy Like That”. In the original, there was a glass door with a blue, yellow and red glass paneling. Spielberg still showcases the color pattern, but with the drapes instead. It was a cute homage to the original, I felt.

I also enjoyed what Tony Kushner did with the script. There’s a lot of Spanish in the film that’s given without any subtitles at all. I’m not sure if that was his decision or Spielberg’s, but for the most part, the feelings are clearly conveyed, whether you can understand what’s being said or not.

Writing is usually supposed to be without bias. I believe the sexual assault allegations against Ansel Elgort (Baby Driver) affected West Side Story’s success, somewhat. At my 7pm showing back in December, there weren’t many seats taken up for the film. That, or perhaps musicals aren’t as popular as they used to be (used to be being only a month prior with Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Tick Tock Boom!). Add to that a Pandemic we thought we were slowly breaking out of only to discover a return with renewed fervor and what could have been gigantic just didn’t seem so. My own biases were in part to blame for not writing about this movie sooner. I didn’t hate the film by any means – I really enjoyed it – I just didn’t want to throw in to the whole cancel culture that screamed “This person did bad things, smite him from our film and shun them from our memories.” (though I suppose by adding this, I am doing just that). Whatever the case, Elgort’s Tony isn’t terrible in any way. Based on his performance in Baby Driver, he would have been my go to pick as well. I just didn’t feel as much for the character as I thought I would, knowing that I found about the actor. Tony’s the only character in this one where I felt they could have swapped in a CGI Richard Beymer and it would have worked fine.

The opposite could be said of Zegler. She has an incredible voice and screen presence, and fits into Maria so well that you might forget you’re watching actors on screen. I hope to see her do more in the future (and while we’re on that topic, let her sit in at the Oscars. What’s one more seat, anyway?)

From top to bottom, West Side Story is stacked with a mix of veterans and young talent that we hope to see more of in the future. Rita Moreno, who played Anita in the original, returns a Doc, the owner of a store (which also makes a nice connection to the previous film). Brian D’Arcy James (Molly’s Game) is on hand as Officer Krupke. Corey Stoll (Ant-Man) plays Lt. Schrank, and that’s about the bulk of the adults you’ll run into other than teachers and the like. For the Jets and Sharks, we have Maddie Ziegler (who is Sia’s Muse) as Velma. We also have Mike Faist as Riff and David Alvarez as Bernardo, who were just fantastic. It is an absolute shame that either actor didn’t gain some kind of recognition during the award season. Thank goodness that at least Ariana DeBose (Hamilton) portrayal of Anita is getting some love. She lights up every scene she’s in, whether it’s dancing or showing grief. She’s my pick for Best Supporting Actress this year, though that position is stacked with some strong nominees.

Overall, West Side Story was a surprise for me. Spielberg hits the right marks, and I feel you can sit it next to Wise’s production. Whatever mood you happen to be in, you can pick one and enjoy. The supporting cast may overshadow the leads, but not so much that it ruins the film.

Conspiracy: The Trial of the Chicago 8 (1987, directed by Jeremy Kagan)

Posted on March 25, 2022 by Jedadiah Leland

The year is 1969 and, in an Illinois courtroom, 8 political radicals stand accused of conspiring to disrupt the 1968 Democratic Convention. The prosecution is putting the entire anti-war movement on trial while the defendants are determined to disrupt the system, even if it means being convicted. The eight defendants come from all different sides of the anti-war movement. Jerry Rubin (Barry Miller) and Abbie Hoffman (Michael Lembeck) represent the intentionally absurd Yippies. Tom Hayden (Brian Benben) and Rennie Davis (Robert Carradine) are associated with the Students for a Democratic Society. Bobby Seale (Carl Lumbly) is one of the founders of the Black Panthers while David Dellinger (Peter Boyle) is a longtime peace activist. John Friones (David Kagan) and Lee Weiner (Robert Fieldsteel) represent the common activists, the people who traveled to Chicago to protest despite not being a leader of any of the various organizations. Prosecuting the Chicago 8 are Richard Schulz (David Clennon) and Tom Foran (Harris Yulin). Defending the 8 are two radical lawyers, Leonard Wienglass (Elliott Gould) and William Kunstler (Robert Loggia). Presiding over the trial is the fearsome and clearly biased Judge Julius Hoffman (David Opatoshu).

Conspiracy: The Trial of the Chicago 8 is a dramatization of the same story that inspired Aaron Sorkin’s The Trial of the Chicago 7 but, of the two films, it’s Jeremy Kagan’s The Trial of the Chicago 8 that provides a more valuable history lesson. By setting all of the action in the courtroom and recreating only what was said during the trial, director Jeremy Kagan and his cast avoid the contrived drama that marred so much of Sorkin’s film. Kagan trusts that the true story is interesting enough to stand on its own. Kagan includes documentary footage from the convention protest itself and also interviews with the people who were actually there. While Kagan may not have had the budget that Sorkin did, his film has the authenticity that Sorkin’s lacked. Kagan also has the better cast, with Michael Lembeck and Barry Miller both making Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin into something more than the mere caricatures that they are often portrayed as being.

The Trial of the Chicago 8 was a film that Jeremy Kagan spent a decade trying to make. When he first tried to sell the idea behind the film to CBS in 1976, Kagan had Marlon Brando, Walter Matthau, George C. Scott, and Dustin Hoffman all willing to work for scale and take part in the production. CBS still passed on the project, saying that no one was interested in reliving the 60s. It wasn’t until 1987 that Jeremy Kagan was finally able to revive the film, this time with HBO. It actually worked out for the best because, with HBO, there was no need to try to come up with a “clean” version for the language that was used in the courtroom or in the interviews with the actual participants. The defendants could be themselves.

Though it has been overshadowed by Sorkin’s subsequent film, The Trial of the Chicago 8 is the definitive film about what happened in the aftermath of the the 1968 Democratic Convention.

I Watched Coffee Shop (2014, dir. by Dave Alan Johnson)

Posted on March 25, 2022 by Dazzling Erin

Donavan (Laura Vandervoort) owns a coffee shop in a small town. Everyone loves her shop but she’s not making any money because she’s not a good manager and she lets her staff and her customers walk all over her. When Ben (Cory M. Grant) comes in the shop and tries to order tea, Donavan thinks that he’s the businessman who wants to buy her shop and turn it into a parking garage. She yells at him but then it turns out that he’s a playwright from New York who is just on vacation after his latest flop. Donavan and Ben fall in love but then the real businessman shows up and it looks like Donavan might lose her business. And then, on top of everything else, Donavan discovers that Ben is writing a play about her situation so she breaks up with him and tells him that he’s not welcome in her shop, even if he has the perfect plan to save it. Who thinks like that!? He’s so inspired by her and how much everyone in town loves her that he wants to immortalize her on stage. How is that a bad thing?

Even though this wasn’t made for Hallmark, it basically is a Hallmark film. There’s no profanity. There’s no sex. I don’t know why it was even rated PG. I liked the small town and the coffee shop looked like it would be a nice place to hang out. The story was too predictable and a lot of Donavan’s financial problem were due to her just being really bad at her job so I had a hard time feeling sorry for her. She should have let someone else run the coffee shop if she was that incompetent.

On a personal note: I’d like to own a coffee shop but I would want it to be located near a baseball stadium. Coffee and baseball is a combo I can get behind.

Guilty Pleasure No. 53: Happy Gilmore (dir by Dennis Dugan)

Posted on March 25, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Poor Shooter McGavin! As played by the great Christopher McDonald, Shooter McGavin is the often unacknowledged hero of the 1996 comedy classic, Happy Gilmore.

I know, I know. Most people will tell you that Shooter is actually the bad guy. He’s the snooty pro golfer who tries to keep aspiring hockey player-turned-golfer Happy Gilmore (Adam Sandler) from competing on the PGA tour. And it is true that he does allow himself to get consumed with jealousy over Happy’s popularity. And he does definitely cross the line when he buys and holds hostage the house where Happy’s grandmother has spent almost her entire life. (“She’s so old! Look at her! She’d old!” Happy exclaims at one point.) But try to look at it from Shooter’s point of view.

Shooter has spent years playing golf. He’s practiced. He’s paid his dues. He’s done what he had to do to earn his spot as America’s best golfer. And now, he finally has a chance to win his first championship. And what happens? A very loud hockey player shows up from out-of-nowhere and totally changes the sport. What really has to be galling is that Happy’s not even a good player. He can’t putt. He has no strategy. His only skill is the distance that he can hit the ball. And yet, despite all that, Happy becomes a media superstar. The only people willing to stand up to Happy and defend the honor of the game are Bob Barker and …. Shooter McGavin.

Really, Shooter doesn’t really start to go after Happy until Happy’s fans starts to purposefully antagonize him. Remember Happy’s ex-boss showing up to heckle Shooter even though he still had that nail in his head? Seriously that’s not right. I mean, who shows up to support the dude who put a nail in your head? Shooter McGavin had every reason to be concerned about that.

Despite the fact that Shooter was treated rather unfairly, Happy Gilmore is definitely a favorite of mine. I pretty much love the entire film, from Carl Weathers’s enjoyably demented performance as Happy’s mentor to the famous scene of Bob Barker beating Happy to a pulp. For those who only know Adam Sandler from his later, lazier comedies, Happy Gilmore will be a bit of a revelation because Sandler and the entire cast actually seem to be making an effort to make a good and funny comedy. The staid world of golf turns out to be the perfect foil for Sandler’s manchild antics. And for those who prefer Sandler when he’s playing serious roles, he actually does a pretty good job in Happy Gilmore’s few sincere moments. His scenes with his grandmother are actually rather sweet.

Happy Gilmore remains Sandler’s best comedy and it’s a personal favorite of mine. Every time I watch it, I laugh and that’s a good thing. I also like to think that Shooter and Happy eventually set aside their differences and got their own talk show on ESPN. They deserved it.

Previous Guilty Pleasures

Insomnia File #53: A Nightmare on Drug Street (dir by Traci Wald Donat)

Posted on March 25, 2022 by Lisa Marie Bowman

What’s an Insomnia File? You know how some times you just can’t get any sleep and, at about three in the morning, you’ll find yourself watching whatever you can find on cable or Netflix? This feature is all about those insomnia-inspired discoveries!

If you were having trouble getting to sleep last night, you could have gone over to YouTube and you could have done what I did when I was having trouble getting to sleep two nights ago. You could have watched the 1989 educational film, A Nightmare on Drug Street.

Clocking in at 39 minutes, A Nightmare on Drug Street opens with three people sitting in a dark room. Though the room seems ominous and the three people often appear to only be shadows, they turn out to to be friendly enough. (And no, Freddy Krueger is not among them. This is Drug Street, not Elm Street.)

“Hi, I’m Jill!” the one in the middle informs us. “I’m dead!”

Filipe, who is is sitting to left of and is a bit less perky than Jill, mentions that they’re all dead. Eddie, the youngest of the three, speaks up and mentions that he’s been dead for two days longer than Jill. They all have a good laugh about that. Jill says that she’s not sure where they are but she thinks that they’re supposed to think about their mistakes and to try to prevent other people their age from making the same mistakes.

“Jill,” I nearly shouted at the screen, “you’re in Purgatory! It’s not that complicated!”

Eddie complains as he realizes that he’s going to have to relive his story again. Jill laughs and says that Eddie is always complaining. Filipe does not laugh because he’s not in a particularly good mood and I don’t blame him. His Purgatory experience is obviously not turning out the way that he was hoping. It would appear that Filipe has gotten trapped on the boring side of Purgatory.

Anyway, we then see how each of them ended up dead. As you can probably guess from the title it all has to do with drugs.

For instance, after winning the big game, Filipe got both stoned and drunk and then decided that it would be a good idea to steal his brother’s car. Needless to say, it doesn’t take long until Filipe’s more intelligent friend is demanding to be let out of the car. It also doesn’t take long to hear the sound of an off-screen crash. Apparently, there wasn’t enough money in the budget to film a real crash.

Jill met a guy at a party and basically allowed herself to be talked into trying cocaine. As anyone who has ever seen a film like this can probably guess, Jill goes straight from doing that one line to stealing from her friends and selling a family heirloom so she can get more money for coke. Her family is disappointed in her. Her friends are angry with her. And her drug dealer keeps hitting on her. No wonder Jill eventually end up snorting too much.

And finally, Eddie, who is still in middle school, is handed a crack pipe by a friend. Soon, Eddie is getting high in the bathroom while his parents try to understand why his grades have gone down.

Interestingly enough, each story is narrated by a dead teen but not the teen that actually dies in the story. So, Jill tells Filipe’s story and makes fun of him for being geeky whenever he gets high. (Yeah, Jill, like you looked really cool with your bloodshot eyes and your red nose….) Eddie tells Jill’s story and manages to get through it without ridiculing her. Filipe tells Eddie’s story while wearing what appears to be a hospital gown. There’s actually a scene in Purgatory where the three of them debate who will tell each story. Do they automatically know the stories or is it just a case that they’re memorized them because there’s literally nothing else to talk about while in Purgatory? The film leaves that question unanswered, which is a shame.

(Speaking of unanswered questions, why are we even in Purgatory in the first place? The three narrators look directly at the viewer when they speak so I’m guess that I’m meant to have died as well. But if I’m already dead, what’s the point of warning me about drugs? Seriously, there’s a lot of unanswered questions in this film.)

Anyway, as for the film itself, it’s another well-intentioned but not quite successful attempt to make an anti-drug scare film. Like many anti-drug short films, A Nightmare on Drug Street suffers due to the fact that the characters are more interesting when they’re high than when they’re sober. The stories themselves often veer into melodrama though, to the film’s credit, it seems to at least be a bit self-aware when it comes to this. When Filipe jumps in his car, Jill says that she knows that we know what’s going to happen but she asks us to keep watching anyways. After being specifically asked to watch, you kind of feel like you have to.

For the most part, this film’s main worth is as a time capsule. It’s all about 80s fashion and 80s lingo. Breaking Bad fans will take note that Filipe is played by Raymond Cruz, who later played a fearsome drug dealer on the classic AMC series. I guess Filipe found his way out of Purgatory after all.

Previous Insomnia Files:

The Great Outdoors (1988, directed by Howard Deutch)

Posted on March 24, 2022 by Jedadiah Leland

Chet Ripley (John Candy) wants to have a nice vacation up at the lake with his wife (Stephanie Faracy) and their two sons, Buck (Chris Young) and Ben (Ian Giatti). Unfortunately, no sooner has he arrived than the vacation is crashed by Chet’s sister-in-law (Annette Bening, making her film debut) and her husband, Roman (Dan Aykroyd). Roman represents everything that that the mild-mannered Chet hates. Roman is loud, obnoxious, and obsessed with showing off his wealth. Roman knows nothing about how to survive in the great outdoors and he treats Chet like he’s a loser but, for the sake of giving his family a good vacation, Chet tries to get along with Roman. At first, it doesn’t work but eventually, Chet and Roman have to team up to find Roman’s daughters and deal with not only a bear but also talking raccoons. Meanwhile, Buck falls in love with local girl, Cammie (Lucy Deakins). I imagine the same can be said of a lot of people who caught this film on HBO when they were twelve.

The Great Outdoors is very much a comedy of the late 80s. Roman may be a crass Yuppie but it doesn’t appear that Chet is suffering financially either. The humor is broad and physical but the film never resorts to the gross-out style that has since come to define cinematic comedy. It’s a film that makes fun of the obligations of family life while also celebrating them and you won’t be shocked to learn that the script was written by John Hughes. John Candy is likable and Dan Aykroyd has a demented twinkle in his eye.

It’s not a bad movie but I just wish it had been funnier. Don’t get me wrong. When you’re a kid and you come across The Great Outdoors on cable, it’s hilarious because it’s got John Candy waterskiing and a bear and, of course, the talking raccoons. Watching it as an adult, though, it’s easier to see just how much the material and the film’s family-safe approach holds back both Candy and especially Aykroyd. Both of them were capable of being wild comedic performance but, in The Great Outdoors, the movie doesn’t let either one of them really go crazy and that’s too bad. Instead of being a showcase for the best of SNL and SCTV, it becomes an amusing but ultimately very safe family comedy. (Arguably, Hollywood never really figured out the best way to use Candy and Aykroyd’s comedic talents, though Candy’s films before his untimely death suggested that he was on the verge of a genuine breakthrough.)

I did laugh when I rewatched The Great Outdoors but I didn’t laugh as much as I did when I was a kid. Now, I feel old and I’m thinking about how unfortunate it is that John Candy died before production could start on the biopic of Fatty Arbuckle that Candy was tentatively set to star in. Much like Phil Hartman, it’s hard to watch John Candy today without thinking about how he was taken when he was on the verge of probably doing what would have been his best work.

Time to cheer myself up with What About Bob?