Late Night Retro Television Reviews: Nightmare Café 1.2 “Dying Well Is The Best Revenge”

Posted on October 9, 2023 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Welcome to Late Night Retro Television Reviews, a feature where we review some of our favorite and least favorite shows of the past! On Mondays, I will be reviewing Nightmare Cafe, which ran on NBC from January to April of 1992. The entire show is currently streaming on YouTube!

This week, Frank and Fay get involved in a case of ghost noir!

Episode 1.2 “Dying Well Is The Best Revenge”

(Dir by Armand Mastroianni, originally aired on March 6th, 1992)

This week’s episode of Nightmare Café begins with Frank and Fay feeling pretty comfortable in their new roles of working at the café under the watchful eye of Blackie. I guess some time has passed since the pilot, as both Frank and Fay seem to be totally okay with the fact that they’re both dead and destined to spend the rest of their existence working as, respectively, a cook and a waitress.

Don’t get me wrong, of course. There’s nothing wrong with being a cook or a waitress. If I was a waitress, I would definitely want to work for Robert Englund and get to wear a cute uniform like Fay does. I think what is throwing me is that Fay and Frank seem to be so comfortable with the idea of being dead. It would take me a bit longer to accept that.

As for tonight’s episode, the action starts when a sultry woman named Angela (Beth Toussaint) enters the café and asks for a cup of coffee. Frank immediately starts flirting with her and Angela flirts back in typical film noir fashion. All of the flirting ends, though, when Angela’s husband, Edward (Justin Deas), stumbles into the café, his face bloodied from apparently being attacked outside while he was waiting for Angela. Angela and Edward leave but Angela later returns so that she can talk to Frank.

Angela claims that Edward is abusive. Frank leaves the café so that he can visit Angela at home and eventually sleep with her. (Fay and Blackie watch on the television.) Fay doesn’t trust Angela, especially after her previous lover — a country club tennis pro (Andrew Airlie) — is mysteriously run over by a hit-and-run-driver. As Fay puts it, she thinks that Frank could be putting his life at risk. But, the thing with that is that Frank and Fay are already dead. That was established in the pilot. So, if Frank is already dead, how is he putting his life at risk? For that matter, if Frank and Fay are dead and the Nightmare Café is basically a dimensional portal, how are they both able to casually leave the café and walk around town? I mean, are they dead and in purgatory or not? Seriously, what are the rules of the Nightmare Café?

Eventually, Edward confronts Frank and Angela and Frank …. SHOOTS HIM! Well, I guess since Frank is dead, he can be a murderer. Except, in a clever twist, it turns out that Edward was already dead and the Nightmare Café gave him a second chance to prove that Angela was the one who set up his murder. When Angela tries to put Edward in the trunk of her car, Edward suddenly gets out of the trunk and Angela shoots him several times. Edward pretends to die once again, allowing the police to arrest Angela for murder. The episode ends with Angela in prison, with Edward as her ghostly companion.

So, as I said earlier, I’m still not sure what the rules of the Nightmare Café are supposed to be and, in this episode, it felt like Frank and Fay could basically just do whatever was convenient to the plot. That’s a bit of a problem because, when there are no rules, there aren’t any stakes either. That said, this episode was helped immensely by the friendly charm of Robert Englund. Blackie didn’t really get involved in the storyline but he did break the fourth wall and talk directly to the audience a few times and Englund delivered the lines with just the right amount of cheery sarcasm. Robert Englund definitely kept things entertaining!

Film Review: The Butterfly Effect 2 (dir by John R. Leonetti)

Posted on February 13, 2019 by Lisa Marie Bowman

“Hey, everyone! Let’s remake The Butterfly Effect, just without any of the goofiness that made the first film so enjoyable!”

That would seem to be the logic behind 2006’s The Butterfly Effect 2. Since the first Butterfly Effect was a minor hit (I saw it in the theaters!), it was inevitable that there would be a sequel. And since the first Butterfly Effect is currently on Netflix, it’s also inevitable that the sequel would follow it.

Anyway, Butterfly Effect 2 is just like Butterfly Effect except, instead of a guy trying to fix his entire screwed-up childhood, the sequel is about an office worker named Nick (Eric Lively) who has just had a really bad year. His girlfriend and his two best friends were killed in a traffic accident. He lost a big promotion at work. His apartment is a mess and he keeps having these hella icky nosebleeds. Agck! Nick, however, discovers that if he stares at an old picture, he can be transported back to the moment that the picture was taken.

Since Nick obviously didn’t see the first movie, he proceeds to start changing the past. He prevents the deaths of all of his friends but now, in the new timeline, he actually has to work with them and this results in him getting fired. He then goes back in the past to keep a jerk from getting a promotion but this leads to Nick getting the promotion instead, breaking up with his girlfriend, and becoming an ennui-stricken bachelor. Apparently, being a wealthy bachelor means doing business with organized crime because Nick soon has people trying to kill him. Maybe there’s no way to create a perfect present, the film suggests.

And the film might be right but that doesn’t make it any less boring to sit through. The Butterfly Effect 2 is just never as much fun as the first film. It lacks the goofy charm of Ashton Kutcher and most of the timeline changes are rather dull. The sequel never matches the glory of Ashton Kutcher waking up to discover that he’s gone from being a disheveled psych major to being a clean-cut, sweater-wearing frat boy.

The Butterfly Effect 2 was directed by John Leonetti, who would later direct the genuinely creepy Annabelle. Of course, he also directed the absolutely awful Wolves at the Door. As for The Butterflyn Effect 2, it’s not creepy but it’s also not awful enough to be memorable. More than anything, it’s a bland movie. It’s just kind of there, floating in direct-to-video, Netflix limbo.

Film Review: Fifty Shades Darker (dir by James Foley)

Posted on February 10, 2017 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The Fifty Shades of Grey trilogy is shaping up to be the cinematic equivalent of a twitter parody account.

That’s the conclusion that I reached today after my BFF Evelyn and I watched the second part of the trilogy, Fifty Shades Darker. Since we had both read the book, we weren’t shocked when Fifty Shades Darker turned out to be a bad movie. Hell, we weren’t surprised when Fifty Shades of Grey turned out to be bad, either. Each subsequent book was worst than the one that came before it so, when the film version of Fifty Shades Freer is released next year, it should be the worst of all.

Still, nothing could have prepared us for the amount of laugh-out-loud moments and odd details that were offered up in Fifty Shades Darker. Consider just a few:

Having broken up with Christian “I’m fifty shades of fucked up” Grey at the end of the previous film, Ana Steele (Dakota Johnson, doing penance in the hope of being sprung from Purgatory) is now working for a hip and trendy Seattle publishing company! How do we know that it’s hip and trendy? Well, it’s in Seattle and it’s called Seattle Independent Publishing! (As opposed to Seattle Corporate Press.) Her boss, Jack (Eric Hyde) leers at her in a style that basically screams, “Lifetime movie villain!” There’s a scene in which Ana tells her editors that they should be making more of an attempt to reach readers in the “18-24 demographic” and everyone reacts as if this is the first time that they’ve ever heard about this concept. You half expect someone to say, “18 to 24 year olds! WHY DIDN’T WE THINK OF THAT!?” Seriously, after seeing this, I’m going to send my resume to the Dallas Observer, along with a note that says, “18-24. Hire me for more info.”

When Christian (poor Jamie Dornan, who I’m pretty sure was trying to blink out an S.O.S. signal at certain points in the film) and Ana first reunite, it’s to attend an art show. Ana’s artist friend has filled an entire gallery with photos of Ana, the majority of which resemble the “sexy” photos that Darcy posted to her MyRoom page in that very special episode of Degrassi. Christian buys all the pictures because he can’t handle the idea of anyone else having Ana on their wall. This obsessive and controlling act is just enough to apparently make Ana reconsider her decision to dump Christian because he was being too obsessive and controlling.

Christian eventually confesses to Ana that he’s only attracted to women who look like his mother and he punishes them because he’s angry with her. “Oh, Christian, your Oedipal complex is so sexy,” Ana coos. Okay, she doesn’t say that. I said that and then Evelyn said something that I can’t repeat. And then we laughed and laughed. Don’t get me wrong. I know that everyone has their issues and God knows, I’ve got a few myself. But the minute a guy tells me that he’s only dating me because I look like his mother, that’s the minute I leave.

When Christian tells Ana about his messed up childhood, Ana responds by drawing on his chest with lipstick. And I swear, that lipstick remains on his chest — without a smudge — for at least a few days. Every time we would catch a glimpse of those perfect lipstick markings on Christian’s chest, Evelyn and I would start laughing. I mean, drawing on your partner (or having your partner draw on you) can be fun but most people wash it off after a while.

(Incidentally, when the Scary Movie people get around to parodying this movie, you know that the lipstick scene is going to be recreated.)

Christian’s childhood bedroom is decorated with a poster of Vin Diesel. When Christian is pouring out his heart, Vin Diesel is glowering in the background. It would have been neat if the poster had suddenly come to life. Perhaps Vin could have suddenly appeared in the bedroom and said, “Someday … BUT NOT TODAY!”

And I’m not even going to talk about the Ben Wa balls.

Anyway, there’s really not much of a plot in Fifty Shades Darker. Ana gets back together with Christian but says that she wants to have a “vanilla” relationship. Christian agrees but he still keeps doing controlling stuff, like buying Ana’s company and freezing her bank account. Ana gets mad. Ana breaks up with him. They get back together. This happens a few times. Christian tells Ana to stay away from a man. Ana gets upset but then the man tries to rape her which feels like the film’s way of putting her in her place for doubting Christian’s instincts when it comes to men. Kim Basinger pops up as the woman who introduced Christian to BDSM and tells Ana that Christian will never be happy in a vanilla relationship. Ana says that vanilla is her favorite ice cream. Here’s my thing: why can’t Ana come up with a more complimentary term than “vanilla” to describe her relationship goals? I mean, Ana’s clever. She came up with that whole 18-24 thing, after all.

There’s also a crazy woman (Bella Heathcote) who shows up occasionally. We know she’s crazy because she’s dressed like someone who lives in an abandoned subway tunnel. She occasionally grabs Ana and says, “I’m nobody!” Hmmm….I wonder what that’s about…

(Well, don’t wonder too much. There’s not a single mystery or question in Fifty Shades Darker that isn’t solved a scene or two after it’s raised.)

One of the redeeming things about Fifty Shades of Grey is that neither Dakota Johnson nor director Sam Taylor-Johnson seemed to be taking it all that seriously. Dakota would pause meaningfully before delivering the worst of her dialogue, a sign that even she couldn’t believe what she was about to say. Meanwhile, Sam Taylor-Johnson’s direction suggested that she found the story to be just as ludicrous and stupid as everyone else. However, Fifty Shades Darker is directed by James Foley. Foley is a veteran director, one who has been making films since before I was born. He does a workmanlike job and you can almost hear him shouting, “Now, where’s my paycheck!?” during certain scenes. Under Foley’s direction, there’s no winking at the audience. There’s no hints of subversion. Foley’s direction is very literal and more than a little dull. He was hired to direct a big-budget version of a Chanel No. 5 commercial and that’s exactly what he does.

The other big issue with Fifty Shades Darker is that Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan have very little romantic chemistry. They both look good naked but that’s about it. Jamie looks miserable to be there and Dakota seems to be trying to keep herself amused. The lack of chemistry was less of a problem in Fifty Shades of Grey. In that film, all that mattered was that Christian was rich and hot and Ana didn’t really haven’t anything better to do. But, in Fifty Shades Darker, we’re asked to believe that they’re actually deeply in love and … no, it just doesn’t work.

Evelyn and I laughed through the entire movie. In the past, we’ve gotten in trouble for doing this because we do have a tendency to get a little bit loud. However, nobody in the audience seemed to mind.

Anyway, Fifty Shades Freer will be coming out next year. Hopefully, someone will read this review and work my idea about the Vin Diesel cameo into the film.

Seriously, it would be great!

Film Review: Fifty Shades of Grey (dir by Sam Taylor-Johnson)

Posted on February 16, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

If there’s anything that’s obvious from looking over some of the reviews of Fifty Shades of Grey, it’s that only after you’ve read the book can you properly appreciate the film.

If you haven’t read the book, you’ll probably watch the film and dismiss it as being a draggy film that has some truly terrible dialogue and which features two actors who look good naked but who have absolutely no chemistry. You might appreciate that fact that Dakota Jonson, at the very least, appears to be trying to give a good performance. You might even acknowledge that director Sam Taylor-Johnson manages to capture a few pretty images. You might even be happy that she resisted the temptation to cast her husband, Aaron Taylor-Johnson (a.k.a., the least interesting bankable actor working today), in the role of Christian Grey. But, even with all of that, you’ll probably still probably watch the film and, even with its artfully composed and shot sex scenes, think to yourself, “That was two hours of my life that I’ll never get back.”

However, if you have read the book, then you will be capable of watching the film and understanding that, as flawed as it may be, 50 Shades of Grey probably should have been a thousand times worse. It may seem weird to praise Sam Taylor-Johnson for managing to create a below average film but, considering her source material, below average is probably the best that could be hoped for.

Both the film and the book tell the same basic story. Anastasia Steele (Dakota Johnson) is a 21 year-old English lit major. We know that she’s intelligent because she knows the difference between Thomas Hardy the writer and Tom Hardy the actor. We know that she’s innocent because, the first time that she interviews Christian Grey, she wears a sweater.

As for Christian Grey (Jamie Dornan), he’s a 28 year-old multibillionaire. We are constantly assured that he’s the most interesting man in the world, despite the fact that he actually seems to be rather dull. He likes Ana. She likes him. But Christian doesn’t do the relationship thing. Instead, he explains, “I fuck. Hard.” (As opposed to doing so limp…) He’s not interested in having a “vanilla” relationship with Ana. Instead, he wants her to sign a contract in which she’ll agree to be his submissive.

That’s right — Christian claims to be into BDSM. And, in order to prove that point, he has a red dungeon that’s full of stuff that he apparently picked up at a BDSM yard sale. The dungeon’s red, of course. In both the book and the film, a good deal of time is spent attempting to explain BDSM and, in both cases, you’re left with the feeling that Christian got most of his knowledge from reading Wikipedia. In many ways, Christian comes across like someone who has never had a drink pretending to be drunk. He tries really hard but … no.

Anyway, a lot of the film comes down to Christian trying to get Ana to sign a contract. Ana agrees to give up her freedom. When she asks what she gets in return, Christian replies, “Me.” Which, if Christian was being played by Ryan Gosling or Michael Fassbender, might be an incentive. But instead, he’s being played by Jamie Dornan who, quite frankly, looks embarrassed to be there.

Those who have read the book will be pleased to discover that Christian’s immortal line of “I’m fifty shades of fucked up!” has been included in the film. Dornan delivers it like an actor who has given up and who can blame him? To her credit, Dakota Johnson manages to keep a straight face.

Here’s the main problem. Christian Grey is a stalker asshole. He’s an obsessive control freak who is basically using the BDSM lifestyle as a way to cover up the fact that he’s a sociopath. Though that was not author E.L. James’s intention when she wrote the book, that’s who Christian Grey ultimately turns out to be. And that’s the way that Jamie Dornan plays the character. It’s not that Dornan is a bad actor. Just watch him in The Fall and you’ll see that Dornan is capable of giving a very good performance. Instead, you just get the feeling that he looked at the 50 Shades script, saw that Christian was an impossible character to play sympathetically, and decided to give the most literal performance possible. When you were reading the book, you could always imagine some redeeming features for Christian. But, when you watch the movie, you’re forced to accept this very literal interpretation of the character and it quickly becomes apparent that the only reason why anyone would possible love Christian is because he’s rich.

Meanwhile, in the role of Ana, Dakota Johnson actually does a pretty good job. Fortunately, the film jettisons Ana’s narration and we don’t have to hear any details about what her inner goddess is doing while being ordered around by Christian. As a result, Johnson’s interpretation of Ana is far different from how the character was portrayed in the book. Whereas the book’s Ana seems to be desperate to be loved by Christian, Johnson’s Ana often seems to be struggling to keep a straight face. Whereas the book’s Ana took the whole contract thing very seriously, Johnson’s Ana always seems to be on the verge of rolling her eyes. It gives the film an interesting subtext in that you never quite believe that Johnson’s Ana could be as intrigued by Christian Grey as both the book and the film insist that she is. Instead, she mostly seems to put up with him and his kinks because he buys her expensive gifts.

And, since Christian is such a jerk, you really don’t mind the possibility that Ana’s main motivation might be materialistic.

(Another great thing about Dakota Johnson is that she seems to be sincerely embarrassed whenever she has to tell anyone that her name is “Anastasia Steele.”)

Finally, a word about Sam Taylor-Johnson. On the basis of Nowhere Boy, she’s a talented director and, as far as 50 Shades of Grey goes, I think she does the best that she could possibly do. At the very least, she seems to realize that the film is a bit ludicrous and she wisely plays some of the book’s worst moments for subversive laughter. Considering that 50 Shades of Grey is one of the worst books ever written (and, by that, I mean that the book’s prose is so clunky and overdone that it’s damn near unreadable), Sam Taylor-Johnson probably does deserve some credit for making a movie that’s only below average as opposed to disastrous. At the very least, I hope that 50 Shades of Grey will not damage her career in the way that Twilight damaged the equally talented Catherine Hardwicke’s.

I forced my boyfriend to see it with my on Valentine’s and there were a lot of couples in the theater. But, for all the talk of how 50 Shades of Grey launched a thousand fantasies, it’s not a particularly erotic film. The sex scenes are well shot but, since Jamie and Dakota have no chemistry, they also feel very clinical and detached. (Add to that, for a film that’s being identified as being a chick flick, the camera spent a lot more time lingering on Dakota’s naked body than on Jamie’s.) All the sex that followed couples viewing 50 Shades on Saturday night had more to do with the romance of Valentine’s Day and the glory of being in love than with the film itself.

(That, of course, is one of the huge differences between 50 Shades of Grey and Magic Mike.)

50 Shades of Grey apparently made a lot of money this weekend and, if you’re reading this review, chances are that you’ve already seen the film. So, I’ll just conclude by saying that the film is not as bad as most people were expecting. It’s just not particularly any good either. I’ll be looking forward to seeing what Dakota and Sam Taylor-Johnson do in the future but Christian Grey can just stay in his red room for all I care.

(And now that you’ve read the review, why not have some real fun and check out the Fifty Shades of Grey text generator!? Click on refresh a few times and you’ll have an erotic best seller of your own, ready to be published and to make you rich!)