Guilty Pleasure #85: Attack of the Killer Tomatoes (dir by John DeBello)

Posted on October 3, 2025 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The 1978 film, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes, opens with a title card that would make James Nguyen proud. It informs us that people laughed when they first watched a film called The Birds. Then, years later, a flock of birds went mad and started attacking people. No one is laughing now.

As for the rest of the film, it opens with a housewife being menaced by a giant tomato and then it just keeps rolling on from there. Something is causing normal, everyday tomatoes to go on a rampage and no one can figure out what. The government is powerless. (The government’s competence is best exemplified by a scene where a helicopter crashes. Reportedly, the helicopter crash was not scripted but the film’s director decided to keep the scene anyway.) The president puts Mason Dixon (David Miller) in charge of defeating the tomatoes.

The film is one gag and one song after another. Mason has a group of eccentric people working for him, including a superstar gymnast and a man who is always dragging a parachute behind him. The streets are soon running red with tomato juice while clueless teenagers continue to listen to absolutely terrible song called Puberty Love….

In the past, I’ve struggled to define how a pleasure can be guilty but I think Attack of the Killer Tomatoes is actually one of the rare films that truly can live up to the label. It’s a pleasure because it’s just so silly and cheerfully stupid that it’s hard not to smile at it. It’s guilty because, premise aide, the film itself is never really as funny as you want it to be. Comedy — even when its something as silly as this film — is all about timing and Attack of the Killer Tomatoes never nails the timing of its gags. Instead, it plays out like a stoned daydream, amusing to talk about but a bit boring to actually witness.

That said, the film deserves some sort of award for its title and also for going on to inspire not only a few sequels but also a cartoon series. Producer Stephen Peace went on to have a successful career in California politics. Good for him.

Previous Guilty Pleasures

Icarus File No. 23: The Last Tycoon (dir by Elia Kazan)

Posted on April 22, 2025 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Based on the final (and unfinished) novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald, 1976’s The Last Tycoon tells the story of Monroe Stahr (Robert De Niro).

Monroe Stahr is the head of production at a film studio during the early days of Hollywood. Stahr is an unemotional and seemingly repressed man who only shows enthusiasm when he’s talking about movies. He may not be able to deal with real people but he instinctively knows what they want to see on the big screen. Stahr is a genius but he’s working himself to death, ignoring his health concerns while trying to create the perfect world through film. He’s haunted by a lost love and when he meets Kathleen Moore (Ingrid Boulting, giving a remarkably dull performance), he tries to find love with her but, naturally, he doesn’t succeed. Meanwhile, he has to deal with his boss (Robert Mitchum), his boss’s daughter (Theresa Russell), a neurotic screenwriter (Donald Pleasence), an impotent actor (Tony Curtis), and a lowdown dirty communist labor organizer (Jack Nicholson)! Sadly, for Stahr, McCarthyism is still a few decades away.

There’s a lot of talented people in The Last Tycoon and it’s undeniably interesting to see old school stars — like Mitchum, Curtis, Dana Andrews, Ray Milland — acting opposite a Method-driven, 30-something Robert De Niro. This is one of those films where even the minor roles are filled with name actors. John Carradine plays a tour guide. Jeff Corey plays a doctor. This is a film about Golden Age Hollywood that is full of Golden Age survivors. It’s a shame that most of them don’t get much to do. The Last Tycoon is a very episodic film as Stahr goes from one crisis to another. Characters show up and then just kind of disappear and we’re never quite sure how Stahr feels about any of them or how their existence really shapes Stahr’s worldview. Robert De Niro may be a great actor but, as portrayed in this film, Monroe Stahr is a boring character and De Niro’s trademark tight-lipped intensity just makes Stahr seem like someone who doesn’t have much to offer beyond employment. This is one of De Niro’s least interesting performances, mostly because he’s playing a not-particularly interesting person. Mitchum, Pleasence, and the old guard all make an impression because they’re willing to coast by on their bigger-than-life personalities. De Niro is trapped by the Method and a total lack of chemistry with co-star Ingrid Boulting.

Still, this is the only film to feature both De Niro and Jack Nicholson. (The Departed was originally conceived as a chance to bring De Niro and Nicholson together, with De Niro being the original choice for the role eventually played by Martin Sheen.) Nicholson’s role is small and he doesn’t show up until the film is nearly over. He and De Niro have an intense table tennis match. Nicholson doesn’t really dig deep into Brimmer’s character. Instead, he flashes his grin and let’s the natural sarcasm of his voice carry the scene. It’s nowhere close to being as emotionally satisfying as the De Niro/Pacino meeting in Heat. That said, Jack Nicholson at least appears to be enjoying himself. His natural charisma makes his role seem bigger than it actually is.

Why was The Last Tycoon such a disappointment? Though unfinished, the book still featured some of Fitzgerald’s best work and there’s a huge amount of talent involved in this film. The blame mostly falls on Elia Kazan, who came out of retirement to direct the film after original director Mike Nichols left the project. (Nichols reportedly objected to casting De Niro as Stahr. While it’s tempting to think that Nichols realized that De Niro’s intense style wouldn’t be right for the role, it actually appears that Nichols and De Niro sincerely disliked each other as Nichols also abandoned the next film he was hired to direct when he was told that De Niro wanted the lead role. Nichols choice for Monroe Stahr was Dustin Hoffman, which actually would have worked. If nothing else, it would have provided a Graduate reunion.) Kazan later said that he did the film solely for the money and it’s obvious that he didn’t really care much about the film’s story. The film has some good scenes but, overall, it feels disjointed and uneven. Kazan doesn’t really seem to care about Monroe Stahr and, as a result, the entire film falls flat.

Previous Icarus Files:

Retro Television Review: Changing Patterns 1.1 “Pilot”

Posted on March 21, 2024 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Welcome to Retro Television Reviews, a feature where we review some of our favorite and least favorite shows of the past! On Thursdays, I will be reviewing Changing Patterns, which aired on CBS in 1987. The entire show is currently streaming on YouTube!

This week, Valerie Perrine and Brenda Vaccaro are changing patterns!

Episode 1.1 “Pilot”

(Dir by Linda Day, originally aired on June 26th, 1987)

Molly (Oscar nominee Valerie Perrine) and Maxine (Oscar nominee Brenda Vacarro) are two housewives who lives in the suburbs. Molly’s husband (Alex Rocco) is an old friend of Maxine’s husband (Robert S. Woods). Maxine’s husband makes smoothies in the blender. Molly’s husband likes to play golf. They made a fortune in the tire business but now, they’re both retired and ready to support Maxine and Molly’s dream. What a wacky group of neighbors.

Molly and Maxine are trying to break into the fashion industry. Since this the 80s, all of their designs feature shoulder pads and none of them look like they would, in any way, flatter the figure of anyone under the age of 57. Despite having never sold a design and presumably having never made any money from their career, Molly and Maxine have a store in the mall and they’re able to employ a professional cutter (Eric Christmas).

When Steve Ballinger (George DelHoyo), a buyer from Sacks, steps into their store, he’s impressed with their work. He wants to buy some of their hideous designs. But — uh oh! — he also mentions that he would like to set Maxine up with a single friend of his. Molly and Maxine assume that Steve is talking about himself and, eager to make a sale, they don’t reveal that Maxine is married.

Molly and Maxine lie to their husbands and then meet Steve for dinner. Steve shows up with his wife! And his single friend, Jim (Hugh Maguire). When Molly and Maxine thought that Steve was interested in Maxine himself, they thought he was being sleazy. But when they discover that Steve just wants to Maxine to hook up with his friend, they think it’s charming. Either way, it doesn’t really seem that professional on Steve’s part. I, honestly, was expecting Steve to be revealed to be a big liar. I mean, do buyers of major stores really walk around the strip mall? Not to mention that none of Molly and Maxine’s designs were actually any good or, in any way, unique. Steve might soon be out of a job.

Anyway, Maxine reveals that she is married and everyone has a good laugh over the misunderstanding. Then Molly and Maxine go home and have a second dinner with their husbands, who are both amazingly forgiving of the whole lying thing. I mean, Alex Rocco was Moe Greene. There’s just something weird about seeing him play such a wimpy character.

You can probably guess that this was the only episode of Changing Patterns. The show had a number of problems, including a laugh track that went off even when nothing funny was happening. The main problem, though, is that Molly and Maxine were pretty much interchangeable. They both had the same personality, the same outlook, the same ambitions, and the same sense of humor. That might work for a friendship but, for a television show, it means that there’s not enough conflict to keep things interesting. For Changing Patterns to succeed, it would have needed to change its own patterns.

Porky’s Revenge (1985, directed by James Komack)

Posted on November 5, 2020 by Jedadiah Leland

The senior class of Angel Beach High finally graduate in Porky’s Revenge, the last official Porky’s film. It’s a good thing, too. Most of the members of the Porky’s cast were already in their late 20s when they were cast in the first Porky’s. By the time Porky’s Revenge was made, most of them looked more like they should be planning for their retirement than for college.

Director Bob Clark did not return for Porky’s Revenge and it really shows. The third film doesn’t have any messages about tolerance or fighting bigotry. Instead, it’s just a typical teen sex comedy with a subplot about Brian Schwartz (Scott Colomby) trying to help Coach Goodenough (Bill Hindman) pay back his gambling debt to Porky (Chuck Mitchell). Otherwise, the gang plays basketball, tries to arrange an orgy with the cheerleaders, and even helps Ms. Balbircker (Ellen Parsons) find love. I guess everyone forgot about Ms. Balbricker allying herself with the Klan during the previous film.

Porky’s Revenge doesn’t really have enough ambition to be terrible though. It’s just bland. Just as it doesn’t have the social conscience of the first two film, it’s also not as raunchy. There’s considerably less nudity and the occasionally rough edges of the first two films have been removed. That makes Porky’s Revenge less problematic but it also makes it less interesting. The first two films may have been imperfect but they did capture the feel of high school. This one doesn’t do that because the actors are too old and suddenly their characters are too nice. If not for the title, you would think this was just another dumb comedy that played for a week at the drive-in as opposed to being the second sequel to the most commercially-successful Canadian film of the 80s.

I did laugh when the gang went to the ruins of Porky’s to make sure that it hadn’t been rebuilt, just to discover that Porky now owned his own steamboat. I’m also glad that everyone finally graduated and gave the Porky’s saga a fitting close.

There was a direct-to-video sequel to Porky’s Revenge. It came out in 2009 and was called Porky’s Pimpin’ Pee Wee. I think I can live without watching it.

Porky’s II: The Next Day (1983, directed by Bob Clark)

Posted on November 4, 2020 by Jedadiah Leland

The teens of Angel Beach, Florida are back! They’re still trying to get laid, they’re still playing pranks on each other, and, this time, they’re …. FIGHTING THE KLAN!?

Porky’s II continues with the first Porky’s mix of raunchiness and social commentary. While Pee Wee (Dan Monahan) tries to get back at his friends for spending the whole previous movie making fun of the size of his dick, the other members of the large ensemble cast thwart an attempt by the Klan to keep them from putting on a Shakespearean showcase. The Klan is upset that a Seminole has been cast as Romeo so they burn a cross and do everything they can to sabotage the production. Also trying to keep the show from going on is the hypocritical Rev. Bubba Flavel (Bill Wiley) and Mrs. Balbricker (Nancy Parsons), who both consider Shakespeare’s plays to be obscene. When Wendy (Kaki Hunter) discovers that one of the county commissioners has been lying about supporting the play, she humiliates him in public by pretending to vomit in a fountain and accusing him of impregnating her. It’s slightly funnier than it sounds but just slightly.

The first Porky’s took a stand against anti-Semitism while the second Porky’s takes a stand against censorship and the Klan. That’s actually pretty cool when you consider that both of these films are usually just thought of as being dumb sex comedies. Just like the first film, Porky’s II may be raunchy but it has a conscience. That was due to director Bob Clark, who obviously meant for the Porky’s films to be about more than just T&A.

Unfortunately, Porky’s II is never as funny as the first Porky’s. Too many of the jokes are recycled from the first film and the cast’s habit of laughing at their own “humorous” lines is even more grating the second time around. Even the film’s most famous scene, where Wendy humiliates the duplicitous commissioner, goes on for too long and doesn’t have as much of a payoff as it should. The best scenes in the film are the scenes that were lifted from Hamlet, Romero & Juliet, and A Midsummer Night’s Dream. You wouldn’t expect the ensemble of Porky’s to feature that many Shakespearean actors but apparently it did. Fans of A Christmas Story, which was also directed by Clark and which came out the same year as Porky’s II, will especially want to pay attention to the MacBeth sword fight scene just because the famous holiday leg lamp makes an appearance.

Porky’s II is nowhere near as good or memorable as the first Porky’s but its heart is in the right place. While not as big of a success as the first Porky’s, it still did well enough to lead to Porky’s III, which I’ll review tomorrow.

Porky’s (1981, directed by Bob Clark)

Posted on November 3, 2020 by Jedadiah Leland

Porky’s.

On the one hand, it’s a crude, juvenile, and raunchy sex comedy where a bunch of teenagers in 1960s Florida think that it’s a hoot and not at all problematic to spy on the girls shower and to hire a black man to scare all of their (white) friends.

On the other hand, it’s a heartfelt plea for tolerance where Tim (Cyril O’Reilly) finally stands up to his abusive father (Wayne Maunder) and makes friends with Brian Schwartz (Scott Colomby), who is apparently the only Jewish person living in Angel Beach, Florida.

What’s strange about Porky’s is that everyone knows it for being the template for almost every bad high school film that followed, with tons of nudity, jokes about sex, and characters with names like Pee Wee, Miss Honeywell, Cherry Forever, and Porky. But, when you sit down and watch the movie, you discover that, for all the raunchiness, it actually devotes even more time to Brian Schwartz dealing with the local bigots than it does to any of the things that it’s known for. Everyone remembers the shower scene but it’s obvious the film’s heart is with Brian and his attempts to make the world a better place. Porky’s is a sex comedy with a conscience.

Porky’s is an episodic film about a group of teenage boys trying to get laid and also trying to get revenge on the owner of the local brothel. There’s a lot of characters but I’d dare anyone to tell me the difference between Billy, Tommy, and Mickey. I went through the entire movie thinking that Billy was Mickey until I turned on the subtitles and discovered who was who. Porky’s has a reputation for being a terrible movie but it’s actually a pretty accurate depiction of the way that most men like to imagine how their high school years went. It captures the atmosphere of good-spirited teenage hijinks if not the reality.

One of the interesting things about Porky’s is that Bob Clark went from directing this to directing A Christmas Story. The innocence of A Christmas Story might seem like it has nothing in common with raunchiness of Porky’s but, actually, they’re both nostalgic films that are set in an idealized past. (If you still think A Christmas Story has nothing in common with Porky’s, just remember that Ralphie didn’t actually say “fudge.”) Of course, A Christmas Story struggled at the box office and only became a hit when it was released on video while Porky’s is still the most successful Canadian film to ever be released in the U.S. Sex sells. As cool as it was to see Brian Schwartz stand up for himself, I doubt the people who made Porky’s a monster hit were buying their tickets because they had heard the film struck a blow against anti-Semitism. They were going because they knew there was a shower scene.

Porky’s deserves its reputation for being a not-so great movie but I would be lying if I said that I didn’t laugh more than once while watching it. (Of course, I still didn’t laugh as much as the characters in the films laughed. I’ve never seen a cast that was as apparently amused with themselves as the cast of Porky’s.) There’s a lot of bad moments but it’s hard not to crack a smile when Miss Honeywell demonstrates why she’s known as Lassie or when one of the coaches suggests that wanted posters can be hung around the school to help catch the shower voyeur. Plus, everyone learns an important lesson about tolerance and how to destroy a brothel. As bad as it is, it’s hard to really dislike Porky’s.

When McQueen Met Ibsen: An Enemy of The People (1978, directed by George Schaefer)

Posted on June 17, 2016 by Jedadiah Leland

What happened when famed action star Steve McQueen met playwright Henrik Ibsen?

Here’s Steve McQueen in The Great Escape:

Steve McQueen In The Great Escape

This is Steve McQueen in Bullitt:

Steve McQueen in Bullitt

Here’s Steve McQueen with his future wife, Ali MacGraw, in The Getaway:

Steve McQueen in The Getaway

And finally, here’s Steve McQueen starring in An Enemy of the People:

Steve McQueen in Enemy of the People

In the four years between appearing in the Oscar-nominated The Towering Inferno and starring in An Enemy of the People, McQueen notoriously turned down several high-profile projects. He turned down the lead role in Sorcerer because director William Friedkin would not write a role for MacGraw. He turned down the lead role in Steven Spielberg’s Close Encounters of The Third Kind because he felt that he would not be able to cry on cue. (When Spielberg offered to take out the crying scene, McQueen replied that it was the best scene in the script.) Francis Ford Coppola could not afford his salary and McQueen missed out on the chance to play Capt. Willard in Apocalypse Now, a role he would have been perfect for.

AnEnemyOfThePeople_poster Instead, after a four years absence, McQueen returned to the screen in one of the least expected films of his career. Based on Arthur Miller’s adaptation of Henrik Ibsen’s original play, An Enemy of the People featured McQueen playing Dr. Thomas Stockmann, a scientist who discovers that his town’s local spring has been polluted by a tannery. When Stockmann reveals his findings, the town turns against him and his family. Stockmann has to decide whether to give into pressure from the town or to stay true to his principles.

As a star who was best known for playing stoic men of action, Steve McQueen was the last actor that anyone expected to appear in a film based on an Ibsen play. McQueen also insisted on playing the role with a heavy beard and a stocky build, making him virtually unrecognizable on-screen. Warner Bros. had no idea how to advertise An Enemy of The People so they didn’t. After a year of sitting on the shelf, An Enemy of the People was given a limited run in a few college towns. Many critics assumed that McQueen deliberately made an uncommercial movie just to get out of his contract with Warner Bros but, according to both Ali MacGraw and Marshall Terrill’s Steve McQueen: An American Rebel, McQueen was actually very enthusiastic about making An Enemy of the People and extremely disappointed when it was not a success. After the film failed to find an audience, Steve McQueen returned to appearing in action films and westerns.

Steve McQueen in Tom Horn (1980)

I recently saw An Enemy of the People on TCM and I thought it was slow and didactic. (It did not help that An Enemy of the People is Ibsen’s weakest play.) Especially in the beginning, there are a few scenes where McQueen struggles to hold his ground against co-stars Charles Durning and Richard Dysart, both of whom had far more theatrical experience. But McQueen gets better as the film goes on and proves that his deceptively casual approach can still be effective even when he is playing an intellectual who chooses to make his point with his words instead of his fists. He does a good job handling Ibsen’s notoriously wordy speeches. By the end of the movie, the idea of Steve McQueen in an Ibsen play no longer seems strange at all.

After An Enemy of the People, McQueen would only make two more movies before dying of cancer at the age of 50. Based on his performance as Dr. Stockmann, I believe that if McQueen had not died, he would have aged into being a great actor, in much the same way as Clint Eastwood. It’s unfortunate that McQueen never got that chance.

bfi-00o-4ni

Shattered Politics #45: The Changeling (dir by Peter Medak)

Posted on January 28, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

If you love horror movies, you have to track down and see The Changeling.

First released in 1980, The Changeling stars George C. Scott as John Russell, a composer. At the start of the film, he watches helplessly as both his wife and his daughter are killed in a horrific auto accident. The grieving John leaves his New York home and relocates to Seattle, Washington. With the help of a sympathetic realtor, Claire Norman (Trish Van Devere), John finds and rents a previously abandoned Victorian mansion.

At first, it seems that John is alone with his grief. But, as you can probably guess, it quickly becomes apparent that John isn’t alone in his house. Windows shatter. Doors slam. And, most dramatically, every night a mysterious banging sound echoes through the house. Slowly, John comes to suspect that his house might be haunted…

And, of course, it is! It’s no spoiler to tell you that because the film is admirably straight forward about being a ghost story. And what a clever ghost story it is. I don’t want to give too much away so I’ll just say that the story behind the ghost involves a powerful family, an age-old scandal, and a powerful U.S. Senator (played, with a mixture of poignant sadness and menace, by Melvyn Douglas).

The Changeling is a very well-done and effective ghost story. For the most part, director Peter Medak emphasizes atmosphere over easy shocks, the end result being a film that maintains a steady feeling of dread and sticks with you long after the final credit rolls up the screen. George C. Scott is well-cast as John Russell, capturing both the character’s grief and his curiosity. (There’s actually a very interesting subtext to the film, in that investigating death actually gives John a reason to live.) At the time the film was made, he was married to Trish Van Devere and the two of them have a very likable chemistry. And, as previously stated, Melvyn Douglas makes for a great quasi-villain.

(It’s interesting to compare Douglas’s intimidating work here with the far more sympathetic performances that he gave, around the same time, in Being There and The Seduction of Joe Tynan.)

My favorite scene in The Changeling comes when John and Claire hold a séance in order to try to discover what the ghost wants. The séance team is made up one woman who asks questions, one woman who channels the spirit and writes down his answers, and one man who reads the answers after they’re written. It’s a wonderfully effective scene, dominated by the eerie sounds of questions being asked, answers being scribbled, and then being shakily read aloud. It’s probably one of the best cinematic séances that I’ve ever seen.

The Changeling is a wonderful mix of political intrigue and paranormal horror. It was also the first film ever to win a Genie award for Best Canadian Film, which just goes to prove the 90% of all good things come from Canada.