A Quickie With Lisa Marie: Putney Swope (dir. by Robert Downey, Sr.)

Posted on June 7, 2010 by Lisa Marie Bowman

One of my favorite recent DVD discoveries is an underground film from 1969 called Putney Swope. Directed by Robert Downey, Sr. (who, as we all know, was the father of not only Iron Man and Sherlock Holmes but Sgt. Osiris as well!), Putney Swope is a hilarious satire of advertising, race relations, and everything in between. It’s a must-see for anyone interested in American independent film, American satire, or just plain vulgarity in the service of art and humor.

Since the film takes place at the Truth and Soul Advertising Agency, it features several fake commercials that are so spot-on perfect that they could easily pass for the real thing if not for all the profanity and occasional nudity. Below is my favorite Truth and Soul Commercial:

Review: Test Tube Babies (dir. by W. Merle Connell)

Posted on June 4, 2010 by Lisa Marie Bowman

If I haven’t already made it clear in my previous reviews on this site, I love exploitation films. Regardless of whether they’re blaxploitation or gialli or whether they’re about zombies or cannibals or just people looking for revenge, I love everything about them. I love them because they’re shameless, they’re frequently incoherent, and occasionally, they’re works of pure (if fractured) genius.

However, I have a special place in my heart for the old school exploitation films of the 1930s and 40s. These are the exploitation movies that came out while the American film industry still operated under the puritanical production code. While the mainstream film industry was still struggling with the idea of Clark Gable saying “damn” onscreen, the underground B-movie makers were making the movies that everyone saw but few people ever talked about. These were low-budget movies, filmed on the cheapest stock available and often times edited with all the skill of a chainsaw-wielding maniac. And while these movies were not necessarily impressive technically, they continue to serve as proof that even our elders occasionally enjoyed a dirty joke.

For the most part, these exploitation films were disguised as being public service announcements. Hence, a film like Ruined Souls wasn’t just a movie about young people skinny dipping and having sex. No, it was a warning about the dangers of venereal disease. Typically, once the film had finished showing off all the bad behavior it could, an authority figure (usually a doctor) would show up and explain why those in the audience shouldn’t do any of the things they had just watched. There’s a shamelessness to these old school exploitation films that reminds me why I admire panhandlers who go through the trouble to come up with an entertaining way to ask me for my money.

1948’s Test Tube Babies (directed by W. Merle Connell and produced by George Weiss, who would produce most of Ed Wood’s early films) is a typical example of an old school exploitation film. Now the title might lead you to think that this is going to be another horror film about demonic children. However, the exact opposite is true. The message of Test Tube Babies (the film’s PSA) is that any marriage — regardless of how drab and dull — can be saved by forcing the wife to go through hours of excruciatingly painful labor.

The first half of Test Tube Babies plays out roughly like the 1st half of Revolution Road. A boring young man named George meets a frumpy young woman named Cathy. They’re attracted to each other and, since this is the 1940s after all, they get married so that they can have sex. George and Cathy go on a whirlwind honeymoon. They get a house in the suburbs. George gets a job and Cathy settles into the life of being a slave (or “housewife,” as it was apparently known in the 1940s.)

However, is it possible that there is trouble in paradise? Shortly after the honeymoon is concluded, we start to get hints that maybe Cathy isn’t entirely satisfied being an indentured servant. At the breakfast table, Cathy and George talk about how boring their social life is. When George’s womanizing friend Frank comes to visit, Cathy greets him in her nightie and proceeds to dance with him while a simmering George watches. What’s wrong with Cathy? Could it be that she’s suddenly realized that she’s surrendered her own identity just to be someone’s wife? Perhaps it has dawned on her that marriage is really just a societal invention that’s designed to keep anyone from truly challenging the status quo. Or maybe she just needs a child to give her an excuse to remain in a loveless charade of a marriage.

Regardless of the reason why, Cathy is clearly dissatisfied with her new life. Soon, once George is off at work, Cathy invites all of her decadent friends over to the house for a party. This party appears to be the 1940s version of a key party. As Cathy plays hostess, Frank proceeds to make out with another man’s wife and then, from out of nowhere, an elderly lady with bleached blond hair shows up and starts talking about her former life as a burlesque dancer. As Cathy watches in horror (no doubt wondering why she couldn’t have just listened to her husband like a good, dutiful slave), the dancer starts to dance and things quickly escalate until Cathy is finally forced to call George at work and beg him to come home.

One of the reasons I love these old school exploitation films is that they provide a chance to see what our grandparents considered to be risqué. It’s a chance to peer into the repressed sexuality of our elders. So, what can we learn from watching the party scene in Test Tube Babies?

1) To judge from the leering reaction given to the frumpy clothing worn by the female guests, Sears was apparently the Victoria’s Secret of the 1940s.

2) The entire party sequence ends with a bizarre catfight between two women, over the course of which both women somehow end up naked. This serves to prove that, much as I always suspected, men have always been the same.

In a plot development that was later shamelessly ripped off by Revolution Road, all of this suburban decadence leads to Cathy and George realizing how empty their “perfect” sham of a marriage really is. Whereas Kate Winslet decided that this emptiness was linked to her sacrificing her own identity to be a wife, Cathy decides that the marriage is empty because she’s not yet a mother. After all, what could be better than bringing another human being into the world for the sole purpose of justifying a failed marriage? Never mind that neither George nor Cathy comes across like the type of people who could actually raise a happy child. What’s important here is to go through the societal motions.

Cathy, of course, wants to get pregnant immediately because you know us women. We’re just slaves to the old biological clock. However, despite George’s best efforts, Cathy simply cannot get knocked up. She wonders if maybe something’s wrong with her. George is quick to agree that something could be wrong with her so, like any good American couple, they go to a doctor to specifically find out what’s wrong with the wife.

(Interestingly enough, just to judge from the movie’s dialogue and the fact that Cathy is shocked when told to undress before being examined, it would appear that this is not only the first time that she’s ever been to a gynecologist but perhaps the first time she’s even heard the term “gynecologist.” To judge from this movie, apparently women in the 40s were simply locked up in the attic until some idiot came by and paid their dowry.)

It’s here that the movie takes a truly shocking turn as it is revealed that — gasp! — nothing is wrong with the wife. Instead, George is sterile. And this, of course, leads us to the whole concept of test tube babies and how they can even save the most pointless of marriages.

Now, the filmmakers obviously knew that this would a bitter pill for a 1948 audience to swallow so, in order to make sure we understand that this sort of thing actually does happen, we are introduced to Dr. Wright. If for no other reason, see this movie for Dr. Wright. With his oily hair, his ever-present smirk, and an equally ever-present cigarette, Dr. Wright is probably the creepiest gynecologist this side of Jeremy Irons in Dead Ringers. As played by exploitation vet Timothy Farrell, Dr. Wright is the only character in the film to seem to realize that he’s surrounded by idiots.

In the great tradition of old school exploitation, Dr. Wright is used to explain and justify the concept of a test tube baby. By doing so, Dr. Wright justifies and excuses all of the “decadence” that has previously been put up on-screen. Dr. Wright also makes a good argument for the health benefits of cigarettes. Seriously, I have never seen a doctor smoke as much as Dr. Wright. Literally, his every scene is enveloped in a cloud of smoke. He smokes while conducting a consultation, he smokes in between operations, and apparently he even smokes while conducting his examinations. (Which reminds me of a story concerning an ex-boyfriend but the less said about that the better…) Perhaps his best scene comes when, spying a nervous George in a hospital waiting room, Dr. Wright suggests that George “smoke a cigarette and relax.” (“I’ve already gone through two packs!” George replies and everyone shares a cancerous laugh.)

In the end, what can you really say about this odd little time capsule? As far as old school exploitation is concerned, it’s not a classic in the way that a movie like Reefer Madness is. Still, the movie holds a strange fascination for me. Some of it, of course, is the whole “so-good-that-its-bad” factor. This movie has that in spades. However, I think an argument can be made that movies like Test Tube Babies provide a view into the American subconscious that more mainstream films simply can not. Freed up from the confines of the Hollywood production code, the old school exploitation movies could give the people what they wanted to see as opposed to what they felt they should want to see.

Perhaps that’s the real appeal of a movie like Test Tube Babies. Its proof that people were fucked up before any of us were born and that they’ll continue to be fucked up long after we’re gone.

Then again, perhaps I’m just reading too much into an amusingly bad B-movie.

Perhaps it would be best to give the movie the final word…

10 Movies I’m Looking Foward To and 5 That I Am Not And 1 That I’m Kinda Sorta Undecided On

Posted on May 6, 2010 by Lisa Marie Bowman

I had all six of my wisdom teeth extracted on Tuesday. Yes, you read that correctly. Not only where my all my wisdom teeth impacted but I had two extra ones as well. I was passed out during the operation and, to be honest, I wish I could be passed out for the recovery as well. I’m bruised, puffy, and it hurts to talk. In short, even with a healthy supply of Vicodin, I am miserable. Boo hoo.

However, one thing never fails to cheer me up and that’s watching, discussing, thinking about, and writing about film. Since Tuesday, I’ve had a lot of extra time to think about some of the films that are due to come out during this year. Below, I’ve listed 16 of them. Ten of them are movies that I’m looking forward to seeing, five are movies that I know I’m going to end up seeing and hating, and finally, one is a movie that I’m genuinely undecided on.

The Ten I’m Looking Forward To:

1) Iron Man 2 — Iron Man 2 is opening tomorrow and I’m exciting for several reasons. First off, I loved the first movie. Super hero adaptations usually bore me to tears but the first Iron Man was actually a lot of fun. Traditionally, sequels are disappointing but most of the people behind the 1st movie — director Jon Favreau, Robert Downey, Jr. and Gwynneth Paltrow — are returning. As well, you’ve got Mickey Rourke chewing the scenery and blowing things up, Sam Rockwell (who I love! love! love! — go and rent Moon if you haven’t seen it!) as a villain, and Scarlett Johansson (Lost in Translation is one of my all time favorite movies) kicking ass in black leather.

On a personal note, my friend Jeff once referred to me as “the Black Widow.” At first, I was a little taken back because I thought he was suggesting that I devoured my mates but fortunately for him, he then explained he was referring to a comic book character who, like me, has red hair. Anyway, for the longest time, that’s been an inside joke between the two of us. I’ve always been the Black Widow even though I have no idea who she actually is. So, imagine my delight when I found out that this is apparently the same character that Scarlett Johansson is playing in Iron Man 2! For that reason alone, I have to see this movie.

Finally, when I’m not obsessing on films, I work as a receptionist/secretary/file clerk/personal assistant and there are times when I’m sitting bored at my desk and I start to think about myself as if I were the character played by Gwynneth Paltrow. I’ll sit there and wonder if maybe my boss is secretly a costumed super hero. (I’m fairly sure that he’s not.) Strange as it may seem, Iron Man has become the fuel for my fantasies. (Release Date: May 7th, 2010 — T0morrow!)

2) Robin Hood — When it comes to English folklore, I tend to gravitate towards stories involving King Arthur accidentally sleeping with his half-sister and thousands of cocky knights vainly searching for the Holy Grail and getting killed in various macabre ways as a result. As a result, I really don’t know much about Robin Hood beyond the basics. I know that he was apparently some sort of socialist and that he liked to hang out in the forest with a bunch of “merry” men. To be honest, the whole idea of Robin Hood has always struck me as being childish and the character bores me. But I’m still looking forward to this latest Robin Hood film and I can explain it in 2 words: Russell Crowe. If anyone can make Robin Hood into an interesting — even compelling character — it would be Crowe. Director Ridley Scott also seems to be the ideal director for this movie and then toss in some speeches about taxation without representation and you’ve got the potential for the perfect Libertarian film. (Release Date: May 14th, 2010)

3) The Expendables — Yes, I am usually not a huge fan of action films and I’ve never quite understood how Sylvester Stallone ever became a star but I’m still looking forward to this movie. Why? Just judging from the trailer, every actor on the planet appears to have a role in the this film. I find Jason Stathan to be about as appealing as Sylvester Stallone but Jet Li and Mickey Rourke should both be fun to watch and who wouldn’t jump at the chance to see Eric Roberts play yet another villain? (Release Date: August 13th, 2010)

4) Splice — I nearly included Splice on my list of films that I’m not looking forward to because, I swear to God, the trailer for Splice is so dull that it could be used to torture prisoners at Gitmo. Add to that, I’ve never quite seen the appeal that Adrien Brody supposedly possesses as an actor. However, I’m willing to take a chance on Splice because 1) it also stars one of my personal role models, the wonderful actress, director, and activist Sarah Polley and 2) director Vincenzo Natali has promised to take a very European approach to the film’s horrors (i.e. lots of casual sex with the monster serving as a symbol for something deeper than just box office receipts). I’m looking forward to seeing if Splice can overcome Adrien Brody and live up to that promise. (Release date: June 4th, 2010)

5) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part One — Okay, I admit it. I’m a fan. Don’t judge me. (Though I will also say that I think J.K. Rowling needs to get over herself in a major way.) It’ll be interesting to see what Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson do with themselves now that their indentured servitude is done with. Radcliffe, in particular, is capable of playing a lot more than just Harry Potter. (Release Date: November 19th, 2010)

6) Howl — James Franco as the late poet Allen Ginsberg? Strangely enough, I think the idea might work. (Release Date: September 24th, 2010)

7) Machete — Robert Rodriguez finally makes a film for someone other than his kids. How can you not be excited about the chance to see Robert De Niro and Jeff Fahey on-screen together? Plus, Lindsay Lohan (who really should just be allowed to live her life) gets a chance to remake her image playing a socialite with a gun. My hope is that if Machete finds success at the box office, Eli Roth will make Thanksgiving. (Release Date: September 3rd, 2010)

8 ) My Soul To Take — Wes Craven has had an odd career and, to be honest, I struggle sometimes with whether he’s truly a great horror filmmaker or if he’s just a journeyman director who has occasionally gotten lucky. Looking at his career, it’s hard not to wonder how the same guy who made the original Last House on the Left and The Hills Have Eyes could also be responsible for something like Cursed? Regardless of how the actual film turns out, My Soul To Take will add another piece to the puzzle. This will be the first film to be both written and directed by Craven in 16 years. Hopefully, as in the majority of his better movies, Craven will be able to balance his commercial side with his sadistic side. (Release Date: October 29th, 2010)

9) Inception — My tastes usually run more towards horror than sci-fi but I find myself growing more excited about Inception with each passing day. Not only does the plot sound like it could have easily come from a long-lost book by Philip K. Dick (one of the few sci-fi writers that I enjoy reading, A Scanner Darkly being my personal favorite) but the film is being directed by Christopher Nolan who proved with Momento that he can make the surreal compelling. And just check out that cast — Leonardo DiCaprio, Cillian Murphy, Ellen Page, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt (who I’ve been crushing on ever since (500) Days of Summer). (Release date: July 16th, 2010.)

10) Salt — I love it when girls get to kick ass in the movies and, when she’s at her best, nobody kicks ass like Angelina Jolie. (Release Date: July 23rd, 2010)

One That I’m Kinda Looking Forward To But I’m Kinda Not

1) Sex and the City 2 — Why are they in the desert? How exactly can you have Sex without the City? (Release date: May 27th, 2010)

The Five I Am Not Looking Forward To

1) The A-Team — Yay! It’s an action movie based on a show I’ve never heard of. I love Liam Neeson and it’s good to see that Sharlto Copley’s underrated performance in District 9 has led to him getting more work but, sorry, I think I’ll pass. (Release Date: June 11th, 2010)

2) The Social Network — I know a lot of people are looking forward to this movie about the founding of Facebook and it is true that it’s being directed by David Fincher. However, there are a few things that lead me to fear that this is not going to be the movie that so many people think it will be. First off, it was written by Aaron Sorkin who is probably one of the most overrated screenwriters working today. He may be best known for The West Wing but most of Sorkin’s work resembles the heavy-handed sermonizing of Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip. Remember how Sorkin reacted when a few bloggers criticized his show? This is not a guy who is comfortable with the Internet. Secondly, the film is being produced by Kevin Spacey, another overrated talent who doesn’t so much act as much as he smugly pretends to act. Third, and most important, The Social Network has got to be one of the worst titles I’ve heard in a long time. Everything about this movie just screams “misfire.” (Release date: October 1st, 2010)

3) Paranormal Activity 2 — Because, you know, the first one was so good. (Release Date: October 22nd, 2010)

4) Twelve — I loved Nick McDonnell’s novel and I usually enjoy movies about decadent rich kids destroying themselves with lots of drugs and promiscuity. I mean, if you’re going to self-destruct, you should at least look good doing it. Unfortunately, Twelve is directed by the American Umberto Lenzi, Joel Schumacher. Schumacher’s films aren’t even enjoyably bad. They’re just bad. Interestingly enough, Joel Schumacher tends to turn up in just about every movie star biography and Hollywood history book that I own. He’s someone who has obviously been around for a very long time and who has cultivated a lot of friends. I imagine he must be very likable in person. But, seriously, isn’t it time to revoke his DGA membership? (Release Date: July 2, 2010)

5) Saw VII — Sorry, I got bored with the Jigsaw Killer about five movies ago. The film’s in 3D so I’m sure we’ll get to see a severed limb fly directly at the camera. (Release Date: October 22nd, 2010)