Thoughts from the Usher Podium: Top 10 Anti-Horror Films

Those who know me, know I'm not a fan of horror films. I watch the ones that are considered required viewing; Halloween (1978), A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), Saw (2004) etc. while simultaneously getting my adolescent kicks out of decidedly terrible old-school schlock; The Killer Shrews (1959), Motel Hell (1980), Demons (1985) et al. I all but ignore modern horror films since they're either not scary or too disgusting to really enjoy.

Looking at you Human Centipede (2009)

Furthermore I take exception to the myriad of horror movie tropes that belie a profoundly almost insultingly traditionalist view of characterization, plot and gender roles. You know the rub; group of horny teenagers die at the hands of a masked villain or a pre-teen goes into that scary house everyone says to stay out of. The lessons in these kinds of movies are clear; do not deviate from the norm. This slave-like adherence to familiar, well-worn formula is indicative to most media to be sure, yet in horror films there's a lack of self-awareness to it. In a post-modernistic world, new traditionalist horror films feel dated upon arrival. What results is the audience can't relate to cookie-cutter characters going through hell and back. It's become an experience reaching the compulsory dryness of a Catholic mass. Even despite the advent of horror comedy, injecting the proceedings with humor and mirth, a wink and a nod does not actually improve or alter the formula. As entertaining as some of these films are, they're hardly the stuff nightmares are made of.

Looking at you Cabin in the Woods (2012)

Which brings me to the reason I formulated this list. Firstly Halloween is coming up and I'm a slut for attention grabbing headlines. Secondly and more importantly, the list of movies below don't just subvert the themes and tropes of modern horror but abandons them altogether in favor of themes that I would argue are truly disturbing. They may not goad their audience with jump scares or force people to scream "don't go in there," but they are nonetheless solid films worthy of appreciation. These films won't just scare you, they'll disturb you for days after the fact.

1. The Shining (1980)
(I'll get the ones we all know and love out of the way first), The Shining stars Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrence a writer hired as an off-season caretaker of the remote Overlook Hotel. With his wife (Shelley Duvall) and son (Danny Lloyd) in-tow, Jack hopes to find solitude to write his new novel however after settling in, Jack starts to act strange then violent towards his family, prodded along by a ghostly supernatural force in the hotel. Meanwhile his son seems to have psychic premonitions about the hotel; a gift described by the hotel chef (Scatman Crothers) as "a shining".

Going to the moon is unambiguous though guys

On the surface, The Shining sounds like a standard haunted house film. Yet with director Stanley Kubrick, nothing is ever that standard. The visuals (as well as much of the plot changes from the Stephen King novel) are inverted in an act of cinematic terrorism. Moments that shouldn't be frightening such as long-take shots of the empty interior of the hotel are downright terrifying. Additionally, the vagueness of the supernatural force keeps the viewer continually ill at ease. There are no jump scares here and the disturbing conclusion while ambiguous, never hammers home a message of conformity. In-fact, over thirty years later, fans are still coming up with theories to explain the film's ending (and everything throughout). These theories range from Jack's descent into hell to elevating Jack as the embodiment of the Devil himself. One thing is for sure, the creepiness surrounding of The Shining accurately portrays what Kubrick called "archetypes of the unconscious"; or the dark side of human nature.

2. We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011)
Told with expressionistic flair and a refreshing non-linear narrative, We Need to Talk About Kevin stars Tilda Swinton as a woman struggling to piece her life back together after an incident involving her teenage son. Once a popular travel writer, Eva now lives a solitary life where everyone who knows her is openly hostile to her. As the movie pieces the story together for the audience, we witness the horror unfold in a chilling build-up that unnerves you to your core.

In addition to having masterful performances by Swinton, John C. Reilly and Ezra Miller as the aforementioned son, We Need to Talk About Kevin subverts everything we think we know about psychology, child-rearing and the minds of wicked souls. Based on the title alone, we as the audience think we know what's going to happen but the movie patiently, almost cruelly absconds the violence and gore, disturbing us instead with the relationships between characters. It all builds up to a nihilistic crescendo that is troubling in its senselessness. Topical and full of some truly shocking moments, We Need to Talk About Kevin is a masters course onto itself on how to make a worthwhile horror film by abandoning the cliche.

3. Teeth (2007)
Teeth is a fun little low-budget horror film whose high-concept leads many to mislabel it a comedy. Yeah no, it truly is not; in-fact if taken as a concept alone, this film is in this writer's opinion, the scariest on this list. Jess Weixler stars as Dawn a religiously faithful teenager who comes to the realization that living near a nuclear power plant allows her a certain, let's say adaptation. This adaptation leads her though a warped path of self-discovery that leaves casualties in her wake. Also in the mix is her sickly mother (Vivienne Benesch) and stepdad (Lenny von Dohlen), her love interest Tobey (Hale Appleman) and her crude stepbrother Brad (John Hensley).

She's a monster!

Within the screen time of the film, our leading lady becomes a personification of the "monster" character which has been featured in cinema since at least The Golem (1920). Yet the film's sly feminist tinge allows the audience to view the movie with an amount of satire and pathos. By the time the credit role, Dawn transforms from shy, chaste, teenager to a one-woman exterminating angel which, depending on your disposition (and likely gender) may put a smile on your face or give you nightmares. I personally appreciate the film's cleverness and subtle subversion of the limited female roles in horror films, even if its directorial style borders on amateurish.

4. A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night (2014)
A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night takes place in a desolate and dying industrial town in Iran. The inhabitants are unknowingly in the midst of a lonely female vampire (Sheila Vand) who is smitten for the hardworking Arash (Arash Marandi). Arash is hassled by the local town hood and takes care of his heroin addicted father (Marshall Manesh) when he's not at work or dreaming of a better life at the club. He too becomes interested in the girl who seems to stalk him from a distance and soon a romance blossoms.

No this isn't an Iranian adaptation of Twilight (2008). In fact to traditional Iranians this film may be the scariest and most subversive ever committed to the screen (The film is in reality American made and was not released in Iran). All characters in the film seem stuck in a miserable set of circumstances, slowly withering away in an unforgiving little city. In comes a woman shrouded in traditional clothing yet exhibiting everything a traditional Iranian patriarchy would fear; independence, criminal predilections, a predatory nature etc. The end echos the teen rebel pictures of 1950's Hollywood as if to signal to the old guard "we're coming for you". Its unsettling to watch, even for a non-Iranian and I bet if you give this film a try you will be unsettled too.

5. Let the Right One In (2008)
Yet another vampire themed foreign film? It's almost as if the rest of the world does a better job at making high-quality horror films than the United States does. Let the Right One In concerns a largely pre-teen cast including Kare Hedebrant as Oskar, a lonely, consistently bullied boy living in a quaint Stockholm suburb and Eli, the peculiar new neighbor played by Lina Leandersson. Eli and her terse elderly human guardian Hakan (Per Ragnar) attempt to stalk their victims in secrecy but eventually Eli must trust Oskar to keep her from forces that would do her harm.

Let the Right One In doesn't just dip into vile themes such as the nature of violence but revels in many of the taboos, especially sexual taboos that society struggles with. Much can be said about Eli's gender and sexual orientation which the movie hints at but never expressly states. Furthermore her relationship with Hakan seems less fatherly and more uncomfortable than one can imagine. The air of sexual subtext, penetrating violence and austere beauty creates a horror film that can terrorize you to your core. The climactic confrontation between Oskar and his bullying classmates is especially jaw-dropping, proving yet again that true horror comes not from what is seen but what remains unseen.

6. Splice (2009)

Speaking of well done horror with blatant sexual subtext (or I guess I should say overtones), Splice stars Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley as two research scientists who are trying to come up with a cure for diabetes among other human diseases. Finding much success with gene manipulation, the two, against the advice of their employer, create a humanoid creature who's DNA can yield useful proteins. They soon discover that their new creature has much more in-common with humans than one would expect.

Even before the chaos created by the new creature, Brody and Polley's pseudo-science tug-of-war has the overtones of a sadistic sexual relationship complete with a mutual God complex. The monster they create is birthed with amphibious and rodent-like qualities but increasingly becomes more human both in intelligence and aspiration. This frightens both the scientists and the audience as every part of the monster's self-discovery is warped to resemble those of a child. The well-worn Frankenstein "there are some things best left to God" motif is replaced with an uncomfortable exploration in what it means to be human. Splice offers an answer to that question that's bleak and unsettling. If the true measure of a movie is what the audience takes from it, Splice is one of those flicks that instantly repels yet you can't forget. Special recognition should be given to Delphine Chaneac who brings the monster to life in a creepy and intense fashion.

7. The Babadook (2014)
Essie Davis plays Amelia a single mother who is struggling to raise her maladjusted son Samuel (Noah Wiseman). After the tragic death of her husband, Samuel has been tormented with nightmares, apocalyptic visions, and monsters only he sees. Enter the manifestation of a new bedtime book and Amelia starts to see Samuel's true tormentor, a gangling ghoul known as the Babadook.

Now some have dismissed this film as a simple ghost story but this can't be further from the truth. Granted, this recent gem from Australia is probably the only film on this list that consistently employs the use of jump-scares. The themes inherent to this nasty little movie are very corrupting indeed. There's a mother who subconsciously blames the death of her husband on her son and has come to resent his constant need for attention. Add to that, a lack of sleep and becoming a pariah to family and friends, its understandable to see Amelia manifest her deep-seeded desires into a pitiless monster lurking in the shadows. The Babadook is in reality about mental illness and its debilitating effect on its victims. I for one would like to see more films about the fragility of reality, instead of the conformity of a ghost story plagued with ghouls looking to solve unfinished problems.

8. Contagion (2011)
Can Contagion be considered a horror film? I suppose if Jaws (1975) makes the cut for making audiences afraid to go into the water, Contagion makes the cut for making audiences afraid to not wash their hands. In Contagion, government officials, healthcare professionals, researchers and ordinary people all come to deal with an ultra-communicable virus dubbed MEV-1 which threatens the world as we know it. Among the all-star cast is Matt Damon, husband of patient zero, Kate Winslet and Laurence Fishburne as CDC experts, Marion Cotillard as a World Health Organization epidemiologist and Jude Law as a conspiracy theorist.

What drives this daring multi-layered movie and consequently makes it so scary, is its complexity. How can one truly face an enemy they cannot see and how do you respond to it? The disconnected, hyper-link style of the story and its characters gives the audience enough unique perspectives to appreciate the narrative as each character must overcome different challenges. Some succeed, others fail and some with the best intentions can wind up aiding in the spreading of the deadly plague. Scarier still is the fact that most of Contagion is scientifically accurate. Sure the lightening-quick spread of the disease itself has not been seen in reality, yet the possibility of a super-virus has been looming heavily on he minds of scientists for decades. If the fear of that danger has been in the back of your mind as well, Contagion offers little, little relief.

9. Eraserhead (1977)
Non-linear, highly experimental and stiflingly off-putting, Eraserhead is hands-down the most surrealistic of the films on this list. In it an unnamed protagonist (Jack Nance) lives in a desolate urban landscape and courts a women (Charlotte Stewart) while holding a candle for the girl next door (Judith Anna Roberts) and imagining yet another woman who appears in his apartment (Laurel Near). Our protagonist discovers his girlfriend has given birth to an inhuman creature and after what appears to be a few months, she leaves, leaving him to raise the monster who cries incessantly while being swaddled in medical gauze.

To watch Eraserhead is to abandon logic and be overwhelmed by the film's visual themes and intricate sound design. penetrating through an unsettling amount of white noise is the protagonist's fear of sex and childbirth which manifests itself in his monster child. It is said that director David Lynch was inspired to write and direct what is essentially a student film based on Franz Kafka oeuvre. I caution those reading, Eraserhead is not for everyone. It is unnerving in all the wrong ways as it is grotesque, warped and ambiguous. This film is truly the stuff of nightmares.

10. Videodrome (1983)
Decades before the iphone and 100+ channel cable TV, director David Cronenberg predicted that technology, specifically television would supplant life as we know it. In a hallucinatory magnum opus on par with Eraserhead (1977) in sheer weirdness, Videodrome is the story of a Lothario cable executive (James Woods) for the small sensationalist CIVIC-TV. Looking for new programming, our protagonist is introduced to Videodrome, a plot-less program where people are tortured and murdered on television in a pseudo-erotic fashion. Initially intrigued by it, our hero stumbles upon a frightening conspiracy with monstrous psychological and physical side-effects.

Cronenberg is considered a master of body-horror, especially ever since the advent of 1975's Shivers. Most audience members however are familiar with his The Fly (1986) remake which involves Jeff Goldblum slowly and grotesquely turning into a gigantic fly/human hybrid. Videodrome's weirdness however includes a tumor-laden James Woods with a flesh-formed VCR in his chest and a TV that pulses with the eroticism of a femme fatale. The repercussions of the story (which I dare not ruin) are dumbfounding and clever, fetishizing our human fascination with screens. Gross, grim and relentlessly weird, Videodrome gets scarier with every repeated viewing.

Crimson Peak

Year: 2015
Genre: Horror
Director: Guillermo Del Toro
Stars: Mia Wasikowska, Jessica Chastain, Tom Hiddleston, Charlie Hunnam, Jim Beaver, Doug Jones
Production: Legendary Pictures

Long gone are the days when the versatile Guillermo Del Toro reached the apex of his horror writing and directing. The Devil's Backbone (2001) and Cronos (1993) are completely out of the public consciousness, their fresh and economic twists on intelligent horror films a relic of their time. Yet Del Toro's public persona is one that still bores into our perception. The mere mentioning of his name conjures the spooky atmospherics of Pan's Labyrinth (2006) and the television phenomena The Strain (2014-Present). In short, to the masses, Del Toro equals horror. So why then is Crimson Peak, his newest directorial effort such an underwhelming disappointment? Well maybe it's because it's not a horror film.

Crimson Peak opens with a young Edith Cushing (Wasikowska) staring into the middle distance. There's a bellowing blizzard, damp blood red clay penetrates through the snow and there's a deep cut on her cheek, the kind of cut we see on heroes who have seen heavy things yet the makeup artist still wants them to look good. After a brief prologue which flashes back to Edith's childhood, we arrive in Buffalo, New York. Edith is an aspiring writer who catches the eye of the handsome but mysterious Baron Thomas Sharpe (Hiddleston). They marry hot on the heels of a family tragedy and she's transported to Crimson Peak, his estate in England where all is not as it seems. Also catering to the atmosphere is Lucille (Chastain), Thomas's cold and domineering sister.

Personally, if I were from the House of Usher, I'd sue

Starting with the good, the film is at many times a marvel to look at. The period detail bursts from the screen and the color schemes, especially during the haunted mansion scenes are jarringly beautiful. The film couples its filigree with the intensity of Dan Lausten's slick cinematography which cushions the film's slower moments with dynamic camerawork. Additionally there are nuggets of advertence signalling to better stories by Daphne du Maurier, Edgar Allan Poe, Anthony Berkeley Cox and Charlotte Bronte. Personally I found the parallels to be less of homages and more blatant rip-offs, but I suppose one man's imitation is another man's emulation. Based on images alone one can almost forgive the film's faults...almost.

Years of subjecting himself to Hellboy fandom has probably made Del Toro comfortable with condescending to the audience. The screenplay isn't just cliche as it is aggressively banal with the creators tipping their hand and answering questions the audience hadn't yet asked. In case your mind was wondering too far from the screen to pick up less than subtle visual cues, all information is regurgitated by lesser characters like week old cud. Things made dull are shrouded in mystery while things meant to be mysterious simply aren't. The only mystery I was looking to solve was why would twice nominated Academy Award nominee Jessica Chastain pick such a project. Then again she did do Mama (2013), so maybe she has an affinity to trivial horror.

In reality all stars will likely survive this film unscathed but at this point Del Toro has become a slave to his own style. Del Toro and Hiddleston both have been attending press junkets and doing late night interviews insisting Crimson Peak is less of a straight up haunted house film and more of a Gothic romance. Right; this is despite the studio's marketing strategy squeezing every jump scare and ghastly ghoul into the trailer. I suppose they have to recoup $30 million budget somehow. I personally knew I was in a long slog five minutes in when Edith explains to a would be publisher "It's not really a ghost story, the ghost is more a metaphor." It certainly was a metaphor. A metaphor for boredom and awkward, fan service for Tom Hiddleston necking.

Final Grade: D-

I Origins

Year: 2014
Genre: Drama
Director: Mike Cahill
Stars: Michael Pitt, Astrid Berges-Frisbey, Brit Marling, Steven Yeun, Kashish
Production: Verisimilitude

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt in your philosophy." - Hamlet (Act I Scene 5)

I wish I could say that to Mike Cahill who in addition to being the film's director also serves as the sole screenwriter. This movie, if one could call it that, tries to be deep, philosophical and spiritual but winds up feeling pedantic and overwrought. As self-important and over-indulgent as this dreck can possibly be, those hoping for a frank, mesmerizing or lacking any of that accurate take on Eastern religion and philosophy will just have to settle for the cinematic equivalent of a fortune cookie. The emotional stakes of this film are so overwhelmed by the back-breaking acrobatics the film's script does to keep its characters motivated that I couldn't help but find the proceedings unintentionally hilarious.

I take pictures of people's eyes and torture animals all day.
...I'm such a catch!

But let's back up: the story starts out rather simply, Ian (Pitt) a biologist studying the evolution of the human eye, falls for perfect specimen, Sofi (Berges-Frisbey) at a Halloween party. He hunts her down because despite not seeing her face that night, he took pictures of her eyes and can identify them with an intensity that most would find creepy. They find each other, fall in love, and eventually make plans to marry. Then she dies tragically. If I wanted to put a spoiler alert I would have put it before that sentence. Years later after a series of increasingly contrived coincidences, Ian discovers that the irises of living people match the irises of the recently deceased and he tracks down Sofi's eyeball doppelganger in the hopes of discovering her possible reincarnation.

The idea in itself is not what I find stupid. Well not the stupidest at any rate. There are religions based on the idea of reincarnation and had the movie been better, I could have overlooked the logistical issues with this movie's view on it. Can people be reincarnated as a dog, cat or any other animal? There were points in Earth's history when there weren't as many "souls" so how does this movie account for that? Account for sin much; Nope. How about accounting for Dharma instead; Nope.

I Origins is just not very developed. Instead of actual story and plot we get a grist of loosely connected ridiculousness tangentially brought to fruition by our protagonist's little explained wanderlust. What are the odds that on the same day a marvelous lab discovery is made our protagonist marries his lady, gets blinded by formaldehyde then witnesses his wife eat it via freak elevator accident. If that's not the tragic backstory of a super-villain, I don't know what is. Years later, after Ian remarries, yet another little explained plot contrivance connects his newborn son to a deceased black dairy farmer in Boise. They find this out only because our protagonist has the funds, free time and inclination to go to Idaho to investigate what could have easily been a stock photo.

Oh yeah...more spoilers.

Then our grief stricken hero travels to India to track down a young girl who shares his former lover's irises in a final hour that leads any casual observer to conclude this guy has serious issues. He searches the streets of Mumbai for weeks and even puts up a billboard to find his lost lover all while being goaded to search by, of all people, his current wife (Marling). But just as he's about to give up, he finds her staring blankly at the freakin' billboard. Well that was lucky! Then the poor little Indian girl follows our hero back to his hotel room and fails his "scientific" test. They embrace anyway because "it feels right," never mind the fact that they didn't prove a thing other than people can have the same set of eyes and two American scientists have way too much time on their hands.

A rare occasion Nic Cage could have improved a movie

I feel like I Origins was originally a failed TV pilot. When they knew it wasn't going to sell they shot a few new scenes and re-imagined it into an incredibly overdone piece of fluff disguised as a laconic "thinker". Fact is the dialogue was stilted, the actors were all boring to watch and listen to, and as I have previously stated the script is contrived, contrived, contrived! I Origins joins The Fountain (2006) as the dumbest, watered-down, and offensive piece of western appropriation of eastern religious ideas since yoga was introduced to the American public. Turgid, lugubrious, and almost painfully artificial, I Origins is a movie I hated.

Final Grade: F

The Friends of Eddie Coyle

Year: 1973
Genre: Crime Thriller
Director: Peter Yates
Stars: Robert Mitchum, Peter Boyle, Richard Jordan, Steven Keats, Alex Rocco, Joe Santos
Production: Paramount Pictures

The grizzled and tired Eddie Coyle (Mitchum) sits opposite a young man (Keats) at a diner. It's a tableaux we've seen plenty of times before; two people exchanging information back and forth; tit-for-tat. Yet there's something mesmerizing about the two actors on the screen. Maybe it's the fact that both characters are unsure of whether to trust the other. Maybe it's the camera which dances at a distance before listening intently to Coyle's story of his broken knuckles; the reason they call him "fingers". Maybe it's the natural magnetism of the actors. Maybe it's all three.

French Connection just wants a hug!

The Friends of Eddie Coyle is full of intimate moments like these, immediately differentiating itself from the exhausting grandeur of The Godfather (1972) and the frenzied mis en scene of The French Connection (1971). It's a crime thriller that lets the audience squirm under the pressure of its paranoia. In the center of the tempest is the distrusting Coyle who slowly realizes he's in a den of snakes.

Coyle is only a few days from  his sentencing in New Hampshire and expects a two-year sentence for driving a truck full of contraband for a friend (Boyle). In order to avoid a stiff sentence, Coyle deals information to the wily agent Foley (Jordan) while simultaneously buying up guns as a middleman for a group of trusting bank robbers. Young Jackie (Keats) the aforementioned young man is the one Coyle buys from. Who will Coyle fink on? Who will be outed as the stool pigeon in this web of deceit? Will Coyle get his sentence lessened or will he pay the ultimate price for his transgressions.

Think of this as our confessional

The bank robbers in question (Rocco and Santos) make a habit of kidnapping bank managers and holding their families hostage in exchange for compliance. Within the time frame of the first robbery we as the audience become voyeuristic accomplices peering between tree branches and nervous POV shots. These early scenes set the tone making everything from Keat's open air sub-machine gun purchase to Coyle's quaint New England kitchen seem claustrophobic. As the film progresses and the fates of all involved becomes crystallized, we're invited rather glumly to watch Eddie's world come crashing down. 

Despite its outlook and subject matter, Friend of Eddie Coyle is neither overtly violent or cynical. The story never treats our protagonist as a criminal or a stoolie but rather as a last vestige for a dying way of life. Due partially to harsh lessons in the past, he takes pride and pays attention to the details of his work. The results of his years of overextending himself in the service of an unseen master allowed him a bourgeois existence on par with any working-class stiff. With that existence threatened, he tries everything within his power to keep it, to no avail.

Many have cited Friends of Eddie Coyle as Robert Mitchum's strongest performance. While I personally would give that distinction to the downright scary Harry Powell in The Night of the Hunter (1955), there's no denying his performance is the stalwart center of a story populated with opportunistic scoundrels. One would argue Mitchum was among the last of the Golden-Age Hollywood screen legends and his prestige created in aura of dignity around the character.

Whitey Bulger 2011

The last scene of the film involves Peter Boyle's Dillon character and Foley callously talking about transpiring events. It's worth noting in preparation for the role, Mitchum had pursued a meeting with Irish Mob boss Whitey Bulger. The character Eddie was loosely based on one of Bulger's old associates, Billy O'Brien whose murder was never solved. Could Bulger have something to do with it? After all, in 1997 it was discovered that Bulger had in-fact acted as an FBI informant against the Patriarca crime Family. Without giving too much away, Bulger's relationship with the FBI has parallels to the events in the film. A sad case of fiction imitating truth.

Final Grade: B-

Bunraku

Year: 2010
Genre: Martial Arts Film
Director: Guy Moshe
Stars: Josh Harnett, Demi Moore, Ron Perlman, Gackt, Woody Harrelson, Kevin McKidd
Production: Snoot Entertainment

The first ever films were on the whole an exercise in capturing the moment. The Lumieres, Edison and later Flaherty took the time to film events unfolding before their eyes and, with little context, simply marveled at the achievement of celluloid. Then came Melies, Griffith and Wiene; three names among others who saw the potential of creating stories, plots and fantasies. Fabrications told with style and economy. A lie that told the truth. Today's popular cinema basks largely in the glory of the romantic flourishes started by the first few silent-era trailblazers. A 110-year-old line can be drawn directly linking The Avengers (2012) to A Trip to the Moon (1902) yet lost along that line is Bunraku, a little seen, often maligned gem that needs reconsideration by the masses.

On the cusp of this deceptively simple film is a near universal acknowledgement of style over substance. It's even in the name Bunraku which is a form of traditional Japanese puppeteer-ing. The opening credits of the film plods with nonsensical narration brought by a cynical voice and colorful puppetry mixed with economical computer graphics. We're submerged into a world of paper mache, all the world is a stage and all the players almost seem to notice. With a wink and a nod they dance around each other; a cowboy, a samurai, a woodcutter, an assassin, a barkeep and a maiden. All the world is a stage and pulling the strings are the dexterous hands and wide eyes of a teenage boy. Deceptively simple because it is an indulgence similar to youth's long hours with toys at the foot of the bed or after midnight's Kung Fu marathons.

Yet there's more than meets the eye here. The script's sometimes frustratingly scant dialogue circles around the notion of violence. Its not one of those films that admonishes violence while inviting the audience to enjoy stylized buckets of blood. It's a film that tries to posit violence as part of the cyclical machinations of the universe. What matters is how you use violence; towards selfish ends or selfless ends. Our heroes, the drifter and the samurai fight for good, in a sense. Their families were effected by the woodcutter and his gang, thus they battle to reclaim their family honor. A simple story of revenge told hundreds of times across multiple cultures and mediums. Even the characters in the plot are aware of their place in the larger story. The barkeep, played by an affable Woody Harrelson even props up a pop-up book telling a similar heroic tale. The tale he tells though the names are changed is that of Spider-Man; confirmed by the moral of the story "with great power comes great responsibility."

The story goes deeper into the depths of political and moral philosophy with the inclusion of a character known as The General. His Proletariat League remains in the periphery until the third act. The character is treated as a phantom which prods the Woodcutters gang to remove his iconography. Then he appears a withered old man reminiscent of an aging Fidel Castro. He's waited, perhaps too long, to strike against the woodcutter and his gang which control the city. Does he, by the end of the film replace a politically violent reign with another? Maybe, but the movie strongly adheres to the cyclical nature of human politics. When Harrelson's character insists he makes the drinks and fought only so he could continue to make the drinks, our two heroes seems disappointed. As if to say when good men do nothing, evil prevails. The movie then ends with a Rising Sun Flag doubling as the sun itself. Fascism and cruelty still lurks in the shadows or in this case, the light.

Yet the draw of a movie of this kind is not a flaccid political statement or a hero's journey we all can recite by heart. Most films, with noted exceptions are like Christmas trees, its not the structure but the decorations that set them apart. And there are a lot of decorations. Bunraku is nearly an entire product of pastiche. The city home to our players is constructed to look cheap as if made on a sound stage, as it likely was. The walls are paper thin, dominated by harsh masculine edges and aside from beer bottles and bifocals, there is no glass in the windows. The unnatural light shifts suddenly from blue to red and orange to create an atmosphere of dread, anger and fear depending on the situation. Its as if The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920)  was remade into  a gangster movie. The vibrant costumes take hints from Bollywood, the scene transitions are pop art, the characters an amalgam of ronins, cowboys and grizzled private dicks; east meets west meets points in between.

The actors themselves are a mixed bag exemplifying the eclectic tastes of its audience. fading teen heartthrob Josh Harnett plays the cowboy. Years earlier his casting would have been the very definition of American Hollywood. His trajectory has a precedence in the late work of Henry Fonda or Eli Wallach who both reinvented themselves as Spaghetti western villains and rogues. The only difference is Harnett's star faded quicker; a boyish stud who lost his appeal when he lost box office. Our other protagonist is played by Gackt, a Japanese pop musician with international appeal. Bunraku was to be his international debut, a step up from the small screen which he had experience. Before Bunraku he played a reoccurring character in a Japanese period TV series called The Trusted Confidant (2007).

Our main villain, the Woodcutter is played by the classically trained Ron Perlman, a favorite of French filmmakers Jean-Jacques Annaud and Jean-Pierre Jeunet. While never amounting to much more than a unique face on the screen, the rugged Perlman brings heft to the tin stars that fight against him. Then there's Woody Harrelson who since his TV days has flirted with commercial and critical appeal. An A-Lister; perhaps not but a solid B-lister who can always count on regular work. Finally there is Demi Moore who in the early nineties was arguably the most popular leading lady in the world. Yet much like her character her star was lost among a menagerie of young ingenues.

To surmise; one greenhorn, two has-beens, one almost-is and one never-was. All posing before the unique art design that floods the screen at any moments notice. Its hard not to realize that all cinema today is pastiche. Coen, Scorsese, Anderson both Paul Thomas and Wes; films and filmmakers that get the most notice are the ones that reference with intelligence. Yet Bunraku is not intelligent. It celebrates it's own brevity with an infused childlike wonder; the workings of a gifted amateur? Perhaps. There are liberal dashes of Kurosawa; a dollop of Leone, layers of the Shaw Brothers and gallons of videogame sensibilities intermixed with directorial decisions seemingly made for economy. Yet through all the filigree, the passion shines through. I must prefer the undisciplined spirit of a gifted amateur over the grizzled and worn cynicism of a pro.

Make no mistake, this movie is a masterpiece and not in an ironic sense either. Frazzled and rough around the edges to be sure, but nonetheless Bunraku reveals a masterful depth politically and visually. It follows in a cinematic tradition while bringing a rare gust of originality that can make you question how to truly make and interpret a lie that tells the truth. All the worlds a stage and in this case, I'd get a front row seat right quick.

Final Grade: B

Bulworth

Year: 1998
Genre: Political Satire
Director: Warren Beatty
Stars: Warren Beatty, Halle Berry, Don Cheadle, Oliver Platt, Sean Astin, Joshua Malina
Production: 20th Century Fox

For those who ever had the inclination to see Warren Beatty rap, boy do I have a movie for you. To be honest, much like today's circus-like political climate, I have no idea what to make of this film. Is it a mess? Is it a masterpiece? Misunderstood? Offensive? Passionate? Tone-deaf? Can it be all of those things? I'm going to venture to say yes.

Jay Bulworth is a longtime Democratic Senator from the State of California. The first time you see him there are frames in his office of Martin Luther King Jr., Jesse Jackson and other prominent civil rights leaders. Yet the campaign ads playing in his office ring of a former liberal turned centrist. Sacrificing his values and trapped in a marriage that's been dead for a while, the insomniac Senator plans to end his life; suicide via hitman. Then he campaigns like a madman telling the truth as he sees it.

I can see where the film is coming from and I give it props for its bluntness. Former rebel-rouser turned Hollywood celebrant Warren Beatty cashed in all his chips to play the manic Senator who sputters his "rhymes" with the truth of the streets. By all outward appearances Beatty may have lost his cache after Dick Tracy (1990) under-performed back in the early 90's but truth be told, Bulworth feels more like his Swan Song leaving everything out on the field.

My Fellow Americans (1996),
not among the savvy political comedies...

Bulworth was released among a mass of savvy political comedies that defined the Clinton years. Dave (1993), Primary Colors (1998) and Bob Roberts (1992) all left an indelible mark and honed in on very specific cultural pressure points and policies. Bulworth is the only one to my recollection that concentrated largely on race, urban blight and crime; a subject not captured outside of movies like Do the Right Thing (1989) and Boyz n the Hood (1991). In other words, movies made by black filmmakers for black audiences, appreciated by the critical community though largely ignored by white America.

Yet as much as I'd like to give Bulworth a thumbs up for focusing on a misrepresented population and catered by white liberal guilt I just can't. Much of it has to do with Beatty's borderline black-face one-man mistral show. For all his good intentions, the level of appropriation and white paternalism should have been enough to make audiences of the nineties look twice. The only person who manages to break through Beatty's campy monologue on race relations is Don Cheadle's L.D., a drug kingpin who scolds the Senator for the company he keeps. Even then his words are simply parroted later as a lazy attempt to empower. It's like Bulworth became Cheadle's white-friendly translator.

Dear lord Beatty! You're making a scene!

I will say this, despite my reservations, this film will remain in my memory for quite sometime due in large part by the visuals. The story certainly puts the audience in the point of view of the sleep-deprived Senator. The dialogue overlaps in a dizzying cacophony of sounds, the lights gleam with jarring intensity and the camera likes to doddle in a series of one-takes yet never seems to stop moving. I suppose that's something; that despite its insensitive portrayals and warped politics it still manages to be visually mature.

Suddenly everyone thinks they can rap now.

Yet despite it's flair, there's the problem of believably. Within a 48-hour period the Senator's campaign implodes in a flurry of insanity. He manages to run from his handlers several times, drive a limo into oncoming highway traffic, slink away from public view to rendezvous with a young Halle Berry, assault a police officer, attend a drug dealer's party and steal a car. This is not even including what he says to his donors! It's realistic for the media to eat it all up in an almost orgasmic fashion but its patently unrealistic for the man to become a political icon because he does all this madness while rapping like a elderly Beastie Boy.

In an almost perverse way, Bulworth has become a harbinger of the modern political landscape in two major and tragic ways. With the repeated incidences of police officers killing unarmed black men and women, it's easy to project the same frustrations we see on the nightly news with the story of Bulworth and his near suicidal odyssey. Much has changed in the last seventeen years yet we still face the exact same problems concerning racial relations now; lack of opportunity, social injustice, abhorrent drug abuse, lack of diversity in those in power, and a huge swath of the population either ignoring the problem or denying there's a problem at all.

Then there's Bulworth as a cult of personality. As his behavior and public persona becomes more erratic, his handlers morph the Senator's new-found honesty into a cynical political strategy. New acolytes to Bulworth's kamikaze campaign consume his words, feed off his brevity and are entertained by his one-man circus act. Dare I say it? In a time before Twitter and Instagram, Bulworth predicted the singularity that is Donald Trump. Bulworth may have a more inclusive message than the Donald but his presentation is much the same, i.e. that of a preaching, vitriolic, rebel-rousing populist. Also much like Trump, instead of apologizing for his insane proclamations, Bulworth doubles down, trampling over anyone with a semblance of sanity.

Much like the American political process, Bulworth is likely messy and off-putting by design. I applaud its efforts but a bi-product of this movies messiness are offensive caricatures and absurdly painful moments that are as unhelpful as they are untactful. Its interesting to note that this movie, unlike Warren Beatty, is still relevant though unfortunately its relevant for all the wrong reasons.

Final Grade: D