Guilty Pleasures

[Johann]

I'm curious to know what guilty pleasures everybody has film-wise.

I like to consider myself a film buff on a level of seriousness, but there are some films that "authorites" would consider crap that I watch every year (sometimes more than once):

Bitter Moon-the most erotic comedy ever made
Cry-Baby-pure fun
The Rocky Horror Picture Show-pure fun
The Little Death-Dwight Yoakam, sex & death-great midnite movie
Hair-the songs, the hair, the hippies
Buffalo 66-Christina Ricci will never be more beautiful
Last Tango in Paris- Jaw-dropping Brando film
Embrace of the Vampire-Alyssa Milano naked
Ed Wood-pure genius
Waterworld-what was so bad about it?
Purple Rain- The pouting Prince made a pretty good movie
The Mod Squad-Claire Danes in her panties. That's it.
The Bridges of Madison County (I have a huge crush on Streep's character)
Clue- triple threat ending
Showgirls- I like it for the acting :) :) :)
Jesus Christ Superstar- "So you are the christ, the great jesus christ..." insane musical
Exit to Eden- I hate to say it, but this movie got me laid. That's why it's on this list. No other reason. (because it's HORRIBLE!)

and last but not least

the epic of emancipation

CALIGULA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now I ask you, has your opinion of me changed?

[oscar jubis]

I watched CALIGULA while attending Ohio State University in one of those now extinct repertory theatres that showed a different double bill everyday. It is the only film I walked out of due to revulsion. The fisting and the sight of labia in contact with barbed wire proved too much for me.

I love LAST TANGO and consider BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY and ED WOOD must-sees. I never tire of ROCK 'N' ROLL HIGH SCHOOL and RUDE BOY because I am a huge fan of The Ramones and The Clash. I will watch anything starring Ms. Jennifer Jason Leigh.

My real guilty pleasures are:

Brian DePalma's PHANTOM OF PARADISE
James Cameron's TITANIC


Best Kept American Secrets:

Charles Burnett's NIGHTJOHN
De Felitta's TWO FAMILY HOUSE
Gordon Green's ALL THE REAL GIRLS
Golberger's TRANS

[Johann]

I must give a little clarification on Caligula & the carnage relating.

While I'm certainly not a psychotic/sadistic person, I have read all of the Marquis de Sade's works-"The 120 days of Sodom" being the most vile thing I've ever read- seen the Pasolini film Salo, seen a german snuff film that I seriously regret (I don't know if it was real or not, but it LOOKED real), and I've seen the uncut caligula about 10 times. I also thoroughly enjoyed films such as Gummo, Natural Born Killers, American Psycho, Taxi Driver and The Baby of Macon- all of which have extremely violent/shocking content. Not to mention the Vietnam documentary "Hearts and Minds" which has the most shocking scene I've ever seen- an execution at REALLY close range. Or how about Michael Moore's 'Roger and Me"? One minute a lady is petting a cute bunny rabbit, the next, she's clubbing it to death with a bat! Should these films be banned? Never. At the very least they remind the living that so many have suffered. It's just too sad that we don't do something about the cro-magnon idea of murder.
Humans will always find ways to justify destructive asinine behavior.

I must state that there ARE some scenes in Caligula that even disgust me. Oscar Jubis mentioned two, and there are a couple of murder scenes that are just horrific. I am not advocating ANY of the scenes in the life of the Caesar Gaius, but neither am I denouncing them. They are what they are. Human beings have a history of being the most remorseless killers/abusers of like-kind since we appeared on the earth. In a utopia, these types of things would not cross our minds,but they do, and we all deal with it in our own way.

I've gotta see "The Phantom of The Paradise". What is it about this film oscar?

[tabuno]

Demi Moore in Striptease was an underrated, overlooked sensual movie with some of the best striptease performances found on film. While the movie was ripped apart by critics and the public, this movie's focus was not so much on the pornographic, explicit sexual content, but one the trials and frantic efforts of a single mother trying to keep custody of her child and the artistry of sensual dance performances.

Liquid Dreams is an erotic, mystery thriller which combines a quality soft porn genre with a solid script and the film noir influence of the fifties - one of the best examples of this blend of bondage and detective thrillers around.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Johann
While I'm certainly not a psychotic/sadistic person, I have read all of the Marquis de Sade's works- I've seen the uncut caligula about 10 times. I also thoroughly enjoyed films such as Gummo, Natural Born Killers, American Psycho, Taxi Driver and The Baby of Macon- all of which have extremely violent/shocking content. Not to mention the Vietnam documentary "Hearts and Minds" Should these films be banned? Never. At the very least they remind the living that so many have suffered.Humans will always find ways to justify destructive asinine behavior.I must state that there ARE some scenes in Caligula that even disgust me. I am not advocating ANY of the scenes in the life of the Caesar Gaius, but neither am I denouncing them. They are what they are.
Indeed. My walk-out of Caligula was visceral, not a moral judgement. Lately though, I'm increasingly suspect of films which milk the cash cow of glorified violence. At the very least I seem more concerned about a film's posture towards violence. This wasn't such an issue when TAXI DRIVER and GOODFELLAS came out. By the release of NATURAL BORN KILLERS(another outrageously entertaining tour de force) it weighed on my mind. I am also less inclined to confuse eagerness to shock and offend with courage or innovation. Seems too easy to make money by showing violence as a heady thrill without denouncing it or at least exploring its implications. For instance, I value the posture towards revenge taken in the current object d'shock IRREVERSIBLE. This french film by Argentine expatriate Gaspar Noe includes a 8 min rape scene and the most brutal face'n'cranium puree ever inside club Rectum while horrid Industrial/Goth music plays loud. I came out moved by the suffering of the principals and comforted by its anti revenge stance. Others interpreted the film differently because of Noe's stylistic winks, including my man J. Rosenbaum. Others left much too early to opine.

[Johann]

I have not seen Irreversible. Sounds like I should. I've heard a lot about it, but I tend to buck new releases when at the video store- If I didn't see it at the theatre, I usually wait about a year to see the ones I missed- that way all the hype (if applicable) is in a vacuum and I can just see the film for what it is. That's how I agree/disagree with the "hits".

I make exceptions to the rule- like I will for "Lost in La Mancha" & Herzog's latest- which Ebert put in his top ten for 2002.

My guilty pleasure films make me seem like a bit of an pervert, but trust me-my heart lies with cinema classics and foreign films. (But! Being a true Greenaway admirer and a trumpeter of Trier is even making me wonder about my "emotion chip" :) Shock and awe in cinema can be a good thing sometimes, no?

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Johann
I've gotta see "The Phantom of The Paradise". What is it about this film oscar?
Brian de Palma had already made Hi Mom! and Sisters but these are still the glitter 70s, before The Ramones returned rock'n'roll to its fast+loud origins. This film is reflective of this druggy dreamy time. The music is schlocky but it fits the fevered melodramatic tone well. The U.S. was carpet-bombing Cambodia (where the enemy was said to be hiding),we had Watergate, and the 60s revolution had crashed with McGovern's defeat. PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE was pure escapism when I needed it. I saw it multiple times as a teen but a couple of adult viewings convinced me of its charms and thrills. It's a Grand Guignol pastiche of Phantom of the Opera and Goethe's Faust. Oh, how my teenage heart lusted for Jessica Harper!

[Johann]

The Ramones returned rock'n'roll to its fast+loud origins.


I am unfamiliar with the work of The Ramones, The Clash, X, The Sex Pistols, etc.. I never had a "punk" phase.- London never called me!.

You've got me a little interested in exploring this angry music, oj.
Where do I begin? I do have a Patti Smith album, though. I think she's great.

[Johann]

Originally posted by tabuno

Demi Moore in Striptease was an underrated, overlooked sensual movie with some of the best striptease performances found on film. While the movie was ripped apart by critics and the public, this movie's focus was not so much on the pornographic, explicit sexual content, but one the trials and frantic efforts of a single mother trying to keep custody of her child and the artistry of sensual dance performances.

Liquid Dreams is an erotic, mystery thriller which combines a quality soft porn genre with a solid script and the film noir influence of the fifties - one of the best examples of this blend of bondage and detective thrillers around.[QUOTE]



Striptease was indeed underrated. I quite liked it in 1996. Promoter to Demi: How about CREAM CORN WRESTLING?
Demi: No.

I haven't seen Liquid Dreams. Quality soft porn? hmmmm.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Johann
Being a true Greenaway admirer and a trumpeter of Trier is even making me wonder about my "emotion chip" :) Shock and awe in cinema can be a good thing sometimes, no?
Yes, specially when there is a worthy purpose. Are you implying that Greenaway is a cold aesthete, j? But what a stylist ah!? Problem is, for moi, his films get smaller outside the theatre. As Janis would say "Oh Lord, won't you buy me a large screen tv?...
I honestly don't get how you connect him with Trier. His Breaking the Waves moved me so. I see parallels with the story of Abraham and the sacrifice of the first born. But that's me.

[Johann]

I thought Janis sang "a color tv"?

Greenaway & Trier- I only grouped the names on an "awe" level. They are completely different in objectives. The subject matter they both show us can be a little off-putting- especially the ending of "Cook, Thief" and most of "The Idiots". I love all of their films and some people would call me daft. -because of the wierd nature of the pictures they make, I assume...

[Johann]

Breaking The Waves


This is one film that I truly don't have words for.
Dancer in the Dark I enjoyed more, but the admiration level is higher for "Waves". It is just so sublime.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Johann
I never had a "punk" phase.- London never called me! You've got me a little interested in exploring this angry music, oj.
Where do I begin?
New York City in the 70s. How do I stop? Well, The New York Dolls injected intensity and urgency to the glitter rock circa '73 then The Ramones added speed and cartoonish ingenuity to a rock'n'roll style dormant since 'bout '59. Then you had an explosion of extremely talented bands playing legendary clubs like CBGB. If you want a guitar god, how about Tom Verlaine of Television. Virtuoso is not a punk term but it fits Tom. The neat and geeky Talking Heads with the nervous energy of David Byrne. The porno starlet/girl-next-door dichotomy of Debbi Harry of Blondie. The please-kill-me nihilism of Richard Hell of The Heartbreakers and The Voidoids. You know about Patti.

Do you want anger? UK's Sex Pistols and early Clash is the way to go. The Clash in particular always knew where to point the finger. Joe Strummer is a hero of mine for his smarts, charm and verve. Soon punk spread elsewhere. L.A.'s X and Cleveland's Pere Ubu were excellent.
10 Punk Era Classics: "The New York Dolls", The Ramones' "Rocket to Russia", Television's "Marquee Moon", Sex Pistols' Never Mind the Bollocks, "The Clash", Wire's "Pink Flag", Blondie's "Parallel Lines", Pere Ubu's "Dub Housing", The Clash's "London Calling" and "Wild Gift" by X.

[Johann]

I've always wondered if Alice Cooper was the first punk rocker. (Never listened to him either)
He said something that's always stuck in my mind:

"I was the guy who drove the stake through the heart of the love generation".

[oscar jubis]

Alice had a knack for self-promotion and stage theatrics. He was pretty good for a song or two per album.

[tabuno]

I'd have to see it again, but the controversial movie "Crash" in which people get off (sexually) in car crashes might fall under this category. I can't remember how I felt about it.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Johann
I'm curious to know what guilty pleasures everybody has film-wise, films that "authorites" would consider crap that I watch every year (sometimes more than once)
It's interesting how Johann starts a thread about guilty pleasures and defines them as films we value way beyond their critical reputation. Immediately we go into how enjoying "Caligula" does not make you a pervert and discussing Striptease, Liquid Dreams, and now Crash.

[Johann]

Ha Ha ha

Ho Ho ho

Tee hee hee

Yes, we are strange creatures, are we not?

[tabuno]

I not crazy, but I read the first post of this thread and there are no definitions as to what Guilty Pleasures means. I don't think you can blame me for interpreting Guilty Pleasures to mean those films which give pleasure but for which one feels guilty watching them.

[Johann]

I will be seeing the infamous "Irreversible" tonight- on a triple bill with Anger Management & X-Men 2. We'll see how good they all are....

[oscar jubis]

I remember watching 5 films one day at the Toronto FF in '95. Too many brain cells have died since so two is my daily limit. I predict you'll find all three "worth watching" or better. Be aware of the need to think about Irreversible after you see it. Then again, maybe you'd want an antidote after it. Something fun and light like Anger Mgmt? BTW, the scenes are shown in reverse order.

[Johann]

That was one hell of a night out. I'm still reeling from "Irreversible"
side effects- the rape scene was almost unbearable. You can't look away..

X-Men 2 was nice and dark and violent. (The way it should be)
and Anger Management I enjoyed the most. I loved the "I'm so pretty" car scene and Woody "lickenzedicken" Harrelson was a riot. Jack just goes for the gonads on this role. Man, he was so

restrained in this movie ;)

[oscar jubis]

Johann I wonder if you have an opinion about my contention that the film's message is the absurdity of revenge. It is essential in my view to realize a fact obscured by reverse chronology which is that they took revenge on the wrong man and the guilty remains free.

[cinemabon]

This little light weight silvery disc you can hold in the palm of your hand sure beats the huge film cannisters I used to lug around Los Angeles. Give me DVD or give me death!

So the studios have finally realized that there are collectors out there who are wanting their European or Japanese films, or whatever region or country you prefer. I have a few silly ones that I have to watch now and then... it is not Bergman, Fellini, or Hitchcock, or Ford or even DePalma... not these are my little guilty pleasures... and thank god for all the new DVD releases, especially the Special Edition ones!

The Day the Earth Stood Still
The Song of Bernadette (to be released this month)
Indiana Jones (in November)
Journey to the Center of the Earth (last month)
First Men in the Moon
All About Eve
Police Squad (I fast forward through OJ)
Top Secret
The Pink Panther Strikes Again
Queen of Blood (not yet on DVD)
Journey to the Seventh Planet (not yet on DVD)
Any James Bond movie
Oliver
The Music Man
Our Man and In Like... Flint
and many others....
I keep them hidden in little enclosable thing from Sauder

Now don't get me wrong... this is not my list of favorite all time movies... these are the films that I watch when no one is looking... my private guilty pleasures... along with the Theater Butter Popcorn and the NON diet soda... oh, the guilt, the guilt!

[Johann]

I like to throw on The Music Man sometimes-the energy of Preston almost matches that of Cagney- almost!

"Right here in River City"...Great silly songs

[Johann]

Originally posted by oscar jubis
Johann I wonder if you have an opinion about my contention that the film's message is the absurdity of revenge. It is essential in my view to realize a fact obscured by reverse chronology which is that they took revenge on the wrong man and the guilty remains free.

Yes indeed. I hadn't thought about the guilty remaining free thing.
But that's besides the point. How about being beaten to death with a fire extinguisher?! Man, Gaspar had me riveted, but great caesar's ghost! From the opening scenes I knew this was not going to be an ordinary movie-going experience.

I will say that this has to be seen on the big screen...(make of that what you will)

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Johann
From the opening scenes I knew this was not going to be an ordinary movie-going experience.
How about the way we learn, towards the end, of the existence of an additional, most innocent of victims. My heart sank. IRREVERSIBLE numbs and shocks, and then it moves you.

[rocketrogerhood]

Originally posted by Johann
I'm curious to know what guilty pleasures everybody has film-wise.

I like to consider myself a film buff on a level of seriousness, but there are some films that "authorites" would consider crap that I watch every year (sometimes more than once):

Bitter Moon-the most erotic comedy ever made
Cry-Baby-pure fun
The Rocky Horror Picture Show-pure fun
The Little Death-Dwight Yoakam, sex & death-great midnite movie
Hair-the songs, the hair, the hippies
Buffalo 66-Christina Ricci will never be more beautiful
Last Tango in Paris- Jaw-dropping Brando film
Embrace of the Vampire-Alyssa Milano naked
Ed Wood-pure genius
Waterworld-what was so bad about it?
Purple Rain- The pouting Prince made a pretty good movie
The Mod Squad-Claire Danes in her panties. That's it.
The Bridges of Madison County (I have a huge crush on Streep's character)
Clue- triple threat ending
Showgirls- I like it for the acting :) :) :)
Jesus Christ Superstar- "So you are the christ, the great jesus christ..." insane musical
Exit to Eden- I hate to say it, but this movie got me laid. That's why it's on this list. No other reason. (because it's HORRIBLE!)

and last but not least

the epic of emancipation

CALIGULA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now I ask you, has your opinion of me changed?

Why is Ed Wood or Last Tango a guilty Pleasure? They're both great films.

[Johann]

They are on the list because some people I know think they are crap. They are great films- hence my defence of them.

Another guilty pleasure film I love is Hanks' That Thing You Do. Tommy boy had a great directorial debut. Liv Tyler is one hot mama- anybody see Bertolucci's Staeling Beauty? A little soft-pornish, but I dig it..

[cinemabon]

I love this posting more than any other at this site. With all of our intellectualization of what certain film's mean, this site is totally about curling up with that special silly film that means nothing but tears or giggles in the dark of your own living room.

Last night, per my son's request, I watched "Flash Gordon" with male model, Sam (the longest schlong in Playgirl mag back in the 70's) Jones. Say, whatever happened to him? Anyway, its such a silly movie. But my son kept laughing at the audacious costumes and the pretense of it all. The Queen soundtrack blasts you out of the living room, if you have 5.1!

Klytiss referring to Adolf Hitler: "Now, he showed promise..."

Just to make up for it, I had to watch Bergman's "Wild Strawberries" just to bring myself back down to earth after my son went to bed. Ah, me...

[Johann]

Hodges' Flash Gordon is a cult classic. I saw it on the big screen as a kid (on a double bill with "Smurfs and the Magic Flute")- yikes! I loved it then and I love it now. The widescreen DVD release is beautiful. One of the best comic strip movies ever. (Along with Dick Tracy & Popeye).

Wild Strawberries. I own the Criterion version, and it is dreamlike celluloid. Victor Sjostrom is probably the only "old man" character in film to burn my psyche (aside from Guinness' Obi-Wan).

cheers cinemabon- I like your style

[treadman24]

Let's see..what would be on my guilty pleasures list...

Flesh Gordon (1974)
Teen Wolf (1985)
The Invisible Kid (1988)
The Terror (1963)
Loose Shoes (1977)
Glitter (2001)
Leprechaun In Da Hood (2000)
But I'm A Cheerleader (2000; I should dislike this movie but I have a thing for Clea DuVall)
Heart Beat (1980)
Reversal of Fortune (1990)
Creature from the Haunted Sea (1961)
Town and Country (2001)
Last Tango in Paris (1973; my mother loathes the film; I think it's brilliant)
Rabbit Test (1978)
Annie (1982)
The Trial (1961)
All the Fine Young Cannibals (1960)
Kiss Me Stupid (1964)
The Trip (1967)



This one really isn't a guilty pleasure but I think it's a woefully underappreciated film
Winter Kills (1979)

[oscar jubis]

C'mon guys! What is this film doing in this thread? LTIP was directed by Bernardo Bertolucci and lensed by Vittorio Storaro. It features perhaps the best performance by one of our best actors in cinema history- Brando's monologue to his dead wife itself is worth the price of admission. The script and performances are calculated to reveal minute psychological detail so that there is a context for the sex scenes. The most influential critic then, Pauline Kael wrote: "I've tried to describe the impact of a film that has made the strongest impression on me in almost 20 years of reviewing". The best-known critic now, Ebert, gave it four stars in his '95 review. I understand there are people who think it's inappropriate, even immoral, for serious films to be explicit about sex. Fine. Just don't call Last Tango a guilty pleasure.

[Chris Knipp]

I see HKFlix is offering a new 2-DVD complete utterly uncensored CALIGULA with "the making of" doc accompanying on region 2 PAL DVD. I want it, but it's useless unless I get a universal DVD player.

I think anything is a guilty pleasure that you think you shouldn't like but you totally do, and that your feeling of liking makes you very confused and troubled about yourself for having.

Maybe it's because it's sick that you think you shouldn't like it. That could be true of REVERSAL OF FORTUNE. And if you really really love DEAD RINGERS (or any truly sick or depressing flick) that would be the same kind of guilty pleasure.

But of all the movies mentioned in this thread, to me only CALIGULA is really a true 100% guilty pleasure. I don't even know if it would still be a pleasure (he said hopefully), but I spent a lot of time watching it intensely and with fascination a few years ago.

Aside from the fact that it boldly breaks all the rules of morality and taste, CALIGULA has generally been condemned on aesthetic grounds. But it's hard to dismiss because of the famous actors in it, Peter O'Toole, John Gielgud, Helen Mirren, Malcolm McDowell, and the elaborate and often beautiful staging of everything, so it has that element of ambiguity of judgment, that opening for ambivalence, that confusion of feeling, that contributes also to guilty pleasure.

Anything else in the guilty pleasure list is lightweight compared to CALIGULA. You'd have to find something pretty disgusting, or pretty sick, or pretty awful to compare to it, and whatever you found would most likely be just so 100% BAD that it would really just be camp, and the enjoyment of camp is a relatively harmless and acceptable activity compared to liking something truly disgusting and immoral.

The only other real guilty pleasures on film would be out and out porn movies. But is porn disgusting? Is it even immoral? Not to my mind. It may awaken confused feelings in relatively naive or straitlaced people, but to my mind most of it is really quite wholesome, and some of it is even quite well done. But if you start thinking some of it is really artistic and underappreciated, that starts to make it a guilty pleasure because of that element of confusion.

[Johann]

Originally posted by Chris Knipp
to me only CALIGULA is really a true 100% guilty pleasure.

I admire you're ability to articulate, Chris. I first thought you were long winded/exhaustive, but after months of reading your posts I've garnered a new appreciation for your opinions.

I'm glad Caligula is respected by some film buffs. I honesttly think that Tinto & Bob tried to make a serious work of art. (casting should have been an indicator). Anyone see Brass' other films? He is a master of the soft-porn film. You can check out more at www.atomiccinema.com

[Chris Knipp]

I am longwinded on this site, and I know it. But I hope I do have something to say. Thanks for the comment.

[FilmWolf]

blue

I've always felt that the definition of a "guilty pleasure" was something that you liked to do/watch for your own personal enjoyment, without really caring if it was of any great artistic merit. Sort of the cinematic equivalent of a extra large buttered popcorn and a Coke...it may not be particularly good for you, but it's enjoyable all the same.

Having said that, here are some of the films that I like to kick back and enjoy, scholarly acclaim and film critics be damned...


1) "Brain Donors" ('92) - from the folks who brought you "Airplane!", this remake/homage to "A Night At The Opera", with John Turturro as a shyster lawyer who really DOES chase ambulances.


2) "King Kong vs. Godzilla" ('63) - Big rubber monsters, explosions, badly dubbed dialogue, miniature buildings getting trampled...what's not to like? :-)


3) The 3 Stooges - Never before have 3 guys travelled to such great heights to be so low-brow. (And I LOVE them for it!)


4) "Aliens" ('86) - Tons of action, a truly scary monster and Sigourney Weaver as the butt-kickin'est babe since Diana Rigg in "The Avengers".


5) "The Shadow" ('94) - Not quite as great as it could have been, but a fun retro-action story all the same.


6) "Batman Returns" ('92) - I'll sum it all up in the following sentence: Michelle Pfeiffer in a skin-tight latex outfit, wearing stiletto heels and brandishing a whip. wooof!



FilmWolf

[Chris Knipp]

I don't see how "Aliens" could in any sense be a "guilty pleasure." It's a good movie! Sigourney Weaver is great in it.

But you are going back to the idea I was trying to argue against.
I've always felt that the definition of a "guilty pleasure" was something that you liked to do/watch for your own personal enjoyment, without really caring if it was of any great artistic merit.

A large popcorn and Coke--fine--but the part that bothers me is "without really caring." If it doesn't bother you to watch this stuff, what's "guilty" about it? It's just stuff that's not high class or arty that you have a lot of fun watching. But is that really a guilty pleasure? I don't think so.

I go back to my original definition: that a real "guilty pleasure" in the movies is something you really don't think you ought to be watching at all, something beyond schlocky into wicked and evil and immoral, and something that you certainly ought not to be enjoying watching so damn much, given how disgusting and sick it is -- like "Caligula," not like "Aliens," or a harmlessly lowbrow thing like a Three Stooges movie.

I keep pushing for a more rigorous definition of the term because I think there are some really sick and nasty movies out there, and these harmless pieces of schlocky pop art and lowbrow entertainment that keep being mentioned are setting the limits in too tame a place.

[cinemabon]

So is this semantics?

What you are saying the definition is, I somehow come across some dirty porn or something I NEVER watch, in my case that would be horror or extreme violence... and somehow I get a vicarious pleasure inside. Then I come to the realization that I feel guilty about feeling good or at least attracted to the horror or whatever is on the screen. Correct?

I would not call that a guilty pleasure... for as sure as humanity is corrupt, I would call that primal instinct, a theme well explored by many filmmakers. That somehhow, there is a primal self, deep within us, that revels in the most disgusting senusal acts or severe acts of violence. Well, surprise... there is that aspect of humanity. Otherwise, Nazi Germany would never have happened. It brought out the worst of humanity.

I believe that is why we have what amounts to civilized behavior. Without it, we would certainly enjoy all the barbarism whose potential we could count on, seeing how programs like Jerry Springer thrive in a world that only teeters on the edge of being civilized. Without these self-imposed restrains, we would slip back to the most sublime of all guilty pleasures: torture in the name of God. So that God, or lack of, is to blame for the sins we ourselves commit.

[oscar jubis]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cinemabon
So is this semantics?
Indeed. The "common" definition of a guilty pleasure is a lowbrow entertainment, "something you watch for personal enjoyment regardless of artistic merit", as posted by FilmWolf. FLASH GORDON and BRAIN DONORS certainly meet the criteria.

The "alternative" definition, such as "something beyond schlocky into wicked and evil and immoral"(Chris Knipp) has taken this thread into unexpected but compelling directions, such as the previous post.

I somehow come across some dirty porn or something I NEVER watch, in my case that would be horror or extreme violence... and somehow I get a vicarious pleasure inside.
I have been interested in your reaction and opinions about violence in films since your posts re:the violence in A.I. Personally, I have never avoided films because of strong sexual or violent content. But I have become much more conscious of cinema's power to manipulate and exploit our baser instincts, to present transgressive images for shock and titillation without regard for the origins, implications and consequences of such acts. In my opinion, it's more important to discern a movie's posture towards violence than the explicitness of its images. For this reason I consider LAST TANGO IN PARIS, IRREVERSIBLE and APOCALYPSE NOW responsible works of film art. The strong images serve a higher purpose or function. On the other hand I am quite concerned about the message and/or use of transgressive images in otherwise brilliant films: Is there a film that glorifies violence more clearly than TAXI DRIVER? Is it not exploitative to cast third-world ghetto children in serial depictions of cruelty and nihilism (CITY OF GOD) solely for the entertainment value? These two films are a source of frustration for me. Both are extremely accomplished but irresponsible.

That somehow, there is a primal self, deep within us, that revels in the most disgusting senusal acts or severe acts of violence. Well, surprise... there is that aspect of humanity.
I believe that is why we have what amounts to civilized behavior. Without it, we would certainly enjoy all the barbarism
I'm not sure I understand, Cinemabon. Are you refering to the vicarious experience of these acts in films satisfying the need to engage in horrible acts in real life?


Without these self-imposed restrains, we would slip back to the most sublime of all guilty pleasures: torture in the name of God. So that God, or lack of, is to blame for the sins we ourselves commit.
Bravo. Scenes from Dreyer's DAY OF WRATH and Bergman's THE 7TH SEAL recalled in my brain.

[Chris Knipp]

My only wish was that the term "guilty pleasures" be used for something you should really be guilty about. Cinemabon has objected to my definition, yet has carried the idea even further than I did, but when I was talking about Caligula being a guilty pleasure for me, it was because at the time when I repeatedly watched it (which is in the past now, so far anyway) I felt it was a movie that's not only in bad taste but arguably immoral--and still I watched it with fascination and pleasure. Pleasure in the transgressive, I guess Oscar might say.

One thing about Caligula is that it's really pretty factual, though some of the scenes are obviously elaborated in a Fellini-esque way, but not stuff beyond what actually happened in Caligula's time. So it's harder to say that they're done to tittilate people, though no doubt they are.

I'm thinking a "guilty pleasure" movie is one that makes you say "I shouldn't be enjoying this as much as I am," and that "shouldn't" means for moral, social, political reasons, not just aesthetic ones.


Is there a film that glorifies violence more clearly than TAXI DRIVER? Is it not exploitative to cast third-world ghetto children in serial depictions of cruelty and nihilism (CITY OF GOD) solely for the entertainment value? These two films are a source of frustration for me. Both are extremely accomplished but irresponsible.

I differ with you there. I think Taxi Driver is over the top and also dated. It caused shudders at the moment when it appeared that it no longer causes. On the other hand I don't think the story of City of God is "solely for the entertainment value" at all. But in either case, these are not "guilty pleasures," Oscar--they're not pleasures for you at all, or "guilty pleasures" for the rest of us, because these movies are approved of by the public and by the critics. They're not forbidden. You may be saying they ought to be "guilty pleasures."

As for A.I., I'd say that's a serious film that alienated a substantial segment of the audience because of its ugly moments both of psychological cruelty and of violence. I saw that when it sent my sister running from the room.

HOw sensitive one is to a movie--which varies over time and from one individual to another--is also another issue than "guilty pleasures". But Spielberg made a misjudgment, perhaps, with A.I. that cost him the audience and the criticsm acclaim he might have had if the movie had been differently edited.

Are the "orgy" sequences in Eyes Wide Shut obscene, guilty pleasures, or just boring? Lugubrious soft porn is more obscene than the cheerful kind.

[cinemabon]

I didn't mean to mislead that any or all violence in film is gratuitous or unnecessary. "The Wild Bunch" would not be the film it is without its grotesque images that vilify certain characters as a plot device. I guess I just have a personal problem when it comes to how some "images" are treated by filmmakers as a part of their storytelling process, especially when it comes to women, children, and some of the more overt acts of violence.

Now take Alfred Hitchcock, our current flavor of the month, and whom I admire a great deal. His film "Frenzy", which I believe to be one of his most under-rated films of his career, has a scene I absolute cringe when watching. This is a scene that is very difficult for me to watch. The rape scene in the office. Hitch takes us to the edge of acceptable imagry, and then says, "Is this not horrible?" How could we not agree? However, seeing so blatently portrayed a theme like rape is questionable to me. Could he have done it differently and yet shown the audience the horror of the act? Probably not... so I am tolerant of some filmmakers who use violence and sex to tell their stories.

Can you tell a tale of gladiators without gore and extreme violence? I would say no. That does not mean I like it. So I still pan movies like "Gladiator" and "A.I." not so much because the filmmaker is not brilliant, Scott and Speilburg are genius, but because their overt use of violence is abhorrent to me to the point of being distasteful. And as a person of taste, I prefer my gourmet meal to be a little more palpable, and not so heavily flavored with one ingredient.

[tabuno]

Perhaps we could take the matter of "guilty" pleasures to civil court and have a judge rule on it. Who is "guilty" of pleasures when watching what movie? So far it is apparent that any universal definition of "guilty" pleasures seems to be subjective to the viewer and their reaction to watching with pleasure or enjoyment something they feel guilty about. Is the movie immoral? Is the movie something the viewer wouldn't want to be caught watching?

It's possible that the societal standard of immorality can be applied to someone watching a particular movie like pornography movies. It's also possible that watching a particular movie that one has condemned as terrible publicly but yet enjoys it may feel insecure about their choices.

I go back to "Liquid Dreams" as a classic example of guilty pleasure because it contains several themes not accepted by the public at large but caters to a number of prurient interests of sexual pleasure and male domination and murder and seduction and mind control, etc., etc. Yet the movie is well done with the appropriate film noir themes with a twist.

But at the same time, I enjoy Buffy The Vampire Slayer and Charmed on television, some would say that such series are not the most accepted series on television such that Buffy never gets nominated for a television Emmy. I do feel guilty watching either of these series.

I even liked "True Lies." What about "Striptease" with the resurgent Demi Moore? Anybody beginning to like Jim Carrey or Adam Sandler now? Anybody willing to admit it?

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by cinemabon
I didn't mean to mislead that any or all violence in film is gratuitous or unnecessary. "The Wild Bunch" would not be the film it is without its grotesque images. Now take Alfred Hitchcock. "Frenzy" has a scene I absolute cringe when watching. The rape scene in the office. Hitch takes us to the edge of acceptable imagry, and then says, "Is this not horrible?" How could we not agree? However, seeing so blatently portrayed a theme like rape is questionable to me.

The scene surprised me, coming from Hitch. There is a religious aspect too, in that the victim, who wears a crucifix around her neck, recites a Psalm just prior to being strangled. Later, the police inspector will say "religious and sexual mania are closely linked".
As far as rape scenes, the 8 or 9 minute rape of Monica Belluci("Malena") in IRREVERSIBLE, perhaps the most controversial scene in any 2003 release, serves an important function. I had never been so in-tune with the perception of "slowed time" described by a couple of my therapy clients, who were raped. I wanted to scream: CUT!!!

Can you tell a tale of gladiators without gore and extreme violence? I would say no. That does not mean I like it. So I still pan movies like "Gladiator" and "A.I." because their overt use of violence is abhorrent to me to the point of being distasteful.

I found the scene in A.I. when David visits his maker's office, finds a row of packaged "Davids" and bashes the head of one sitting at a desk quite disturbing. Partly because of David's age, mostly because the premise of the movie allows Spielberg to create one of the most unique and horrific suicidal images in cinema history.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Chris Knipp
Taxi Driver caused shudders at the moment when it appeared that it no longer causes. City of God . You may be saying they ought to be "guilty pleasures."

Exactly. As defined by you, Taxi Driver and City of God (and Natural Born Killers) qualify as my "guilty pleasures" because: a) I consider them exploitative and/or immoral and/or irresponsible, and b) I derive enormous pleasure from them, having watched Taxi and Killers several times and planning to watch City again when the dvd is released. I experience guilt watching them.
TAXI DRIVER is perhaps the best film ever made that promotes revenge as a desirable course of action and that presents the avenger as a community hero in that beautifully shot, morally vacant finale.

[Chris Knipp]

As defined by you, Taxi Driver and City of God (and Natural Born Killers) qualify as my "guilty pleasures" because: a) I consider them exploitative and/or immoral and/or irresponsible, and b) I derive enormous pleasure from them, having watched Taxi and Killers several times and planning to watch City again when the dvd is released. I experience guilt watching them.


That's exactly right. But I don't find that this happens to me very often -- that (b) happens, but (a) remains. If I derive a lot of pleasure from a movie, I trust my gut reaction, and I don't consider it "exploitive and/or immoral and/or irresponsible" any more, if I had at first. This may seem odd, but usually if a movie is to me "exploitive and/or immoral and/or irresponsible" I know that instinctively at once, and I derive little or no pleasure from it. The evaluation, "exploitive and/or immoral and/or irresponsible," is probably out there, but not necessarily mine. I have to base my sense of the quality, moral, intellectual, and aesthetic, of a movie on my own gut reaction to it -- not on an external, received set of values or critical assessments. For me, (a) and (b) coming together and remaining together on repeated viewings is as rare as a solar eclipse.

My evaluations of movies aren't purely a matter of gut reactions, but of the interplay between those and the whole context -- which ideally our discussions enlarge. Our discussions hopefully enrich our point of view and may cause modifications in how we evaluate and respond to movies. Otherwise we'd just be spinning out a web of self centeredness, talking to hear ourselves talk.


TAXI DRIVER is perhaps the best film ever made that promotes revenge as a desirable course of action and that presents the avenger as a community hero in that beautifully shot, morally vacant finale.

I don't see, myself, how Taxi Driver "promotes revenge as a desirable course of action." I don't read the narrative that way at all. Travis Bickle isn't a character I identify with. He is pathological; a psychopath; not a free agent but the pawn of his own inarticulate complexes. His revenge doesn't seem in any sense a "desirable" solution. If he becomes a "community hero," that's by accident. He deserves no credit for it and therefore is not to be emulated. If you find the finale "morally vacant," as we do, how can we say that the movie "promotes revenge"?

P.s. I notice that the U.S. DVD of Henry Bean's The Believer (starring Ryan Gosling) is finally out, and I hope more people will see this bold and powerful movie.

[HorseradishTree]

And don't forget Death Wish!

A companion and I were recently discussing films that made us physically ill. One was Eraserhead, whilst another was The Sentinel. Has anyone you know gotten sick like this due to a film?

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Chris Knipp
I don't see, myself, how Taxi Driver "promotes revenge as a desirable course of action." I don't read the narrative that way at all. If he becomes a "community hero," that's by accident. He deserves no credit for it and therefore is not to be emulated.
TAXI DRIVER doesn't convict Bickle or even place him on trial, after killing everyone in sight at the brothel. He is declared a hero by everyone in the film who's still alive, even the sensible woman played by Ms. Shepherd. Iris's father writes a letter read offscreen: Unfortunately we cannot afford to come to New York again to thank you in person, or we surely would". Newspaper headlines on Bickle's wall: "Taxi Driver Hero to Recover" and such. This is a work of fiction, he is presented as a hero by Scorsese and Schrader, not "by accident". They are going out of their way to celebrate Bickle's carrying out his puritanical, vigilante fantasies with this ending. The film would be better had it ended with the overhead shot of the outcome of the massacre, allowing the viewer to ponder how society reacted to it.

It was interesting for me to learn that Marty changed Schrader's script to tone way down Bickle's racism by having several racist remarks written for him excised or said by other characters. Also at least one of those killed by Bickle in Schrader's script were African-American, but not in the movie.

Some perspective: I am still in awe of what Scorsese, Schrader, De Niro and Herrmann (his last score) have accomplished here. TAXI DRIVER is still in my Top 10 for '76 but I am bothered by its message, for the reasons stated above.

the U.S. DVD of Henry Bean's The Believer (starring Ryan Gosling) is finally out
I rented it based on your recommendation and enjoyed it. Thanx.

[Chris Knipp]

Though Scrosese is a great cinematic figure in this country, and contributes a lot, I'm not much of a fan. His movies aren't much fun, and I don't know why. Ikiru might be said to be not much fun, but it's uplifting and wonderful.

Taxi Driver seems to me very dated now. It may be that I see it differently because I saw it when it was new and was excited by it then, because it was close to actual events of the time and its methods seemed fresh, and of course De Niro had such conviction, but the whole context is so different now, it just doesn't hold up.

It seemed to me at the time, and it seems to me now, that all the congratulation Bickle gets at the end is very, very ironic from our point of view. It's a grim irony, to be sure. You might--we might , you and I--need to consult directly with Scorsese on this, to see what his intention was. I cannot believe that he would agree with your interpretation. The mere fact that he toned down the racism in Schrader's screenplay doesn't mean he was making Bickle "okay." It means that he was trying to make it harder for us to detach from him; to make the whole sequence of events, including the approbation for his act, more convincing to the general audience, and therefore more troubling. And he was toning down Schrader's characteristic shrillness and glibness.

But that either Martin Scorsese himself, or Paul Schrader, is recommending revenge of this madman-stalker sort, and the shooting up of brothels, I just find extremely far fetched, and I'm surprised that you think this. I may not be a Scorsese fan, but I respect his intelligence and his civilized outlook, which I suspect is as outraged by Bickle's behavior as ours is.

Top Ten for 1976 -- well, of course, yes.

I'm glad you liked The Believer, which I think extraordinary, and it's sad that it's so little known; the DVD may remedy that somewhat.

[Johann]

We really have intelligent people on this site.

I've been so busy lately I can only read new posts.
When will I have more time?!?!

If you've seen Taxi Driver more than 3 times or are familiar with Scorsese's body of work the films do become dated (oscar) and lose their power. They settle into the "beautiful excercise" category.
That reminds me of a friend who asked me if I still find THE SHINING scary after all the times I've screened it. I said no because I like the film and it's maker too much to be scared.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Johann
We really have intelligent people on this site.
People who have watched a lot of good films; some like you and me, interested in "catching up" with cinema history, despite the inherent difficulties. I do wish for more members free of subtitle-phobia. Or is it sometimes that folks watch movies simply to be entertained, and comforted by films that validate their views, rejecting any challenges(artistic and otherwise). Imagine 20% of the Matrix audience giving RUSSIAN ARK a chance and getting turned on and provoking a cultural revolution. Dream On.
The way pmw has designed the site (easy to quote others and highlight text,etc.) facilitates debate.

I've been so busy lately I can only read new posts.
When will I have more time?!?!
I hope your moving is going smoothly, and that you find time to post. The latter applies to docraven and cinemabon too.

Scorsese's films do become dated and lose their power.
The only thing I find dated in TAXI DRIVER is NYC, particularly Times Square, now Disney-fied, and the decreased visibility of the sex industry, now transformed by home video and computer technology. TAXI DRIVER is now a visually brilliant period film.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by Chris Knipp
But that either Martin Scorsese himself, or Paul Schrader, is recommending revenge of this madman-stalker sort, and the shooting up of brothels, I just find extremely far fetched, and I'm surprised that you think this. I may not be a Scorsese fan, but I respect his intelligence and his civilized outlook

I am a Scorsese fan and consider him the greatest American director of the past 30 years (as measured by the number of outstanding films he's directed in that span). An intelligent, civilized man. I urge everyone to give the forgotten THE KING OF COMEDY a chance, and to enroll in Marty's course: A PERSONAL JOURNEY WITH MARTIN SCORSESE THROUGH AMERICAN MOVIES, out on dvd. I wouldn't dare judge him based on my objections about the last three minutes of one, 27-year-old film. Objections based directly on what's on the screen. I'd never judge a film based on the artist's biographical details, but these sometimes lead to insights about the work.

Consider Schrader, his scripts, particularly the early ones, show a pattern of puritanical/conservative views and rescue-and-revenge themes. He was raised strict Calvinist, never allowed to watch a film until age 18. When he moved from Michigan to attend UCLA film school, he was ill-prepared. The result were years of depression, moral confusion, and drug addiction. In interviews he explains he was "suicidal and quite enamored of guns" when he wrote TAXI. The first film he both wrote and directed, HARDCORE('79), details yet another rescue from and revenge on the porn underworld, this time with a midwestern Calvinist hero. His script for ROLLING THUNDER('77), a film now known mostly because Tarantino named his production company after it, features a Vietnam vet taking revenge on perverts who killed his wife and son. The carnage takes place...inside a whorehouse. Richard Gere is an object of pity in AMERICAN GIGOLO whose sole reference to homosexuality is not a bit "friendly". The views of the Labor Movement and the counter-culture in BLUE COLLAR and PATTY HEARST are one-sided. Schrader is a good writer, perhaps most apparent in the Scorsese-commissioned scripts for RAGING BULL and THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. It is possible that he thinks Keitel and co. deserved it because they're "scum"(Taxi Driver). But what concerns me is that the film believes the avenging Bickle deserves the admiration and gratitude of society.

[Chris Knipp]

I still think this deserves some further research into Scorsese's and Schrader's intentions in Taxi Driver, but I have not found the answer to that question. I also still think, Oscar, that you are taking the whole movie too unironically, as if Travis Bickle were somehow a figure of admiration for the filmmakers. That admiration, if there is any, is surely very uneasy -- as, perhaps, is yours.

Jonathan Rosenbaum http://www.chireader.com/movies/archives/0496/04016.html describes Tavis Bickle as a "twisted self-portrait" of Schrader, and points out that De Niro made creative additions such as the famous "You talkin' to me?" vignette which may make the picture even more luirid. In collaborating with Schrader so often, Scorsese knew what he was doing; obviously the director too has a taste for the Manichean and the lurid, and both men have one foot in European High Culture and the other in Hollywood pulp.

I recall, Oscar, that you listed Taxi Driver as one of your "guilty pleasures," and that that's what we were originally talking about. It isn't one of mine, for various reasons: not much of a pleasure, though it was one once; not "period" but dated, which of course is quite different; and nothing I'd be guilty about even if it were still a pleasure, because I see the movie's viewpoint ironically. Scorsese and Schrader are playing with the extremes of Schrader's Calvinistic indoctrination and parodying them, in my view; "playing with" does indicate enjoying, but "parodying" means distancing. That there may be an interaction between playing and parodying means that the movie is ambiguous in a way that is somewhat morally suspect, if not all the way so.

Ebert http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/greatmovies/taxi.html focuses in his discussion of Taxi Driver on the movie's strictly limited point of view and asserts that the finale is an ambiguous resolution, and only one for the main character, if that.

As I said before, whether or not one thinks Scorsese's movies hold up he is an important figure for his many contributions such as you mention, Oscar, to our knowledge of cinematic history. I am not making any judgments about him on the basis of biographical details, nor am I judging Taxi Driver on the basis of the last few minutes. I wouldn't say that "the film believes" anything. It challenges our beliefs.

[Johann]

I don't know where I heard this quote but here it is:

Never Trust The Artist But Always Trust The Art

(Fellini perhaps..)

[Chris Knipp]

Fair enough. I've been trying to oppose the "Intentional Fallacy" all along.

Johnny Depp: "Don't trust nobody nowhere. Ever."




www.chrisknipp.com

[HorseradishTree]

Alright, I just saw Taxi Driver in film class, and I honestly can't understand some all of these perceptions everyone exhibits. I certainly don't view it as a film that "promotes revenge as a desirable course of action." What the hey was this guy revenging?

It just didn't seem like my cup of tea, as after discussing it with friends, we agreed that we were all "weirded out."

[Johann]

The 70's had some dark cinematic moments...

How about Marty in the back of the cab?
That "pussy/gun speech" is pretty harsh.
I can see why the Academy didn't give him the gold and why you might be "weirded out"...

[Chris Knipp]

I think Taxi Driver, like Easy Rider and various others, tried too hard to be timely, and in doing so, set itself up to become dated, which now it is. As they used to say, "You had to be there."

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by HorseradishTree
What the hey was this guy revenging?
Iris' innocence, of course. In doing so, he's made a hero and receives the respect and admiration of the community.

It just didn't seem like my cup of tea, as after discussing it with friends, we agreed that we were all "weirded out."
Meaning nothing, except you don't quite know yet how you feel about Taxi Driver.

[Chris Knipp]

True, Oscar,Taxi Driver wouldn't be working right if it didn't weird you out. It certainly had a big impact on me when I first saw it. But then when I resaw it recently, as I've said, I found it dated, felt I was revisiting a period. But Horseradish Tree's reaction shows it's still working, shaking people up.





www.chrisknipp.com

[Johann]

Has anybody heard that Robert DeNiro has cancer?

I wouldn't wish "the big C" on my worst enemy...

[cinemabon]

I never understood the word "visceral" until I saw "Taxi Driver". I can remember gritting my teeth at one point during watching the film in the theater for the first time, and wishing I, too, had a gun. I would have shot Harvey Keitel and felt nothing. Yet all of my life, I have been a man of non-violence. Then I realized something about film that revealed something about me, a cinephile. It takes more than just words, scenery, acting, editing, or music to move someone into that kind of gut reaction. It takes a great filmmaker. Marty had all the right ingredients on this one. Sometimes things click and voila! You have a souffle! Rather than just some cooked eggs, cheese, and flour...

[oscar jubis]

I recognize Scorsese's filmmaking skills. But as a fellow man of non-violence, I don't want films to celebrate vigilantism because I don't believe in it; I don't want to feel like I could shoot a person and feel nothing.(I am well aware of man's propensity to violence). I want movies that present vigilantism and revenge to explore their ultimate implications, like the recent French film Irreversible. Taxi Driver is great filmmaking that leaves me with a sick taste in my mouth.

[Johann]

Every time I watch Taxi Driver I get goosebumps. And it always happens immediately:when we see the sewer fog and the cab slowly passing the screen. Bernard Herrman's melancholic score and the words TAXI DRIVER are all I need to feel what's coming.

The scenes with Iris I remember the most. (and Travis trying to convince her to have a better life). Harvey Keitel is appropiately slimy as her pimp.

This movie is great because of EVERYTHING associated with it. It's more about that total cinematic experience than any one thing.
You could argue it's DeNiro's acting, Marty's direction, the "pushing the envelope" violence, etc.. But for me it's just the themes, the vibe, the ambiance you're left with afterwards that make this film a classic.

[Johann]

I forgot to mention John Waters' excercise in really bad taste: Pink Flamingos

It is hard to recommend, but I get a guilty thrill out of voyeur-ing these "characters".

BUT!!!!!

I get very queasy with the chicken scene, the bowels of the park scene and I simply can't stomach the final scene.

It's still a pleasure to watch, tho because the soundtrack is pretty damn good and just the unbelievable audacity of Waters to actually film this story gives Flamingos a special place in film history.

Anyone see it?
If not, my recommendation comes with a serious-ass warning.

[Chris Knipp]

I saw it but I like Waters' more "mainstream" efforts much more. All of those I saw at the Senator Theater in Baltimore, where they premiered, with my mother, who knew John Waters' mother, Pat Waters. I've never met him, but it helps to be from Baltimore, the "hairdo capital," where everybody calls you "hon," when you watch John Waters. Have you read his writing? He's a really funny, smart writer. Like H.L. Mencken, he has chosen to maintain his connection with his city of origin to keep it real and stay in touch with his inspirations. You probably have to be from there to know why that matters.

[Johann]

I have read some of Waters' writing. He's great.
He did a "tour of Hollywood" piece that was extremely entertaining.

Cry-Baby is his best to me. I agree that his "mainstream" movies are better than his "trashy" movies. Pink Flamingos is his first and best "bad" movie. (if that makes sense).

Cry-Baby is his only film NOT on DVD yet.
I heard he's putting together a beautiful edition to mark it's appearance. Johnny Depp is one bad hillbilly boy in this one...

Wow, your mother knows Waters' mother! Very cool.
I didn't see Cecil B. Demented. Anyone have a review?
Serial Mom was bizarre, and Hairspray is outrageously fun.

[oscar jubis]

Hairspray was a recent pick for "family night". Chelsea and Dylan cracked up and fell in love with Ms. Lake. The boy doesn't know what to make of Divine though.
I'd have to say my personal favorite is FEMALE TROUBLE.

[pmw]

I may be in the minority on this one, but I actually liked Pecker quite a bit among his more mainstream offerings. Christina Ricci and Ed Furlong are fantastic in it. I know its a bit light for Waters fans, but something appealingly sentimental about it.
P

[Johann]

Pecker is #2 in my Waters pecking order. (yes. I'm cheeky!)

It is well known I think that Christina Ricci invades my most private thoughts quite often. In Pecker, she is her naturally great self. The nun with the Mary statue disturbs me. Her scenes actually could have been left on the cutting room floor. Ed Furlong was an odd choice for a Waters movie, but he does a fine job.

So you showed the kin Hairspray, eh oscar? It is a family film. That just shows that Waters is not just a perverted shock-meister....

[Chris Knipp]

Hairspray, Pecker, Cry-Baby, in that order I think. After all Hairspray was musical material and has become a huge hit. That afternoon TV dance show: my sister was on it. Again, I urge people to get acquainted with Waters' talents through his writing (I particularly recommend Crackpot):
ers, John K. Director's Cut. Scalo Books. December 1997, 200 pages, 1st Scalo edition, Hardcover, ISBN: 393114156X. Buy it at Amazon.

Cookie Mueller, Amy Scholder (Editor), John K. Waters (Introduction). Ask Dr. Mueller: The Writings of Cookie Mueller (Serpent's Tail High Risk Books). Serpents Tail. February 1997, Paperback, ISBN: 1852423315.

Waters, John K. Trash Trio: Three Screenplays: Pink Flamingos, Desperate Living, Flamingos Forever. Thunder's Mouth Press. May 1996, 2nd edition, Paperback, ISBN: 1560251271.

Waters, John K. Shock Value: A Tasteful Book About Bad Taste. Thunder Mouth's Press. December 1995, 256 pages, Reprint edition, Paperback, ISBN: 1560250925.

Waters, John K. Crackpot: The Obsessions of John Waters. Vintage Books. October 1987, 144 pages, 1st vintag edition, Paperback, ISBN: 0394755340.

P.s.

Cecil B. Demented I did see, of course. It's a bit chaotic, but Waters always has the most elaborate and tidy plots; that's part of his camp style.


__________________

[HorseradishTree]

Sorry to say it, but I could barely sit through Cecil B. Demented. The whole premise was alright. And there may have been a motive, but it wasn't that well presented.

It just bugged me how it was supposed to be a comedy, but since all of the characters seemed so serious about what they did, especially exhibited by Stephen Dorff's constant angry facial expression, it just wasn't that funny.

Call me crazy, but I'm just not much of a John Waters fan.

[Chris Knipp]

You're right: Cecil B. Demented is a bit of a mess, and pretty angry for a comedy. But Hairspray and Pecker and Cry-Baby are lovely, heartwarming craziness -- though you can't imagine the extra emotional element and personal understanding that come from being a Baltimorean and seeing Greenmount Avenue and Guilford and girls who use "hon" in every other sentence. (Barry Levinson provides some of the same unique pleasures, especially with Diner and Tin Men. Diner is, essentially, my generation, with the only difference being that I went away to college and those guys stayed in Baltimore. The locations are real, and the interiors of the beauty parlor and the art house cinema are authentic and fit with the exteriors.) John Waters is a very witty, talented man, skilled both as a still photographer and a wordsmith--a collector of absurdity like his equally Baltmore-loyal (but very straight) predecessor H.L. Mencken. An entertaining speaker, and a humane person who's generous in his support of the arts, with an international reputation and many outside connections Waters has still stayed true to his roots. There's something unique about Baltimore. I used to be ashamed of it when I went away to a fancy New England college, but then I learned to appreciate it and be proud of it. It's funny, friendly, and real. John Waters captures that.

[cinemabon]

I went to the world premiere of "Pink Flamingos" in Baltimore and still have my "barf bag", which consisted of small brown paper bags handed out by Waters himself, stamped with "Pink Flamingos" in pink on the side. He did this because he expected the audience to do the same at the end of the picture when Devine ate the dog shit.

During the question and answer after the film, Waters explained how they did the shot.... and I'm paraphrasing:

"We fed the dog all day and it wouldn't go. Devine agreed to do it but we couldn't get the dog to cooperate. Finally, we decided to give the dog an enema, and what happened next was the final shot in the film."

He wanted the audience to come away saying it was the grossest film they had ever seen. To this day, I have to agree. Waters achieved his effect.

[Chris Knipp]

That tops me by a mile. But the Senator Theater where all Waters' mainstream flicks premiere is a nice theater and is near the house where I grew up.

How did you happen to be in Baltimore? Your mother didn't live there, did she?

[cinemabon]

A group of us in film school at Ohio State trekked to Maryland just for the occasion. We also attended the so-called Midwest premiere of "Rocky Horror Picture Show" right around the same time (give or take a year). I remember all the very nervous people from Fox wondering how they were going to market a film they were sure would be a loser. At the PREMIER (mind you), they couldn't find enough people to fill the theater. There were cast members there, but I was too stoned to remember which one's they were. Afterward, I do remember my friends and I thinking we actually liked it. We went back to film school and told one of the profs about it. After that, he used to start out one of his lectures every year talking about "those big red lips". Strange world we live in.

[Chris Knipp]

I see--that's very interesting.

By the way, does anybody know how Raising Victor Vargas was developed? Did the director have a script, or did he just get the actors together and have them improvise?

[oscar jubis]

Cinemabon,
I attended graduate school at Ohio State from '81 to '83. There was a repertory theatre just across campus on North High Street and 20th or 21st street. I think it was called Cinematheque but I'm not sure, even though I watched about 5 films per week there. When I returned to Columbus 10 yrs. later, the theatre had closed. The University of Miami's Cosford Theatre, where I took cinema courses as an undergrad, is still running though. Do you remember the Columbus one? Two different films played there every day.

Chris: Raising Victor Vargas started as a short called Five feet high and raising. Mr. Sollett developed a screenplay for the feature film at the Sundance Institute. The actors were given some freedom during shooting to make changes, in collaboration with the director.

[cinemabon]

Film school was at the north east end of the main campus just off High street up near Lane. I went to the web site just a few minutes ago to find the building I was in and I don't remember which one it was. I know it was a small building. (Jeez! I was there for over three years... went year 'round, spring, summer, winter, and fall. You'd think I could remember!) I started in 1973 and went through 1976. I also worked on campus, and the building I worked in looks like a shed compared to the building they put up right in front of it. Even the stadium has changed.

Plus, High Street was completely made over. A few years after I left, they closed High Street and turned it into a mall! Now its reopened again, but most of the bars we used to hang out in, like 'Larry's', are gone. There was a movie theater just north of campus where we used to go to the midnight movies on Saturdays, but I don't even see the building on the map! I thought it was near Lane and High, but there's a field of grass instead! Additionally, there were two theaters across from campus (single theaters, only one screen). My cousin, who went to OSU in the early eighties told me: "They tore that stuff down years ago." Kinda dates a person... jeez!

[Chris Knipp]

Oscar--thank you for your info on Victor Vargas. You're well informed. I knew that in general, but you give more details. I found even more right away via a Google search of "raising victor vargas script development," which led to a web page where Sollett is interviewed and answers those questions. I passed the link on to the guy who had asked me, somebody who had read my review of the movie on IMDb, an actor who wanted to know how much the script was improvised.

Not to be pedantic, but it was, of course, Five Feet High and Rising. "Raising" came later.

[cinemabon]

Oscar... Did you ever get over to Marzetti's Studio 35? They had part of the seats taken out in the back of the theater and a BAR put in! You could drink beer, eat popcorn, and see a film like "Treasure of Sierra Madre", for example. It was awesome! I spent many an hour there. I think it was on Summit. They had a double feature every night. I saw The Red Shoes, L'Avventura, Blow Up, Cries and Whispers, 8 1/2, Amarcord, Satyricon, Blow Up, and many, many, others.

[pmw]

Beer, popcorn and Satyricon; sounds like an awesome combo. This needs reviving...

[oscar jubis]

Marzetti sold it while I was attending OSU, circa '82, and it became simply Studio 35. The theatre has existed since the 1930s. The only thing that changed is that the programming became a bit less adventurous. But what matters is that they kept everything else, the bar, wine/beer/pizza, low prices, the athmosphere of the place! Did they have a parrot near the bar when you were there? Thanks for the memories Cinemabon. The 35 was actually located on Indianola Ave. I went back there in '93 and the place looked exactly the same. But most of High Street had gone "high end", all the cheap dives I loved had vanished.

[Johann]

Originally posted by cinemabon
You could drink beer, eat popcorn, and see a film like "Treasure of Sierra Madre", for example. It was awesome! I spent many an hour there. I think it was on Summit. They had a double feature every night. I saw The Red Shoes, L'Avventura, Blow Up, Cries and Whispers, 8 1/2, Amarcord, Satyricon, Blow Up, and many, many, others.


I am so jealous it's not even funny