Reviews

Last night at Weird Wednesday, The Alamo Drafthouse in Austin presented 'The Wild Pussy Cat'- a '68 Greek sexploitation movie that superseded everyones expectations. The performances were perfectly overwrought and weird and the melodrama was high, but in this very stylized, syrupy way. This movie did sex and sadism wrestling with one another in a way that I've seen a lot of other films attempt but fail, and clearly other directors have seen this one. According to Kier-La Janesse, Joe D'Amato remade this one as an Emmanuelle movie, with some very minor changes. I hope someone makes a DVD of 'The Wild Pussy Cat' at some point, it's worth seeing (provided, of course, you can cope with sick Greek S&M revenge movies, but otherwise, why would you be looking for information about it now?)

Obviously the film isn't for everyone and anyone who has seen Happiness or Welcome to the Dollhouse knows what they're in for. The film sat well with me though.. far from the sadistic gut-kickings of Happiness, the characters here are broken softly and with great sadness. The subject matter of the film will turn many people off (violently), but the actual execution I found inoffensive, and a worthwhile trip. I'm convinced that Mark Weiner's reappearance at the end of the film is a stand-in for Solondz himself, as he dryly confirms that he is not a pervert, and is in return told by the protagonist that he is too passionless to be a pervert. There's more soul searching in this film than misanthropy and it's a positive turn for the director.

Have you ever read a trade journal? One of those magazines meant expressly for plumbers or welders and never intended for the general public? Full of weird lingo and with content so intensely fixed that it becomes almost comedic? This movie is a little like that. Made in the 1970's with a modest budget, this stinker is entirely about CUSTOM VAN CULTURE. Airbrushed unicorns, feathered hair, racing stripes, CB radios. And don't think for a moment that this is some kind of quirky, ironic documentary. It's a really bad narrative piece of fiction. There's sort of a plot. I think somebody has to win a van contest or something similarly morbid. There's a wacky professor that designs a van that shoots lasers for some reason. The soundtrack is all 70's soft rock about Vans. The ridiculousness of the whole thing shoots through the roof when Charles Bukowski wanders drunkenly through a party scene wearing a shirt that says "Water boy for the wet T-shirt contest" (maybe they lured extras by advertising free beer). Whoah man, this movie is so bad it feels like getting clubbed repeatedly with a dead howler monkey just trying to watch it. Of course, if you can stand it, and if you are a connoisseur of bad films, this one is pretty funny in its patheticness.

Solaris is a brooding, swelling, intensely quiet film full of subtle eye candy that today's audiences may not have the attention span for. I often have a difficult time recommending Tarkovsky to others, and I'm always interested and surprised by the reactions to his films I hear from different people. His films and this one in particular (Along with Andrei Rubalev and The Mirror, provide me with a lot of personal joy. It may be a long time before someone dares again to make a thoughtful science fiction film like this, one that's a meaningful, searching piece of art, rather than a video game full of hackneyed one-liners and green blood.

Parents is a singularly underrated film that succeeds both as a darkly funny parody of the '50s, American, Steak eating, Behemoth car driving, plastic-smiles-all-around family - and as a genuinely frightening and disturbing horror film. Quaid delivers a menacing performance that comes completely from left field. The young star is soft spoken and unusually realistic. The movie is imaginative and frightening in an original and unusual way. A real delight.

There are so many things wrong with this movie that it becomes next to impossible to find anything positive to say about it. Atrocious writing, epileptic pacing, characters made out of wet cardboard, special effects that look like a video game and cinematography to match.

Watch the first two of this series and then compare them to this abysmal write-off. If you can't tell the difference, you may have severe perceptual problems. Possibly even a crippling mental handicap. The first two films of this series are original, inventive, and genuinely frightening. They've been imitated by lesser movies ever since. Unfortunately this movie is one of those imitators, and among the weakest and most tedious.

I was unable to make it ten minutes through this film.