True Romance
When Sopranos
actor James Gandolfini died unexpectedly this month of a heart attack, my
friend Kenny suggested that we watch the only film of his I happen to own. In True
Romance from 1993, directed by Tony Scott and written by Quentin Tarantino,
Gandolfini is just one of more a dozen character actors that brings this
otherwise vulgar and violent material to vibrant and vivid life.
Christian Slater stars as Clarence, a guy who
works in a comic book store, and is quite possibly the coolest geek you’re ever
likely to see. When his boss hires a
hooker to be his date on his birthday, he meets Alabama, a very bubbly Patricia
Arquette, who comes clean with Clarence about everything, convincing him that
she’s only been a call-girl for three days and that she has, in fact, fallen
head over heels in love with him and wants to “straighten up and fly
right.” Prompted by his subconscious,
which masquerades as the ghost of Elvis (Val Kilmer), he decides to see her
pimp Drexl (Gary Oldman), a scary, scarred white dude with dreadlocks who actually
thinks he’s black. Drexl has already
managed to gun down a business associate (Samuel L. Jackson), leaving him in
possession of a great deal of cocaine belonging to the mob. A showdown with him leaves Clarence in
possession of the coke, and after reconnecting with his father Clifford (Dennis
Hopper), now a security guard who used to be a cop, he and Alabama take off for
Hollywood to get married and make some quick money by offloading the drugs to
arrogant film producer Lee Donowitz (Saul Rubinek). Meanwhile, the mob, including self described
mob lawyer Vincenzo Coccotti, expertly played by Christopher Walken (who can do
these kinds of quirky mob characters in his sleep), attempts to track down
Clarence and Alabama, and their first stop is Clarence’s dad, Clifford, leading
to a fascinating scene between Hopper and
Walken that is equal parts chilling, emotional, and hilarious, all at the same time. Clarence’s Hollywood connection
is a rather naively affable friend who is a struggling actor, the appealing
Michael Rapaport as Dick Ritchie, and whose roommate is a perpetually wasted
pothead named Floyd, hilariously portrayed by Brad Pitt!
Their connection to the movie producer is Elliot Blitzer (Bronson
Pinchot), a PA who bites off more than he can chew when [SPOILER ALERT] a fight with a
girlfriend during a routine traffic stop by the police leaves him covered in coke!
To avoid jail, he agrees to wear a wire
for two hyped up, excited detectives (Chris Penn & Tom Sizemore). Meanwhile, mob hitman Virgil (James
Gandolfini) manages to catch up with the main couple on the run, and he surprises
Alabama in their motel room, beating the living crap out of her; yet she's not really the helpless victim she appears to be!
 |
| True Romance: What a Cast of Characters! |
With the mob questioning the wasted Floyd for
information, and not getting anywhere, it all leads to a showdown in the movie
producer’s hotel room between Clarence, Alabama, and Ritchie with Elliot (who
is now working with the police), the movie producer and his trigger happy body
guards, the cops, and eventually, the mob!
As with many of Quentin Tarantino’s movies, almost every scene is an
entertaining classic piece of celluloid, all leading up to a satisfying
conclusion and a bit of poetic voiceover from Patricia Arquette as the
southerly charming Alabama. The film is
filled with drugs, violence, and profanity, making it a very questionable
choice, especially for a Christian, yet I found it to be one of the most
entertaining guilty pleasures I’ve ever seen!
If you’re a fan of Quentin
Tarantino movies, yet haven’t seen this one since he only wrote the screenplay,
do yourself a favor and SEE THIS MOVIE!
Airplane!
With the possible exception of Young
Frankenstein, surely this was the forerunner for all the satires and parodies
that have flooded the market as of late, and almost everyone knows the drill by
now: “Stop calling me Shirley!” These modern parodies have gotten worse over
the years, I’m afraid, starting with even the sequel to Airplane! And some of the humor is pretty darned racy
for an old PG film. Was that a pair of
naked breasts I saw running through the screaming, panicked passengers? Did I just see that old lady give the drunk a
stink eye, and then proceed to snort coke right there on camera? There are many questionable moments like this
peppering the film, getting thrown at the wall with all the jokes to see what
sticks, and I don’t want these moments to drag this very funny film down, but
if you start keeping a tally, they do!
If I listed them all here, you might have the same response I had. This is PG?
I
suppose all these satire comedies have their fair share of raunch (and some
have much more than their fair share).
And sometimes I don’t know which is worse. Many comedies of this type (and other types)
aren’t all they funny. They have the
references to other movies, but simply having those references isn’t always
funny in and of itself, making them nothing but raunchy without being
funny. But what do you do when they ARE
funny, like the first two Naked Gun movies and most of the flicks in the Scary
Movie franchise? You wind up attempting
to excuse the raunch in the name of comedy, forcing them to become a guilty
pleasure at best. My contention here isn't necessarily even with the raunch
itself, but with the rating. I still
cannot believe this is rated PG.
But
given all this, I guess the best that I can say is that, even with this raunch,
it is funny from beginning to end, and if you’re going to use that as the only
barometer, then it’s a hit! A cleaned up version with all the questionable stuff eliminated (such as Captain Over's wife in bed with a horse, or Lloyd Bridges character picking the wrong week to quit drinking, smoking, taking amphetamines, and sniffing glue, or Julie Hagarty "blowing" the blowup autopilot named Otto) or at least some of it toned down, would be preferable,
Superman II
It’s funny. You go to these movies when they come out in
the theater (and we saw this in 1981) and you’re blown away by the special effects, and you end up
thinking how much they’ve improved over the years since those old 50's sci fi films or superhero movie serials. And then 30 slip by, they essentially remake
the film, and then you go back and revisit this one you held up as a great film , and it ends up seeming quite quaint! What once impressed and ended with such a
bang now seems substandard and just a bit ridiculous. And consider:
This really IS the best of the old Christopher Reeves Superman movies!
As
such, some of it still hold up. I was
just complaining about the new one, saying how I missed some of the more
organic effects and lighter tone of this one, not to mention Christopher
Reeves. This still isn’t a bad film, and
the new one could have used some of the levity of this one. Yet in light of the fact that they’ve started
adding new effects shots to old science fiction films like Star Trek: The
Motion Picture (and the series), the first three Star Wars movies, and E.T. The
Extra-Terrestrial, perhaps they could update this film at the same time.
It’s
still a good movie. It did boast some
good special effects for the time, and the conclusion where Superman bested
General Zod by knowing Lex Luther would try to double cross him was simply
delightful. I just don’t like to see
some of these old favorites become so dated!
I mean, Superman III and IV, sure, but not this one too! Please say it isn’t so! This one was really good!
No comments:
Post a Comment