So I'm thinking about To Live And Die In LA.
A couple IMDb users describe it as having been "shamefully misunderstood" by critics of the time. I dunno, maybe it was (I was paying more attention to Back To The Future and Cocoon that year). I know Roger Ebert liked it a lot, though.
What did I think? I think this is a film with no heroes, just a protagonist. My rule of thumb has always been that whoever ends up changed the most by the events of a story is its protagonist.
The biggest twist in this movie is that the person who you think that is for the first 106 minutes or so turns out not to be, and that's all I'll say for those of you who haven't seen it, which you probably should.
In bare bones, this is about a cop (William L. Petersen) whose partner is killed and who decides that the son-of-a-bitch responsible (Willem Dafoe) must pay.
The film has more mean twists to it than this suggests, unfortunately, it also has some big, stupid logic holes.
But anyway, those bare bones aren't really what the piece is about. What it's "really" about, first of all, is a man who lowers himself into hell and finds that he likes it there.
Visually it's a beautifully composed and shot film (directed by William Friedkin, photography by Robby Muller) with a great sense of place and time; almost worth seeing for those elements alone.
Some of the dialog, unfortunately, is brutal: "I'm gonna bag Masters, and I don't give a @%&% how I do it." Which is why more than any movie except Legend and Star Wars: Episode I, this one might be just as well enjoyed if the DVD had a music-only audio track.
Even though none of the film music is as good as the title song. I'm always up for a little Wang Chung tonight, but this is the most dated part of the film.
That title song remains perfect, however.
Especially when you realize that the lyrics make the most sense if thought of not from the point of view of one of the "stars," as you might think, but someone who appears sixth in the credits. I'll get back to that in a moment.
You see, what I think this movie is about, secondarily, is not just the hatred of women, but the rejection of any "womanly" qualities (like vulnerability).
Dafoe's character, ostensibly the "bad guy" of the piece, has many "effeminate" characteristics. And although he is shown as having a girlfriend, played by the very shapely Debra Feuer, that character is a male impersonator; revealed to be either lesbian or bisexual.
It's suggested that she is making sport of him all along.
(Her girlfriend, just as an aside, is played by a young Jane Leeves, later known for Frasier and before that Murphy Brown.) Even a scene cut from the original release but available on the DVD supports this reading of the film as being about men needing never to let their guards down, lest a soft side show.
It features Petersen's partner, played by John Pankow (who probably never topped this in movies, but was good, and funny, on Mad About You on television).
He tries to reconnect with his ex-wife when his world is falling apart, and is violently rejected.
The character who I think most suits the lyrics of the title song is played by Darlanne Fluegel. She's a parolee who trades information, and her body, to keep on Petersen's good side lest he throw her back in jail.
It's suggested she may want to form a truer bond with him, but he blocks her every attempt. It's Fluegel who wonders why she's wasting her life; feels trapped and dreams of running away.
But the character either goes unrewarded, or, depending on how you want to put some things together from the clues the movie gives you, was a traitor all along.
In which case she gets exactly what she deserves, the movie darkly seems to be saying. Still, she's the only one in the movie who longs to fit her life with another person (or at least with a man-see above).
Everyone else, whether a "good" guy or bad, thinks only of themselves.
A couple IMDb users describe it as having been "shamefully misunderstood" by critics of the time. I dunno, maybe it was (I was paying more attention to Back To The Future and Cocoon that year). I know Roger Ebert liked it a lot, though.
What did I think? I think this is a film with no heroes, just a protagonist. My rule of thumb has always been that whoever ends up changed the most by the events of a story is its protagonist.
The biggest twist in this movie is that the person who you think that is for the first 106 minutes or so turns out not to be, and that's all I'll say for those of you who haven't seen it, which you probably should.
In bare bones, this is about a cop (William L. Petersen) whose partner is killed and who decides that the son-of-a-bitch responsible (Willem Dafoe) must pay.
The film has more mean twists to it than this suggests, unfortunately, it also has some big, stupid logic holes.
But anyway, those bare bones aren't really what the piece is about. What it's "really" about, first of all, is a man who lowers himself into hell and finds that he likes it there.
Visually it's a beautifully composed and shot film (directed by William Friedkin, photography by Robby Muller) with a great sense of place and time; almost worth seeing for those elements alone.
Some of the dialog, unfortunately, is brutal: "I'm gonna bag Masters, and I don't give a @%&% how I do it." Which is why more than any movie except Legend and Star Wars: Episode I, this one might be just as well enjoyed if the DVD had a music-only audio track.
Even though none of the film music is as good as the title song. I'm always up for a little Wang Chung tonight, but this is the most dated part of the film.
That title song remains perfect, however.
Especially when you realize that the lyrics make the most sense if thought of not from the point of view of one of the "stars," as you might think, but someone who appears sixth in the credits. I'll get back to that in a moment.
You see, what I think this movie is about, secondarily, is not just the hatred of women, but the rejection of any "womanly" qualities (like vulnerability).
Dafoe's character, ostensibly the "bad guy" of the piece, has many "effeminate" characteristics. And although he is shown as having a girlfriend, played by the very shapely Debra Feuer, that character is a male impersonator; revealed to be either lesbian or bisexual.
It's suggested that she is making sport of him all along.
(Her girlfriend, just as an aside, is played by a young Jane Leeves, later known for Frasier and before that Murphy Brown.) Even a scene cut from the original release but available on the DVD supports this reading of the film as being about men needing never to let their guards down, lest a soft side show.
It features Petersen's partner, played by John Pankow (who probably never topped this in movies, but was good, and funny, on Mad About You on television).
He tries to reconnect with his ex-wife when his world is falling apart, and is violently rejected.
The character who I think most suits the lyrics of the title song is played by Darlanne Fluegel. She's a parolee who trades information, and her body, to keep on Petersen's good side lest he throw her back in jail.
It's suggested she may want to form a truer bond with him, but he blocks her every attempt. It's Fluegel who wonders why she's wasting her life; feels trapped and dreams of running away.
But the character either goes unrewarded, or, depending on how you want to put some things together from the clues the movie gives you, was a traitor all along.
In which case she gets exactly what she deserves, the movie darkly seems to be saying. Still, she's the only one in the movie who longs to fit her life with another person (or at least with a man-see above).
Everyone else, whether a "good" guy or bad, thinks only of themselves.
Tell Your Friends