Tough Guys Don't Dance

The story revolves around Tim Madden, a writer and ex-con.He has to deal with two heads of women he knew.The problem is he can't remember if he is the killer or not.Tough Guys Don't Dance (1987) is a Norman Mailer direction, and he also wrote the book.The movie was a flop, even getting some Rasberry awards.The actors do a decent job.It has Ryan O'Neal as Tim Madden.Lawrence Tierney is his father Dougy.Isabella Rossellini plays Madeleine Regency.Wings Hauser is her husband Capt. Alvin Luther Regency.Debra Sandlund plays Patty Lareine.Penn Jillette portrays Big Stoop.Frances Fisher plays the part of Jessica Pond.I read Mailer's original novel, written in 1984, before seeing the movie.I must say the novel is better, but the movie isn't a huge failure.It does fail to be a great movie, though, but it could be a lot worse.I guess the biggest weakness of the movie is the lack of likable characters.There are all these killers and junkies, and it's very hard to like those people.The main character may have some good qualities, though.But anyway, if you've got nothing better to do, you can watch this movie.Maybe you even like it a bit.

Norman Mailer used to mean something, literary-wise. He was a Big Noise back in the fifties and sixties trying to be the heir apparent to his hero Hemingway, but since Mailer was really just a small-statured city boy with no interest in the outdoors he resorted to games of thumb-wrestling and head butting men (and assaulting women) instead of hunting and traveling. Like this movie, Mailer is a juvenile, woman-hating, gay-hating, faux-tough guy obviously obsessed with his fragile masculinity. Decades of hype and bad writing and activities (including the notorious Abbott disaster) have reduced his noisy reputation to virtual silence. He has become as pathetic as this movie, based on another one of his terrible novels. Granted this film is more coherent than his previous directorial attempts way-back-when (i.e. 'Wild 90,' 'Maidstone') there is still no reason to give it any more credibility considering its supreme awfulness. Of course, there IS the 'Showgirls'-like aroma of a risible good time to be had for those inclined to cheer on the execrable disasters of filmmakers who thought they were making something worthwhile and were so very wrong. For other viewers this is a stupefying experience mirrored by the consistently haggard look of Ryan O'Neal throughout. Like Spike Lee, Mailer MUST include his obsessions on screen. Ala Spike, consider this a 'Norman Mailer Joint.' That means you will hear men grousing to other men about "being men" and "not being fags" and how spiteful and cruel all women are, and it will be spoken in purplish film-noir-meets-gym-locker-room dialogue (my favorite: "Don't tickle my stick.") There will be countless scenes of women degrading themselves for no reason or men complaining/crying because those ruthless harpies have emasculated them. Since it's directed by a rank amateur, naturally the actors look either lost or unhinged. In short, this film, like its author, is an embarrassment.

What were they thinking? Didn't anybody read the script or did they read it and then lack the guts to tell Mailer it didn't work? Whatever the reason this is one pathetic film. Bad script and hilariously bad acting. It is the bad acting that keeps you watching. You want to find out how bad can it get. In most films, even bad ones, you can find something to recommend it. I can't think of anything to recommend about this one.

If you have an insatiable appetite for movies and want to get into something unusually tasty then serve yourself this movie tonight!

Important sidebar: if you've already read a critique posted on this site that nay-sayed this piece please do yourself a favor and etch-a-sketch that memory away. Though well-worded, Jack Sommersby's review of Tough Guys Don't Dance is just as equally misguided. For instance, the same gentleman who waxes that he was summarily summoned into Sleepyville three times before he was capable of viddying this work from beginning to end also asserts that it is a film that "you can't quite take your eyes off of." Believe me, you won't have a problem making more than "a bit of sense" from this mixture of the twisted, oddball and suspenseful. In fact even Doctor Dunderhead couldn't help but sleepwalk into a bit of truth when he characterized this Norman Mailer pastiche as "perversely fascinating." You don't need to know Jack to dig this flick the first time through, and you may find yourself revisiting it soon afterwards haunted by its savage and sublime reverbations.

This movie is a MUST SEE for film fans. Ryan O'Neal steps out from under typecasting--which has rendered him ineffective in much of his work--to engage in an often upsetting, yet somehow casual dance with the devil. He, Lawrence Tierney and Wings Hauser serve up sumptuous performances. All the while the supporting cast provides color, depth and character to a plot that is as unnerving as it is both captivating and entertaining.

Ignore Sir Superlative Sommersby's slight of hand and rent this movie! If I'm wrong then blast me back herein. On the other hand, if you like what you see then do me a favor and explain to me what the last phrase of Jaded Jack's review means--"rendering us helpless under power to disturb"!?! In the meanwhile, fellow movie devotee, keep on dancing.

When Lawrence Tierney utters the line that gives Tough Guys Don't Dance its title, he evokes the stoic, hard-boiled codes of post-war noir, felt in films he made like Born to Kill, The Bodyguard and The Devil Thumbs A Ride. And when Isabella Rossellini shows up, she suggests David Lynch's kooky and subversive Reagan-era suspense movies like Blue Velvet. These homages mark two of the many streams that flow into Norman Mailer's rhapsody on themes of sexual intrigue, multi-tiered duplicity and garish murders. (Mailer directed his movie from his 1984 novel.) It's a baroque contraption that comes close to self-parody - and may even cross the threshold - but neither is it just a fling at film making by a celebrity author intoxicated by his own publicity.

The forlorn setting is Cape Cod under the sign of Sagittarius: the dunes and the bars empty, and the Atlantic is choppy and gunmetal grey. Ex-con Ryan O'Neal (his boyish superstardom well behind him) has been drinking heavily since his wealthy if white-trash wife (Debra Sandlund) left him; one morning he wakes to find a tattoo on his arm and his jeep's upholstery soaked in blood. Circumstances lead him to a burrow where he stashes his marijuana harvest; in it he finds the severed heads of his wife and a woman he had picked up (along with her boyfriend) a few nights before.

The clues he starts piecing together lead him back down paths that wend through his own none-too-savory past. There's the out-of-town `couple' with whom he had spent a hard-drinking night (Frances Fisher and R. Patrick Sullivan); a woman he had once loved (Rossellini) now married to Provincetown's sadistic Chief of Police (Wings Hauser); another woman he had met when she was married to a wife-swapping Christian preacher (Penn Jillette) and who later wed a rich, spoiled Southern boy (John Bedford Lloyd) then, ultimately, O'Neal, whom she recently left. Helping him find his way is his gruff, cancer-ridden father (Tierney).

What plot line there is hangs on cocaine (maybe) and several millions, but that's but a pretext for Mailer to worry the preoccupations, even obsessions, which crop up again and again in his work, most notably the yin/yang of eroticism and violence. The women come across as predatory sirens but end up being almost beside the point - they're prizes for sexual competition between males, conflict that shades into edgy attraction, right up to taunting flirtation. (The movie is loaded with homosexual references, generally pejorative - the bisexual boyfriend is even given the name `Pangborn' - and the continuum of couplings, both on screen and in the back story, results in a very kinky daisy chain in which everybody save Tierney might just as well have slept with everybody else. Mailer comes close to suggesting that two men who have slept with the same woman share an implicit homosexual relationship themselves.)

Coming to Tough Guys Don't Dance expecting anything like a conventional suspense film (even something `post-' or `neo-') is to court disappointment. One comes for Mailer, who's like the little girl with the curl right in the middle of her forehead: When he's good, he's very, very good, but when he's bad, he's horrid. How the proportions weight out in this movie can be argued, but adventurous and provocative nuggets nestle among some very bad choices (the acting runs the gamut from rather good to execrable, often within the same performance). Caveat spectator: wildly uneven and sometimes grotesquely macho, Tough Guys Don't Dance is far from negligible.