The Ninth Configuration

It's rare to find five films that offer as much combined intelligence, passion, visceral excitement, and uncontrolled belly laughs as this. "The Ninth Configuration" is the sort of film people either love or hate. Like many great works of art, it doesn't settle into any middle ground. It's my all-time favorite movie, not perfect but a real screen miracle all the same. This is the sort of movie they don't make any more, because they never really made anything like this. Just this one time. For that, and much else, it is unique.

Scott Wilson plays the despairing Capt. Cutshaw, who believes the universe is a random void based on suffering and cruelty. He is challenged in his atheism by Stacy Keach, a Marine colonel sent to command the institution where Cutshaw and other Army servicemen, many Vietnam War heroes, have been committed to after assorted acts of deviancy. Cutshaw's own madness culminated in his refusal to be launched into space during a final countdown, vividly pictured near the beginning in one of many arresting visuals when the horizon around the launching pad suddenly fills up with the sight of a ferocious, threatening moon, several times bigger than life.

Cutshaw and Keach's Col. Kane duke it out in a serious of probing yet riotous metaphysical dialogues. "I don't belong to the God-Is-Alive-But-Living-In-Argentina club," Cutshaw announces. "But I believe in the Devil alright. And you know why? Because the prick keeps doing commercials!" Kane's counterargument, much weaker at the outset but gaining intensity as Cutshaw's desire to be converted becomes more clear, is that if evil is as powerful and omnipresent as Cutshaw thinks, correctly, than why doesn't he also believe in the real, counterbalancing power of human goodness as something that has its origins beyond humanity?

Meanwhile, the other inmates follow their own neuroses, adapting Shakespeare for dogs and trying to train atoms to allow humans to walk through walls. There's also Neville Brand's Major Groper, a put-upon asylum keeper who finds himself victimized by such pranks as having his name attached to a love letter sent out in a mass mailing addressed to "Occupant." "I got phone call after phone call," he complains, adding bitterly that the female respondents he did contact were "ugly as sin."

People criticize the movie for being filled with such amiable nuttiness, but it relieves the heaviness of the central story and sets the right tone of anarchy and chaos to be sorted out as the picture develops. The third character in this film, after Cutshaw and Kane, is Ed Flanders' Dr. Fell, the medical officer who treats his hangovers with whisky and Alka-Seltzer and observes the lunacy around him with a bemused calm. But he has no small stake in the larger story being worked out between Kane and Cutshaw. In fact, he's more the central figure than anyone, and watching his reactions at key moments is one of the many treats of repeat viewings.

The acting is superb, particularly by the three principals. As we learn in the penetrating director's commentary that accompanies the DVD, the three leads were originally supposed to be Nicol Williamson as Kane, Michael Moriarty as Cutshaw, and Jason Robards as Fell. They would have been good, but not anywhere near as good as the three performances we have. Further proof of God's existence, for anyone who feels the "Ninth Configuration" argument advanced by Kane doesn't hold water, can be found in the fact Wilson and Keach were last-minute replacements in a low-budget film made only to help create a loss-leader for the producers. Unpromising origins to be sure, yet such a brilliant payoff. And how richly perverse: I love the way Kane makes his strongest case for man's goodness while dressed in full Nazi regalia. You don't even notice that the first time you see it, because the power of his words and the questing desperation in his eyes.

I'm dancing around the story itself, because a first-time viewer deserves surprises. Think of C.S. Lewis's "The Screwtape Letters" with a kick-ass bar fight, and you are in the right ballpark. Add to that the moody set design of an old castle in the Pacific Northwest (but actually shot in Hungary), an unobtrusive but powerful score, and surefire direction by screenwriter William Peter Blatty, who sets every scene as a sort of tableau of Cutshaw and Kane's inner turmoil.

Most of all, the film is amazingly quotable, particularly the canine Shakespeare adapter's (Jason Miller, sublime as Reno) unique take on "Hamlet," which takes the story in a whole new direction while offering a brilliant analysis of Shakespeare's great play. Even the little lines resonate with rare power. "Every kind thought is the hope of the world," Fell says at one point. Humble but true, as this film is proof.

You may not be converted into a belief in the divine, and the end does push things a bit harder than many would like (though with a blind courage rarely seen in film), but "The Ninth Configuration" will make you think a little more about the questions of our existence. And you will laugh a lot on the journey. Like I said, they don't make films like this anymore because they never did. This is a one-of-a-kind experience worth seeing.

Upon my initial viewing of this film I found it extremely difficult to really sit down and review it. To the point where it may have been impossible. I was not ready for this film. I received a film I was not expecting. I was quite excited to see it as it is highly rated here on this website to go along with a great cast and William Peter Blatty writing and directing it. I hated the first and second acts, but the 3rd act I loved. I was torn. So I gave it about 6 months and rewatched it. In the end I found it to be a great film and there is much to digest from it. Also extremely difficult to just pigeonhole into one genre. It has strong comedy going on, but can be very dramatic and has elements of horror as well.

Blatty throws away much of the mainstream ideas of filmmaking in his quite impressive directorial debut as he brings his 1966 novel TWINKLE, TWINKLE KILLER KANE to the screen. I have not read the book, but what we get in the end it may have in fact been difficult to have the big studios understand what he was bringing to the screen. I think Martin Scorsese's SHUTTER ISLAND has a bit to thank this film for.

An insane asylum is being run by the US government for those who were in the military. The setting is excellent as a old abandoned castle is where it is set. A new psychiatrist is coming on board Col. Vincent Kane (wonderful performance by Stacy Keach). We are introduced to all of the inmates of the asylum and each give great performances (including Jason Miller, George DiCenzo and Moses Gunn to name just a few). Kane becomes quite involved with former astronaut Capt. Billy Cutshaw (Scott Miller) and in turn leads to thoughts on sacrifice, faith and God.

To me Keach puts in quite an amazing performance and the scene near the end where Capt. Cutshaw goes to the bar and gets involved in a bar fight with a rough and tough bike gang (that includes Richard Lynch) to me is an extremely powerful scene. Blatty even has an extremely funny role as Lt. Fromme. Also starring Ed Flanders, Neville Brand and Tom Atkins.

Well, well, well. At last a rating I can fully agree with. Yes, the Shawshank Redemption was very good. But this is a hidden classic. If you're one of those people (like me) who loves to be taken completely by surprise by a movie, this is the one for you. The IMDB rating says it all: VERY few people know about this one, but those who do are nearly unanimous: this is outstanding storytelling. First time viewers, be warned: be patient. Let it happen. You won't know where it's going at first. Your patience will be rewarded, I assure you - it all comes together, culminating in a bar-room brawl that is an absolute textbook piece of tension-building. And then, you'll want to rewind it and watch it all over again, to pick out all the clues that slipped by you the first time through. Quentin Tarantino, eat your heart out: THIS is how it's supposed to be done.

THE NINTH CONFIGURATION, a drama set in a scenic castle functioning as a mental ward, and asking fundamental questions about life, goodness and evil, was written and directed (and even performed in in a small role) by William Peter Blatty, who became practically a household name in the 70s after the worldwide success of the dramatization of his work, THE EXORCIST (1973). CONFIGURATION is his directorial debut, and reveals him to be a highly talented director; it is really too bad he did not make any other films beside EXORCIST III (1990), for which a director's cut LEGION (2016) was released right around his death.

The spectacular direction, acting and cinematography cannot, in my mind, completely compensate for the implausibility of the plot reveal, which occurs about 2/3 of the way. That implausibility, at least as presented, distracts in turn from the treatment of the serious existential questions the film asks because after the reveal, events to make the movie's point seem contrived to be "just so".

Evidently, the expression "ninth configuration" is supposed to refer to the improbability of proteins randomly rearranging themselves to give rise to life. An astronomically small number is mentioned,and compared unfavorably to the probability for the existence of God, but I must admit that, as a scientist, I had never heard this term before. Nor does it seem to me that anyone could seriously calculate the probability of life arising on earth, given that the sample size of planets where this is known to have occurred is exactly one (there is something called the Drake equation for estimating the number of alien civilizations, which requires estimates for the probability of life in other worlds, but there are too many unknowns to make it possible to perform a serious calculation).

I have found that theological arguments are sometimes dressed up in mystical-sounding mumbo jumbo, and can't escape the suspicion that this might be the case here, too. However, that does not diminish the importance of the question itself of how life could have arisen.

The main philosophical question this films asks, however, is this: if we are really just a collection of atoms, perpetuating a phenomenon involving proteins which originated in an incredibly improbable random event long ago, then whence comes goodness?

The premise behind the question is strongly reductionist: for example, we have at least some biology-based frameworks for understanding altruism in higher organisms, and even if some proteins may play a role in these, the behavior of atoms at that level has long faded into explanatory irrelevance.

The movie is idiosyncratic and plays really well with our expectations. There is a hilarious scene in the beginning involving a short exchange between the protagonist and the man himself, which both foreshadows events to come, and sets us up to question what is real and what is not.

Scene after scene, we are sprayed with rhetorical snippets and actions by the mental patients (and even the attending physician) which seem nonsensical, but then, every once in while, there is follow-up dialogue which makes clear that what we thought was nonsense actually makes perfect sense.

No doubt Blatty did all this to disorient us, the audience. I can only speculate, but I suspect he sought to achieve a state of disorientation in the audience because it is, in a way, the best possible state to be in when asking the most fundamental questions: since we are not certain of anything, we cannot attach ourselves with certainty to any side of the debate.

And not taking sides is nowhere more important than when we try to really get to the bottom of things.

If my speculation is correct, then the set-up is nothing short of a stroke of genius. It makes how the aforementioned plot-reveal was handled all the more disappointing.

My problem is that an impossibly far-fetched set of events is presented to us straight. If, instead, it had taken the movie, say, in a surreal direction, then it would not have cheapened the film's attempts to provide an answer to the main question. As presented, it makes the final sacrifice, and especially the very last scene, seem like plot devices which betray that the author has, after all, taken sides.

Despite this criticism, CONFIGURATION is an impressive debut.

Films with similar elements:

1. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST (1975)

2. AMARCORD (1975)

3. KING OF HEARTS (1966)

Everybody's got their own list of overlooked movies that they can't believe aren't recognized as classics. I have several contenders but this brilliant movie must surely top the list! William Peter Blatty of 'The Exorcist' fame adapted his own novel for his debut as writer/director and came up with a mind-bending classic. I only know a handful of people who have even heard of this movie, but everyone who gets to see it becomes an instant raving fan. Yes, it's THAT good.

Colonel Kane (Stacey Keach, 'The Long Riders', 'American History X') is sent to a top secret facility full of military personal suffering from breakdowns, delusions and other mental problems. While attempting to find some way to cure them he becomes particularly concerned with a tortured astronaut, Captain Cutshaw (Scott Wilson, 'In Cold Blood', 'The Way Of The Gun'), and the two form a special, odd relationship. However things are not what they first appear to be, and to give anymore plot points away would be criminal. All I can say is that you're in for one hell of a ride!

Keach and Wilson are both outstanding in two of the best roles of their careers, but what really makes this a must-see is the superb supporting cast of character actors who are all equally good, and spout some of the freshest, most memorable dialogue you'll ever hear. Some of them include Robert Loggia ('Lost Highway'), Jason Miller ('The Exorcist'), Tom Atkins ('Maniac Cop'), Moses Gunn ('Rollerball'), Neville Brand ('Eaten Alive'), Joe Spinell ('Maniac') and Richard Lynch ('Open Season'). This movie is heaven for b-grade film buffs, and I can't recommend it highly enough. An unforgettable experience.