Il tagliaerbe

I got 'The Lawnmower Man' as part of one of those 'Buy a pizza and get a free movie' deals, and I put off watching it. And put it off more. And more, until finally I had nothing else to do, so I popped it in the VCR and sat back. Two and half hours later (It was the director's cut- don't see the normal version as it is not nearly as good) it instantly became one of my favorite movies, so I rewound it and watched it again.

To date I have seen it four of five times, as it has problems, it's not very fast paced, but is terribly engaging and Fahey is superb in the lead. The writing isn't great, but is passable, and the computer effects, though far from the center of the story, are excellent.

If you haven't seen it yet, or have only seen the normal version, it is well worth the rental, or even purchase.

This effect-laden sci-fi horror film looked pretty impressive back in 1992. But of course times move on, and such movies have a tendency to look dated quicker than most as technology marches on to new levels. I guess The Lawnmower Man is one of these films. But in fairness, it can be quite fun to look back at old special effects and see what was cutting edge back in the day. In truth, today if you were to give a 12 year old child a computer game with graphics similar to those in The Lawnmower Man, that child would turn around and laugh in your face. Such is the speed of computer technology. So yes, The Lawnmower Man no longer looks cutting-edge but neither does it look terrible, its effects work within themselves and are only occasionally atrocious, such as the burning priest.

As most people already know, the story is about a simpleton who is turned into a genius via virtual reality technology. The side effect of this method is that it turns the, otherwise good natured man into an insane evil psychotic.

The Lawnmower Man is neither a particularly good film, nor an especially bad one. There's certainly nothing special here, and the effects were by far its chief selling point. Without them this would almost certainly be a forgotten B-movie. Pierce Brosnan and Jeff Fahey are reasonable enough in their roles, but they were always going to play second fiddle to the CGI. At the heart of it all it's a simple clichéd story that doesn't really hold very many surprises to be perfectly honest. But it's still quite good fun in a silly kind of a way.

Brilliant scientist Dr. Lawrence Angelo (Pierce Brosnan) uses simple-minded gardener Jobe (Jeff Fahey) as a guinea pig in his virtual reality experiments, using mind altering drugs and immersive computer technology to enhance his subject's intelligence and awaken parts of the brain that have lain dormant for centuries. As Jobe becomes smarter and smarter, the evil corporation behind Angelo's funding pull a switcheroo on the drugs, making the gardener more aggressive. Eventually, Jobe attempts to leave the physical realm to inhabit the worldwide computer network, where he would be a technological god.

So dissimilar is this film to Stephen King's original short story, that the author successfully sued the company that made it. Despite this, The Lawnmower Man still feels very much like a King product, especially with its dysfunctional characters, small-town setting, and occasional religious overtones. Since I deem anything King-related to be worth a watch, no matter how slight the connection, I had a reasonably good time with the film, although there no denying that its once cutting-edge visuals now look horribly dated, and render the film less effective overall (it's hard to be impressed by graphics that most of today's kids could do better on their laptop).

Watch to see a cyberchimp firing a pistol, Fahey transforming from a simpleton to super buff stud-muffin, an abusive father being chased by a big red lawnmower, Jenny Wright as a rich floozy, and a pre-Bond Brosnan with floppy hair pulling Semtex out of thin air. Don't watch expecting to be wowed by incredible special effects (the burning of a sadistic priest ranks amongst the worst CGI that I have ever seen).

I went to see this movie in the theater when it was released. At the time the graphics were not dated in any way shape or form. Where is VR today? I recently bought the DVD and after watching it and remembering that it was an eight (8) year old movie, I still enjoyed it. I have seen a few VR games in arcades and to be honest the graphics today aren't much better than they were in this movie. I have seen a lot of comments about the effects being dated and I think that should be common sense when watching an older movie. When I watch Tron I don't think that the graphics are dated, I just remember that the movie was made in 1982 and effects and computer animation weren't the same back then as they are today. Most older movies have that look when compared to today's special effects. I always take that into account when watching older movies. I enjoyed Lawnmower Man then, now and I will the next time I watch it. I will keep it in my DVD collection.

The movies of yesterday get quite a beating by the moviegoers of today.

"Cheesy" is the word used most often, for movies like MANNEQUIN or WEIRD SCIENCE, that have silly or unbelievable plots surrounded by fun and humor. Movies like WARGAMES and TRON get bashed, because of their dated looks and technology-related plots that are clearly not possible today, only because the technology of today renders them ridiculous.

ROLLERBALL also suffers this fate, ironically, because its supposed to be a brutal future-sport based on Roller Derby, which by now has all but disappeared from the sporting world.

Taking all of this into account, I still love THE LAWNMOWER MAN. Jeff Fahey plays Job, a slow, mentally and physically abused man who is laughed at and mocked by his entire community, save Jeffrey Lewis playing Terry, his partner and friend throughout the film.

Pierce Brosnan plays the scientist Lawrence Angelo, a man who is obsessed with exploring the higher dimensions of the functioning brain by using chimpanzees as guinea pigs. All is going very well for him, until "the Shop" (admittedly a bad pun on Stephen King's work, most notably FIRESTARTER) demands that his research be used to modify the chimps into killing machines. When one of his chimps suddenly escapes, and cannot tell reality from the simulated virtual reality he was being trained in, all hell breaks loose.

As a result, the project is halted, and the doctor is out. Way out. He sinks into depression, questioning his life and his purpose. He decides one day, when he sees Job come to mow his lawn, a potential new guinea pig for his experiments.

Looking back at this picture, I can see that the doctor's intentions went way beyond his actions. He used Job as an experiment, and the experiment went awry. Mix in the fact that the Shop interferes, much in the same way that it did for the mass-murdering chimp, and even more hell breaks loose than before.

Now, is there a level of "cheesy", here? Absolutely. Some of the moments in the film where Job is having side-effects of his treatments come across as overdone, and the fears of the effects of Virtual Reality of yesterday are nothing but jokes today, because the tech still isn't really going anywhere. The ideas are strong, without the tech to back it up.

But you could make similar arguments about TRON. You could probably make similar arguments about ANY sci-fi pictures that came out before the nineties. Hell, you could probably make similar arguments about any sci-fi picture at all, once you debunk the science behind it.

What we've forgotten is how to have FUN at movies. The reason why silly movies like this one were so good is because we DIDN'T know how the world worked. We DIDN'T care about the tech behind it, because we knew it was FICTION. There are too many movies coming out today that are based on reality. Too much of what we see on the screen, both big and little, are rooted in the grim, grisly world of today.

If you want to enjoy this movie, like I still do, sit back, put your feet up, and pretend that what you see before you is actually possible. Let the actors do their jobs (which they did very well) and enjoy the ride. Enjoy the score, the theme, the plot, and even the silly CGI that doesn't hold up to today's standards, but looked pretty good for the crazy movie they were making back in the day. Stop taking everything so seriously.

Because I think THAT is the reason why "Hollywood can't come up with anything original anymore". Original, back in the day, was synonymous with "silly" and "chancy".

You wouldn't want any of that today, would you?