Ultimex_Varptuner

Despite it's critical mauling and audience apathy, the world created by Zack Snyder's Sucker Punch is something truly special, uniquely beautiful and, though flawed, it stands as a good example of the ongoing trend of big name directors gambling on films that offer something different to the same old story, same old set pieces and same old sequel friendly endings.

I'm biased. I admit, this film could easily have been made just for me: I am a white male in my 30's who loves video games, fantastical fiction and beautiful women kicking ass in skimpy costumes.

That said, I like artistic depth and bold choices in my cinema and despite Sucker Punch's lurid façade and apparent lack of characterisation, it is a film of considerable profundity which belies a high level of attention to detail and artistry.

Dealing as it does with a brooding 1950's nightmare of loss and domestic dysfunction, giving way to a young woman's incarceration in a mental asylum; in turn snapping to a fevered vision of a glamorous yet resolutely abusive brothel which holds young, vulnerable women hostage in order to 'entertain' various n'er do wells. From there we are dragged deeper into a series of microcosmic worlds populated by monsters, robots and steam-powered zombies, in which our protagonists re-materialise as an elite team of ludicrously sexy and infinitely cool warrior women. I think it's fair to say that I can't think of another film that does visually beautiful, surreal, action-packed and amazingly choreographed to such a mad degree. But yet, never does it feel gratuitous, pondering, as it does, matters of guilt, regret, atonement and self sacrifice throughout.

Much has been made of the films lack of character development and reliance on music video style to tell it's story and, to be honest this is true. However, rather than a weakness, this is simply how Snyder has chosen to tell the tale. On first viewing, it is perhaps less than effective. The story is not thrilling. It is something different: like a visual poem, it whispers to you, drawing you into the luxurious veils of chocolate brown, copper blue and red wine that seduce the eye. I must confess that initially, it was only the outward glamour that held my attention and only upon reaching the end, contemplating the sparse dialogue and the portent glowing symbols which spring from the screen, did I think about it all and realise just what an unusual and magical film it was. The next day I watched it again. The day after, I watched the extended edition. Now, despite it's flaws it is one of my favourite films.

Regarding said extended edition. Yes, it is required viewing if the original version cast as much of a spell over you as it did me, but as a standalone work, it is inferior to the theatrical version.

A couple of the scenes blatantly should have made the final cut: Baby Doll's conversation with the High Roller at the end is absolutely beautiful to watch and listen to, gives huge credit to both actors and backs up the Doctor's apparent compassion towards the asylum inmates. Equally, there are a few bits and bobs in the phenomenal 'trenches' sequence that should have stayed.

On the other hand a couple of bits, ultimately should have remained on the cutting room floor. We didn't need to see Sweet Pea stealing the clothes from the washing line at the end. It only served to undermine the dignity and beauty of this wonderful character, so tenderly played by Abbie Cornish. Equally, the stylised gunplay in the 'dragon' sequence was a bit of a bridge to far. While elsewhere, the weapon handling is quite convincing and does credit to the film's military advisors; here things get slightly ridiculous. Also Sweet Pea's swordplay in this scene looks a little weaker than Baby Doll's.

Lastly, things I am on the fence about: The extra musical number in the brothel. Yes, it's great to watch if you are already familiar with the film. But perhaps it lightened the mood just a shade too much, showing a playful side to Blue and giving too much of an identity to the other girls in the brothel, who, for the remainder of the film, remain as indistinct beauties in the background.

Zack Snyder apparently commented somewhere that the film was not completely finished. Indeed you can imagine the big money behind the project getting jittery about how abstract it was, tapping their watches and ripping the incomplete product from his hands. Indeed, this lack of completeness does resonate somewhat in the film. The ending in particular is fairly cerebral and downbeat. It is possible that on first viewing you might not even pick up that Sweet Pea is the narrator and that both Baby Doll and the Wise Man are 'Angels'.

It is a flawed piece, no doubt. But as mainstream Hollywood films go, it is among the most interesting, thought provoking and downright stunning films of it's generation.

You have the weapons… now use them!

It's a surprise that Death Trap (Eaten Alive) was the film Tobe Hooper followed up The Texas Chainsaw Massacre with as, at first sight, TCM is totally and utterly superior in every way. However, that is not to say the Death Trap is not without it's charm. Albeit a warped, distorted, bizarre charm that leaves you feeling as if you've been watching the film through the bottom of a jam jar… after seven pints of beer.

Okay, so right off the film lacks Gunnar Hansen's iconic, brilliantly unveiled antagonist, instead delivering… Judd. He is a mumbling, demented hotelier who looks a bit like a messed up version of my father-in-law, talks stream of consciousness nonsense and at one point sings a painfully elongated rendition of a song so annoying that you will want to murder him yourself. For all that, Judd is an interesting villain when set against the physical power of Leatherface. He doesn't look particularly sinister, almost certainly isn't particularly strong and due to his inability to speak properly, we can only guess at his motives and back story. In some ways these factors makes it more shocking when he lapses into hysterical, jittering psychotic episodes which are usually followed in short order by him feeding his victims to an extremely naff-looking plastic crocodile.

On the subject of Judd's victims, this is one area where the film takes a pleasantly surreal turn and sets itself aside from it's peers. The crowd who visit the hotel on what appears to be rather a brisk day for trade are even weirder than Judd himself. We start with a messed up young woman sporting a wig so fake and pathetic looking that it would have stuck out like a sore thumb in an early 80's porno. Then you have the anal-retentive, deep-south John Cleese who comes looking for his estranged Daughter and Robert Englund, looking good as an angry southern hick who's only goal in life seems to be to get a female of the species to indulge him in the love that dare not speak it's name. Next onto TCM's lovely Marilyn Burns wearing, for reasons unknown, yet another really lame looking wig and her daughter, sporting a metal leg brace. But by far the craziest character here and, indeed, the most unhinged man this side of Frank Booth is Roy. This boy, to be fair to him, is a complete and utter raving lunatic who thinks nothing of lapsing into crazed animal impersonations and descriptions of having his eye burned out by his wife in front of his weeping child.

Death Trap unfolds on a few scant, cheap and sleazy looking sets, none of it appears to be shot outdoors and all of the proceedings appear murky, often lit with a trashy red hue. These things should not be considered negatives to fans of this kind of cinema (myself included) as the whole thing looks like some ungodly, nightmare 70's theme park gone wrong and the constant soundtrack of either analogue synth bleeps or wailing atonal country and western music give the film a truly evil and otherworldly atmosphere.

Personally I love the days of these crude, surreal, trashy films which now seem so far behind us and if the above are to be considered pluses then sadly there must be minuses. For me my single biggest gripe is that some scenes where nothing really happens, play out just too long and too uneventful. The problem here is that Judd's character is established as being so one-dimensional that once we have discovered he is a murderer, there isn't really anywhere else to go other than to show him shambling about being irritating. I guess Tobe Hooper wanted this film to more closely follow the perpetrator, rather than the victims (as in TCM), but with so little psychological meat, it just doesn't work.

The overall film is also hindered by the fact that it doesn't gather pace heading towards the climax a la TCM. There is no real feeling of ratcheting up the suspense as Judd's actions get increasingly more risky and threaten to expose him.

Tobe Hooper should be applauded for following a runaway indie hit with something that was so different. Can you imagine a writer/director these days under contract to some big shadowy corporation choosing to buck a winning formula and try something completely distinct in style? It simply wouldn't be allowed to happen. Which is why we need to treasure these films and our memories of the times they come from. Because it was a time when challenging, even assaulting the audience was the film maker's first goal and if you left the drive-in after seeing Death Trap feeling like you needed a shower then Tobe had done his job.

He did his job.

P.S.. I love you Marilyn Chambers.