You Don't Nomi

I've never seen Showgirls, and I probably never will. But this movie does a nice job of laying out its history and exploring its cult-movie status. It also gives you all the nudity without having to watch the movie itself.

I see about half the reviews here hate this movie for being "woke," i.e. exploring how the movie portrays women. Having not seen the movie I can't speak to how persuasive the analysis is, but it's pretty interesting and they do make a good case. And I have never heard the opinion of anyone using "woke" or "feminist" as a criticism who wasn't a complete idiot, so that's a point for the movie over its critics.

The talking heads are smart and often witty, there are some interesting personal stories, there are a range of perspectives, its fun to see how the makers tried to spin their disaster, and there are some attractive naked ladies, so all-in-all worth watching.

"You Don't Nomi" (2019), directed by Jeffrey McHale, is a documentary that affectionately and meticulously examines the infamous "Showgirls" (1995), the film by Paul Verhoeven and Joe Eszterhas that was harshly criticized upon its release and has since gained a cult following. Through a montage of archival footage and audio interviews with critics and fans, the documentary attempts to answer a central question: where does the true value of "Showgirls" lie?

One of the main focuses of "You Don't Nomi" is the theory that "Showgirls" is not simply a poorly executed film but rather a biting satire and sociocultural commentary that deliberately uses sex and nudity to unsettle the audience. According to this interpretation, Elizabeth Berkley's supposedly "terrible acting" is not a reflection of her lack of talent but a conscious choice by Verhoeven to amplify the film's intentions.

The documentary also examines Paul Verhoeven's career, highlighting his tendency to use provocative material to elicit strong reactions from audiences. However, this exploration feels somewhat superficial and does not delve deeply enough into the impact of his filmography. Despite this, the film offers intriguing observations about visual and narrative elements of "Showgirls," such as the recurring use of mirrors, the symbolism of the name "Nomi," and the widescreen compositions that establish connections with other works by the director.

One of the most notable contributions comes from April Kidwell, who played Nomi in the Off-Broadway parody adaptation "Showgirls! The Musical." However, her participation focuses more on the personal significance the film had for her rather than an analysis of its artistic value. Through a vast array of clips, including negative reviews, parodies, fan gatherings, and iconic scenes from the original film, "You Don't Nomi" documents the critical and popular reevaluation that "Showgirls" has undergone over time.

For "Showgirls" fans, this documentary represents a vindication and provides ample evidence to support their defense of the film. However, for those who still see it as a cinematic disaster, "You Don't Nomi" is unlikely to change their perception. Ultimately, McHale offers a passionate yet biased analysis of a work that continues to divide opinions and whose legacy keeps evolving in pop culture.

This documentary puts forward the idea that perhaps Paul Verhoeven's Razzie winning film "Showgirls" needs reappraisal.

If you haven't already seen it I would suggest you watch "Showgirls" first and then wait at least a day, if not a week, before watching this documentary.

My overall impression of the original film was it was a mis-fire from an over the top, intelligent and creative director who likes to provoke and entertain at the same time. The performances throughout the film are so exaggerated that it is not enjoyable to watch, and while there is a lot of nudity this film is not sexy or titillating at all. As with all the Verhoeven films I've seen there is sex and graphic violence.

This documentary takes the viewer on the journey of how the film has been received over the years, and how it has gained cult status. Fans of the original film praise it, books have been written about it.

The use of excerpts from Verhoeven's other films with insert images of Showgirls on TVs and monitors was interesting, as well as cutting excerpts from other films to compliment the narration/interviews from various critics.

Showing how Paul Verhoeven's stance towards "Showgirls" has changed over the years is interesting, but In the end the film is still a bad film and not the masterpiece that some of the participants in this documentary put forward.

This exploration of what makes Showgirls such a great cult film is at times interesting, but with one main speaker on the subject, it can feel a bit like attending someone's lecture about this in a film school hall. No idea how prohibitive that would have been, but more input from some of the people who helped bring it to life would be interesting.

Reading the reviews for this documentary on IMDB, it seems clear to me most viewers didn't understand that the context for the various critical commentaries made in the documentary changes all the time as you watch. The fact almost nobody gets that this is happening is totally the documentary's fault. The editing is simply not clear enough with in its intentions.

What happens in this documentary is that its author, David Schmader, who sees a lot in Showgirls both in the positive and negative, and from both the genuine and camp angles, gets various critics - and/or actors standing in for critics, it's not clear - to read out their genuine and mostly negative critical reviews or thoughts of the film on the soundtrack. You never know if these thoughts were written today or back in 1995, or a mixture of both; the documentary never fully declares the sources.

Schmader then contrasts each of these critical attacks with his own additional commentary (or perhaps in some cases, other people's, but again, it's hard to tell) on the same themes or scenes from the film, pointing out value, directorial skill or just other ideas that people might have missed. He also shows clips from other Verhoeven films. These are illuminating when they're used to show recurring Verhoeven themes. Unfortunately, he also alters some of these shots as a sort of gag where the people in the other Verhoeven films are 'interacting' with elements of Showgirls, and these moments are usually downright confusing.

So people ranting on about 'wokeness' of this film and such - blame each critic David was quoting. Neither he nor the documentary is outright endorsing these views. They present them in order to either comment on them, refute them or expand on them. But because the doco is really bad at saying who's speaking from what time period, and when or why, it's understandable viewers miss this.

The crucial point is, this is NOT a single point of view film. It invites a pile of points of view, mostly bundling them into positive or negative camps (which you might expect - polarisation is the hallmark of Showgirls) and compares them, through unfortunately bad editing, usually giving the positive camp the last word. By stepping away from the critics' views late in the film, it ends with other kinds of positives. But make no mistake, you will hear a lot of negative commentary on Showgirls in this film.