Skip to main content

Sometimes you got to forget your head and grab your balls.

Black Rain
(1989)

(SPOILERS) By 1989 a decade had passed since Alien, and Ridley Scott was yet to experience a bona fide follow-up hit. Blade Runner had received an (at best) mixed response and its box office was underwhelming (a sci-fi movie, from the director of the most defining entry in the genre since Star Wars, and the biggest star in the firmament; how could it fail?) Legend outright bombed, and appeared to put a permanent dampener on the director’s more immersive approach to world-building. He then served the penance of Someone to Watch Over Me, a low-key thriller that failed to muster much interest. Scott found himself in danger of being put out to permanent pasture, cast into the commercial wilderness (directing commercials). So he did a Tony, and made Black Rain. It was a hit, or enough of a hit. But it represented the shape of things to come for the director; a make-do script (never the director’s strong point) and meticulous visuals fail to coalesce, and lead one to wonder if those early successes were just flukes. Were the atmosphere, the texture and the intent that embedded in every frame of Alien and Blade Runner merely the happy accidents of a director who just hadn’t yet honed his filmmaking to a formula?


When it came to formula, brother Tony was always much more reliable. The macho bluster that informed his action movies also carried, at their best, a winning self-consciousness with regard to the ridiculousness of it all. The last thing that comes to mind when considering Ridley Scott films is how funny they can be (exhibit A; A Good Year). It would be another decade before Scott hit his true formula stride, the success of Gladiator initiating a run of pictures (11 since 2000) that were rigorously processed but lacked the painstaking care of his early work. Any old subject matter would do, fashioned in the same resistibly identikit style. There were exceptions, but for the most part Scott seemed to have fallen back from any attempt to make interesting films that he was fired up to make. Keeping working, keep churning them out, were his watchwords. And always keeping a niche historical epic in reserve if he had to regroup,


Whether that’s a step up from the fallow decade that followed Black Rain is debatable. Even though his output was variable, there was still reason to be excited by the prospect of a new film from the director. He had made Alien and Blade Runner. He could do it again. Thelma and Louise was feted for succeeding as a character piece, something the director had not quite accomplished before (Someone attempted it but failed), although its sheen was a harbinger of the slicker Scott to come. Two soggy voyages were to follow, the underrated 1492: Conquest of Paradise and the stricken White Squall. Scott found himself back in difficulties, so picked something overtly commercial again. And again, it was a hit (G.I. Jane).  Few would have countenanced the Scott of 15 years previous tackling something quite so crass.


Which brings me back to Black Rain. I recall its release well, arriving a week after Al Pacino’s comeback in Sea of Love (a much better movie than Black Rain, although one marred by a lack of possible suspects). At the time I was probably close enough to a Scott acolyte, lapping up anything he had to offer. Certainly, I was far too forgiving of the picture’s flaws. Some ‘80s pictures age such that their era-specific quirks are endearing. Others do in such a way that they become laughable. Love or hate Top Gun, it was always OTT. Black Rain is an attempt to do a cop thriller, but without the knowhow to do it well. That’s both Ridley and lead actor Michael Douglas who need to take the blame.


The screenplay, credited to Craig Bololtin and Warren Lewis (the latter wrote The Thirteenth Warrior, but that aside there’s been little of note from either since) spews up a half-digested selection of cop movie tropes and splatters them across the fish-out-of-water setting. Overlaid on this is Ridley penchant for dry ice, partially lit sets (he can’t get enough of light streaming through industrial wall fans) and glittering cityscapes (on more than one occasion, be it smoking skylines or neon jungles, Black Rain recalls Blade Runner).


Then there’s the soundtrack, a garish, aggressively tone-deaf selection of ‘80s soft rock (Gregg Allman) or no-longer hipness (UB40), punctuated by Hans Zimmer’s less-than-subtle score. The latter takes its cues from traditional Japanese instrumentals (as in, Hollywood cliché versions thereof) to atmospheric effect. It’s a rumbling, muscular, electronic sound (Black Rain really wants to be muscular, unfortunately it stars Douglas), at times evocative and inspired  But it is also frequently laughable, particularly when it falls back on the ‘80s mainstay of the action-drum solo and electric guitar tour de force. The climactic fight sequence between Nick (Douglas) and Sato (Yusaku Matsuda) is ridiculous, but not in a cherishable way. It exemplifies the worst of the decade’s cheesy excess.


Indeed, its noteworthy how, in the last year of that decade, Black Rain is so ingrained with the era it’s about to exit. Michael Douglas had a good decade, essaying the most iconic (in a negative sense) of  ‘80s greed (Gordon Gekko) and tapping into male angst (infidelity and its consequences in flashy AIDS parable Fatal Attraction; he’d further explore the embattled and unsympathetic white male psyche in the next decade) while effectively showing his comedy side as a preening egoist in three Turner/De Vito pictures. Perhaps it’s a consequence of this, that Douglas at his best is aware of his baggage and more than content to play on it, that his performance as Nick Conklin is such a disaster.


It isn’t just the uber-mullet, perhaps the most laughable of all his ‘dos. It’s the appropriation of a hard man image that has no weight behind it. Put puffy Douglas in a boardroom and his lizard demeanour is chilling. Stick him on a motorbike in a leather jacket, with a cigarette hanging out of his mouth, and he’s found guilty of clueless posturing. He’s a goddam maverick! Did Douglas see a Mel Gibson movie and think he could rise to the challenge? One has to assume so, as his piss-take jock adventurer in Romancing the Stone should have been the last word in his portrayals of heroism (his cop in Basic Instinct is little more believable – nice sweater - but fits more comfortably into Paul Verhoeven’s absurdist milieu; Verhoeven was attached to this at one point, but it’s difficult to see how he could have made it into anything worthwhile).


Bolotin and Lewis set up some standard cop tropes for Nick. He’s on the take, butts heads with his boss (the great John Spencer, wasted in a couple of scenes). Oh, and he’s a speed freak (the opening motorcycle race under the Brooklyn Bridge is knuckle-brained macho bullshit that only serves to make Nick look like an imbecile). He even wears sunglasses indoors. Nick’s been there, seen it all. He’s under investigation by Stephen Root (Office Space) and has a lousy temper. Douglas isn’t believable for a single second in Black Rain, but he’s never less than watchable. And, because Scott has very little idea of what film he is making, it would be difficult to argue his star ruins something that had potential.


On the other hand, watching Andy Garcia (as partner Charlie Vincent) is a reminder of just how much promise he once had; he’s brimming with natural energy, and effortlessly puts the viewer in a position where, because Charlie’s observing and commenting on Nick’s unlikely swagger, Nick might just be some weird anomaly of the police force. Charlie is the peacemaker. He’s young, a bit (but not too) cocky, flash (he likes his suits), and indulgent of his partner.


Whenever Garcia’s on screen, the picture attains something approximating verisimilitude, and Garcia makes it look so easy. He’s also great when the two travel to Japan, showing abundant chemistry with Ken Taukakura (as Japanese cop Masahiro) that Douglas wholly lacks. Their karaoke rendition of What’d I Say might be the highlight of the movie. It would be easy to watch a whole picture focussing on Charlie, with his cheerful, conciliatory demeanour (“What is this, a conspiracy to ruin my evening?”) and Black Rain suffers as soon as his head is lopped off by the Yakuza.


Sugai: I was 10 when the B-29 came. My family lived underground for three days. We when came up the city was gone. Then the heat brought rain. Black rain. You made the rain black, and shoved your values down our throats. We forgot who we were. You created Sato and thousands like him. I'm paying you back.

The title of the movie is explained in a typically blunt manner. It’s shallow, base commentary, flagrantly manufacturing conflict. Any Hollywood movie about Japan will need to acknowledge Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and usually in the most trite manner (a Japanese film of the same name also came out in 1989, focusing on the aftermath of Hiroshima). Having established that the Japanese may have cause to nurse ill-feeling towards America, Black Rain spends most of its remaining running time expounding how they need a brash American to actually get things done round there.


It’s the usual 'white man in a foreign land' cliché, one that will later be repeated in The Last Samurai. Nick and Charlie are instructed to escort the cuffed Sato to Osaka. Once there, they immediately lose him, and Nick must spend his time bucking the system (bureaucracy and regulations are even worse in Japan!) while engaging obtuse examinations of honour codes with Mashahiro. We note Nick’s casual racism early on (“Just hope they got a nip in this building who speaks fucking English?”), but little is made of this, certainly not in a Nick Nolte-48Hrs way.


On the surface, we are clearly not supposed to approve of this, or Nick’s behaviour. But he is the hero, after all. The issues confronting him are really focussed on the shame he has brought by taking money, although these fail to lend him any realism. Nick “knows nothing of loyalty and respect”. He is implicitly compared to Sato, who “might as well be an American. His kind respect just one thing – money”. Yet it is Nick’s familiarity with the filthy stuff that gives him the edge on his button-downed hosts; he can spot a counterfeit not a mile off (Sato has stolen one of the plates that will press fake dollars), and can’t resist waving his superiority, and a burning note, under their noses.


Nick: Sometimes you got to forget your head and grab your balls.

As such, the picture can certainly be charged with engaging in crude stereotyping, without the wit or wisdom to engage in insightful commentary on Japan-American relations. Rising Sun would broach similar territory a few years later, with only partially more success. I wouldn’t label Black Rain racist, though. Rather, it’s insincere and manipulative, with no more to say about cultural divides than Red Heat, but less of a sense of humour in how it doesn’t say it. 


In the end, it’s Nick’s version of honour that wins out (he does what he said he would do, bringing Sato to justice rather than killing him, and he shows the by-the-book Matsumoto how to follow the western example, putting the individual rather than the group first). It’s a witless film, most definitely, and a crude one, but not intentionally racist (Douglas would surely not be involved in if it was, but you’d expect a little better from him than this… Actually, he went on to make Disclosure, so probably not).


The picture is generally so unleavened in its construction that it’s hardly a surprise when Kate Capshaw turns up as the token love interest. She’s no more out of place than Douglas, to be fair, and her perm at least gives his mullet a battle for the frame. She is also given one of the best lines (when Nick asks who knows about the war between Sato and his old boss Sugai, she replies “Counting you and me? Eleven million”).


Nick: You watch your tail, cowboy.

Ken Takakura brings refinement and respectability to Masahiro, and, as such, he isn’t really on the same page as Douglas with his coiffured posing. 


Yusaku Mastuda, however, is relentlessly OTT as Sato, a punk crazy who takes delight in the damage he inflicts. It was Mastuda’s last role, as he died of bladder cancer shortly after the film was completed (he kept the condition from Scott, who dedicated it to his memory, and was said to have said that “This way, I will live forever”). Mastuda is certainly memorable, but it’s a shame the picture itself is never more than middling.


Scott carries off the occasional impressive scene. The restaurant set piece, in which Sato murders two men while Nick and Charlie can only look on, sets up the stakes with queasy tension. The execution of Charlie has a certain grandstanding flourish. But there’s also a lot of Douglas running or riding about (with obvious stunt doubles), amid jets of steam, collapsing shelves or hanging meat. There’s much too much that is generic here, and the climax has only several nasty incidents involving hands to single it out (that, and the aforementioned ludicrous mud fight between Nick and Sato).


Ridley reportedly had such a bureaucratic bad time in Japan, he vowed never to film there again (the climax was shot in California, which may explain the rather surprising appearance by Al Leong, of Big Trouble in Little China, Die Hard and Genghis Khan in Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, as a Yakuza). So far, that’s been the case. Fatal Attraction DP Howard Atherton had lensed most of the picture when he resigned over the stress the shoot caused; Jan de Bont finished off and got the credit, with Atherton recognised for “Additional Photography”. Scott’s handling of racially sensitive material hasn’t necessarily improved in the 25 years since Black Rain, as the white faces adorning Exodus: Gods and Kings attest. Also beyond doubt is that his nose for a good script is even more congested than it was then.


As unconvincing as Black Rain is, even as straightforward action fare, it did what it need to for Scott’s career. It might not have been a towering success in the US (although it was at Number One for two weeks) but it was a reasonably big hit internationally (14th for the year globally, 28th in the US).  Ridley would finally get back into critics’ good books with Thelma and Louise, but there’s a feeling that Black Rain is the true point of departure from the Scott with endless potential. Where Blade Runner had hidden depths and recesses that could be pored over, set in an environment that yielded more upon revisits, Black Rain’s patina emphasises how strictly pedestrian and shallow it is. As such, it will inform the director’s future outlook, where lip service is paid to subtext and the surface details are the only details to behold.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.