Skip to main content

One man's mundane and desperate existence is another man's Technicolor.

Strange Days
(1995)

(SPOILERS) In 1998 – I know, I can’t stop mentioning it, but the opprobrium is deserved, really –  James Cameron rather infamously gave an Oscar acceptance speech in which, following a request that the assembled Academy members observed a minute’s silence in remembrance of those who lost their lives on the Titanic, he directly followed up with the invitation “And now. Let’s go party till dawn!” There’s a sense, revisiting Strange Days, which he devised and co-wrote with Jay Cocks, of eerie premonition, of similarly pat, consequence-free logic in a tale of rape, murder, racism, police corruption, voyeurism and general brutality that resolves itself with a millennium’s eve kiss; as the credits go up, Lenny and Mace go party till dawn!



Strange Days was released to general viewer indifference, but I well recall being bowled over by it during a period that seemed to be offering great movies week after week (late ’95 and early ’96). Most of these (Heat, Seven, Twelve Monkeys, Trainspotting) remain tried-and-tested classics. But, in the cold light of day, Strange Days, like much of Cameron’s filmography, is revealed as sore lacking. Simplistic, shallow, but with brandished aspirations towards depth and resonance, its anticipation of a post-grunge, cyberpunk millennium, complete with ‘70s retro-wear and long greasy hair, is as quaint as Predator 2’s globally-warmed zoot suits. Jimbo was originally set to direct (can you imagine that, his first outright flop?) but commitments to True Lies and Titanic gummed up the works. He reportedly had Andy Garcia in mind for the lead, but he may just have been be one of many mooted.


For Kathryn Bigelow, coming off a Cameron exec-produced picture that narrowly escaped a Doors-referencing title (Riders on the Storm became Point Break), and alighting on one that feels as painfully self-conscious as Morrison’s music, it’s a case of making the best from what you’ve got. Which is a mostly great cast, a whopping budget, and a resultantly miniscule gross. The full-blooded manner with which she confronts and explores the concept of SQUIDs (Superconducting Quantum Interference Device; the device jacks in to the cerebral cortex of the user, becoming a kind of virtual-sensory VCR – Brainstorm a decade on, basically) would likely receive accusations of misogyny were a man to have shown it (another near-escape for Jimbo there; this would be just the sort of thing one would expect from De Palma), and there’s a nagging feeling throughout that this is little more than well-presented exploitation cinema (“Goddam, you know I don’t do snuff!”).


Despite the rigour of the art direction, and the unsurprising detail of the mechanics of the SQUID, there’s something rudimentary and facile about Cameron’s conception of this then-near-future that should be unsurprising to those familiar with his cartoonish characterisations and plotting. Areas that, when given to good actors can either be exposed as even more unflattering, or, at best, are moulded into an almost respectable form.



Max: This is life, straight from the cerebral cortex.

The idea behind the SQUID, being very much embedded in the VR-curious ‘90s, is that the technology was developed by the FBI to replace wearing a wire, then went black market. So we get street slang (“Have you ever jacked in?”; “Have you ever wire tripped?”) and grand pronouncements as to its experientiality (“You’re doing it, seeing it, feeling it”).



Some of Cameron and Cocks’ ideas are suitably, believably, grizzly, such as the murderer forcing his victims to jack in to his own outlet (“She’s seeing what he sees”), but for all Bigelow’s visual flair, there’s something simultaneously banal at the premise core. This isn’t like Until the End of the World, where we get a strong sense of the seductive ambience of viewing one’s own dreams, or Videodrome, where the allure of the technology is both repellent and alluring. It remains wholly on the side of gloss and glorification, so the revulsion itself is virtual, facsimile; this is a movie forever celebrating its own design and construction, closer to a two-and-a-quarter-hour Smack My Bitch Up video than suggesting anything profound.


And, being Cameron, there’s the cumbersome exposition of things – of 2K, of SQUID – to people who would surely know what they are; its very Cameron to drop in the unadorned info-dump. Jimbo’s approach to all his subjects is that of a blunt instrument, so when he writes something with drugs, sex and sleaze in it – relatively foreign ground – that’s all there is. There are no shades here, be it taking on police violence directed at African-American citizens by way of Rodney King/ the LA Riots (Cameron was inspired after seeing them on the news) or the inclusion of a martyred rapper, Jericho One (with this and the limos, I was occasionally put in mind of the considerably more perspicacious Cosmopolis).



Yet the police (strictly supporting appearances from Vincent D’Onofrio and William Fichtner) are revealed as bad apples spoiling an otherwise good barrel; it’s the ultimate and rote Hollywood cop-out, so everything ends happily ever after, an unconvincing and ill-at-ease fairy tale finale. That the resolution is so trite adds to the sense that the overt, sexualised violence is exploitative and unjustified by the content. Cameron and Bigelow have rendered a movie encapsulating seedy, scuzzy, speedball-heroin chic; it’s designed for designer-imitations, not to really make you think.


The assembled cast are mostly very strong, though. Fiennes, in a rare flirtation with Hollywood leading man status, is convincingly weasily as hustler Lenny Nero, although it’s less easy to believe he was “the finest cop ever thrown off Vice Squad”. Angela Bassett is similarly strong, playing another of Cameron’s hot, kick-ass female fantasies made flesh (he’s nothing if not consistent, is Jimbo), and is responsible for that renowned piece of dialogue sampled by Fatboy Slim ("This is your life, right here, right now!" imbuing it with conviction it doesn't have on the page). Michael Wincott, as always, is wonderfully debauched, while Tom Sizemore, a babe in his mid-30s but looking at least a decade older, is in typecast mode, handed the role of psycho Max because he’s a psycho because he’s a psycho. 



Letting the side down is Juliette Lewis (though no doubt it got her work with The Prodigy) as the unlikely object of Lenny’s affections, but that may just be personal taste; she’s convincing enough as an incorrigibly debauched wild child, I guess, but it’s quite impossible to perceive what Lenny sees in her.



Bigelow’s direction is first rate, of course. From the use of slow motion (revellers mugging Santa) to bravura action (the scene where the limo comes under fire from the bad seed cops, and subsequent submerged escape is as good as it gets), but there’s an cumulative sense of fatigue to the slew of night clubs and indie rock, not helped by it being some 50 minutes before Lenny even gets interested in the case. The pacing is off, and there isn’t sufficient intrigue to keep it motoring along (Cameron was heavily involved in the editing so we can blame him for that too). And she can’t diffuse the overcooked Jimbo inclusions, like the flashback of why Mace cares so much for good old Lenny.



I mentioned Until the End of the World before, another Millennium-obsessed ‘90s film transfixed by the idea of escaping from all the hideousness into a virtual world. It’s also a picture with its own quirky sense of fashion, soundtrack and technology. If anything, though, Wim Wenders’ foray has only improved with age, its themes transcending era. Strange Days has really very little to say, beyond the obvious, and its grand gestures seem not a little pedestrian (an interracial romance transcending the brutalising environment that would hold it back), as one would expect from its screenwriter, and essayed quite unpleasantly. It’s too well made and performed to be a dog, but I’m no longer so swept along by such acumen that I can ignore what lies beneath.





Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Tippy-toe! Tippy-toe!

Seinfeld 2.7: The Phone Message The Premise George and Jerry both have dates on the same night. Neither goes quite as planned, and in George’s case it results in him leaving an abusive message on his girlfriend’s answerphone. The only solution is to steal the tape before she plays it. Observational Further evidence of the gaping chasm between George and Jerry’s approaches to the world. George neurotically attacks his problems and makes them worse, while Jerry shrugs and lets them go. It’s nice to see the latter’s anal qualities announcing themselves, however; he’s so bothered that his girlfriend likes a terrible TV advert that he’s mostly relieved when she breaks things off (“ To me the dialogue rings true ”). Neither Gretchen German (as Donna, Jerry’s date) nor Tory Polone (as Carol, George’s) make a huge impression, but German has more screen time and better dialogue. The main attraction is Jerry’s reactions, which include trying to impress her with hi

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…