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.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

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 system when Burton did it (even…

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

The more you drive, the less intelligent you are.

Repo Man (1984)
In fairness, I should probably check out more Alex Cox’s later works. Before I consign him to the status of one who never made good on the potential of his early success. But the bits and pieces I’ve seen don’t hold much sway. I pretty much gave up on him after Walker. It seemed as if the accessibility of Repo Man was a happy accident, and he was subsequently content to drift further and further down his own post-modern punk rabbit hole, as if affronted by the “THE MOST ASTONISHING FEATURE FILM DEBUT SINCE STEVEN SPIELBERG’S DUEL” accolade splashed over the movie’s posters (I know, I have a copy; see below).

This popularity of yours. Is there a trick to it?

The Two Popes (2019)
(SPOILERS) Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globes joke, in which he dropped The Two Popes onto a list of the year’s films about paedophiles, rather preceded the picture’s Oscar prospects (three nominations), but also rather encapsulated the conversation currently synonymous with the forever tainted Roman Catholic church; it’s the first thing anyone thinks of. And let’s face it, Jonathan Pryce’s unamused response to the gag could have been similarly reserved for the fate of his respected but neglected film. More people will have heard Ricky’s joke than will surely ever see the movie. Which, aside from a couple of solid lead performances, probably isn’t such an omission.

Look, the last time I was told the Germans had gone, it didn't end well.

1917 (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I first heard the premise of Sam Mendes’ Oscar-bait World War I movie – co-produced by Amblin Partners, as Spielberg just loves his sentimental war carnage – my first response was that it sounded highly contrived, and that I’d like to know how, precisely, the story Mendes’ granddad told him would bear any relation to the events he’d be depicting. And just why he felt it would be appropriate to honour his relative’s memory via a one-shot gimmick. None of that has gone away on seeing the film. It’s a technical marvel, and Roger Deakins’ cinematography is, as you’d expect, superlative, but that mastery rather underlines that 1917 is all technique, that when it’s over and you get a chance to draw your breath, the experience feels a little hollow, a little cynical and highly calculated, and leaves you wondering what, if anything, Mendes was really trying to achieve, beyond an edge-of-the-seat (near enough) first-person actioner.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.