Skip to main content

Oh man, they wronged you. Why they gotta be like that? You exude a cosmic darkness.

Mandy
(2018)

(SPOILERS) Sometimes you're left scratching your head over a movie, wondering what it was about it that had others rapturously raving while you were left shrugging. I at least saw the cult appeal of Panos Cosmatos’ previous picture, Beyond the Black Rainbow, which inexorably drew the viewer in with a clinically psychedelic allure before going unceremoniously off the boil with a botched slasher third act. Mandy, though, has been pronounced one of the best of the year, with a great unhinged Nic Cage performance front and centre – I can half agree with the latter point – but it's further evidence of a talented filmmaker slave to a disconcertingly unfulfilling obsession with retro-fashioning early '80s horror iconography.


There's a ponderousness to the first hour of Mandy that suggests Cosmatos believes he's rendering something of depth, that will get under the skin, but really all he's doing is fine-tuning atmosphere, to be discarded later for Nic going the full Cage with a chainsaw; he's in the service of portentous shlock, basically. I'm sure advocates of the picture are responding to the whole kit and caboodle –mostly the chainsaw fight, though, let's face it – but my reaction was one of listlessness. Mandy's too self-seriously moody to be a fun movie wallowing in its gory tropes, and that moodiness tends towards an endurance test; the addled ramblings of a writer-director evidently far too fixated on his own formative altered-states drug habit, even if it's largely historic ("I just can't do drugs any more"; "Every time I've tried to smoke weed now I feel like I'm in a battle with the demon's embrace. It feels like an epic power struggle against the universe"). 


Cosmatos' garbled account of what Mandy's about suggests he's still suffering the after-effects even when he doesn't try to smoke weed now. Of Cage's Red, transforming into a revenge-fuelled unstoppable force in the second half of the picture, Panos comments "he has sort of modified into this sort of demigod-like, gazing war beast, gollum, sort of enacting pure will on the mortal coil". Yeah, dude! Righteous! Er, what? 


As such, I evidently saw a different film to one of the year’s most visceral love stories "handled with profound sensitivity and told with hypnotic precision". Rather, I encountered an exercise in juvenilia in terms of structure and content, the junk imagining of a fourteen-year-old let loose with a movie trainset and a packet of pseudish gibberish ("I wanted the weapon he forges himself to crystallise, a manifestation of his grief and insanity and not like a real object"). Yeah, it probably is the best movie of the year if you're really high while watching.


Don't get me wrong, Cage and Andrea Riseborough (the titular character) are great, and I'm happy to watch either in pretty much anything (although Cage seems intent on testing his faithful with his output of late), but I'm not wholly persuaded by the great love story allowed to breath in the opening stages. It feels to me that Cosmatos thinks this slow, underwritten, wispy Athena poster of interaction will instil meaning into their relationship and so underwrite the revenge side when Mandy is taken. But it doesn't really. Instead, we're constantly barraged by geek trapping distractions. Mandy's more defined by her Black Sabbath t-shirt than her starlings story, Red by his affinity for Galactacus as his favourite planet ("Galactacus isn't a planet"). 


Early on, I wondered if there might be conceptual coherence to Red's initial choice of Saturn, the expression of the demiurge, that he might be seen in some way to have invited the events that follow, just as Mandy wearing an inverted pentagram may have attracted the cult. But I don't think there's any kind of depth to the references; Cosmatos has just thrown in stuff he thinks is cool. He talks in interviews about how Mandy is Galactacus, "she is the one who eats planets", but the reference is one he added after Cage was cast. It smacks of making it up as you go along. No, I don't want to smoke any more weed. Oh, okay. Go on.


Honestly too, the much-cited vodka-fuelled full-Cage scene, in which Red breaks down in his underpants, did nothing for me. But then, the director refers to the sequence as "an absurdist one-act play", so if he's that removed from making us care about the central relationship, it's not surprising it doesn't quite hit the spot. It pinpoints where the movie is lacking; Cosmatos is big on the atmosphere – credit where it's due, he's really, really good at it – but he appears indifferent to the beats of emotion. The second half is a revenge picture, but it isn't driven by our desire to see Red's revenge, in the manner most such narratives operate (take Straw Dogs, for example, where it's palpable). It just happens. Of course, this is a director who gave his star Friday the 13th Part VII to watch as prep for the movie's climax.


You can dress a movie up in whatever finery you like (if in doubt, throw in some Joseph Campbell), but when you hear "I think maybe one of the first things I realised I wanted done was probably the chainsaw fight", it becomes pretty clear where the viewer stands. Perhaps Cosmatos is genuinely bewildered by the serious attention he's receiving for Mandy. He comments that this is a movie about dealing with loss… Yeah, but so is Death Wish; are we going to campaign for the auteurist rep of Michael Winner? 


Cosmatos seems content to throw in any kind of randomness under the loose label of an alternate, mythologised '80s landscape, believing that's enough. So we get an acid bikers that ate Paris from hell gang that may as well have ridden off the An American Werewolf in London set, just without the accompanying laughs. There's something slightly infantile about his approach. But then, Panos pretty much admits as much, that the 1983 depicted is "this sort of landscape of my childhood memories and my emotions of the time and I’m coping with them now".


Jeremiah: Do you like The Carpenters? I think that they're sensational. But this is even better.

I was going to suggest Cosmatos has no idea about how the Children of the New Dawn, the cult he's created, functions, but apparently there's a seventeen-minute track called My Journey, in which Jeremiah Sand (Linus Roache) gives his views on the world and God. From the movie, though, they're a mash of incoherent tropes, from Manson-esque musical stylings (and concordant mockery of the same from Mandy – "You wrote this song?" – before laughing). Red refers to them as "Jesus freaks", but there seems precious little evidence for that, particularly since he follows it with "They were weirdo hippy types". Cosmatos refers to "creating this mythological landscape, and then populating it with neurotic people", which to be fair does describe its members, and the jealousy of Mother Marlene (Olwen Fouere) at the new chosen one in their midst (Jeremiah "thinks you’re so special").


They appear marked as a personality cult ("If you’re not with me, you will not ascend") who, of course, take weird William Burroughs drugs ("I like to call that the cherry on top") and have an artificially elevated view of their superiority: "Take a good look, you worthless piece of human excrement. This is the Tainted Blade of the Pale Night. Straight from the Abyssal Layer". Red's a mere human, one of the "Poor stupid dogs. Born without souls". This has been something of a year for cult movies, as in movies featuring cults, but this one's are much nearer to the spurious group of Apostle rather than the clearly demarcated one of Hereditary.


The picture boasts a fine Jóhan Jóhannson score and effectively evocative cinematography from Benjamin Loeb, but when I read about the "unnervingly beautiful and grotesque worlds" of Cosmatos' imagination, my kneejerk response is to suggest "You mean retro synths and a red colour filter?" I'm being reductively crude, but then so is much of Mandy, complete with lovingly silhouetted axed villain's head. There are appealingly goofy touches, like the Ralph Bakshi-esque animated Mandy seen by Red at intervals, but it simply underlines that these are the teenage appetites of its director put on celluloid.


Cage gets some good Cage-isms that will no doubt go down in his lexicon; his obsession with his favourite item of clothing ("You ripped my shirt!" he declares to a cannibal biker before stabbing him in the throat, this after he's dispatched another with "You are a vicious snowflake" sign off). And he takes some weird biker drug – of course he takes some weird drugs – so becoming "a Jovan warrior sent forth from the eye of the storm". Which effectively means he ends up embroiled in a sub-Bruce Campbell/Braindead splatterfest, culminating in his confrontation with Jeremiah, where he grandly announces "I’m your god now". And engages in some orgasmic skull bursting. The effect is nothing so much as puerile. Ultimately, though, this isn't the Cage-rage classic I'd hoped for; there are only a few precious moments offering the kind of manic flip out he's celebrated for, certainly nothing that can go the distance with the monumental insanity of Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans.


Red: They were weirdo hippy types. A whole bunch of them. Then there was the muscle. It didn't make any sense. They were bikers and gnarly psychos and… Crazy evil.

You've got a plot synopsis for Mandy right there, and just as intelligible. It's clear Panos Cosmatos never got past the early '80s video nasties his dad let him watch unfiltered; at least, it looks as if he's going to be stuck on that track, stranded in 1983, for the rest of his career. Which is a little weird. Mandy suggests his approach is all period reference, with no real identity beyond that. I thought Beyond the Black Rainbow might have been a taster for a director who would grow in psychedelic splendour and thematic depth, but this suggests only regression. There's something of a witless Garth Merenghi about Cosmatos' era-specific genre doodling, but without the accompanying mirth. Mandy's undoubtedly worth a look for the sounds and visuals, but they ultimately serve to emphasise how empty it is.


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

Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

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.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

I can’t be the worst. What about that hotdog one?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (SPOILERS) It would have been a merciful release, had the title card “ The End ”, flashing on screen a little before the ninety-minute mark, not been a false dawn. True, I would still have been unable to swab the bloody dildoes fight from my mind, but at least Everything Everywhere All at Once would have been short. Indeed, by the actual end I was put in mind of a line spoken by co-star James Wong in one of his most indelible roles: “ Now this really pisses me off to no end ”. Or to put it another way, Everything Everywhere All at Once rubbed me up the wrong which way quite a lot of most of the time.

We’ve got the best ball and chain in the world. Your ass.

Wedlock (1991) (SPOILERS) The futuristic prison movie seemed possessed of a particular cachet around this time, quite possibly sparked by the grisly possibilities of hi-tech disincentives to escape. On that front, HBO TV movie Wedlock more than delivers its FX money shot. Elsewhere, it’s less sure of itself, rather fumbling when it exchanges prison tropes for fugitives-on-the-run ones.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?

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.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

He doesn’t want to lead you. He just wants you to follow.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) (SPOILERS) The general failing of the prequel concept is a fairly self-evident one; it’s spurred by the desire to cash in, rather than to tell a story. This is why so few prequels, in any form, are worth the viewer/reader/listener’s time, in and of themselves. At best, they tend to be something of a well-rehearsed fait accompli. In the movie medium, even when there is material that withstands closer inspection (the Star Wars prequels; The Hobbit , if you like), the execution ends up botched. With Fantastic Beasts , there was never a whiff of such lofty purpose, and each subsequent sequel to the first prequel has succeeded only in drawing attention to its prosaic function: keeping franchise flag flying, even at half-mast. Hence Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore , belatedly arriving after twice the envisaged gap between instalments and course-correcting none of the problems present in The Crimes of Grindelwald .