Skip to main content

Kilmer didn't like Brando. Brando didn't like Kilmer. They all didn't like Frankenheimer. Frankenheimer didn't like them.

Lost Soul: The Doomed Journey of Richard Stanley’s Island of Dr. Moreau
(2015)

I’m not one of those who thought the John Frankenheimer-inherited The Island of Dr. Moreau was one of the worst movies ever made. Indeed, I found it very patchy – so reflective of most of the director’s efforts by this point in his career – but actually quite entertaining, much of that down to the absurd performance of Marlon Brando, who if this documentary from David Gregory is anything to go by, really had it in for the film’s producer New Line.


Although, that could speak for Brando’s attitude to anything he stumbled into searching for spare cash by this point in hiscareer, invariably the most notable, dare I say prominent, part of otherwise middling-at-best fare. Richard Stanley’s career hitherto, making a name for himself with Hardware at a fledgling 23 and following it up with the ill-fated Dust Devil, had also been mixed. His debut had been something of a minor hit (particularly on video), a micro-budget Terminator knockoff that was technically accomplished but which left me otherwise unimpressed – aside from the PiL-infused trailer – but I rather liked Dust Devil, positing Robert John Burke as a supernatural Namibian serial killer (the mirror scene is iconic); it’s one I really ought to revisit, particularly as it seems it’s been released in a fuller version than the one I probably saw at the time. Certainly, the ideas in that one confirmed Stanley as a talent worth following, so it’s ironic it would be his last – so far – completed fiction feature (although, it might be about time to pull a Terrence Malick on us, if he’s ever going to).


I recall articles at the time on the production nightmare surrounding Dr Moreau, in particular one in first issue of the much-missed Neon magazine, the hipper sibling to Empire. That sets the scene for the Stanley who struck it too big too fast in an enterprise that escalated out of control and beyond him once he made a deal with Ed Pressman, and includes character background the doc misses out on, with more detail on his childhood, and then his time in Afghanistan during the Soviet-Afghan war (see Rambo III and The Living Daylights for authentic accounts), his run-ins with Harvey Weinstein over Hardware merchandising (cyborg dolls and poppers for sex shops) and how he watched the finished movie tripping at Cannes. 


The latter titbit’s particularly telling, as one forms a strong sense of a very mid-20s occult-freak stoner about the Stanley circa Dr Moreau – although there’s no reference in the doc to drug use on his part until he’s gone AWOL – (and to be fair, that mysticism-and-fringes-lurking figure persists in the older one who has found solace in France and the former haven of the Cathars). That sense lingers with his clobber; Stanley dressed then, and to an extent at the time of the documentary, like a Fields of the Nephilim groupie (not so much his white linen suit on Dr Moreau), so it’s perhaps appropriate that he made a video for them.


To be honest, the concept material we see for Dr Moreau displays the same lack of restraint and discernment that put me off Hardware, with skewed attempts to justify a modern setting – the arguments about how HG Wells would have approached it now are presumptuous, since Dr Moreau is intrinsically a product of its time; that’s why The War of the Worlds never quite works when modernised, and yes I’m including Spielberg’s version – and a taste for excess (the pig lady biting Montgomery’s dick off); if Stanley didn’t understand how the system worked, it really just meant he was kidding himself. 


If his approach to tone probably didn’t do him any favours, former New Line boss Robert Shaye consistently comes across as standoffish and disinterested in the project, while noting the director was a “somewhat unusual guy” (even Pressman, who has mutual respect for Stanley, notes “He’s and odd character, but I’ve worked with many odd characters as directors”).


Richard Stanley: Knowing that the odds were stacked against me, I resorted to witchcraft.

Who knows, if Stanley hadn’t couched the experience in spell-casting, maybe he wouldn’t have had a productive meeting with Marlon (amid the news Roman Polanski had been selected to take over), but maybe he wouldn’t have had encouraged a foreboding mood to percolate through the project; Stanley talks about how he hit it off in the crucial meeting with Brando who “took a shine to me” (in Neon, he put it down to the actor’s fascination with his accent) and the Kurtz/Conrad/Wells link (there’s also mention of Stanley’s great-grandfather, a reported influence on Kurtz), but he clearly thinks subsequent derailment of his hopes and dreams is down to his pact with the devil. 


Which makes sense, at very least from the point-of-view of the size of film it became with someone of Brando’s significance attached; Bruce Willis came on board, and James Woods (neither of whose involvement I’d been aware of), and the picture gradually began to escape Stanley’s grasp. Willis exiting and being replace by Val Kilmer only compounded problems (although Stanley was sanguine about the actor in Neon: “He’s the kind of guy who would walk down a beach with a china teacup and just leave it there. He’s not someone that’s used to picking up after himself. One can’t really fault that guy for being a bit of an asshole”). Two difficult leads on a picture was a recipe for hellishness for any director, as Frankenheimer was to discover (“When Frankenheimer was on set one day, I remember him say to a few of us… if I was directing a film called The Life of Val Kilmer, I wouldn’t have that prick in it”).


It’s actually executive producer Tim Zinnemann who comes across as exerting the most antagonistic influence on Stanley’s presence on the picture, though, instantly taking a negative view of his capacity to guide the project and being the first to suggest he be replaced when problems arose. Maybe Stanley wasn’t helping himself, if reports that he wasn’t attending production meetings and was sequestering himself in his very nice Queensland pad were true, but it’s abundantly clear that there were those on the production side willing him to fail, or to give them reason to remove him, and he evidently played into their hands sufficiently. I’m unclear why Rob Morrow got quite as upset as he did so quickly (he took Kilmer’s original role when the latter opted for the Woods part; Thewlis, who barely gets mentioned, eventually replace him), but it’s evident Stanley hadn’t worked out the action sequences he decided to shoot with the actor, or discuss them with his AD.


Fairuza Balk: And he said ‘No. This is all insane. I’m getting paid. You’re getting paid. None of the scripts make any sense, so why worry? You know, do what you’re doing. You’re beautiful, don’t worry about it’.

Fairuza Balk is a consistently sympathetic presence, forced to remain on the movie after Stanley was axed by threats she’d never work in this town again (there’s also her conversation with Brando above, when she sought to discuss characters with him). The gratifying side is how nothing went any better with Frankenheimer, “one of the last old school screamers”, calling the shots and evidently capitulating to all Brando’s requests, which included wearing an ice bucket on his head and promoting Nelson de la Rosa, the shortest man in the world (the sex-crazed inspiration for Mini-Me), to his right hand man over Marco Hofschneider (consistently great value as a wry interviewee). 


The sections on New Line are as interesting as those on Stanley’s tribulations, although it’s a shame we never get any insights from Michael de Luca – who scripted Carpenter’s last great movie In the Mouth of Madness, a short while before this picture came got the greenlight – as he’s suggested to have been amused by the manner in which the production spiralled out of control, and incurred Shaye’s wrath over allowing Brando to be hired at all, because the actor was “an incredible pain in the ass” on Don Juan De Marco. The bad feeling was clearly mutual, the latter wanting to close down production “to fuck with Bob Shaye”.


Richard Stanley: Marlon Brando told me that everyone in the industry were hyenas and that I should try and stay clear of them and try and make a better life for myself.

Stanley famously came back on set disguised as one of Stan Winston’s prosthetic creations. He got to speak with Brando (above), who’d evidently been a “don’t give a shit” disruptive figure to movies for a good twenty years by this point, but that isn’t to say the industry – rather than persevering filmmakers occasionally trying to make art – didn’t deserve what it got if it kept employing him. 


When interviewed for Neon, the director commented “I’m not sure I want to end up as some wizened old fuck trying to get his movies off the ground”, and he seems to have stuck to his guns over the subsequent two decades. He has written screenplays (including an unfilmed – and now never to be, I’d warrant – High Rise), and an adaptation of Lovecraft’s The Color Out Of Space with Nic Cage has been announced (don’t hold your breath), but he has mostly devoted himself to shorts and manageable documentaries, most notably The Otherworld, on his home in the French Pyrenees, covering the Cathars and Rennes-le-Chateau. Lost Soul is a fascinating document, although it’s production values occasionally disappoint (there are synching issues I’d read about before this, and they were present in the version I saw). As it proves, documentaries about the making of cinematic disasters are generally more compelling than the disasters themselves.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

You're waterboarding me.

The Upside (2017)
(SPOILERS) The list of US remakes of foreign-language films really ought to be considered a hiding to nothing, given the ratio of flops to unqualified successes. There’s always that chance, though, of a proven property (elsewhere) hitting the jackpot, and every exec hopes, in the case of French originals, for another The Birdcage, Three Men and a Baby, True Lies or Down and Out in Beverly Hills. Even a Nine Months, Sommersby or Unfaithful will do. Rather than EdTV. Or Sorcerer. Or Eye of the Beholder. Or Brick Mansions. Or Chloe. Or Intersection (Richard Gere is clearly a Francophile). Or Just Visiting. Or The Man with One Red Shoe. Or Mixed Nuts. Or Original Sin. Or Oscar. Or Point of No Return. Or Quick Change. Or Return to Paradise. Or Under Suspicion. Or Wicker Park. Or Father’s Day.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

Would you like Smiley Sauce with that?

American Beauty (1999)
(SPOILERS) As is often the case with the Best Picture Oscar, a backlash against a deemed undeserved reward has grown steadily in the years since American Beauty’s win. The film is now often identified as symptomatic of a strain of cinematic indulgence focussing on the affluent middle classes’ first world problems. Worse, it showcases a problematic protagonist with a Lolita-fixation towards his daughter’s best friend (imagine its chances of getting made, let alone getting near the podium in the #MeToo era). Some have even suggested it “mercifully” represents a world that no longer exists (as a pre-9/11 movie), as if such hyperbole has any bearing other than as gormless clickbait; you’d have to believe its world of carefully manicured caricatures existed in the first place to swallow such a notion. American Beauty must own up to some of these charges, but they don’t prevent it from retaining a flawed allure. It’s a satirical take on Americana that, if it pulls its p…

You know what I think? I think he just wants to see one cook up close.

The Green Mile (1999)
(SPOILERS) There’s something very satisfying about the unhurried confidence of the storytelling in Frank Darabont’s two prison-set Stephen King adaptations (I’m less beholden to supermarket sweep The Mist); it’s sure, measured and precise, certain that the journey you’re being take on justifies the (indulgent) time spent, without the need for flashy visuals or ornate twists (the twists there are feel entirely germane – with a notable exception – as if they could only be that way). But. The Green Mile has rightly come under scrutiny for its reliance on – or to be more precise, building its foundation on – the “Magical Negro” trope, served with a mild sprinkling of idiot savant (so in respect of the latter, a Best Supporting Actor nomination was virtually guaranteed). One might argue that Stephen King’s magical realist narrative flourishes well-worn narrative ploys and characterisations at every stage – such that John Coffey’s initials are announcement enough of his …

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Kindly behove me no ill behoves!

The Bonfire of the Vanities (1990)
(SPOILERS) It’s often the case that industry-shaking flops aren’t nearly the travesties they appeared to be before the dust had settled, and so it is with The Bonfire of the Vanities. The adaptation of Tom Wolfe’s ultra-cynical bestseller is still the largely toothless, apologetically broad-brush comedy – I’d hesitate to call it a satire in its reconfigured form – it was when first savaged by critics nearly thirty years ago, but taken for what it is, that is, removed from the long shadow of Wolfe’s novel, it’s actually fairly serviceable star-stuffed affair that doesn’t seem so woefully different to any number of rather blunt-edged comedies of the era.

Is CBS Corporate telling CBS News "Do not air this story"?

The Insider (1999)
(SPOILERS) The Insider was the 1999 Best Picture Oscar nominee that didn’t. Do any business, that is. Which is, more often than not, a major mark against it getting the big prize. It can happen (2009, and there was a string of them from 2014-2016), but aside from brief, self-congratulatory “we care about art first” vibes, it generally does nothing for the ceremony’s profile, or the confidence of the industry that is its bread and butter. The Insider lacked the easy accessibility of the other nominees – supernatural affairs, wafer-thin melodramas or middle-class suburbanite satires. It didn’t even brandish a truly headlines-shattering nail-biter in its conspiracy-related true story, as earlier contenders All the President’s Men and JFK could boast. But none of those black marks prevented The Insider from being the cream of the year’s crop.