Skip to main content

So, I'm just supposed to keep dying until I figure out who my killer is?

Happy Death Day
(2017)

(SPOILERS) A delightfully tongue-in-cheek Groundhog Day horror from Blumhouse, which gave the project the greenlight a decade after its former studio abandoned it. Director Christopher Landon (writer of Disturbia and no less than four Paranormal Activitys) ensures his mysterious masked murderer on campus and repeat is glossy, upbeat, self-aware and full of vim, making it the natural inheritor of Scream’s post-modern mantle, right down to the manufacturer of the murder’s mask.

The picture’s greatest asset, though, is Jessica Rothe, whose comic touch is absolute perfection, and who essays Tree Gelbman’s transformation, Bill Murray-like, from superficial bitch to empathetic soul with effortless charisma. Landon (uncredited) rewrote Scott Lobdell’s screenplay, but structurally one wonders if Danny Rubin and Harold Ramis shouldn’t get a credit (which they kind ofdo; the movie’s penultimate scene asks “How do you sleep at night? You’ve never seen Groundhog Day?”) We have the thawing of the initially standoffish lead character, refusal to accept her situation transforming into stark realisation, her romance with someone she barely gives the time of day first time round, and a montage of her going about helping people she was formerly dismissive towards. Of course, this is also true of Edge of Tomorrow to a degree, so one might simply argue it all comes with the subgenre.

One might also reasonably suggest Happy Death Day diverges significantly in where it ends up, though, since it requires Tree to kill her murderer in order to release herself from the loop, notthe most life-affirming of solutions. It’s also less easy to pin down on the rules of Tree’s stir-and-repeat, and since she only goes through the experience eleven times, rather than Murray’s thousands, there’s a sense at times that that Langdon and Lobdell have brushed over some of the salient points in favour of the highest impact hits. We never find out if Tree’s day would have reset anyway, had she successfully avoided being murdered, and her methods of attempting to avoid such an outcome aren’t entirely convincing (just what is she doing all day, besides nursing a hangover?)

In contrast to most of these loop tales, there’s a ticking clock of sorts applied, the signs of major trauma her body exhibits when she gets a check-up (“Technically, you should be dead”); we aren’t informed if her waking on the 19th resolves this issue, so one assumes so (but, the sequel…) There’s also a very horror movie disinclination to follow logical procedure except when it suits; a very funny sequence sees Tree pulled over by a cop and fail to get sent to jail so as to avoid any further violent encounters (which may suggest the rules are that she simply can’t escape the killer, no matter what countermeasures she takes, until she IDs her, but if so it would have been fun to see some of the absurd lengths she goes to – hop aboard a transatlantic flight?) But when she disarms a police officer and shoots dead the serial killer he’s guarding, there are apparently no repercussions that would detain her for the rest of the night, and she’s allowed to go home and eat a poison cupcake (likewise, her elaborate preceding plan, to right wrongs including visiting her estranged father, somehow doesn’t include checking how a firearm works).

I’ve seen some commenters suggest the identity of the killer was very obvious; while my first thought on seeing the binned cupcake early on was the it was poisoned, I’d argue the picture does a largely commendable job throwing red herrings to distract us (I note too that, in the rough drafts of the screenplay, Charles Aitken’s Doctor Butler was also in on it, and that a cut final ending had Butler’s wife, disguised as a nurse, kill Tree after Tree killed Lori, which seems positively De Palma-ish). The conveniently located serial killer (Rob Mello) is fairly blatant, but it isn’t as if the movie’s solefunction is as a whodunnit.

Carter: I don’t think you should be taking that many. I mean, you could die.
Tree: If only it were that easy.

There’s strong support from Israel Broussard as geeky Carter – the right sort of geek clearly, as he has posters of They Live!, Back to the Future and Repo Man on his wall – whom Tree develops affection for and Rachel Matthews as sorority queen bee Danielle, but everyone’s a good fit for their roles. Langdon propels the picture along punchily and confidently, ensuring the campus encounters are replete with the wit and attention to social strata expected of the high school/college genre (at its best) and that the switches into the slasher antics (PG-13 style) don’t miss a beat; one of the best murders comes quite quickly in the repeat scenario, as the killer repeatedly stabs Danielle’s boyfriend, whom Tree is also seeing on the not-so-sly, while Tree is on the phone in the foreground, the scene all the while timed to deafening techno.

In the end, while I’ve quibbled that Landon might have imbued Happy Death Day with that crucial extra finesse, the picture’s considerable plus points far outweigh its deficits, most particular Rother’s star-making turn and the guilelessness with which it encapsulates the romantic aspiration of John Hughes at his best (right down to a lead who’s a wee bit too old for the age she’s playing). And anyway, it very much looks as if Happy Death Day 2 U will be diving straight into the whys and wherefores of the original’s scenario, in Rothe’s words, Back to the Future Part II-style. I can’t wait (and don’t have long to).


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

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.