Skip to main content

You're not even an ape. You're a media person.

Natural Born Killers
(1994)

(SPOILERS) In which Oliver Stone loses the plot. Casting about for something new to get incensed over now he’s burnt himself out on Nam and dead presidents, Oli happens upon a Tarantino script (sold for $10k) and proceeds to take a wrecking ball to it. As a non sequitur of a cinematic experience, it’s almost as if he actively sought to piss away the good will the editing Oscar for JFK engendered (notably awarded to a different editor). As a media “satire”, Natural Born Killers reinforces criticisms that his only means of tackling a subject is napalming it.

Suffice to say, I’d not returned to Natural Born Killers since it crawled into UK cinemas in early 1995, riding the crest of furore-fanned wave (alleged copycat murders – Universal has been either especially spineless or especially shrewd, if it means increased interest later, in putting The Hunt on the shelf for the time being). My immediate reaction was to deem it of negligible value, a visually and thematically incoherent – in that, if you’re shouting about something to the point of being deafening, no one can follow your rant any more – misfire that bowdlerised Tarantino’s screenplay (he’s still upset about it). I was more interested to give the movie another go than with most Tarantino-related fare, however, because I’d found it so forfeit; any number of factors can affect how one first experiences a movie, and who knows, I might have done it an injustice (contrastingly, I knew the soundtrack very well, although I’m generally keener on the actual music tracks than the dialogue excerpts). I didn’t.

I may be mistaken, but I don’t think The Open Road, the Tarantino/Avery script that split into True Romance and Natural Born Killers, is out there. Some versions have it that True Romance is the version of Natural Born Killers a screenwriter character wrote, others that it’s the version of True Romance Clarence writes. Either way, Tarantino was embracing the mythologising of characters, and in Natural Born Killers particularly so, with a journo who makes his living from it. Stone, David Veloz and Richard Rutowski extensively rewrote the original script, shifting the focus from Robert Downey Jr’s shock TV journo Wayne Gayle – designed by Tarantino to allow for a low-budget, videotaped, point-of-view approach for significant sections – to serial killers Mickey and Mallory Knox (Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis).

It’s easy to see why Stone felt he had licence to push that, less so his thick-headed assault on media causality (of which, why would someone so partial to conspiracies think the buck for society’s ills stopped with the media? Take it to the source, if you really want to grapple with the theme, Oli). Part of the problem with this is, though, that it’s very difficult to see how Mickey and Malorie have become so popular. They’re so desperately unappealing in every instance, it would take some remarkably skilful media manipulation to turn them into the Bonnie and Clyde icons they’re supposed to be riffing on.

Then there’s the problem that, if everything you’re doing is heightened, nothing stands out. Stone filmed for two months but edited for eleven, and boy, does it show. There was a criticism of Last Action Hero, a valid one, that if you’re making a big action movie anyway, it’s impossible to exaggerate that effectively in an in-movie parody of a big action movie. Natural Born Killers has no rises and falls, no real form. It’s an incessant barrage of visuals, but not in the MTV sense where there’s usually some kind of rhythm or implied stylistic continuity. Stone just cuts to cut, because he’s bored, restless, or on some serious drugs.

The bombastic quality extends to the performances. Everything has to be BIG or it’s drowned out, and the results are expectedly variable. Harrelson, whom Stone sensitively suggested had the eyes of a killer (Woody’s dad was Charles Voyde Harrelson), is too fractured to gather a performance much beyond one-note psycho, with little opportunity to bring his natural charm to bear. Just about his most effective decision is the Lennon shades. Lewis is at the zenith of her nails-on-a-blackboard, white-trash performances, which I guess is an achievement of sorts. Tom Sizemore offers an early art-reflects-life (see also Strange Days) as a gone-to-heel detective on the case, while Rodney Dangerfield appears as Mallory’s abusive father in a tone-deaf (like everything here, it’s set to eleven) sitcom version of her life.

There are some notables, however. Downey Jr, unaccountably inspired to adopt an Australian accent, struggles to keep his head above water – you can see in his career that matches with alpha directors don’t always bring out the best in him, Fincher being another – since his voice should be the biggest thing here. That’s the nature of a shock broadcaster. Occasionally he achieves that – his “Betongo, Betongo, Betongo” riff in the prison is very funny – but mostly, he’s barely able to make himself heard above the din. Perhaps surprisingly – and in contrast to most takes on his performance – Tommy Lee Jones fares best as the prison warden; presented with a seedy Vincent Price moustache and a shock of Brylcreem, he’s doing a successful version of the more renowned Harvey Two Face in the following year’s Batman Forever via Tom Waits. Steven Wright, meanwhile, as Mallory’s psychiatrist, gets the best line, in response to being told “Yet Mallory Knox has said she does want to kill you”: “I, uh, never really believe what women tell me”. Generally, though, the level of wit is typified by lines like “You’re not even an ape. You’re a media person” and “I’m doing a benefit tonight for homeless transsexual veterans”.

Tarantino may not always be the best appraiser of his own work, but he can be quite acute in assessing the flaws in others’. To wit Stone: “his obviousness cancels out his energy and his energy pumps up his obviousness”. That’s Natural Born Killers in a nutshell. It’s all sound and fury, signifying nothing. He throws everything against the wall in a hapless collage – film stocks, black and white, POV, rear projection – in support of his lunatic quest, and the results aren’t so much exhausting as nullifying. I’d say desensitising, but he might take that as a compliment going to the heart of his rally against media manipulation. Stone said of the movie “I had tried to create chaos deliberately” and the Natural Born Killers smacks of exactly that over-chewed approach.

It still surprises me how relatively well received Natural Born Killers was. Besides being aggressively unpleasant, it epitomises Stone’s subsequent career (with the odd exception): a director forced to fall on the sword of hyperactive technique when he has no (real) personal investment in the material (particularly true of the similarly risible U Turn, also Savages). The sad thing is, this feels like the career path of the director of The Hand, rather than the one who brought us Salvador, Talk Radio and JFK, wherein the spleen is directed and channelled, with acute and resonant results.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Do you know that the leading cause of death for beavers is falling trees?

The Interpreter (2005) Sydney Pollack’s final film returns to the conspiracy genre that served him well in both the 1970s ( Three Days of the Condor ) and the 1990s ( The Firm ). It also marks a return to Africa, but in a decidedly less romantic fashion than his 1985 Oscar winner. Unfortunately the result is a tepid, clichéd affair in which only the technical flourishes of its director have any merit. The film’s main claim to fame is that Universal received permission to film inside the United Nations headquarters. Accordingly, Pollack is predictably unquestioning in its admiration and respect for the organisation. It is no doubt also the reason that liberal crusader Sean Penn attached himself to what is otherwise a highly generic and non-Penn type of role. When it comes down to it, the argument rehearsed here of diplomacy over violent resolution is as banal as they come. That the UN is infallible moral arbiter of this process is never in any doubt. The cynicism

Now listen, I don’t give diddley shit about Jews and Nazis.

  The Boys from Brazil (1978) (SPOILERS) Nazis, Nazis everywhere! The Boys from Brazil has one distinct advantage over its fascist-antagonist predecessor Marathon Man ; it has no delusions that it is anything other than garish, crass pulp fiction. John Schlesinger attempted to dress his Dustin Hoffman-starrer up with an art-house veneer and in so doing succeeded in emphasising how ridiculous it was in the wrong way. On the other hand, Schlesinger at least brought a demonstrable skill set to the table. For all its faults, Marathon Man moves , and is highly entertaining. The Boys from Brazil is hampered by Franklin J Schaffner’s sluggish literalism. Where that was fine for an Oscar-strewn biopic ( Patton ), or keeping one foot on the ground with material that might easily have induced derision ( Planet of the Apes ), here the eccentric-but-catchy conceit ensures The Boys from Brazil veers unfavourably into the territory of farce played straight.

Yeah, it’s just, why would we wannabe be X-Men?

The New Mutants (2020) (SPOILERS) I feel a little sorry for The New Mutants . It’s far from a great movie, but Josh Boone at least has a clear vision for that far-from-great movie. Its major problem is that it’s so overwhelmingly familiar and derivative. For an X-Men movie, it’s a different spin, but in all other respects it’s wearisomely old hat.

I can always tell the buttered side from the dry.

The Molly Maguires (1970) (SPOILERS) The undercover cop is a dramatic evergreen, but it typically finds him infiltrating a mob organisation ( Donnie Brasco , The Departed ). Which means that, whatever rumblings of snitch-iness, concomitant paranoia and feelings of betrayal there may be, the lines are nevertheless drawn quite clearly on the criminality front. The Molly Maguires at least ostensibly finds its protagonist infiltrating an Irish secret society out to bring justice for the workers. However, where violence is concerned, there’s rarely room for moral high ground. It’s an interesting picture, but one ultimately more enraptured by soaking in its grey-area stew than driven storytelling.

Never underestimate the wiles of a crooked European state.

The Mouse on the Moon (1963) (SPOILERS) Amiable sequel to an amiably underpowered original. And that, despite the presence of frequent powerhouse Peter Sellers in three roles. This time, he’s conspicuously absent and replaced actually or effectively by Margaret Rutherford, Ron Moody and Bernard Cribbins. All of whom are absolutely funny, but the real pep that makes The Mouse on the Moon an improvement on The Mouse that Roared is a frequently sharp-ish Michael Pertwee screenplay and a more energetic approach from director Richard Lester (making his feature debut-ish, if you choose to discount jazz festival performer parade It’s Trad, Dad! )

Yes, exactly so. I’m a humbug.

The Wizard of Oz (1939) (SPOILERS) There are undoubtedly some bullet-proof movies, such is their lauded reputation. The Wizard of Oz will remain a classic no matter how many people – and I’m sure they are legion – aren’t really all that fussed by it. I’m one of their number. I hadn’t given it my time in forty or more years – barring the odd clip – but with all the things I’ve heard suggested since, from MKUltra allusions to Pink Floyd timing The Dark Side of the Moon to it, to the Mandela Effect, I decided it was ripe for a reappraisal. Unfortunately, the experience proved less than revelatory in any way, shape or form. Although, it does suggest Sam Raimi might have been advised to add a few songs, a spot of camp and a scare or two, had he seriously wished to stand a chance of treading in venerated L Frank Baum cinematic territory with Oz the Great and Powerful.

It’s always open season on princesses!

Roman Holiday (1953) (SPOILERS) If only every Disney princess movie were this good. Of course, Roman Holiday lacks the prerequisite happily ever after. But then again, neither could it be said to end on an entirely downbeat note (that the mooted sequel never happened would be unthinkable today). William Wyler’s movie is hugely charming. Audrey Hepburn is utterly enchanting. The Rome scenery is perfectly romantic. And – now this is a surprise – Gregory Peck is really very likeable, managing to loosen up just enough that you root for these too and their unlikely canoodle.

Dad's wearing a bunch of hotdogs.

White of the Eye (1987) (SPOILERS) It was with increasing irritation that I noted the extras for Arrow’s White of the Eye Blu-ray release continually returning to the idea that Nicolas Roeg somehow “stole” the career that was rightfully Donald Cammell’s through appropriating his stylistic innovations and taking all the credit for Performance . And that the arrival of White of the Eye , after Demon Seed was so compromised by meddlesome MGM, suddenly shone a light on Cammell as the true innovator behind Performance and indeed the inspiration for Roeg’s entire schtick. Neither assessment is at all fair. But then, I suspect those making these assertions are coming from the position that White of the Eye is a work of unrecognised genius. Which it is not. Distinctive, memorable, with flashes of brilliance, but also uneven in both production and performance. It’s very much a Cannon movie, for all that it’s a Cannon arthouse movie.

Farewell, dear shithead, farewell.

Highlander II: The Quickening (1991) (SPOILERS) I saw Highlander II: The Quickening at the cinema. Yes, I actually paid money to see one of the worst mainstream sequels ever on the big screen. I didn’t bother investigating the Director’s Cut until now, since the movie struck me as entirely unsalvageable. I was sufficiently disenchanted with all things Highlander that I skipped the TV series and slipshod sequels, eventually catching Christopher Lambert’s last appearance as Connor MacLeod in Highlander: End Game by accident rather than design. But Highlander II ’s on YouTube , and the quality is decent, so maybe the Director’s Cut improve matters and is worth a reappraisal? Not really. It’s still a fundamentally, mystifyingly botched retcon enabling the further adventures of MacLeod, just not quite as transparently shredded in the editing room.

Have you betrayed us? Have you betrayed me?!

Blake's 7 4.13: Blake The best you can hope for the end of a series is that it leaves you wanting more. Blake certainly does that, so much so that I lapped up Tony Attwood’s Afterlife when it came out. I recall his speculation over who survived and who didn’t in his Programme Guide (curious that he thought Tarrant was unlikely to make it and then had him turn up in his continuation). Blake follows the template of previous season finales, piling incident upon incident until it reaches a crescendo.