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

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds . Juno and the Paycock , set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

Do you know the world is a foul sty? Do you know, if you ripped the fronts off houses, you'd find swine? The world's a hell. What does it matter what happens in it?

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) (SPOILERS) I’m not sure you could really classify Shadow of a Doubt as underrated, as some have. Not when it’s widely reported as Hitchcock’s favourite of his films. Underseen might be a more apt sobriquet, since it rarely trips off the lips in the manner of his best-known pictures. Regardless of the best way to categorise it, it’s very easy to see why the director should have been so quick to recognise Shadow of a Doubt 's qualities, even if some of those qualities are somewhat atypical.