Skip to main content

This is about one thing: dominion. It’s not their planet any more.

Ghosts of Mars
(2001)

(SPOILERS) I might have more sympathy for John Carpenter’s protests that Ghosts of Mars was misunderstood if the content did more to support the idea that it was intentionally over-the-top and tongue-in-cheek. Such as silly/amusing plotting and characters and campiness instead of scares. It does rather come across, as per his defence of Escape from L.A. as better than the original, as trying to cover the ineptitude of the production with the old “It was meant to be ‘so bad it was good’; it was self-consciously, post-modernly bad” excuse.

To be fair to JC, I’m going by the Wikipedia quote, which is not unexpurgated, and he may have said additional things about his take that clarified matters. Still, I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s smarting exactly as much as he sounds like he is there; it led to a nine-year (feature) directing hiatus, and it’s been the same time again since then (The Ward wasn’t received a whole lot better). But when you see stylistic reference to such diverse (by intent) fare as Rambo: First Blood Part II, Commando and Predator. Well, yeah, there’s self-consciousness in the latter two, but Predator for one is also incredibly well made. Rambo: First Blood Part II has none of the qualities Carpenter is alluding to, so… Yes, if he wanted Ghosts of Mars to be interpreted as “intended”, he really should have made it more obviously comedic and “in on the joke”.

As it stands, though, Ghosts of Mars doesn’t work on any level, and certainly not on the one he says he intended. He’s made movies before that carry a strong comedic or parodic element – Dark Star, Big Trouble in Little China, They Live – and they’re among his best pictures, but he also made Escape from L.A. which stumbles in its humour and execution as often, or more often, than it lands. And this is very much of that similar late period “can’t be bothered, would rather play video games”, giving-a-shrug approach.

If Carpenter had seriously intended to pull off the picture as stated, he needed to pull his finger out and surround himself with the necessary cast and crew. It’s been suggested – Wikipedia again but noting the source is unsubstantiated – that Ghosts of Mars was originally Escape from Mars, a third outing for Snake Plissken. That’s entirely believable based on a premise revolving around – before getting side tracked by the titular ghosts – Ice Cube’s convict Desolation Williams, at very least a Plissken clone.

But this is exactly it. Kurt Russell brought a self-aware Clint-esque swagger to Plissken (as he did a John Wayne-wannabe quality to Jack Burton). Ice Cube has presence, but he isn’t much of an actor. He glowers with the best of them, but the role needed deadpan. Which the Stath, originally cast, can provide in abundance (see Spy for the best example). The Stath is no Olivier either, but he is good at deadpan. Yet he has to make do with a supporting role as a sexually over-compensating sergeant (this was only his fourth movie role, but he’s still more engaging than most of the performers here, with the possible exception of Joanna Cassidy).

There are elements that might lead one to think Carpenter’s professed intent is plausible – I don’t think there’s any way you can have a flashback within a flashback within a flashback and not be purposefully taking the piss – but the entire production reeks of “don’t care”. Top of the list, as ever, is cinematographer Gary B Kibbe, who makes the movie utterly flat and lifeless. If there isn’t a shred of atmosphere or depth to Ghosts of Mars, it most certainly isn’t because Carpenter was self-consciously trying to make it look that way; it’s because that’s how Village of the Damned and Escape to L.A. and Vampires look (ironically, his first couple of low-budget team-upss with Kibbe don’t fare quite as badly, perhaps because the actual scrappiness there works to their advantage).

I don’t know, though; if Carpenter equates campy with dramatically inert and utterly stilted in performance and staging, then Ghosts of Mars is campy. But campy for me usually requires a bit of flair somewhere in the mix, even if one or other element falls down elsewhere; either stylistically or in terms of performance, it should furnish something extra. Ghosts of Mars’ only real flourish is the look of main villain Big Daddy Mars, but the very fact of dressing a stuntman (Richard Cetrone) as a member of KISS with a piercing fetish tells you all you need to know about how much fun that part of it is.

There’s also Natasha Henstridge as the lead, who epitomises the production’s vanilla lack of energy; she’s certainly not aware of the camp side. Cassidy’s good as the doctor who unleashed the beast, but possibly too much so for the limitations of the production. No doubt intended to reflect his self-mutilating antagonists’ frenzied fervour, Carpenter teamed with a number of heavy-metal bands on the soundtrack, which really only serves to underline the sense of amateurishness (or in-on-the-joke campery?) pervading the movie; if you set up incredibly lethargic action sequences and flood them with wall-to-wall metal, you can only really be interpreted as trying to make up for a lack. Or, alternatively, revelling in a really shoddy production.

The thing of it is, for all that I’ve spent half-a-dozen paragraphs doing Ghosts of Mars down, it’s still more watchable than something like Village of the Damned or Vampires. The skeleton of Carpenter’s siege movie format – Assault on Precinct 13, The Thing, Prince of Darkness – does a lot of heavy lifting, and while this one is never remotely good, it doesn’t make me want to entirely give up the ghost (of Mars). I’ll caveat that by saying the first (and only) time I’d watched it previously, I found the movie utterly tedious, so perhaps I was in a relatively receptive mood this time. But there are more than enough ingredients on paper for Ghosts of Mars to have made a decent little B-movie. Which means it’s probably for the best that it didn’t end up as the third Snake Plissken pic, as no level of inflated budget would have encouraged Carpenter to care sufficiently about what he was making by this point.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Nanobots aren’t just for Christmas.

No Time to Die (2021) (SPOILERS) You know a Bond movie is in trouble when it resorts to wholesale appropriation of lines and even the theme song from another in order to “boost” its emotional heft. That No Time to Die – which previewed its own title song a year and a half before its release to resoundingly underwhelmed response, Grammys aside – goes there is a damning indictment of its ability to eke out such audience investment in Daniel Craig’s final outing as James (less so as 007). As with Spectre , the first half of No Time to Die is, on the whole, more than decent Bond fare, before it once again gets bogged down in the quest for substance and depth from a character who, regardless of how dapper his gear is, resolutely resists such outfitting.

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.

Just a little whiplash is all.

Duel (1971) (SPOILERS) I don’t know if it’s just me, but Spielberg’s ’70s efforts seem, perversely, much more mature, or “adult” at any rate, than his subsequent phase – from the mid-’80s onwards – of straining tremulously for critical acceptance. Perhaps because there’s less thrall to sentiment on display, or indulgence in character exploration that veered into unswerving melodrama. Duel , famously made for TV but more than good enough to garner a European cinema release the following year after the raves came flooding in, is the starkest, most undiluted example of the director as a purveyor of pure technical expertise, honed as it is to essentials in terms of narrative and plotting. Consequently, that’s both Duel ’s strength and weakness.

These are not soda cans you asked me to get for you.

The Devil’s Own (1997) (SPOILERS) Naturally, a Hollywood movie taking the Troubles as a backdrop is sure to encounter difficulties. It’s the push-pull of wanting to make a big meaningful statement about something weighty, sobering and significant in the real world and bottling it when it comes to the messy intricacies of the same. So inevitably, the results invariably tend to the facile and trite. I’m entirely sure The Devil’s Own would have floundered even if Harrison Ford hadn’t come on board and demanded rewrites, but as it is, the finished movie packs a lot of talent to largely redundant end.

Ours is the richest banking house in Europe, and we’re still being kicked.

The House of Rothschild (1934) (SPOILERS) Fox’s Rothschild family propaganda pic does a pretty good job presenting the clan as poor, maligned, oppressed Jews who fought back in the only way available to them: making money, lots of lovely money! Indeed, it occurred to me watching The House of Rothschild , that for all its inclusion of a rotter of a Nazi stand-in (played by Boris Karloff), Hitler must have just loved the movie, as it’s essentially paying the family the compliment of being very very good at doing their very best to make money from everyone left, right and centre. It’s thus unsurprising to learn that a scene was used in the anti-Semitic (you might guess as much from the title) The Eternal Jew .

You are not brought upon this world to get it!

John Carpenter  Ranked For anyone’s formative film viewing experience during the 1980s, certain directors held undeniable, persuasive genre (SF/fantasy/horror genre) cachet. James Cameron. Ridley Scott ( when he was tackling genre). Joe Dante. David Cronenberg. John Carpenter. Thanks to Halloween , Carpenter’s name became synonymous with horror, but he made relatively few undiluted movies in that vein (the aforementioned, The Fog , Christine , Prince of Darkness (although it has an SF/fantasy streak), In the Mouth of Madness , The Ward ). Certainly, the pictures that cemented my appreciation for his work – Dark Star , The Thing – had only a foot or not at all in that mode.

Sleep well, my friend, and forget us. Tomorrow you will wake up a new man.

The Prisoner 13. Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling We want information. In an effort to locate Professor Seltzman, a scientist who has perfected a means of transferring one person’s mind to another person’s body, Number Two has Number Six’s mind installed in the body of the Colonel (a loyal servant of the Powers that Be). Six was the last person to have contact with Seltzman and, if he is to stand any chance of being returned to his own body, he must find him (the Village possesses only the means to make the switch, they cannot reverse the process). Awaking in London, Six encounters old acquaintances including his fiancée and her father Sir Charles Portland (Six’s superior and shown in the teaser sequence fretting over how to find Seltzman). Six discovers Seltzman’s hideout by decoding a series of photographs, and sets off to find him in Austria. He achieves this, but both men are captured and returned to the Village. Restoring Six and the Colonel to their respective bodie

Isn’t sugar better than vinegar?

Femme Fatale (2002) (SPOILERS) Some have attempted to rescue Femme Fatale from the dumpster of critical rejection and audience indifference with the claim that it’s De Palma’s last great movie. It isn’t that by a long shot, but it might rank as the last truly unfettered display of his obsessions and sensibilities, complete with a ludicrous twist – so ludicrous, it’s either a stroke of genius or mile-long pile up.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.