Skip to main content

They’re a normal condition of the planet. They’re just not part of our consensus of what constitutes physical reality.

The Mothman Prophecies
(2002)

(SPOILERS) Movies tackling renowned supernatural or folkloric themes are prone to satisfy no one. Most certainly not the devotees, for whom the key features are inevitably dumbed down or simplified. And more than likely not a general audience either, since despite all available concessions, attempts to convert such material into an accessible narrative still fall short. I remember seeing The Mothman Prophecies at the cinema and being unmoved by Mark Pellington’s snoozefest, the occasional atmospheric moment or two aside. Revisiting the film, I wonder if I might have given it too much credit.

Pellington came on board after Carl Franklin had fallen out. As Bob Rickard reported it, Pellington was interested in the problems of objectivity that confront the investigator – John Keel, of course, in the 1975 book, here reconfigured as Alan Bates’ Alexander Leek – “when he loses detachment and becomes personally involved in the unfolding drama”. Which could make for a good movie; on numerous occasions, rewatching the picture, I imagined a David Lynch take on the material. But the effect on Pellington’s picture – who had earlier delivered the smart little paranoia thriller Arlington Road, all about the subjective lens – is to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Pellington, from a screenplay credited to Richard Hatem, fashions a narrative focusing on Washington Post journalist John Klein (a typically somnambulant Richard Gere), sucked into the strange goings-on in Point Pleasant, West Virginia following the death of his wife. According to Rickard, Pellington “told me that previous scripts of Keel's book were too literal. He was more interested in the psychological predicament of the witnesses than in making a film about UFOs or an alien creature and so rational or materialistic explanations are glossed over. In the film, Klein is tormented by the death of his wife from a brain tumour. Before she died, she had visions of a sinister shape with glowing red eyes, but even the pragmatic reporter cannot accept that all the witnesses are afflicted with similar tumours”.

Consequently, the movie gives us a predominately passive protagonist who roams around Point Pleasant aimlessly, occasionally offered moral support from Laura Linney’s police officer and lent a conviction that something very strange is definitely going on by a reliably unhinged Will Patton. Plus: strange voices on the telephone, foretold events and slips of time. None of it remotely coheres in a gripping or even mildly arresting manner. Pellington’s unable to locate any glue to bind his story, because he’s already decided that the story’s most salient feature – the literal, or treating it as literal – isn’t interesting.

I suspect The Mothman Prophecies needed to be treated as a historical document to lend it substance and a through line. It could still have exhibited the most important element to Pellington, that of psychological impact, but without the extraneous Hollywood baggage of Gere grieving over a lost Debra Messing, and the redundant crutch of Linney’s understanding shoulder. As told, all the elements Pellington chooses to include from Keel’s account – the Mothman visions, predictions that come true, ones that don’t, the bridge collapse, the marvellously named Indrid Cold – lack any impact because, in isolation, without the “fact” of them, they’re meaningless. Or worse still, translate as rather minor and pedestrian. There were common criticisms at the time of its release that The Mothman Prophecies wasn’t so far from an X-Files, and that’s very much what we have: a feature-length episode that has loses its bearings on the essential, uncanny lure of Keel’s book, so leading to a generic and forgettable – and dull – piece of work.

The late, great Robert Anton Wilson covered The Mothman Prophecies (the book) in Cosmic Trigger Vol.1 – The Final Secret of the Illuminati. He commented on a series of significant elements – crucial ones, one might argue, if one is to do the story justice – that Pellington ignored. Elements such as: cattle mutilations, UFO sightings (more than a hundred) and abductions, poltergeist activity in farms, and appearances by the ubiquitous Men in Black. All that besides the seventy or so appearances by Mothman himself.

Pellington offers no sense of the “contagious hysteria” around Point Pleasant during 1968, and because the film is set in the present, he inevitably omits the fascinating predictions that are a key note of the case. As described by Wilson, these include Robert Kennedy being in danger in a hotel kitchen, the Pope being stabbed while visiting the Middle East, and a nationwide power failure on December 24 at noon. We know the veracity of the first one. The Pope wasn’t stabbed in the Middle East, but he was stabbed in Manila a year later. And while the power outage failed to materialise, a bridge collapsed in West Virginia on that same date, killing more than a hundred people.

Keel’s response to the bridge tragedy was “They knew this was going to happen… They just didn’t want me to warn anyone”. He fashioned the non-exclusive term ultraterrestrials for these “malicious and vicious” entities “existing on the borderland between matter and energy, or reality and dream, and regards them as mischievous, deceptive, often dangerous, and likely to produce mental illness in those who insistently try to communicate with them” (as Wilson with Miriam Joan Hill noted in Everything is Under Control). Wilson comments that Keel’s description isn’t so far from the traditional notion of “demons”, while throwing a scrap to the multiverse theory that these entities might have been telling the complete truth, but for a different universe to the one Keel experienced. Keel, meanwhile, very cogently expressed the idea that these ultraterrestrials – he might as aptly have called them Archons – thrive on belief, and the more people who believe in UFOs, the more they “can manipulate people through false illumination”; “This was the feedback, or reflective effect”.

This is, of course, fascinating territory, and not a million miles from Pellington’s stumbling thesis. Wilson further recognises Keel’s point that “major UFO flaps have this penumbra of magick and surrealism about them, usually ignored by both sceptics and ardent believers in the ETH (extraterrestrial theory)”. Whether a coherent movie could be made from such subject matter is debatable, though, as you’re inevitably taking a deep dive into very dense concepts, ones resistant to anything less than an involved seminar or essay. I suggested Lynch, but perhaps prime Olive Stone, in JFK mode, could have pulled it off.

Pellington’s approach offers the title (which likely enabled it to gross as much as it did, but nothing more) but resists shies away from the meat. Indrid Cold is there, but he isn’t from Lanulos. The investigator becoming the focus for the strange is there, but thanks to Gere’s undiscerning presence, the character entirely lacks edge and drive. The bridge disaster features, and is technically impressive, but it simply serves as a means for heroic Gere to save Linney. It’s no coincidence that the best parts of The Mothman Prophecies are those featuring Bates and Patton; the proceedings pick up briefly, but unfortunately, not for long enough to build a head of steam. I don’t doubt the project finally got the greenlight off the back of The X-Files’ success, but it arrived at a point when that wave was pretty much done, and could offer nothing to distinguish itself.


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.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

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

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.