Skip to main content

A miracle without proof is only a miracle.

Medicine Man
(1992)

(SPOILERS) I’m not sure I really buy John McTiernan’s description of Medicine Man as “a little art movie with Sean Connery”. Sure, the Sean Connery bit (now just turned ninety, but then a fresh-faced sixty-one). But you don’t make little art movies that pay their lead $10m (and a $40m price tag – or $27m as McTiernan tells it – is only relatively little if you’re not expecting to do solid business). But yes, the movie was mis-characterised as an action movie. Even though that decision is understandable, as it doesn’t comfortably fit into any bracket.

Back in 1992, McTiernan was one of my favourite directors, up there with James Cameron and Ridley Scott. Albeit, very much on the basis of Predator and Die Hard rather than The Hunt for Red October, which I found mildly disappointing. Consequently, I made sure to catch Medicine Man on its opening week. I didn’t hate it, unlike most critics, it seems. Indeed, I found it an agreeable enough if very lightweight time passer, but it was most definitely guilty as charged of cause-based, delusionary Hollywood fare that seems to think it can make a difference from its ivory tower. At least George Miller’s Lorenzo’s Oil – another case of an action director departing from the straight and narrow, although there one who also trained as a doctor – was based on actual case and so had plausibility on its side. Medicine Man had Sean acting as exec producer, for the first time since The Offence, which might sound like an indication of quality given that earlier film, but his producing tag became par for the course during the rest of the 90s, and those movies are not all good ones.

The irony being, Medicine Man is partially based on fact, even that fact has been fed through the Hollywood meatgrinder and consequently bears scant resemblance to the original. If it had used the actual story, it might have been more engaging.

Connery’s sporting a “youthful” ponytail (based on composer Jerry Goldsmith, it seems, although Highlander was his first foray into such rug-with-benefits territory). His sprightly Robert Campbell is in the Amazon rainforest researching a plant-based cure for cancer, but he’s having difficulties replicating what he believes to be positive results. Having asked for a (male) research assistant, the charming old sexist ends up with Lorrain Bracco’s loud, brassy Bronx Doctor Rae Crane. Mutual respect thaws the initially strained relations between them, naturally. Combined with “Bronx” becoming convinced Campbell’s quest is real. Meanwhile, a logging road is encroaching ever more on their jungle idyll.

Connery handpicked Bracco, understandably impressed by her performance in Goodfellas, but she’s nails-on-a-blackboard here – winning a Golden Razzie nom for her trouble. To the extent that she makes Kate Capshaw’s Willie Scott in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom seem like the easiest going of female leads. McTiernan and writers Tom Schulman (Dead Poets Society) and Sally Robinson appear to think they presiding over an affectionate homage to the screwball era as chalk and cheese fall for each other, but there’s no whiff of that between the stars. If the picture had managed to get the central relationship right, the lack of substance elsewhere would have been much more forgivable.

At least Connery’s inimitably Connery, and it’s purely coasting on his charisma that keeps the picture watchable. He even inveigles his love of golf into the proceedings, which you have to respect (his devotion to the sanctity of character and avoiding forcing his own proclivities on Campbell).

Chemistry aside, Medicine Man’s major problem is the classic one of a tackling a big issue that hasn’t been resolved (see also Superman IV: The Quest for Peace). Since there is no cure for cancer – at least, officially – we know how Campbell’s quest is going to end, so the movie relies on a false paradigm, one that can only fail to sweep audiences along for the ride. This leads to laborious plot loops in an attempt to sustain itself (“What don’t you understand? I found a cure for the fucking plague of the twentieth century and now I’ve lost it! Haven’t you ever lost anything Dr Bronx?”) When Campbell does get to the bottom of his dilemma, it turns out his precious flower has no “juju”; a species of rare and elusive ant fell into the mix, and so off they go together ant hunting (not having so much as smooched).

It’s a desperately thin narrative thread on which to sustain a movie, and it’s unsurprising that the picture has more juice when Campbell is confronting the loggers and his research station burns down (along with a section of prime rainforest). I mentioned the actual story, and a suit was brought by Dr Wilburn H Ferguson – settled out of court – alleging copyright infringement based on his project Tsanza from 1973. Therein, he charts his own research into a cure for cancer. Unsurprisingly, since it’s widely regarded as a racket, the “Cancer Establishment” refused to endorse or ratify Ferguson’s research. Which makes for a much better story, one of conflict, fighting the odds and hope, even if one is unable to win out in the immediate moment. But let’s face it, you are not going to get a movie made by a major studio suggesting a cure for cancer is out there and that for whatever reason it is being withheld. Even if, as a bonus, it doesn’t include magic ants.

By most reports – Premiere magazine delivered something of a hit piece on the production – the shoot wasn’t a blissful one (“The food was appalling. Everybody got sick. I wasn’t sick only because I drank too much vodka. There’s no relief factor. You couldn’t swim in the water… eat in the town. The noise of insects and wildlife where I had this house was insanity – noises that were Neanderthal, primordial, noises that I’ve never heard anywhere else”). McTiernan, in contrast to Connery, professed “Personally, I enjoyed it. It’s not very often that one gets time outside and still make a living out of it”.

McTiernan seems to have been consigned to permanent directors’ jail due to his penchant for phone tapping, but back then, he was on an unstoppable run (this and Last Action Hero would put a significant dent in that). And if his sensibility isn’t really suited to the picture’s romantic tone (any more than it was the satirical/cartoonish sweep of Last Action Hero), his motives during the production at least appeared to be honourable (“It wasn’t like the movie was going to make $125 million and people were going to walk away with Academy Awards from it. The one thing it might have done was make a number of million people in the world more aware of a problem we all have to face eventually, or pay the consequences for”). By using tribal Indians who had moved to the cities, he ensured the Mexico shoot didn’t make John Boorman’s mistake with The Emerald Forest. Because otherwise “they will be forever changed by the experience of meeting a movie crew. It is, after all, only a movie and there are some moral limits”.

Medicine Man duly stresses not only the perils of deforestation but the threat to indigenous populations, most particularly from western disease when Crane first arrives. In concert with cinematographer Donald McAlpine (Predator), the Mexican rainforest is lush and seductive, and ponytailed Goldsmith’s score soars romantically, even if the content is rather more restrained. The irony is that, for an action director, McTiernan has no idea how to make the material move. There are vistas galore, but it’s down to Connery to sustain any interest, and he can only do so much between golf swings.


Popular posts from this blog

I’m smarter than a beaver.

Prey (2022) (SPOILERS) If nothing else, I have to respect Dan Trachtenberg’s cynical pragmatism. How do I not only get a project off the ground, but fast-tracked as well? I know, a woke Predator movie! Woke Disney won’t be able to resist! And so, it comes to pass. Luckily for Prey , it gets to bypass cinemas and so the same sorry fate of Lightyear . Less fortunately, it’s a patience-testing snook cocking at historicity (or at least, assumed historicity), in which a young, pint-sized Comanche girl who wishes to hunt and fish – and doubtless shoot to boot – with the big boys gets to take on a Predator and make mincemeat of him. Well, of course , she does. She’s a girl, innit?

I’m the famous comedian, Arnold Braunschweiger.

Last Action Hero (1993) (SPOILERS) Make no mistake, Last Action Hero is a mess. But even as a mess, it might be more interesting than any other movie Arnie made during that decade, perhaps even in his entire career. Hellzapoppin’ (after the 1941 picture, itself based on a Broadway revue) has virtually become an adjective to describe films that comment upon their own artifice, break the fourth wall, and generally disrespect the convention of suspending disbelief in the fictions we see parading across the screen. It was fairly audacious, some would say foolish, of Arnie to attempt something of that nature at this point in his career, which was at its peak, rather than playing it safe. That he stumbled profoundly, emphatically so since he went up against the behemoth that is Jurassic Park (slotted in after the fact to open first), should not blind one to the considerable merits of his ultimate, and final, really, attempt to experiment with the limits of his screen persona.

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) (SPOILERS) There’s something daringly perverse about the attempt to weave a serious-minded, generation-spanning saga from the hare-brained premise of The Place Beyond the Pines . When he learns he is a daddy, a fairground stunt biker turns bank robber in order to provide for his family. It’s the kind of “only-in-Hollywood” fantasy premise you might expect from a system that unleashed Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man and Point Break on the world. But this is an indie-minded movie from the director of the acclaimed Blue Valentine ; it demands respect and earnest appraisal. Unfortunately it never recovers from the abject silliness of the set-up. The picture is littered with piecemeal characters and scenarios. There’s a hope that maybe the big themes will even out the rocky terrain but in the end it’s because of this overreaching ambition that the film ends up so undernourished. The inspiration for the movie

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) (SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron ’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison. Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War , Infinity Wars I & II , Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok . It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions ( Iron Man II ), but there are points in Age of Ultron whe

Death to Bill and Ted!

Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) (SPOILERS) The game of how few sequels are actually better than the original is so well worn, it was old when Scream 2 made a major meta thing out of it (and it wasn’t). Bill & Ted Go to Hell , as Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey was originally called, is one such, not that Excellent Adventure is anything to be sneezed at, but this one’s more confident, even more playful, more assured and more smartly stupid. And in Peter Hewitt it has a director with a much more overt and fittingly cartoonish style than the amiably pedestrian Stephen Herrick. Evil Bill : First, we totally kill Bill and Ted. Evil Ted : Then we take over their lives. My recollection of the picture’s general consensus was that it surpassed the sleeper hit original, but Rotten Tomatoes’ review aggregator suggests a less universal response. And, while it didn’t rock any oceans at the box office, Bogus Journey and Point Break did quite nicely for Keanu Reev

I think it’s pretty clear whose side the Lord’s on, Barrington.

Monte Carlo or Bust aka  Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies (1969) (SPOILERS) Ken Annakin’s semi-sequel to Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines tends to be rather maligned, usually compared negatively to its more famous predecessor. Which makes me rather wonder if those expressing said opinion have ever taken the time to scrutinise them side by side. Or watch them back to back (which would be more sensible). Because Monte Carlo or Bust is by far the superior movie. Indeed, for all its imperfections and foibles (not least a performance from Tony Curtis requiring a taste for comic ham), I adore it. It’s probably the best wacky race movie there is, simply because each set of competitors, shamelessly exemplifying a different national stereotype (albeit there are two pairs of Brits, and a damsel in distress), are vibrant and cartoonish in the best sense. Albeit, it has to be admitted that, as far as said stereotypes go, Annakin’s home side win

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994) (SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction ’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump . And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

This entire edifice you see around you, built on jute.

Jeeves and Wooster 3.3: Cyril and the Broadway Musical  (aka Introduction on Broadway) Well, that’s a relief. After a couple of middling episodes, the third season bounces right back, and that's despite Bertie continuing his transatlantic trip. Clive Exton once again plunders  Carry On, Jeeves  but this time blends it with a tale from  The Inimitable Jeeves  for the brightest spots, as Cyril Basington-Basington (a sublimely drippy Nicholas Hewetson) pursues his stage career against Aunt Agatha's wishes.

Poetry in translation is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

Paterson (2016) (SPOILERS) Spoiling a movie where nothing much happens is difficult, but I tend to put the tag on in a cautionary sense much of the time. Paterson is Jim Jarmusch at his most inert and ambient but also his most rewardingly meditative. Paterson (Adam Driver), a bus driver and modest poet living in Paterson, New Jersey, is a stoic in a fundamental sense, and if he has a character arc of any description, which he doesn’t really, it’s the realisation that is what he is. Jarmusch’s picture is absent major conflict or drama; the most significant episodes feature Paterson’s bus breaking down, the English bull terrier Marvin – whom Paterson doesn’t care for but girlfriend Laura (Golshifteh Farahani) dotes on – destroying his book of poetry, and an altercation at the local bar involving a gun that turns out to be a water pistol. And Paterson takes it all in his stride, genial to the last, even the ruination of his most earnest, devoted work (the only disappoint

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.