Skip to main content

I don’t know if we should leave, but I would definitely advise skipping the fish course.

The War of the Roses
(1989)

(SPOILERS) Danny DeVito’s ruthless black comedy is an evergreen. Based on Warren Adler’s 1981 novel of the same name – Adler’s Random Hearts was later adapted much less successfully – it finds the director using audience familiarity with Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner and himself to sell a very different prospect to the Indy-riffing Romancing the Stone. The War of the Roses certainly wasn’t guaranteed to become the hit it did, but it’s uncompromising freshness, and its offbeat seasonality (it was released in December in the US, with an accompanying 12 Days of Christmas-riffing trailer), hit a nerve with audiences.

Much of the credit for this is down to DeVito, who favours a heightened, sometimes cartoonish style. You’ll see the use of split diopter here, courtesy of cinematographer Stephen H Burum and a reliance on punchline reaction shots, as well as a comic style that wouldn’t be out of place in a John Hughes movie. Or a Warner Bros cartoon (the scene where, after being delicately injured, Douglas’ Oliver Rose is pushed out of the loft hatch by Turner’s Barbara Rose, is pure slapstick). Even the opening credits shot is a macro one, of the sort then recently seen in Innerspace, as the camera pulls back from DeVito’s handkerchief.

But the movie’s success is also heavily to do with its stars. Trevor Willsmer in The Film Yearbook Volume 9 speculated over how much of the antagonistic energy directed at Oliver by Barbara was genuine on Turner’s part. After all, she just been sued into making The Jewel of the Nile by her co-star, and he was being paid many times her fee for this picture.

If there was any of that in the mix, it nevertheless has to be recognised that Oliver Rose is not the kind of part an egomaniacal star embraces. Indeed, in context, The War of the Roses is merely the most extreme and unstinting of the Douglas brand of flawed males that began with Fatal Attraction and would continue through much of the 90s. Here, though, there’s really very little at all that’s likeable about Oliver, and Douglas gleefully plays up his deficiencies, his blinkeredness and self-centredness. He doesn’t want a divorce, has no capacity to identify with his wife’s position and takes the pettiest approach to every situation when it’s abundantly clear there’s no rescuing their relationship. And yet, he still professes to love her.

In concert, DeVito and Turner make sure Oliver’s irritating qualities – in particular, his assumption that he’s always right, that “phoney laugh” and his sitting at the opposite end of a long dining table smirking and talking to himself as he wolfs down his dinner – are writ large for all to see. He revels in his self-conceived role as breadwinner, mocks Barbara’s desire to start her own business (“You sold liver to our friends?”) and uses the contract he’s promised to read as a fly swat.

DeVito allows the small and not-so-small irritations to fester with enough ghoulish emphasis that, by the time things break – she doesn’t turn up to hospital when it turns out he isn’t dying at all (he has a hiatal hernia, rather than a heart attack) – there’s no room left for rationality and civility. Hence, DeVito’s lawyer Gavin’s framing device of a cautionary tale: that it’s best just to persevere and look on the bright side, because the alternative will be much worse. Oliver’s “Go on then, smash my face in!” gets a literal response he didn’t expect, and from there, it isn’t long until they have divided up the house into zones (“I’ve got more square footage” gloats Oliver to a bewildered Gavin: “This seems rational to both of you?”)

Barbara comes out better in this mess simply because she only stoops to pettiness when Oliver’s already been childish or inconsiderate. Which is most of the time. His volunteering her for an anecdote at a meal with his boss, then telling it for her when she starts rambling, elicits an entirely understandable “Fuck face!” But Barbara is quite capable of living in her own flawed bubble (“I don’t think it’s a good idea to give them sweets like that” warns Oliver; the next time we see their children, they have ballooned).

When escalation reaches a certain point, she drives over his car and ignites the final fatal fight by leading him to believe his pet pooch is in the pâté – “A good dog to the last bite” – after he accidentally ran over her cat. Admittedly, he did earlier ruin an important evening for her potential clients by pissing on the fish. By the time it’s over, they’re both equal and opposites, except that Oliver is more weaselly and comes out worse in any altercation.

The manner in which The War of the Roses was completely ignored by the Academy was noted at the time. Perhaps its sensibility was too brazenly bleak for Oscar to appreciate the quality of writing and performances (and direction); BAFTA did give it a screenplay nod. Thirty-plus years on, the observational humour remains as sharp as ever; it’s a shame DeVito the director didn’t manage to make good on his first two features’ promise. He largely continued with black comedies, but only Matilda met with any kind of comparable success.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Damn prairie dog burrow!

Tremors (1990) (SPOILERS) I suspect the reason the horror comedy – or the sci-fi comedy, come to that – doesn’t tend to be the slam-dunk goldmine many assume it must be, is because it takes a certain sensibility to do it right. Everyone isn’t a Joe Dante or Sam Raimi, or a John Landis, John Carpenter, Edgar Wright, Christopher Landon or even a Peter Jackson or Tim Burton, and the genre is littered with financial failures, some of them very good failures (and a good number of them from the names mentioned). Tremors was one, only proving a hit on video (hence six sequels at last count). It also failed to make Ron Underwood a directing legend.

Here’s Bloody Justice for you.

Laughter in Paradise (1951) (SPOILERS) The beginning of a comedic run for director-producer Mario Zampa that spanned much of the 1950s, invariably aided by writers Michael Pertwee and Jack Davies (the latter went on to pen a spate of Norman Wisdom pictures including The Early Bird , and also comedy rally classic Monte Carlo or Bust! ) As usual with these Pertwee jaunts, Laughter in Paradise boasts a sparky premise – renowned practical joker bequeaths a fortune to four relatives, on condition they complete selected tasks that tickle him – and more than enough resultant situational humour.

I hate natural causes!

Body Bags (1993) (SPOILERS) I’m not surprised Showtime didn’t pick this up for an anthology series. Perhaps, if John Carpenter had made Coming Home in a Body Bag (the popular Nam movie series referenced in the same year’s True Romance ), we’d have something to talk about. Tho’ probably not, if Carpenter had retained his by this point firmly glued to his side DP Gary Kibbe, ensuring the proceedings are as flat, lifeless and unatmospheric as possible. Carpenter directed two of the segments here, Tobe Hooper the other one. It may sound absurd, given the quality of Hooper’s career, but by this point, even he was calling the shots better than Carpenter.

I'm offering you a half-share in the universe.

Doctor Who Season 8 – Worst to Best I’m not sure I’d watched Season Eight chronologically before. While I have no hesitation in placing it as the second-best Pertwee season, based on its stories, I’m not sure it pays the same dividends watched as a unit. Simply, there’s too much Master, even as Roger Delgado never gets boring to watch and the stories themselves offer sufficient variety. His presence, turning up like clockwork, is inevitably repetitive. There were no particular revelatory reassessments resulting from this visit, then, except that, taken together – and as The Directing Route extra on the Blu-ray set highlights – it’s often much more visually inventive than what would follow. And that Michael Ferguson should probably have been on permanent attachment throughout this era.

What's a movie star need a rocket for anyway?

The Rocketeer (1991) (SPOILERS) The Rocketeer has a fantastic poster. One of the best of the last thirty years (and while that may seem like faint praise, what with poster design being a dying art – I’m looking at you Marvel, or Amazon and the recent The Tomorrow War – it isn’t meant to be). The movie itself, however, tends towards stodge. Unremarkable pictures with a wide/cult fanbase, conditioned by childhood nostalgia, are ten-a-penny – Willow for example – and in this case, there was also a reasonably warm critical reception. But such an embrace can’t alter that Joe Johnston makes an inveterately bland, tepid movie director. His “feel” for period here got him The First Avenger: Captain America gig, a bland, tepid movie tending towards stodge. So at least he’s consistent.

As in the hokey kids’ show guy?

A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t think Mr Rogers could have been any creepier had Kevin Spacey played him. It isn’t just the baggage Tom Hanks brings, and whether or not he’s the adrenochrome lord to the stars and/or in Guantanamo and/or dead and/or going to make a perfectly dreadful Colonel Tom Parker and an equally awful Geppetto; it’s that his performance is so constipated and mannered an imitation of Mr Rogers’ genuineness that this “biopic” takes on a fundamentally sinister turn. His every scene with a youngster isn’t so much exuding benevolent empathy as suggestive of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ’s Child Catcher let loose in a TV studio (and again, this bodes well for Geppetto). Extend that to A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood ’s conceit, that Mr Rogers’ life is one of a sociopathic shrink milking angst from his victims/patients in order to get some kind of satiating high – a bit like a rejuvenating drug, on that score – and you have a deeply unsettli

I’m just glad Will Smith isn’t alive to see this.

The Tomorrow War (2021) (SPOILERS). Not so much tomorrow as yesterday. There’s a strong sense of déjà vu watching The Tomorrow War , so doggedly derivative is it of every time-travel/alien war/apocalyptic sci-fi movie of the past forty years. Not helping it stand out from the pack are doughy lead Chris Pratt, damned to look forever on the beefy side no matter how ripped he is and lacking the chops or gravitas for straight roles, and debut live-action director Chris McKay, who manages to deliver the goods in a serviceably anonymous fashion.

Hey, my friend smells amazing!

Luca (2021) (SPOILERS) Pixar’s first gay movie ? Not according to director Enrico Cassarosa (“ This was really never in our plans. This was really about their friendship in that kind of pre-puberty world ”). Perhaps it should have been, as that might have been an excuse – any excuse is worth a shot at this point – for Luca being so insipid and bereft of spark. You know, the way Soul could at least claim it was about something deep and meaningful as a defence for being entirely lacking as a distinctive and creatively engaging story in its own right.

Why don't we go on a picnic, up the hill?

Invaders from Mars (1986) (SPOILERS) One can wax thematical over the number of remakes of ’50s movies in the ’80s – and ’50s SF movies in particular – and of how they represent ever-present Cold War and nuclear threats, and steadily increasing social and familial paranoias and disintegrating values. Really, though, it’s mostly down to the nostalgia of filmmakers for whom such pictures were formative influences (and studios hoping to make an easy buck on a library property). Tobe Hooper’s version of nostalgia, however, is not so readily discernible as a John Carpenter or a David Cronenberg (not that Cronenberg could foment such vibes, any more than a trip to the dental hygienist). Because his directorial qualities are not so readily discernible. Tobe Hooper movies tend to be a bit shit. Which makes it unsurprising that Invaders from Mars is a bit shit.

Who’s got the Figgy Port?

Loki (2021) (SPOILERS) Can something be of redeemable value and shot through with woke? The two attributes certainly sound essentially irreconcilable, and Loki ’s tendencies – obviously, with new improved super-progressive Kevin Feige touting Disney’s uber-agenda – undeniably get in the way of what might have been a top-tier MCU entry from realising its full potential. But there are nevertheless solid bursts of highly engaging storytelling in the mix here, for all its less cherishable motivations. It also boasts an effortlessly commanding lead performance from Tom Hiddleston; that alone puts Loki head and shoulders above the other limited series thus far.