Skip to main content

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars
(1978)

(SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman (Straw Dogs, Logan’s Run) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

Streisand dropped out because the subject matter wasn’t her thing (too “kinky” as Peters later put it). She was replaced by Faye Dunaway, who’d appeared in a number of hits during the previous decade yet had proved a firmly resistible box office draw in her own right; The Eyes of Laura Mars duly performed respectably, but it wasn’t the hit it ought to have been. Certainly given the amount Peters spent on it (not least in publicity). The aftereffect of Streisand’s involvement was a song for the soundtrack, a soundtrack that goes to lengths as notable as the location shoot to establish a sense of time and place, awash as it is with synth disco – most notably Let’s All Chant, but not the Pat and Mick version, alas – mainly during Laura’s photoshoots.

Photoshoots that have made Laura Mars famous for her Helmut Newton-tinged marriage of sex and violence. It emerges that her disturbed style has been formed through flashes of images she’s been privy to over the past couple of years. Now, though, she is experiencing full-blown visions of acts of murder. Acts perpetrated on those she knows. Director Irvin Kershner duly presents a roster of possible perpetrators, including her flamboyant friend Donald (René Auberjonois rocking a Barry Manilow look), her driver Tommy (Brad Dourif in his third film role, and since he’s already been typecast as unhinged, clearly earmarked as Suspect Number One) and her ex-husband Michael (Raul Julia).

Investigating the case is Tommy Lee Jones’ police lieutenant John Neville. For various reasons, he’s the least likely person to have committed these crimes, so when it turns out to have been him all along, it rather undercuts Kersh’s stated desire to inject realism into the proceedings (“the original script was a trick, and I didn’t want that trick. I wanted it to be a result of psychological truth”). The Wiki summary suggests Neville’s behaviour is down to multiple personalities (reasonable to the extent that he has only just empathically spent time berating Frank Adonis’ Sal for gunning down Tommy with “He didn’t even know what he’s doing, Sal. He’s sick, Sal. He’s sick!”) If so, then it’s another risible Hollywood take on multiple personalities (MKUltra only occasionally gets a look in from Tinseltown, but that’s probably a good thing if insights are coming via Max Landis). Carpenter, it seems, had an idea very much in line with Michael Myers’ unmotivated massacres, in the form of a killer unknown to the audience.

If the picture never rises above the structural stir and repeat of Laura getting a vision, vision getting killed, Laura getting another vision, whittling down suspects and offering an occasional red herring as she gets it on with the copper, it is nevertheless diverting due to its more than solid cast. Julia’s unable to do much with a few scenes as Laura’s alcoholic ex, but Dourif’s a typically nervy livewire while Auberjonois relishes all the best lines (“Hey, I do a terrific Lloyd Bridges” he tells a cop at one point, before proving it).

Kershner can thank the movie for getting him The Empire Strikes Back gig – purportedly, an early rough-cut impressed George Lucas – but there’s little here (or indeed, in his work either side of that classic) to suggest the finesse and detail of his Star Wars foray. There are some fine compositions, yes, but little real sense of creative vision outside of Laura’s photography. Indeed, the Laura-eyed view, all gauzy POV, is particularly uninspired. And as Carpenter pointed out in his critique, the director’s decisions, far from supporting them, rather went against notions of realism (“In my version Laura Mars was a crime photographer. Also, I think Irvin Kershner failed at making the visual style of the visions compelling. Finally, if you could see through someone else’s eyes you would be essentially blind to your own surroundings. You’d experience vertigo, lose your balance, etc.”)

By changing Laura to a fashion photographer, Kershner seems to be striving for a slice of lofty commentary about on what that world does to women. Except that there’s little sense of such thematic content in the final film, aside from Laura’s statement on her art (“I’ve seen all kinds of murder. Physical yes, but moral, spiritual and emotional. I can’t stop it, but I can show it”). And, of course, Kershner’s professed envisaging would make Laura herself a perpetrator. Production values aside, the only element that really sets the picture apart from serial killer outings to follow is how scrupulously Kersh avoids lashings of the red stuff. But if he isn’t attempting to titillate by slasher standards, The Eyes of Laura Mars’ leery structure more than does that job for him.


Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

The Krishna died of a broken finger? I mean, is that a homicide?

Miami Blues (1990) (SPOILERS) If the ‘90s crime movie formally set out its stall in 1992 with Quentin Tarantino’s Reservoir Dogs , another movie very quietly got in there first at the beginning of the decade. Miami Blues picked up admiring reviews but went otherwise unnoticed on release, and even now remains under-recognised. The tale of “blithe psychopath” Federick J. Frenger, Jr., the girl whose heart he breaks and the detetive sergeant on his trail, director George Armitage’s adaptation of Charles Willeford’s novel wears a pitch black sense of humour and manages the difficult juggling act of being genuinely touching with it. It’s a little gem of a movie, perfectly formed and concisely told, one that more than deserves to rub shoulders with the better-known entries in its genre. One of the defining characteristics of Willeford’s work, it has been suggested , is that it doesn’t really fit into the crime genre; he comes from an angle of character rather than plot or h

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

People still talk about Pandapocalypse 2002.

Turning Red (2022) (SPOILERS) Those wags at Pixar, eh? Yes, the most – actually, the only – impressive thing about Turning Red is the four-tiered wordplay of its title. Thirteen-year-old Mei (Rosalie Chiang) finds herself turning into a large red panda at emotive moments. She is also, simultaneously, riding the crimson wave for the first time. Further, as a teenager, she characteristically suffers from acute embarrassment (mostly due to the actions of her domineering mother Ming Lee, voiced by Sandra Oh). And finally, of course, Turning Red can be seen diligently spreading communist doctrine left, right and centre. To any political sensibility tuning in to Disney+, basically (so ones with either considerable or zero resistance to woke). Take a guess which of these isn’t getting press in reference to the movie? And by a process of elimination is probably what it it’s really about (you know in the same way most Pixars, as far back as Toy Story and Monsters, Inc . can be given an insi

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

You tampered with the universe, my friend.

The Music of Chance (1993) (SPOILERS) You won’t find many adaptations of Paul Auster’s novels. Original screenplays, yes, a couple of which he has directed himself. Terry Gilliam has occasionally mentioned Mr. Vertigo as in development. It was in development in 1995 too, when Philip Haas and Auster intended to bring it to the screen. Which means Auster presumably approved of Haas’ work on The Music of Chance (he also cameos). That would be understandable, as it makes for a fine, ambiguous movie, pregnant with meaning yet offering no unequivocal answers, and one that makes several key departures from the book yet crucially maintains a mesmerising, slow-burn lure.

I only know what I’ve been programmed to believe. But, of course, the same goes for you.

Raised by Wolves Season One (SPOILERS) Ridley Scott’s latest transhumanist tract is so stuffed with required lore, markers and programming, it’s a miracle it manages to tell a half-engaging story along the way. Aaron Guzikowski ( Prisoners ) is the credited creator, but it has the Ridders stamp of dour dystopia all over it, complete with Darius Wolski ( Prometheus ) cinematography setting the tone. Which means bleak grey skies, augmented by South Africa this time, rather than Iceland. Raised by Wolves is a reliable mix of wacko twist plotting and clumsy, slack-jawed messaging; like the Alien prequels, it will surely never be seen through to a conclusion, but as an agenda platform it’s never less than engaging (and also frequently, for the same reasons, exasperating).

You’re like a human mummy!

The Lost City (2022) (SPOILERS) Perhaps the most distressing part of The Lost City , a Romancing the Stone riff that appears to have been packaged by the Hollywood equivalent of a processed cheese plant lacking its primary ingredient (that would be additives), is the possibility that Daniel Radcliffe is the only viable actor left standing in Tinseltown. That’s if the suggestions at least two of the performers here – Sandra Bullock and Brad Pitt – are deep faked in some way, shape or form, and the other name – Channing Tatum – is serving hard atonement time. If the latter’s choices generally weren’t so abysmal and his talent in arears, I’d assume that was the only explanation for him showing up in this dreck.

Okay, just jump right into my nightmare, the water is warm.

Jerry Maguire  (1996) (SPOILERS) I didn’t much like Jerry Maguire at the time, which I suspect is intrinsically linked to the fact that I didn’t much like Tom Cruise at the time. I’m still not really a massive fan of either, but the latter at least made an effort to rein in his most irksome traits subsequently. Jerry Maguire , however, finds him drawing on the same “bag of tricks” that mystifyingly transfixed his fan base a decade before in Top Gun . Bonnie Hunt suggested the toughest part of the role was “ playing a character that doesn’t like Tom Cruise ”. I wouldn’t have had that problem. I do not like Tom and Jerry.