Skip to main content

Don’t you ever call them tattoos!

The Illustrated Man
(1969)

(SPOILERS) I’d been blissfully unaware The Illustrated Man didn’t have a great rep. And that Ray Bradbury – not that authors/originators necessarily ought to be looked to as arbiters of the quality of adaptations of their work – thought it stank. I was quite taken with it on the occasion I first saw it – which must be upwards of thirty years ago – and this revisit confirmed many of the qualities I recognised in it then. To a degree, it’s little more than a pretentious, SF twist on then popular portmanteau horrors, but its conceits, likely the same ones Bradbury didn’t like, lend The Illustrated Man an eerie resonance.

Carl: Don’t you look at these illustrations too long, cos they’ll come alive and they’ll tell you stories.

Inevitably, adherents of the book tend towards a unified front in denouncing the adaptation, but what did they expect? Eighteen stories couldn’t be done justice in a movie; you might argue for an over-priced Netflix anthology – Zack Snyder was attached to a new movie version at one point, and I’m sure aficionados breathed an audible sigh of relief when it fell silent – but I rather like the phantasmagorical, non-literal suggestions Howard B Keitsek’s screenplay makes.

One might claim they make a nonsense of it all – Rod Steiger’s Carl, Clair Bloom’s Felicia and Robert Drivas’ Willie appear variously in stories that come alive through Carl’s tattoos, I mean “skin illustrations” – but the picture appears to be struggling towards a theme of entwined destinies across the ages, not so very far from Cloud Atlas. The stories depicted may not be real – “Each person who tries to see beyond his own time must face the questions to which there cannot yet be absolute answers” warns Felicia – but mad Carl appears convinced his tattooist, I mean “skin illustrator”, comes from the future (“She went back into the future, beyond her own time”).

Jack Smight might not have been the most creative of directors, but he achieved a respectable run in the ’60s (Harper, Kaleidoscope) that gave way to fare more defining of his skillset (Airport 1975 and Midway, both big hits). He’d struck up a relationship with Steiger on the previous year’s No Way to Treat a Lady (adapted from a William Goldman novel), and the actor met with Bradbury’s approval. Some find Rod insufferable here, but I tend to appreciate a fine ham, and Steiger at his best (In the Heat of the Night, A Fistful of Dynamite, The Loved One) can make it a virtue.

He shows up glowering, ranting and raging, but his intimidating presence does a lot of the movie’s heavy lifting, offsetting the viewer, who naturally falls into identifying with Drivas’ itinerant novice. The framing material is the stuff of classic portmanteau; there has to be an “Oh!” twist to lead us out, so Willie sees himself being killed by Carl when stares at the uninked area on Carl’s shoulder blade. As a result, attempting to forestall the inevitable, Willie brains the sleeping artwork with a rock and pegs it, beside himself, but it’s quickly revealed he failed in his task; Carl sets off, T-600 like, in pursuit.

The three tales are all variant SF futures with a sting in the tail. Again, Smight’s imagination has been impugned here, but I’m more than happy to wallow in the very ’60s futurism of moulded white-plastic sets and jumpsuits, particularly when it’s refracted through a fantasy veneer. Tom Milne, in a positive Time Out take, suggested Smight was referencing the Garden of Eden and Cain & Abel in the recurrent fittings for the leads, while the trio of stories “all hinge obliquely on the betrayal of love, with sometimes one character, sometimes another, becoming the victim”. They are also, however, profoundly dystopian futures, regardless of the spiffy trappings.

Star Trek’s Federation is something to be dreaded, not demanded. In The Veldt, a couple’s children are equipped with a nursery allowing “free involvement” in an instantaneous atmosphere (manifested as an African veldt, complete with lions and vultures). However, the family’s counsellor warns the system is dangerous, that the children “aren’t releasing destructive thoughts… they’re embracing them”. This environment is one of inherent artifice; the house is a sealed bubble, and “Everything’s done for us”, be it food, sleep or sex.

Globalism is most definitely not a solution, such that there are “stupid labour laws” dictating one “can’t work for more than six months of the year, so you mustn’t upset the great planned global balance of economy”. Although they remain together, the essence of the family unit is fractured and dysfunctional. None of the individuals – children, wife, husband – are able to observe their designated roles. The room itself takes on the characteristic of a virtual-reality tulpa, thought forms enabled to act on the participant; “The room will hate you if you kill it” warn the kids. The counsellor discovers the lions have devoured their parents when he arrives, the children left entirely undisturbed by the massacre. One can’t help but read into this a very current anaesthetised, plugged-in VR mindset, although Bradbury doubtless had TV more exclusively on his mind.

The Long Rain offers a very verisimilitudinous, drenched studio alien planet in which crash-landed space travellers are subjected to endless torrents or rain, so merciless it drives them mad, deaf or suicidally drowns them. Carl’s captain is at loggerheads with Willie, who understandably resents having been led in a circle for seven days, back to their crashed (and contaminated) spaceship. They’re seeking respite from the downpour in one of the 130 sundomes – provided, naturally, by the Unified States of Earth – across the planet, but it’s only when he is alone at the end that Carl comes across one. Whether he does or not is perhaps questionable, since it’s occupied by a come-thither Felicia.

The Last Night of the World delivers an inversion of The Veldt’s parricide. Once again, it’s the unified globe that holds sway, as the Council of the World forum has decreed, following a vision of the end of the Earth to take place that night, that all children are to be euthanised, so sparing them potential trauma (“Will it be sudden? Will it be lingering?”) The events of the gas cloud of 4187, which decimated the population, are noted in support of the proposed action. When Felicia awakes, clearly not dead, she rushes to her distraught husband. She’s too late. He has gone ahead with the terrible deed. Doubtless Frank Darabont had this in mind when he conjured a “better” ending to Stephen King’s The Mist.

The ellipses and sense of fractured time here made me wonder at the feast Nicolas Roeg might have made of the same material. Bradbury complained of Smight’s film "There was no screenplay" and noted François Truffaut had been unable to secure the financing to adapt it prior to making Fahrenheit 451. When interviewer Chris Hicks suggested that would have been wonderful, Bradbury replied "Don't break my heart". But again, devotees were sure to have been disappointed. Chances are, when translating between mediums.

Willie: I’m sorry. I never saw a dog in a bag.

Ray did think Steiger was good in The Illustrated Man, underlining that any opinion is as subjective as they come. I’d suggest the star performance – all three leads are good (Bloom was Steiger’s wife at the time) – is undeniably Pogo the Pomeranian, whom Carl has been carrying around in a bag and refers to as a Pekinese. How this hound didn’t have a bright and shiny, coke-fuelled, glitterball-bedazzled career ahead of him, yet The Littlest Hobo ran for six seasons (eight if you include its earliest incarnation), is mystifying.



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?

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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.