Eraserhead (1977)

While I was as saddened by the news of the passing of David Lynch as many other film fans, the silver lining to that very dark and sky-filling cloud is the fact that it finally gave me the motivation to check out a couple of long-standing blindspots in my journey through cinema. One of those movies, The Straight Story, didn't feel like such an embarrassing omission, although I am now kicking myself for not having made time for it sooner, considering how moved I was by it. The other one, however, was Eraserhead, a film that many would consider part of any Lynch 101 course.

Jack Nance plays Henry Spencer, a man who ends up fathering a child with Mary (Charlotte Stewart). The two adults end up stuck in Henry's very small apartment, struggling to deal with the constant crying of a newborn that resembles something far removed from the usual images of cute babies seen in the real world. Mary doesn't want to stick around, but Henry at least seems to find temporary respite in daydreams that soon start to warp into nightmarish visions bleeding into his reality.

The debut feature from Lynch, this has everything in place that would become commonplace in many of his later works. Despite the fairly low budget, the sound and visual design is constantly impressive, there's an atmosphere of oppressive fear and horror, and Nance is the kind of actor clearly able to work well under Lynch's direction. It also helps that the central creation here, the child, remains a horrifying and mind-boggling piece of work. Other practical effects also work well, but that baby is as nightmare-inducing now as it was back in 1977 when it was first seen.

It's hard to really discuss the performances, things are already so firmly set in a Lynchian style (from the performances to the content), but Nance is superb throughout, Stewart also does very good work, and Allen Joseph and Jeanne Bates are effective as the parents of Mary, Judith Roberts is an extra point of interest (credited as Beautiful Girl Across The Hall), and Laurel Near was able to cement her place in cinema history while portraying the unforgettable Lady In The Radiator. Perhaps the best performance comes from the mind of David Lynch, who always remained secretive on exactly how the practical effect for the baby was created.

Eraserhead is about the loneliness of modern life, even while you're with a partner. It's about the fear of parenthood, both before it happens and when it takes over your life. It's also about much more than that. But, essentially, it's very much about announcing the incredible talent and vision of David Lynch. It's scary, it's upsetting, it's sometimes life-affirming, and you don't want to lose it once you have it in your life. And that's another way to cast off the shrouds of grief that have covered so many film fans in recent weeks. Because we may have lost the man, but his work will be with us forever. Even if that leads to you having an extra nightmare or two caused by his images.

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Mubi Monday: Lucky (2017)

There are a couple of credits that appear after this movie in the filmography of the late Harry Dean Stanton, but I think that is more to do with the timing of the releases, which is why I would be happy if we can all agree that Lucky is his last main movie role, and it's difficult to think of a more fitting swansong for a career so full of memorable turns. It's a shame that he died approximately two weeks before this was officially released, as I am sure he would have been very proud of the final product.

The story itself is simple. Stanton plays Lucky, an old man who goes through the same daily routines as he deals with his old age, the fact that you can no longer smoke in many of the establishments that he used to enjoy smoking in, and how his friends are dealing with their own growing sense of mortality. Lucky is one of those little films that doesn't feel as if it says anything important, it's just the chance to hang out with a great character, but it has some wisdom buried in many scenes. And even if it didn't . . . just spending time with Stanton in a role seemingly perfect for him is enough of a reason to want to give it your time.

Logan Sparks and Drago Sumonja, both able to now list this as their first filmed script, have written such a sweet little film that it's hard to think of it not being personally shaped around Stanton and friends (David Lynch has a small role, as do Ron Livingston, Tom Skerritt, Beth Grant, James Darren, and Barry Shabaka Henley). It's a perfect combination of words and cast.

John Carroll Lynch is the one bringing it all together, making his directorial debut after many years of being "that guy" in a number of movies (you may not recognise the name, but you know him), and I hope he follows this up with some other directorial work. He has a great eye, certainly has faith in his cast of quality characters, and also has the patience to hang back and trust that viewers will wait through many quiet moments to enjoy some of the small, but wonderful, payoffs.

Stanton is a treat throughout, unsurprisingly, and his final moment here is just about as bittersweet as you could get. It's a truly fortuitous bit of cinema magic. Lynch gets on well alongside his good friend, not asked to stretch himself while he and others simply orbit the central character, and everyone else mentioned steps up to the quality of the material. Even Livingston, who I like but rarely view as a great actor, makes the most of a moment that allows him to deliver some of the best dramatic dialogue he has ever been given (to my knowledge). Yvonne Huff, Bertila Damas, and Ana Mercedes also deserve a mention for their work.

It's hard to separate my reaction to this as a movie from my reaction to it as a poignant celebration of the massive talent and wonderfulness of Stanton. Others may want to knock my rating down a point or two, but I'm happy to reassure fans of the star that this is an unmissable performance, as well as an amazing tribute to him.

9/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Mubi Monday: The Elephant Man (1980)

The Elephant Man has always struck me as the most un-Lynchian film in the filmography of David Lynch (although someone did recently remind me of The Straight Story, which I have yet to see), and yet it is no less worthwhile, or rewarding, for fans of his work.

Based on the true life story of John Merrick (played under a load of make up by John Hurt, with a performance that I would argue remains his finest achievement), this is a fairly straightforward look at someone who was viewed as a freak for most of his life. And even those who sought to help him ended up falling into a trap of occasionally putting him on display for the benefit of others. The main person to try helping Mr. Merrick is a doctor named Frederick Treves (Anthony Hopkins), who decides to home the man in the hospital he works at, helped in his endeavours by a matron (Mrs Mothershead, played by Wendy Hiller), and the governor of the institution (played by John Gielgud).

Describing various moments from this movie would easily make you question my opening paragraph. There are some nightmare and dream sequences that certainly wouldn't be out of place in other Lynch movies, and nor would the idea of evil making visits in the guise of various humans. But here, couched within a film that has such a strong emotional core in the plight of Mr. Merrick, it all feels a bit different. The darker, sometimes surreal, touches are just that. This is a story told respectfully and effectively by Lynch, with incidents in the script (co-written by himself, Christopher De Vore, and Eric Bergen) that show why it would appeal to him, cinematically.

The performances are brilliant across the board. Hurt gets all of the praise, and rightfully so, but he's rivalled by the beautifully restrained, for the most part, turns from Hopkins, Hiller, and Gielgud. Freddie Jones and Michael Elphick are far less restrained, playing the kind of nasty and abusive individuals who wouldn't look out of place in a classic Dickensian tale (which this very much feels like), and you have a number of familiar faces in smaller supporting roles: Anne Bancroft (who gets a few wonderful main scenes alongside Hurt), Dexter Fletcher, Hannah Gordon, Lesley Dunlop, Pauline Quirke, and Kenny Baker.

The black and white cinematography is gorgeous, whether scenes are crystal clear or murky when showing the smoke-filled and less hygienic back lanes of London, and Freddie Francis deserves no small amount of praise for his contribution as director of photography. In fact, this is a film in which I wish I could namecheck everyone, from the make up team to the costume designers and on and on. I always remember that film is a collaborative effort, and am always aware that when writing reviews I am picking and choosing the "main names" to discuss, but The Elephant Man is a classic that simply emanates care and hard work from every frame, making me feel more remiss than usual in not listing every credited contributor.

If you have seen this before then revisit it some time, when you can handle something serious, rewarding and moving. If you haven't seen it yet then get to it, and do it as soon as possible.

9/10

You can buy the movie here.
Americans can buy a disc here.

Sci-Fi September: Dune (1984)

I was taken to see Dune when it was first released in cinemas. I was about 8 or 9. My mother and her partner, I assume, thought that this was going to be the next Star Wars. I can't remember every minute of the experience, but I can sum it all up in one word. Boredom.

Revisiting it now, about 30 years later, I can sum it up in two words. Interesting failure. It's still boring in places, but the visual style does keep it worth at least one viewing and there's something enjoyable about watching something so gloriously messy.

I'd attempt to explain the dense plot if I thought I could. Let's face it, the film itself has an opening narration from a young Virginia Madsen that tries to explain a hell of a lot to viewers in the space of a few minutes so I don't think a few sentences here will do any better. Let me just say that the whole movie is a bit like Dallas in space, with a magical spice replacing oil, Kyle MacLachlan as a Bobby Ewing figure (albeit one with the potential to become much more powerful than anyone else around him), and Gordon Sumner (AKA Sting) appears in a metal codpiece at one point, just to haunt your nightmares for years.

I really couldn't begin to run through the entire cast of characters and their relationships to one another. This is one dense film. MacLachlan is the lead, he's the character you get to stick closest to throughout the entire movie. His parents, played by Jurgen Prochnow and Francesca Annis, also play a large part in the proceedings. And then there's a love interest in the shape of Sean Young. The main villain is a boil-covered, rancid Baron, played by Kenneth McMillan (it's worth checking around for other articles that make the case for Dune being one of the most homophobic movies of the decade, based on that character alone).

Adapting the mammoth novel by Frank Herbert would have been no easy task, but David Lynch seemed to think he was up to it. Sadly, he wasn't. He does much better in the role of director, mainly thanks to the impressive visuals of the movie that he allows to take centre stage, but that clunky screenplay is the wobbly foundation that sets this sci-fi house of cards tumbling.

The performances often don't help either, with MacLachlan just not impressive enough in the lead role. He's an actor with a very particular style, one that works in the right roles (Blue Velvet and Twin Peaks spring to mind) and really doesn't in the wrong ones, as we see here. Sting is another weak link, and the least said about Alicia Witt's turn the better, although I don't hold that against her (she was only 9, it was her first movie role, and Lynch seems to have helped in creating the performance he required). McMillan is a lot of fun as the repellent Baron, and there's fun to be had in the performances from great names such as Patrick Stewart, Jose Ferrer, Dean Stockwell, Max Von Sydow, Siân Phillips, and Everett McGill.

There's an enjoyable soundtrack from Toto, with a decent contribution from Brian Eno, some impressive creatures from the great Carlo Rambaldi, and a few darker sequences that hint at a very different approach to the material that Lynch may have been more comfortable with. None of these things, sadly, can make up for the many problems that drag the movie down.

But at least it inspired Fatboy Slim to sample the line: "walk without rhythm, and we won't attract the worm" - allowing me to end with THIS music video

5/10

http://www.amazon.com/Dune-Blu-ray-Kyle-MacLachlan/dp/B00371QQ0M/ref=sr_1_2?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1411739580&sr=1-2&keywords=dune

Side By Side (2012)

A documentary that looks at the current choice being made by film-makers to either shoot traditionally or move towards digital, Side By Side contains some nice pieces of information, but is mostly a chance to hear a variety of directors talk about their approaches to film-making and their passion for whichever format they choose.

Keanu Reeves is the constant element here, conducting interviews with directors and people who work in other areas of the film business. The list of names includes, but isn't limited to, Martin Scorsese, James Cameron, David Fincher, Danny Boyle, Steven Soderbergh, Robert Rodriguez, George Lucas, David Lynch, Christopher Nolan, Greta Gerwig and Joel Schumacher.

Directed by Christopher Kenneally, who also wrote the linking narration, this isn't a documentary to win anyone over, and it's not full of surprises. If you like the feel and look of actual FILM then you'll feel that you've been proven right in your choice as the end credits roll. But so will anyone who likes the options provided by filming digitally. And if you can't already guess what side of the fence James Cameron and George Lucas fall on then you've never seen a James Cameron or George Lucas film lately. The two men end up being two of the duller subjects interviewed, funnily enough, with Lucas being almost laughable in his passion to convert everyone to the world of digital.

The greater fun here comes from people either putting up a great variety of reasons for their choices, with Rodriguez being just as passionate about digital as Cameron or Lucas but putting forward his argument in a much more practical manner, or from listening to people who can state their own personal preference while also looking at the bigger picture and the pros and cons of each method.

A film for film lovers (on any format), Side By Side is a pleasant, civilised debate that serves to remind people of just how much blood, sweat and tears went into creating the movies that are now beloved classics. When remembering all of those movie memories, the main argument becomes a lot less significant, but no less interesting. Well, that's how I felt as I smiled throughout the whole thing.

7/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Side-By-DVD-Keanu-Reeves/dp/B00B74R3CQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390658737&sr=8-1&keywords=side+by+side