You Can’t Watch This

Thanksgiving Week

So, a friend of mine from L.A. came out to Austin this past week to hang out with me and my girlfriend, have some turkey, and, of course, watch some movies. It was a good week, and we had a blast, but I must say that some of the films we watched definitely deserve a space on this website.

The High Points: “Live Free or Die Hard” was fantastic–it had just the right amount of comedy and a ton of great action. “Severance”, a film I’d been wanting to see for quite some time, didn’t disappoint, and “Vacancy” also had a lot going for it.

What really took the cake, however, was “Mr. Brooks”. I had absolutely no desire to watch this movie, but my buddy talked me into it. There’s nothing better than when you think something’s going to be boring or preachy or whatever and it turns out to be incredible. I happen to like Kevin Costner quite a bit (”The Postman”, in my book, is right up there with “The Road Warrior” for post-apocalyptic excellence); even still, I was absolutely certain that “Mr. Brooks” was going to be terrible. I was so wrong. If you’re looking for a creepy, disturbing, and all around triumph of a film, look no further.

Here are the other movies I’ve watched in the past week: No Country For Old Men, The Mist, Hitman, Invisible, 200 Motels, The Number 23, Van Wilder 2; The Rise of Taj, a Joe Rogan stand-up special, Heartbeeps, and, inevitably, Beowulf. When we needed to take a break, we watched the first season of upright Citizens Brigade, YouTube stuff, a few pieces of movies on Showtime (including the incredibly entertaining last 15 minutes of a film called Doppleganger starring Drew Barrymore), and several installments of Magic’s Greatest Secrets Revealed.

Not all of these were bad. No Country was pretty good, and Hitman was a lot of fun. Of the remaining movies, however, The Rise of Taj was the best. Not to knock Van Wilder 2, cause I had a good time watching it, but when that’s the best pick out of so many films, you know something’s horribly amiss.

Bad movies are kinda my thing, but the past week really was a fluke. I always joke with my girlfriend that, since I went to film school, I should be the one who gets to pick the movies when we go to rent something. After going into a video store and coming out with “The Number 23″ and “200 Motels” at the same time, I’ll never be able to use that argument ever again.

Biggest disappointment runner-up: “Invisible”. I’m really tired of movies and TV shows that focus on privileged teens. “Invisible” is about this well-off kid that gets the hell beat out of him and is left for dead. But he’s NOT dead, see, and his soul (I guess) walks around shouting at people and being judgmental. It is literally IMPOSSIBLE to feel even a bit of sympathy for this bobo because he’s such a brat.

Listen, I’m all for the idea that everybody has problems, but I’m totally sick of watching shows and movies about the trials of regular people. Real problems are boring, and infusing them with stupid music and quick camera cuts only makes them louder and more annoying to watch. You know what kind of problem I want to see when I rent a movie? “The potion i just drank makes me irresistible to women” (i.e. Dr. Alien) or maybe “The Russians have invaded our high school and it’s up to the football team to take them on”. “There’s too much pressure to be something I’m not” is beyond played, and I wish people would give it a rest (or at least be required by law to put a sticker on it, a la Mr. Yuk, so I’ll know not to rent it).

Biggest disappointment of the week: “The Mist”. My buddy said that people have been trying to make this movie for years, but I have no idea why. There were only about 3 or 4 cool things that happened in this humiliating kick in the crotch of a film, and that’s including watching one of the characters get knocked off. A few of the monsters are worth seeing, but there’s no humor to the movie what so ever (which, in a horror flick, is a big problem). The characters seem to get dumber as the plot progresses, and the whole thing ends with a scene that makes “it was all a dream” look like “what’s in the box” from “Seven”.

If I had my druthers, I’d strap down Invisible and The Mist and make them watch 200 Motels over and over again for revenge.

On that note, Happy Holidays. I’m running a bit low on dares, so if you or a friend has any bad ideas, let me know!

-JN

Bookmark to:

doug wrote:
Curse your cold heart, Jon! I swore a decade ago I would never think of this movie ever again, but you have reminded me of the one film I have never been able to see to the bitter end (and for good reason you’ll see). I bestow upon you Frank Zappa’s 200 Motels.PS: You probably shouldn’t drop acid before you watch this…not that I think you would but I wouldn’t be a good friend if I didn’t warn you.

200 Motels- Dir. Tony Palmer and Charlie Swenson 1971

“200 Motels” is a movie made by Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention about life on the road, and what it takes to be in a rock and roll band (or, at least that’s my best guess).

When it comes to psychedelia, this movie is filled to the rim with Brim. I once helped make a movie about break dancers that looked a bit like this–shot on video with a distracting amount of in-camera “special effects” that looked terrible and assured that any viewer would feel not only removed from the footage, but a bit angry at the production crew, as well. “200 Motels” takes this to the next level. Most of the time, the video effects are so heavy that you can’t tell what (if anything) is going on. Even when you can make out the visuals, it’s hard to care because you just sat through so much uninteresting swill.

The Plot: “200 Motels” is a movie made by Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention about life on the road, and what it takes to be in a rock and roll band (or, at least that’s my best guess).

What made it watch-able: I was initially excited to watch this movie. I’m not the biggest Frank Zappa fan in the world, but I like some of his stuff and was quite interested in seeing what a film made by the guy would be like. About 15 minutes into the movie, I realized that I didn’t really want to watch it; the experience was incredibly uncomfortable, but I knew it had to be done–”200 Motels” is basically, the cinematic equivalent of a prostate exam.

What do you say about a film that tries to not make sense? Well, if it’s only 5 or 10 minutes long, you might be able to watch it a few times and take something from it. In the case of “200 Motels”, you might have an opinion by the middle of the movie, but with a running time of about 99 minutes, the middle is a long way from the end. Anyone would be hard pressed to keep their thoughts on this film intact by the time they reach the finale, which, in my opinion, came about 60 or 70 minutes too late.

The film is bad, and don’t let anyone tell you it isn’t. Sure, there are some interesting moments; there were even a few points in the movie where I laughed. As a whole, however, “200 Motels” is very close to unwatch-able. The only scenario I can think of where I could watch even part of this movie again and be happy goes something like this: I’m watching something really good, but a character in that good movie is watching “200 Motels”–then that character gets killed by a dragon or a swarm of super-intelligent bees.

Now, some people will tell you that this movie is awesome and ground-breaking or whatever, but don’t believe them. Throwing a bunch of slop together and calling it a movie didn’t begin with “200 Motels”, and it certainly didn’t end with it, either. If you’re looking for something “experimental” that actually has some merit, check out George Kuchar’s “Hold Me While I’m Naked” or (and I can’t believe I’m about to write this) “Dog Star Man” by Stan Brakhage. As a period piece, I suppose “200 Motels” has something to offer–it’s just not enough to justify watching it.

Times I had to avert my eyes: 0
Breaks needed to complete viewing: about 5
Overall rating from 1 to 10: 2.5

Bookmark to:

doug wrote:
Heartbeeps, Jon, Heartbeeps! It will make you cry, it will make you cry…

Heartbeeps- Dir. Allan Arkush 1981

This movie (according to IMDB) got nominated for an Oscar; I at least hope that the Academy did the same for Judge Dredd and Short Circuit 2. I fully admit that I am a bit impressed whenever something can tick me off so much in 78 minutes just by looking at it, but seriously guys, I can watch this and you cannot.

I got this dare and was actually excited about it at first. I’d just finished watching “Severance” (which, if you like a good slasher flick, you should check out) and thought I’d be immune to anything for at least a few hours.

I’d never heard of this movie before and looked it up: robot love story with Andy Kaufman, Randy Quaid, Bernadette Peters, and the ever-radiant Dick Miller. It had to have something going for it, right? I popped this piece of refuse into my DVD player and found out that, though I’m a man of steel when it comes to watching terrible cinema, my limits can still be tested.
The Plot: Andy and Bernadette play two cyborgs that are put on the same shelf at the cyborg repair shop. They get to talking, one thing leads to another, and before you know it, they’re on a romantic journey to a tree they saw through the shop window. Since each could tell that the other would be pretty boring, they invited another broken robot (that was built to tell one-liners) to come with them to sprinkle a little “fingernails on a chalkboard” style grating onto the overall stink of their trip.

After realizing that they’re relationship is stupid and meaningless (this takes all of about 10 minutes in the film, but the audience will know immediately), they decide to–wait for it–make a baby! How reasonable! Anywho, the group of four goes, looks at the tree, then turns around to go back to the factory. Their apparently worthless energy cells wear down, and some factory workers come and pick them up in a truck. THE END

What makes it watch-able: This film is crap. Anyone worth a wooden nickel will get tired of the dumb way the robots talk to each other very quickly. Then, if they’re lucky, they’ll start to feel itchy all over, take a second to scratch, and hopefully when they look back at the screen will realize that this is going to continue for the length of the film and turn it off. The robots talk to each other with this pseudo-technical manner, but they are expressing feelings that a real person might think at one time or another–it’s supposed to be amusing and thoughtful, but it’s not.

Maybe if they were a little more boxy (like that one in the Beastie Boys video that fought the guy with the octopus head) it would have made a slightly more interesting impression on the viewer, but these were “cyborgs” and they looked, for the most part, like people. Wow, a robot that looks a lot like a person doing things that seem almost human; if that doesn’t blow your mind, you’re obviously not a total idiot (although, you would be watching “Heartbeeps”, so you can’t be too awful bright).

The little kid robot they make is okay (at least it looks cool), and there’s a 2 second long flash of a woman wearing a fantastic skirt, but, other than that, this movie, even at only an hour and eighteen minutes, will beg you to turn it off.

Times I had to avert my eyes: 0
Breaks necessary to complete viewing: 0
Overall rating from 1 to 10: 3

Bookmark to: