Nostalgiaville: “The Dark Crystal”

Just like most decent, God-fearing American children raised in the 80s and 90s, I grew up watching a lot of Jim Henson movies. The Muppet movies were a staple, as was “Labyrinth.” I knew all the words to the Muppet Show theme song, as well as “Dance, Magic, Dance.” I was a big fan.

But there was one Henson movie I never got behind that lots of people hold in high regard: “The Dark Crystal.” I first watched it a year or two after seeing “Labyrinth,” told by my parents that I would love it. I did not, but I remember really wanting to, out of devotion to all things Henson. I even watched it twice, to see if I would like it better the second time, with no success. Something about it just didn’t hit me the way “Labyrinth” did. I was curious to watch it again to see if the passage of time would perhaps change my opinion of the movie. It didn’t, but now I can more exactly pinpoint what doesn’t work about “The Dark Crystal” for me, and what does.

“The Dark Crystal” was Henson’s first movie with conceptual designer Brian Froud, the mad genius responsible for creating the look and feel of “Labyrinth” and Henson’s TV series “The Storyteller.” It involves a fantastic world inhabited by the nasty, cruel Skeksis, who look like a cross between a vulture and a decaying horse, and the peaceful Mystics, who look like your favorite grandparent imagined as a cuddly dinosaur. They are in a struggle for power, which will be finalized at a soon-to-come eclipse. Our hero, Jen, is a deerlike creature called a Gelfling, who’s tasked with repairing the mysterious Dark Crystal before that eclipse happens, so he can restore the balance of power.

“The Dark Crystal” was an experimental foray into a form Henson would later use with great success, branching out from the Muppets to create more “realistic” puppets. As a result, some of the characters look and move better than others. The Skeksis and Mystics look fantastic, as do the myriad animals and insects Henson uses to people the world he creates. But the Gelflings have problems. They’re an awkward size, too small for full-body puppetry like the Skeksis and Mystics, too big for small, precise movements. Consequently, they  are stiff and slow— like the puppet version of the uncanny valley.

But the main issue of “The Dark Crystal” that I think got in the way for me as a
child is in the storytelling. This movie is about 60% less fun than “Labyrinth” (I imagine part of it probably comes from it having 100% less David Bowie). It’s a dark movie, with no obvious jokes or clever humor. For children whose main joy in life comes from fart jokes and pratfalls, this makes it a hard movie to get behind. There’s also very little internal conflict. The characters are simple. The good guys are unfailingly good, the bad guys are unfailingly bad, and sarcasm is a totally foreign concept. As a result, I didn’t find myself caring much about any of the characters.

Another important factor “The Dark Crystal” is missing is an audience surrogate. It’s a big leap for audiences to be dropped into an unfamiliar world, with rules known only to its creators. We need a character who’s as new to it as we are to help us navigate the setting. “The Dark Crystal” gives us only an opening narrative about the Skeksis and the Mystics, then lets us do the rest of the work. It requires extra attention, more than I was willing to give this time around, let alone as an easily-distracted kid.

But there’s one thing Henson gets right that hints at his successes to come: details. The world of “The Dark Crystal” is full of gorgeously detailed sets and costumes and odd little scenes that reflect a unique biology. There are fairy-like creatures that float around like dandelion seeds, something that looks like a log, but swallows bugs and small animals like a large bullfrog, and teeny-weeny rodents that move like tiny balls of lint. Those are just a few of the many things to look at. This is one of the few parts of “The Dark Crystal” that’s really delightful, and something Henson later used to an increasingly fun degree in his later collaborations with Froud.

I’m glad I re-watched “The Dark Crystal,” if only to re-affirm my belief that it’s a lesser film in the Henson canon. It was an admirable attempt, to be sure, but in retrospect only shows how far he had to come with his newer, more realistic brand of puppetry. It’s missing the dose of whimsy that so many of Henson’s other movies had, the thing that makes them so special. As a kid, it just didn’t feel right. As an adult, it’s a little more interesting, but still just doesn’t ring true.

Note: I’m still competing for a speaking role on Neil Gaiman’s “American Gods” audiobook! I need LOTS of votes to get into the top 20 and be considered. Help me out by going here and voting! Thanks!

The Non-Fiction Section: Subway Preacher

I’ve written about Dennis W. Ho’s short documentary “Subway Preacher” briefly before, in my overall review of the True/False film festival back in March. I didn’t get to write much in-depth about the film, which is an interesting piece of cinema verite, so this week I’m doing a full review. Like George Ratliff’s movie “Hell House,” “Subway Preacher” is an interesting, frustrating and strangely entertaining look into the lives of a group of right-wing Christian fundamentalists who have clearly got some other issues they need to tackle in addition to religion.

The movie’s focal point is Brian Kelly, a man who’s given up his job to go into ministry full time. Now, when I say “go into ministry,” I don’t mean go to a theological seminary, or becoming a missionary. Brian is the subway preacher of the movie’s title. He and the members of his pitiful congregation, spend hours and hours every day in the New York City subway, handing out religious pamphlets, praying loudly, and threatening hellfire for heathens. Brian’s wife, Rose, dutifully helps him with his work, meaning that the couple has no income. During the course of the film, Brian starts having feelings for Kaitlin, a Columbia grad student and member of his flock. Discord between Brian, Rose and his ministry partner Shawn follow as a result.

Ho pulls no punches here. He presents Brian as a wholly unlikeable, off-putting character and his congregation as a bunch of enthusiastic but misguided souls. Brian’s manipulative. He exploits Shawn. He verbally abuses Rose. He proudly takes photos with “born again” Son of Sam killer David Berkowitz. But through all of this he still truly believes he is doing God’s work, and shouts it at the top of his lungs. An exchange Kaitlin has with an irritated subway commuter as Brian spouts his dogma in the background says it best:

Man: Is he (Brian) going to hell?

Kaitlin: No, he’s saved. He isn’t going to hell.

Man: Then how bad could (hell) be?

With representatives like Brian around, it’s no wonder people get turned off by Christianity.

As much as I’d like to get on my high horse about the film’s unfortunate but true “Christians-as-wackjobs” portrayal of Brian and his team, my goal here, first and foremost, is to evaluate “Subway Preacher” as a movie. And it’s a really good movie. Ho gets creative with his camera, setting up very cinematic shots of characters, and creative transitional montages of subway scenes. The drama between Brian, Rose, Kaitlin and Shawn is heartbreaking.  You never get the sense that characters are exaggerating, or are reacting to the camera, with theexception of Brian—it could be argued that his behavior

 during the whole film (his pursuit of Kaitlin, his rejection of his wife) is a giant reaction to Ho’s presence.

Amidst all the drama, “Subway Preacher” really serves to show the ironic life and hypocrisies of people with extreme beliefs. Brian’s fundamental theology ought to eliminate divorce from Rose as an option. But yet, Brian finds a way to justify it to himself through verbally abusing her and calling her a rebellious woman when she sticks up for herself, though it’s clear she loves him. Brian and Kaitlin both claim they’re “on fire for God,” yet choose to show that fire by scaring away anyone they might potentially convert. Kaitlin actually makes a good point earlier in the film that she feels she has blood on her hands every time she chooses not to evangelize to someone, the point being that she’s keeping them from Heaven by not telling them about Jesus. But her particular brand of evangelism does more harm than good—those whose souls she’s concerned for might be better off if she didn’t say anything at all.

“Subway Preacher” is a curious slice-of-life movie that looks closely at the existence and beliefs of people most of us go out of our way to ignore. It’s not necessarily revealing or surprising, but there’s a surprising wealth of drama that provides entertaining, sympathetic characters and an engaging story. Director Dennis W. Ho has made a creative, thoughtful movie that’s as easy to laugh at as it can be cringe-inducing.

Shameless self-promotion: Neil Gaiman’s American Gods Audiobook Contest

Hey, everyone!

Last week I entered a competition for a speaking role in an upcoming audiobook edition of Neil Gaiman’s award-winning novel “American Gods.” I’ve uploaded an audition MP3 to the web site. Here’s the catch: in order to be considered in the competition, I have to be voted into the top 20 most popular entries. As of today, I’m number 26. So, I’m enlisting the help of the blogosphere! I’ve got a link to my contest entry at the bottom of the sidebar (just click on the image of the “American Gods” book cover), but am also including it here, in case of technical difficulties. You can vote once per day, and the contest ends May 2nd. Help a blogger out and vote! If you feel so moved, enlist friends and family to do the same. I wish I had a better incentive to offer other than good karma…but for now, that will have to do.

I’ll have a new Non-Fiction Section post up tomorrow–see you then!

That Guy File #6: Wallace Shawn

Where you’ve seen him: “The Princess Bride,” “Manhattan,” “My Dinner with Andre,” “Toy Story” 1,2 and 3, “Southland Tales,” “Gossip Girl,” “The Incredibles,” “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine,” “Murphy Brown,” “Clueless,” “The Cosby Show,” “Radio Days,”

Of all the “That Guy” actors, Wallace Shawn is probably the one whose name most people already know. He’s so well-known that I actually go back and forth on whether or not he really belongs in the group. He doesn’t have the obscurity that lots of other actors on this list do, but he’s never really been in a major role in any movie, with the exception of “My Dinner with Andre,” (which he also wrote).

Shawn’s got a face and voice that you just can’t take very seriously, which is why most of his roles are comic. His definitive roles are Vizzini in “The Princess Bride” and Mr. Hall in “Clueless,” and he doesn’t often play against type. Shawn’s generally played blustery, cocky bullshitters and quiet, self-assured smart guys his whole career. As is the case with a lot of character actors, he’s also done a lot of iconic voice work, as Rex in the “Toy Story” movies, and Gilbert Huph, Mr. Incredible’s diminutive bully of a boss in “The Incredibles.”

But offscreen, Shawn is one of those people whose activities stretch into a much more interesting realm. I mentioned before that he wrote “My Dinner with Andre,” a classic art house film directed by Louis Malle—it recently got a brilliant send-up on “Community.” He’s also the author of nine plays, four of which were adapted into films, and one “liberal translation” of “The Threepenny Opera.” I always felt Shawn’s writing work was like a secret double-life that not many people knew about, since I didn’t even know he wrote until “Threepenny Opera’s” 2006 debut. But it turns out he’s actually been writing longer than he’s been acting. His first play, “The Hotel Play,” was published in 1970, and his first screen role came in 1974 as Diane Keaton’s ex-husband in “Manhattan.”

Looking at Wallace Shawn’s first career as a writer kind of makes you look at his acting career in a whole new light. He’s had a total of 137 film and TV roles (that’s almost as many as Vincent Schiavelli!) that seem to reflect a genuine enjoyment of acting. Sure, there are paycheck jobs, but every “That Guy” actor has those (a man’s got to pay the bills!). Shawn just can’t seem to get enough of performing, and the industry doesn’t seem to have any problems with that, since he keeps getting so many parts. Whether he’s constructing diabolical plans, reprimanding airheaded teenagers or putting his brainpower on full display, Shawn’s never dull to watch, and it’s always fun when he shows up on screen.

 

Minding the Gap: Blue Velvet

This is a new segment which I’m hoping will replace “Shot-for-Shot,” which has been getting tougher and tougher to put together in the time I have. I’ll be exploring my cinematic blind spots, and reporting the results. Let me know what you think!

As much as I love writing about movies, there’s a lot I haven’t seen. I never got a formal education in the medium, so my blind spots are so big they’ve practically got their own zip codes. I try to remedy this as much as I can, but a lot slips through the cracks.

Of the many gaps in my viewing experience, the most embarrassing is David Lynch’s “Blue Velvet,” a movie that, upon its release, scooped up a cornucopia of critical acclaim. It remains a source of inspiration for many filmmakers today. I have no excuse for not having seen it until now. But I’m glad I finally did, not only because it was a weight off my critical conscience, but because “Blue Velvet” is a damn fine movie, full of multilayered themes and uniquely odd symbolism.

If, like me, “Blue Velvet” is a glaring blank for you, I’ll fill you in on the details. Kyle MacLachlan is a college student coming home to look after his hospitalized father. One day, while walking around town, he discovers a human ear lying on the ground. He takes it to the cops, but decides to do some investigating on his own, with the help of a detective’s daughter, played by Laura Dern. His search leads him to nightclub singer Isabella Rossellini, who’s being held sexually captive by nasty criminal Dennis Hopper (who also enjoys getting high on nitrous oxide). Hopper’s kidnapped her kid, and uses Rossellini for abusive sexual favors whenever he wants.

Being a David Lynch movie, “Blue Velvet” is steeped in brilliantly twisted nostalgia. Characters have names drawn from classic American iconography—for example Rossellini’s character Dorothy Vallens (Dorothy like the Wizard of Oz, Vallens like Ritchie Valens of “La Bamba” fame). There’s also a gorgeous “Leave it to Beaver”-like aesthetic covering everything from clothes to cars to interior decoration, making the film’s eventual descent into chaos and graphic violence all the more shocking.

And, being a David Lynch movie, “Blue Velvet” is chock-full of symbolism that you can interpret any number of ways. There are representations of evil, hope, oppression and more oedipal complexes than a Greek tragedy. But despite all its darkness, what I saw was a movie that, in a deeply subversive way, is about the triumph of love and hope in a world full of hidden evils.

We’ll start with one of the prevailing symbols of the movie: bugs. The first scene of “Blue Velvet” starts with Jeffrey’s (MacLachlan’s) father watering the manicured lawn of the family’s home. He suffers an injury—perhaps a stroke, it’s never explained—and collapses. The camera then descends below the evenly-cut grass to display a nest of nasty-looking insects, a metaphor for the seedy underbelly of society Jeffrey will later experience. When Jeffrey scopes out Rossellini’s apartment for the first time, he comes in the guise of an exterminator which, in a way, he will later become, eradicating the threat posed to Rossellini by Hopper.

After Jeffrey first encounters Frank (Hopper), he has a conversation with Sandy (Dern) about his discovery that Frank has kidnapped Dorothy’s child, and abuses Dorothy as a kind of ransom. He asks, exasperated, “Why is there so much trouble in this world?” Sandy responds with a dream she’s had about the world being covered in darkness, with light and love being brought by a flock of robins. It’s a lovely image, and I think it’s no coincidence they’re parked in front of a church during this scene. This dream later comes into question when Dern, just after proclaiming her love for MacLachlan, discovers he’s been having sex with Rossellini. But one of the final images of the movie is a robin, that symbol of love and light, with an insect crushed in its beak.

Of course, that journey from light to darkness and back is difficult, and one that leaves many people permanently scarred. Sandy’s experience is the most jarring. In the course of one night she sees her worldview crumble like the walls of Jericho. She maintains her integrity, but it takes an emotional toll. Both she and MacLachlan come out just fine on the other side, but Rossellini doesn’t do so well. She’s been putting up with Frank’s abuse so long that she kind of likes it; it’s the only intimacy she knows anymore. When Rossellini semi-forces MacLachlan to have sex with her, she demands that he slap her around, much to his dismay. The last scene shows her reunited with her child, but she doesn’t seem too content. One gets the feeling she may never be.

With any movie notorious for its shocking elements, it’s easy to get hung up on images that bother you instead of why those images are there. “Blue Velvet” contains odd sexual behavior and some truly disturbing violence. But they present a stark contrast between the picket-fence world of American idealism and the twisted underbelly we’d like to forget about, but can’t. They also represent, in an extreme way, the maturation in sexual attitudes and general outlook all young people go through: being exposed to harsh realities, questioning what we know, and adapting accordingly. “Blue Velvet” is odd, certainly, but I’m convinced there’s a sound reason behind every choice David Lynch made. That kind of conviction is impressive.

Random observations:

-I love Laura Dern in this movie. She’s the moral center, but not whiny or overbearing. She manages to be both well-meaning and cool. And she and MacLachlan have great chemistry together.

-Dennis Hopper is also amazing. He’s terrifying and hilarious, often at the same time. Say what you will about the man’s career choices, he was never dull.

-Another odd repeated theme in this movie: Beer brands. Jeffrey likes Heineken. Sandy’s dad likes Bud. Frank? Well…Frank likes PBR. A lot.

Extra link: Isabella Rossellini’s “Green Porno” and “Seduce Me” series, possibly even more bizarrely sexual than this movie.