Blockhead
Pretty funny. Happy Halloween.
Melodramatic Vampire Adventures
Louis wants his story told.
In 1994, there was this darling of a film called Interview With a Vampire directed by Neil Jordan and based on a novel by Anne Rice of the same name. Interview starred, Tom Cruise as the Vampire Lestat, Brad Pitt as Louis emo vampire extraordinaire, and Kirsten Dunst as Claudia, the child vampire. Damn if vampires don’t look decadent, somewhat mysterious (alluring), and downright lethal killers. This film masks a potent vision that immortality is not without a high amount of tragedy.
“Decadent” is a key word here, as vampires in this world are very indulgent, and embody the dark fantasy powers that make immortality both exciting and disgusting. To live forever one must kill living beings. It’s pretty nasty. The allure fades quickly. These creatures don’t seem sensual or magnificent, but dark twisted beings. In this respect they are shadows of the human psyche.
The framing narrative is interesting. Louis is so calm and sedate as the world passes him by. Telling his tale to a stranger appeared to bring him some peace. He was resigned to his fate as an immortal to an extent. Let’s talk about the biting for a moment. This seriously has a sexual aspects going here as fangs penetrate skin with a mix of pain and pleasure. There’s a plenty of biting going on for victims and converts .
Lestat fails to understand what Louis meant by "personal space."
This is a world filled with a bit of melodrama, and about the pain of losing a child, which is not fully thought or acted upon until the child is gone. Rejection seems to be a silent theme here as well. Lestat is rejected, as is Claudia, and Armand at different points in the film.
Like many people back in the day I scoffed at Cruise playing Lestat, a true bastard of a vampire. Well he did a good performance. I’m not here to knock it. Granted this film isn’t for everyone. If you like Anne Rice novels, you may or may not even cared to see it adapted to the big screen. I’ll say Cruise does put some energy and charm behind Lestat. Clearly the character is meant to enjoy his actions and that comes through here. Every act is meant to tease and amuse Lestat in some cruel, inhuman way. He’s elitist, arrogant, and evil. He delights in killing and teaching Louis the ways of vampirism.
Claudia's hunger is only beginning.
While Cruise impressed as Lestat, I think Pitt and Dunst stole the show here. As Louis, Pitt is melancholy, super emo, and somewhat annoying. He cannot enjoy being a vampire because he is still too much like his former human self. While Lestat promised Louis that his transformation to a vampire would “pluck out the pain,” it only seems to intensify his misery. Louis remains at odds with the world around him. He takes little or no pleasure from anything around him. Where vampire films may bring about a doppelganger effect to the character’s persona, it does nothing for Louis. He’s still brooding. He resists the urge to give into his need to kill humans for blood/food.
Dunst’s performance is interesting as Claudia. She’s an efficient killer and her wrath is immense as she feels the pain of not being able to grow past a child’s age into a woman (even though she is thirty). Her anger and revenge is swift and cruel, and only highlights the tragedy that will befall her.
The Electra/Oedipus Complex comes to mind when one thinks of Claudia. It is her separation from her two fathers that sends her down the tragic road she leads. Lestat can be seen as her father as he did turn her. Louis is the mother figure since he does nurture and care for Claudia. To Lestat she is a means to control Louis. Claudia in effect kills her dark father, and knows her mother will abandon her soon. Louis is so wishy washy that Claudia has to die before any emotion can be pulled from him. His revenge on the theater of vampires is without pity. For Armand’s (Antonio Banderas) part in Claudia’s demise, Louis rejects him.
Washing that hair must be a bitch, Armand.
The makeup and effects by Stan Winston are wonderful. Lestat’s death at the hands of Claudia, and back from the swamp after Claudia’s failed assassination attempt was creepy as hell. Claudia’s own ashed body was haunting. Fire comes into play a few times in this film. Louis’ manor, Lestat’s home, and the theater where the vampires dwelled. Perhaps it suggests that it is the only element the immortals fear, as it kills them. Fire can mean passion, and passion can destroy the strongest of beings (or redeem them).
I wondered where Lestat was all this time. He was so pivotal at the beginning of the film, but is barely there when Louis and Claudia leave the States for France. When Lestat finally pops up again in what appears to be a chance meeting with Louis, he’s lost his impact as a mentor to Louis and as the monster he truly was. Mind you, Lestat still proves that life is merely a game to him.
Black Swan: Magic In the Metamorphosis?
Went to see Black Swan with a friend for the holidays. We were thinking this film would be a bit wild, dark, and a little unpredictable. Directed by Darren Aronofsky, with performances by Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, Vincent Cassel and Winona Ryder. For my own satisfaction, I was more than curious about the use of the doppelganger (the other self) in this film.
What I also liked was the contrast of art and psychosis. To create and destroy within the film is a chaotic paradox worth digesting. There’s something sly and elegant at work within this film. A sublime taste of tragedy that gave me mixed feelings about an ambitious blend of horror, fantasy and drama. I left the theaters feeling a little cheated with the finale. That’s not to say I did not enjoy the journey the story took me to.
Portman plays Nina, a ballerina who’s chosen to play both the white and black swans in a production of the “Black Swan” ballet. While Nina’s perfect for the role of the graceful white swan, she doesn’t not have the freedom to pull off the performance for black swan. She struggles with throughout the film to embody the qualities of both swans. When Lily (Kunis) appears, I got the impression she is the bad girl of the ballet company, and she was made to be the black swan.
While the turmoil and politics of the dance company stir and make for good backstage drama, Nina mental state takes a dramatic turn as she comes undone. This doesn’t mean she was stable from the start. She’s a kleptomaniac, and her mother is emotionally high strung and manipulates her daughter in a bi-polar – let me live through your life – fashion.
The sexual desires of Nina’s psyche come from her attraction to the dark side, and Lily. As a doppelganger Lilly seems to be the things Nina is not. Lily is not as graceful, but skilled. She’s also sassy, a bit crass, and not afraid of drugs. At some point it appears Lilly is ruining Nina’s chance to be the lead dancer. Lily also represents a certain freedom Nina denies herself in order to be the perfect ballerina. Nina’s repression is released in this sexual union/fantasy to some extent. It does not stop the torture and anguish.
The Jungian archetypes are more than interesting to see played out on the big screen. For those not into psychoanalytical theory that won’t matter, but to see the shadow and the unconscious desires come to the surface held my attention. Note the use of color in this film to tap into the symbolic qualities of the shadow: While Nina wears the color white in her clothes Lily wears black.
The reason I feel the fantastic should have been stronger is because the audience kept getting hints of it, and that part of having a doppelganger is that a person is going through a metamorphosis. It’s not that the hallucinations aren’t in Nina’s head, but that we the audience sees them as real in addition to Nina. I’m compelled to let go of my disbelief a little to see that.
Likewise the horror is about deforming the body via mutilation. It’s quite disturbing and tragic as the body manifests physical symptoms of the mental breakdown.
Black Swan for sure is a dark film and part of me wishes it were completely a mix of horror, dark psychology, and the fantastic. Ultimately the genre of Black Swan is tragedy, which possibly should have been how it was labeled from the start.
Body Politics in An American Werewolf In London
As the curse begins, humanity and wild converge in dreams.
An American Werewolf in London is a 1981 cult horror film directed by John Landis. This film mixes black comedy with tragedy, and horror. Story-wise, the title says it all: An American, David ( David Naughton) hikes in England with his friend, Jack (Griffin Dunne) and they are attacked by a Werewolf. While Jack is slaughtered, David survives. The curse lives on in David.
This is why I never go hiking.
I think of the 1980s look as “rustic” because narrative and visuals hold up pretty well. You see where the film attempts to edit some scenes but I find that gore and nudity come together to make the film.
Nudity plays a provocative role of danger and laughs when the primal side of the body’s displayed. Censors and prudes be damned. The beast was unleashed, played for a while, then put down. It is a rejection of our own bestial natures. Visually and emotionally David’s body journey’s through multiple stages of vulnerability, love, suffering (transformation), and ends with David’s death.
Note the contrast in David's gaze from previous image.
Seeing the undead people arguing with each other and discussing ways for David to kill himself to break the curse is hilarious and dreadful. David is mortified, and in some was so was I, yet found the scene funny .
David’s transformations from human to beast are horrible, yet sublime. The special effects look painstakingly detailed. We have the human body being reshaped into a creature. As the film progresses, you want this torture to end, yet you don’t want David to die. Like David, we don’t really have a say in the matter.
Waxing is gonna get ugly for poor David.
