Classic Movie Review: The Decline of Western Civilization Part II: The Metal Years (1988)

The Decline of Western Civilization Part II: The Metal Years (1988)

Directed by: Penelope Spheeris.

 

The Decline of Western Civilization Part II: The Metal Years is a very different film from the first film. That film was about the punk scene in L.A. in 1979-80, and focused on bands who were outsiders, and seemed determined to stay that way. They weren’t going to break big, and didn’t really want to break big – that wouldn’t be punk aftermath. The second film focuses on Heavy Metal bands – all of whom seem very, very committed to breaking big – that’s their whole reason for being there. It contains interviews with people who are already big stars – Steven Tyler and Joe Perry of Aerosmith, Paul Stanley of KISS, Ozzy Osborne, etc. – as well as some up and comers. It’s a more purely enjoyable film than the first film – in large part because of the over-the-top ridiculousness on display.

 

Perhaps the genius moment for director Penelope Spheeris in filming this movie was the decision to let the people being interviewed at a place of their own choosing. While many choose the standard issue setup you would expect – you also get some genuine weirdness going on. Ozzy Osborne is filmed as he’s making breakfast for example. Paul Stanley is shot in an overhead shot, looking down on him as he is sprawled across a bed with a number of scantily clad women. Chris Holmes floats in a pool with his mother looking on scornfully at her son, who is clearly drunk and miserable.

 

Like the first film, this one is a portrait of hedonism – and yet this time, in a more controlled and corporate ways. Those who have reformed from their drug days – Tyler, Ozzy, etc. – give lot of sound bites about the dangers of drug use, but they feel like the type of thing their publicists would want them to say, more than anything they truly feel. When you catch them in more unguarded moments, they seem to have enjoyed those early, drug fueled days. The up-and-comers as they were (most didn’t become anything) seem to be more focused on putting on the image of rock stars – even if they aren’t there yet. A lot of talk about drugs, booze and sex – but almost all the talk about women comes across as the preening and bragging of insecure men, desperate to have you think they are lady killers. The few women interviewed mostly kind of roll their eyes at this attitude – or at least admit what everyone is in it this for.

 

The first film is an invaluable document of a specific time and place – that if Spheeris hadn’t capture, probably wouldn’t have been captured at all. It was about legendary punk performers who are still legendary in that world, but never really sold any records or became big. They had brief, glorious moments “at the top” which was still fairly low down. The second film is about the same excess, but from a different point of view – those who are rich and famous, or those that want to be. I suppose you could argue that both sets of bands are all about image – but the punk performers seem to genuinely believe what they’re saying. For the metal guys, it’s all an act – a performance trying to convince of something. The punk guys didn’t care what you thought of them – that’s all the metal guys care about.