Ranking Paul Schrader

One of my most anticipated films of 2018 is Paul Schrader’s First Reformed – which just opened in Toronto a few weeks ago, but I’ll have to wait until it expands a little bit. In preparation for that film, I decided I’d go back and watch or re-watch every film Schrader directed before First Reformed – and then I would write reviews for each and every one of them. I was all the way up until Adam Resurrected in 2008 – when my USB drive encountered a washing machine, and while I was able to save almost all of my files, the one with the reviews was lost. Re-writing 15 reviews, written over a three week span just wasn’t possible. So instead, please indulge me with an in-depth ranking of all 21 of Schrader’s films. I am unsure of the top spot to be honest – its seems perhaps premature – but it is my gut feeling, so I’m think I’m right.

 

21. Forever Mine (1999)

Forever Mine is one of those films many great auteurs have on their resume – the one where pretty much everything goes wrong, and you kind of wonder if the director has lost it. Schrader’s film mixes element of melodrama and noir, in a story where half takes place in 1974 and the other half in 1987. In the earlier time period, Joseph Fiennes is a young Miami cabana boy who has an affair with the rich wife (Gretchen Mol) of a corrupt New York politician (Ray Liotta) – and then follows them to New York. We know from the start of the movie things don’t go well – as in 1987, Fiennes is horribly scared, going by a different name, and headed back to New York for love and revenge. You can kind of imagine someone like Douglas Sirk making some of the overheated dialogue work in one of his films, but it completely undoes the cast here. Fiennes is horribly miscast as the cabana boy, and even worse as the violent drug kingpin he becomes. Mol doesn’t change at all, but her only job is to be doe eyed. Only Liotta emerges unscathed – because he basically just has to be in angry Ray Liotta mode the whole time. The film is pretty embarrassing for all involved – it looks and sounds awful, and while it contains hints at Schrader’s pet themes of violence and the past inflicting its pain on the present, it does so in the most obvious and overwrought way. It’s hard to imagine this much talent making this bad a film.

 

20. Witch Hunt (1994)

Out of all of Schrader’s films, this is the one the only one I would say is anonymous – sure, Forever Mine is way (way) worse, but you see Schrader in there, somewhere. But Witch Hunt was a strange choice for Schrader to make – a HBO sequel to their own hit movie, mixing magic and noir together, but recasting the lead role with Dennis Hopper – who is asked to be the straight man in a film full of craziness. The film is basically trying to be Chinatown, with magic – and throw in McCarthy-ism as well, with a rampaging Senator (Eric Bogosian) complain about all of Hollywood coming under the influence of magic. I wouldn’t say Witch Hunt is a bad movie per se – it isn’t good, but it’s watchable – but it is also completely and totally forgettable, and seems disconnected to everything else Schrader has done. Schrader never played nice with Hollywood – never seemed to take a pay cheque only gig. This one is a weird sort of exception, as I cannot figure out why he made it.

 

19. Dying of the Light (2014)

Schrader and stars Nicolas Cage and Anton Yelchin all disowned the movie – which was taken away from Schrader, recut and remixed – and according the cinematographer, they didn’t even let him do the proper color correction on the film either. So, it’s safe to say that the film doesn’t look or sound precisely like Schrader wanted it to, so I suppose many will give him a pass for this one. Yet, he’s still responsible for some of the downright awful dialogue, and allowing Cage to go wildly over the top in ways that don’t make much sense (I’m more willing to give Schrader a pass on the plotting of the movie – which cuts corners, because perhaps his movie would be longer). The most frustrating thing about the film – other than its complete mediocre-ness – is that there is a great idea at the core of the film, in which Cage plays a CIA agent, who has been stuck behind a desk for years who finds out he’s dying – and heads back into the field to find the one terrorist only he thinks is still alive, that got away 22 years ago – who is also dying. The idea of these two combatants, who even as they are dying, cannot let go of the past is pure Schrader – and I can see him making a hell of a movie out of it. This isn’t it – and while we can blame the studio for part of that, I don’t think it was entirely their fault.

 

18. Touch (1997)

Schrader is not the writer/director I would most want to see adapting Elmore Leonard – both are great, but wildly different, as Schrader is obsessed with morality, and Leonard basically doesn’t care. What’s interesting about Touch though is that at its center is a sincere character – Juvenal (Skeet Ulrich) – a former monk, who can heal people with his Touch, and has the wounds of Jesus. He’s plopped in the middle of a film filled with typical Leonard schemers, lowlifes and conmen – Christopher Walken as a former crooked preacher, who is still crooked, but no longer preaches, Tom Arnold as a Catholic, who believes the modern Church is too modern, Gina Gershon as a trashy TV talk show host, etc. There is also Walken’s former underling (Bridget Fonda) – who he enlists to get close to Juvenal, who ends falling in love with him. The film doesn’t really work – for one thing, Ulrich is too much a dull, blank slate (that may have been the point, but it doesn’t make him more interesting to watch) to hold the movie together and for another, Tom Arnold isn’t able to pull off the film’s most complex character, which basically sinks it. And yet, while Touch is undeniably a failure, it’s an interesting one. I still don’t think Schrader should have adapted Leonard – and there is a reason why this isn’t considered one of Schrader bests – and the novel isn’t considered one of Leonard’s best, I just don’t think it’s possible to make this story work. But its fun seeing some of the actors, and Schrader, give it their all.

 

17. Light of Day (1987)

Light of Day is both a film that has been properly rated as lesser Schrader, and yet still deserves a better fate than it’s gotten thus far. The film isn’t available for streaming anywhere, and never got a Blu-Ray or even a DVD release (I saw a rather poor version on YouTube). This is a working class film in which a brother and sister duo (Michael J. Fox and Joan Jett) work in Cleveland, while also playing in a rock band at night in the bars, as Jett tries to raise her son, and they both clash with their religious mother (Gena Rowlands). The film never really gets over the miscasting of Fox and Jett – Fox is fine in the dialogue heavy scenes, but isn’t able to carry the weight of the quieter scenes where he has to carry the burden of his family, and is counted on (as many Schrader characters are) to do a lot with no dialogue – he just looks like he’s staring off into space. Jett has a raw energy – and is great on stage of course, but struggles if she has to string together more than a few lines of dialogue. The other problem is that Schrader, coming off of the most visually adventurous film he’s ever made (Mishima) swings so far back in the other direction, and has made a dull, uninteresting film to look at. And yet – despite all of those problems – I wish Light of Day could be more widely seen today – there are currents of Schrader’s pet themes throughout, and Fox and Jett do have moments that work well. In particular though, it does contain a brilliant performance by Rowlands as their religious mother – if George C. Scott in Hardcore is Schrader’s father, then this is his mother, and the character is key to Schrader as a whole. Sure, the film isn’t great – but it’s interesting, and we should at least be able to watch a better version of this than we can currently.

 

16. Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist (2005)

Hiring Paul Schrader to direct an Exorcist movie was an inspired choice for the movie studio – who for some reason didn’t actually want a Paul Schrader movie. Schrader was fired, replaced by Renny Harlin, who reshot the whole movie – released as The Exorcist: The Beginning. When that tanked, the studio gave Schrader a few dollars to finish his version – the result being the awkwardly titled Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist. It would be divine justice if Schrader’s version was a masterpiece – but in reality, it’s easy to see why the studio didn’t like Schrader’s version – its low on horror and blood, and is really, a long exploration of faith lost and found, and guilt and redemption – classic Schrader themes – with some horror elements thrown in. The movie is better than I remembered it being – it’s actually quite fascinating to see Stellan Skarsgaard as Father Merrin, reeling from his choice during WWII, and the way the film draws parallels between the Nazis in the opening, and the British colonists in Africa for the rest of the film. The special effects aren’t great (they gave him almost no money to do them) – and the two actors who were replaced really are quite bad in the film. And, the film is too long, and not at all scary. Yet, I still found it interesting throughout – even if a little slow. The lesson here is simple – if you don’t want a Paul Schrader film, don’t hire Paul Schrader – this is a Paul Schrader film, for better or worse.

 

15. The Canyons (2013)

The period between Adam Resurrected (2008) and this represents the longest break between directing efforts of Schrader’s career – and you can tell fairly early in The Canyons that Schrader is a little bitter and angry about that. The film was written by Bret Easton Ellis – and honestly, I’m not sure it’s a great fit for Schrader (I’d rather see Brian De Palma’s version) – but while you could dismiss The Canyons as two older white men yell at millennials (there is certainly an element of that here) – it’s remains a fascinating film about Hollywood – and how the movie industry is dying. It’s also a reminder of just why Lindsay Lohan became a movie star in the first place – she has an undeniable presence in the film – the type that really cannot be taught. Her co-star, porn star James Deen, making his legitimate movie debut (before all the allegations against him came out – which colored this movie somewhat, since we know he’s an abuser playing an abuser) – isn’t as good. Still, this erotic thriller has some good moments, and is fascinating from beginning to end – this time through was certainly an improvement for me – although, I don’t think I’d watch it a third time.

 

14. Cat People (1982)

Schrader’s first foray into studio horror was this 1982 remake in name only of Jacques Tourneur’s 1942 classic Cat People. As was true of Dominion, Schrader was probably hired to deliver a pure horror film – and instead delivered some kind of weird crossbreed of his signature, art house style, with the excess of 1980s horror – there aren’t particularly a lot of bloody scenes in Cat People – but when they hit, they are bloody as hell. For the most part though, this is a weird, surreal art film – with a great performance by Natasha Kinski at its core, and Malcolm McDowell clearly having a blast as her brother – with the pair of them being part of an ancient species that take on animal form after sex, who won’t turn back until they’ve killed – unless they have sex with each other. Yes, it’s weird, it’s strange – there is a lot of trippy imagery, a great David Bowie song, and lots of strangeness. It doesn’t all necessarily work – but then how could you possibly expect a film like this to work completely?

 

13. Adam Resurrected (2008)

Adam Resurrected is a rarer thing than a great Holocaust film – it is a completely different Holocaust film from any other I’ve seen. That it is not wholly successful shouldn’t be overly surprising – it’s hugely ambitious, jumps around in time from different parts of the 1930s-1960s, all centered on Adam Stein (Jeff Goldblum) – a German Jew, who was a vaudeville performer before the war, had to act like a dog for the Commander of the death camps (Willem Dafoe) during the war in order to survive – even as he watches his own family being marched to the their deaths – and then spends parts of the 1960s in an Israeli mental hospital, dealing with his survivors remorse and shame for the way he behaved. Goldblum has rarely been asked to deliver such a complex performance – the man is almost a meme in most of his roles – and spotty accent aside, he delivers a brilliant performance as this man. Schrader mostly plays the film straight – which hurts it at times, because the film has some comic moments dying to get out, and the various allusions and metaphors are about as subtle as sledgehammer. Still, he avoids the trap that apparently Jerry Lewis didn’t with his infamous The Day the Clown Died – and made a respectful, fascinating film about a performer during the Holocaust. It doesn’t all work, but you have to admire the effort.

 

12. The Walker (2007)

A kind of unofficial quasi-sequel/remake of Schrader’s Americano Gigolo, Woody Harrelson stars as Carter Page III – the only son of a wealthy Virginian family of politicians, who basically lives off his family’s wealth, and spends his time with the rich wives of powerful men in Washington, D.C. Page is openly gay in a town that still views that as dishonorable – but he does keep that part of his life under wraps. One of the wealthy women he has befriended uses him as a cover when she goes to meet her lover – and when that lover ends up dead, Page becomes the prime suspect. The film is very much of the Bush era (the word Bush is never uttered, but there is talk about “this administration being horrible” – wait a decade people, it will get worse). The film is ultimately a character study more than anything else – especially in the way it portrays Page as a man who discovers just how loyal he is – and how loyal everyone else is. He is tired of hearing about what a great man his father was – when he knows the truth about him. By the end, he proves, to himself if no one else, that’s he’s better than that. The murder plot is overly convoluted, and takes up too much time in the movie – especially since it’s pretty clear Schrader is just using it as a device. Yet, the film is still fascinating and interesting – an era that is only a decade behind us, but feels so far away.

 

11. Dog Eat Dog (2016)

One of the reasons I love to do these re-watches of an entire directors work is because occasionally you run across a film like Dog Eat Dog – a film I pretty much dismissed two years ago, but had an absolute blast watching this time around. From its candy colored opening, ending in horror, to the strange end in which Nicolas Cage does an extended Humphrey Bogart impression for reasons, Schrader’s nihilistic, coked up crime thriller is pure sadistic joy. It focuses on three ex-cons (Cage, Willem Dafoe, Christopher Matthew Cook) who get involved in a kidnapping scheme – that of course goes horribly wrong. The film is vile and violent from beginning to end – and purposefully so. Cage doesn’t exactly reign it in for the performance, but he isn’t quite so manic this time around. Dafoe is even better – a somewhat pathetic and weak willed psychopath, who talks in therapy speak, even as he continues to do horrible things. Schrader goes for broke here, and gets there, in a highly entertaining, completely crazy film. The teenage me would have watched this 10 times.

 

10. The Comfort of Strangers (1990)

The Comfort of Strangers is one of the strangest movies of Schrader’s career – Harold Pinter wrote the screenplay based on a book by Ian McEwan, and the sensibilities of the three very different artists come together in one, very strange mixture. A British couple (Natasha Richardson and Rupert Everett) are vacationing in Venice to try and reignite their relationship – only to fall victim to the strange charms of Christopher Walken, and later his girlfriend, Helen Mirren. The film is bizarre – a thriller that is more unsettling than truly intense. Walken is great in every scene – it’s one of his best performances – and yet by the end, you still have no idea who he is. The film is absolutely beautiful to look at – and completely understands Venice, where you have no idea where you are at any time. By the end, I wanted something more – an ending of some kind that the film deliberately does not give you. There is a difference between satisfying ambiguity, and frustrating ambiguity, and this walks the very fine line. I think this may improve on repeat viewings (which is why it sucks it’s not available from streaming).

 

9. Patty Hearst (1988)

The Patty Hearst story is infamous, and a strange one for Schrader to take on – although I think he does it as good as it can be done. Schrader wastes almost no time in the film’s opening scenes – she is kidnapped quickly, and then he places us right alongside Hearst during her ordeal where she spends weeks blindfolded inside dark closets, with people talking to her, but her only half grasping who they are or what they want. This is the best part of the movie – it’s deliberately disorienting for the audience, and it’s great. The film does sag in the middle section – after most of the SLA members are killed, and she’s on the run with two of them (played by William Forsythe and Frances Fisher). The ending of the movie is great though – and snaps Heart into clearer focus. For most of the movie, Natasha Richardson played Hearst as either terrified or terrifyingly blank – it’s only in those closing scenes where she is allowed to be a real person – a real character – because she’s finally not being terrorized. Yes, this is the version of the story Hearst would want told – but that doesn’t make it any less of an accomplishment.

 

8. American Gigolo (1980)

Schrader was somehow able to smuggle in a Bresson-like study in loneliness into a mainstream movie about a male prostitute, with a surface sheen that makes the film look like a proto-typical example of 1980s excess. Richard Gere has perhaps never been better than he is here – playing Julian, who takes pride in his work – and is really very good at it. But he also has an inflated sense of himself, that will eventually comes crashing down on him as he is the lead suspect in a murder, and all of a sudden all his fancy, rich clients and friends want nothing to do with him. If there is a problem with the movie it is twofold – for one, Schrader clearly doesn’t really care about the murder mystery – he solves it in an almost throwaway line, and second the Lauren Hutton character isn’t very clearly defined – so you’re not sure why she does what she ultimately does. Still, though, this is a great Schrader film disguised as something far more unseemly.

 

7. Auto Focus (2002)

I’m not sure Schrader has ever made a sadder film that Auto Focus – the story of Bob Crane (Greg Kinnear) who became a sitcom star with the lead role in Hogan’s Heroes, and then started a long, slow descent into sex addiction, which ultimately led to his murder (the real life facts, which may not quite match here, are not as important to what Schrader is doing). Kinnear is perfect as Crane – his regular, affable niceness makes his descent all the more unlikely, and Willem Dafoe is just as good as John Carpenter – the man eventually charged and tried (but ultimately acquitted) of the murder – he’s a sad sack hanger on who loves Crane, and cannot bare to be without him. The period detail on the film is perfect, and the long sad trajectory of the descent of addiction here feels real and painful. The film was pretty much ignored when it first came out – and its reputation hasn’t grown much since – but it deserves to.

 

6. Light Sleeper (1992)

Light Sleeper is a sad film about the people who stay at the party too long, who know it’s time to leave, but cannot quite seem to be able to. In the film, Willem Dafoe plays John – a onetime drug addict, who made his living dealing drugs, and even though he’s clean now, still does deal. What else is he going to do? His boss (Susan Sarandon) wants to go legit – but cannot quite seem to make that transition – and when she does, he’ll be left behind anyway. Things are thrown for a loop when John meets his old girlfriend (Dana Delaney) who got clean before him, and is now in town as her mother is dying. Like several Schrader films, there is a murder here, and our hero gets involved in the investigation, and has to find his way out again. The violent conclusion of the film strikes some as wrongheaded – as if Schrader is merely trying to recreate the end of Taxi Driver again. But it’s a sadder ending than that really – and over much quicker. But Light Sleeper does, ultimately, end on a somewhat happier note – some hope for the future at least, as John finally figures something out. This is the best work Dafoe has ever done for Schrader (that’s saying something – they’ve worked together a lot) and one of those films that sticks with you and refuses to go.

 

5. Mishima: A Life in Four Acts (1985)

There is no question that Mishima is Schrader’s most ambitious and visually stunning film. Schrader is telling the life story of famous Japanese author Mishima – with scenes from the past being shot in stunning black and white, as we learn about his weird childhood, scenes from three of his stories shot in stunning, bright colors which underline his obsessions, and scenes of the last day of his life – when he and his personal army take hostages at a military base to argue for Japan to reinstate the Emperor – something even the Emperor didn’t want. The film connects with many of Schrader’s films – it is a man in a room, getting ready to face the world, and it is a story about the trauma of the past imprisoning the person in the present. It’s a sad, violent film – and is just about one of the most stunning visual films of the 1980s. It is a sprawling mess of a film as well – and that’s just the way it should be.

 

4. Blue Collar (1978)

Schrader’s directorial debut is a great film for several reasons. One of the most surprising of the reasons is that it is one of the great American films – especially by a white director – dealing with race. In the film, Richard Pryor, Harvey Keitel and Yaphhet Kotto play a trip of Detroit autoworkers who are tired of getting screwed by both the company they work for and the Union that is supposed to represent them – and decide to rob the latter. Things do not go as planned. For much of the film, race seems like a non-factor – these are three men, all basically in the same boat, all getting screwed, all in need of money. But as things start to spiral downwards, race becomes a major factor – especially in the haunting final scene as slurs are thrown around. This is the best screen work of Pryor’s career – he has a few funny moments, but basically, he’s playing it straight, and his rage and anger are real – he carries the film. It’s strange that Schrader never really addresses race in any of his other films (perhaps a few moments in Witch Hunt and Dominion – but not really). Blue Collar stands out for many reasons – but that’s the surprising one.

 

3. Hardcore (1979)

The more times I watch Hardcore, the more I love it. I’ve always loved most of the film – it’s Schrader, once again diving into territory explored by John Ford’s The Searchers – Schrader also did this in Taxi Driver. All three involve older men, trying to save teenage girls from a situation where they very well may not want to get saved. In this case, it is George C. Scott, as a successful businessman – a Calvinist from Grand Rapids, who daughter runs away from a class trip to California, and when a P.I. finds her, she has been making porn (in the film’s most infamous scene, Scott breaks down watching the film in question). From there, he starts his own investigation – and ends up with a teenage prostitute (Season Hubley) who walks him through this world. Schrader clearly relishes this seedy side of San Francisco and Los Angeles – he shot in real porn shops and clubs, and he has some with the film school generation in the porn shoots. But mainly, this is a strange, sad film about this fathers search. I’ve always thought the ending of the film (SPOILER WARNING) where he finds his daughter, and they talk was a mistake – but this time through, it worked better than ever. It doesn’t let Scott off the hook – like the “heroes” of The Searchers and Taxi Driver are – they don’t have to deal with the aftermath of what they’ve done. It’s all strange and sad – and in the end, Scott walking away from Hubley is almost cruel. This is one of the most underrated films of the 1970s.

 

2. Affliction (1998)

In many ways, Affliction is the most direct, simplest examination of the themes that have been driving Schrader’s films all along. In small town New Hampshire, Wade (Nick Nolte) is the police chief – but that basically means he drives the snow plough, and does school crossings. He is divorced, his pre-teen daughter wants little to do with him. He drinks and can be an asshole. The only thing he doesn’t want to be is exactly what he is becoming – his father (James Coburn, in an Oscar winning role). Coburn is a mean, nasty drunken who has spent his life abusing his wife and children – and really that’s his whole purpose. The other siblings have been smart enough to get out – get away from him and his influence. But after their mother’s death, Wade sinks deeper and deeper in with his old man. There is a murder mystery of a sort in Affliction – it’s not much of one by design – but mainly this is a character study of this man, forever doomed by his childhood, and unable to escape it. Schrader has made more complex films – more ambitious films – but he’s never made one that moved me this much – that gets right to the heart of what his work has been about for his entire career.

 

1. First Reformed (2018)

Schrader’s latest film strikes me, upon first viewing, as his masterpiece – the crowning achievement of his career that best summarizes his work, while being its all distinct film. Ethan Hawke gives the best performance of his career as Pastor Toller – a grieving former military pastor, who lost his on to the war, and wife to divorce – who now presides over a church that sees more tourists than parishioners. His life is thrown into tumult when he agrees to counsel a young, environmental activist who doesn’t think its right to bring a child into this world – even though his wife (Amanda Seyfried) is currently pregnant. This is the film of Schrader’s career where his love for directors like Bresson, Dreyer and Bergman all come through the clearest (there are elements of The Diary of Country Priest, Ordet and Winter Light for example) – but it’s filtered through Schrader’s own worldview. The film walks the tricky line between being very timely to the issues going on right now, and yet it seems timeless. For all the pain in the film – and there is a lot of it – it may actually be one of Schrader’s most hopeful films. Schrader here has moved completely away from commercial concerns – and in doing so has crafted his masterpiece – the film that he will be remembered for.

Tuesday, June 26, 2018

Movie Review: First Reformed

First Reformed **** ½ / *****

Directed by: Paul Schrader.

Written by: Paul Schrader.

Starring: Ethan Hawke (Toller), Amanda Seyfried (Mary), Cedric Kyles (Pastor Jeffers), Victoria Hill (Esther), Philip Ettinger (Michael), Michael Gaston (Edward Balq), Bill Hoag (John Elder).

 

Paul Schrader’s remarkable First Reformed is a film that perfectly encapsulates his entire career as a writer and director – addresses pet themes that have been on his mind since at least Taxi Driver in 1976. And yet, it’s also a somewhat different film for Schrader in a way – it’s much more in line with the work of the directors that made him fall in love with cinema – and inspired his first book Transcendental Style in Film: Ozu, Bresson, Dreyer – particularly the latter two in that book, along with Ingmar Bergman – in particular his Winter Light – which was part of his loosely connected Silence of God trilogy. You’ve certainly seen elements of those directors throughout Schrader’s filmography (I actually went back and watched all 20 of his previous directing efforts before seeing First Reformed – a full ranking will be out soon) – but I think this perhaps the first time he’s ever really try to fully recreate that style in one of his films. First Reformed will likely frustrate many audiences who want something more straight forward from their films – but what Schrader does here is quietly profound – he forces you to sit and contemplate the world of this film. It’s not a passive viewing experience – not a film that you give yourself over to, but want you engage with. It strikes me on first viewing that this is Schrader’s masterpiece – the best film he has ever directed. It’s not often that happens with a 72 year old director – especially someone who has always had an uneven career behind the camera, but especially in the last 20 years or so.

 

In the film, Ethan Hawke stars as Ernst Toller – a Protestant minister, who presides over an historic church – about to celebrate its 250^th Anniversary – that is more tourist attraction than house of worship. Not many people attend services there – and the Church is “owned” as it were by a nearby Megachurch, presided over by Pastor Jeffers (Cedric “The Entertainer” Kyles). Toller is another of Schrader’s characters who you could call “God’s Lonely Men” – and early in the film we understand why. He was once a military pastor – from a long line of military men – and he encouraged his son to enlist, and 6 months later he was dead in Iraq. His wife couldn’t stand to be with him, and left him, and he has never forgiven himself for encouraging his son to fight in a war that had no “moral authority”. Presiding over this church is a form of self-punishment for Toller – and a way to hide from the outside world, while still serving God. Unlike many a Schrader character before him, he has not lost his faith – although he finds a connection with God difficult.

 

Despite his trying to hide from the outside world, it intrudes on him anyway. Mary (Amanda Seyfried) is the young wife of an environmental activist Michael (Philip Ettinger), recently released from jail in Canada for his activism, who questions the wisdom of bringing a child into the world when they find out Mary is pregnant. In a long, pivotal scene early in the film, Toller and Michael sit in Michael’s den, as Michal lays out just how the world is changing – how climate change will kill us all, and not in some distant future, but within our lifetimes. How can he look at his child when they ask him that they knew all this and didn’t stop it? He also asks Toller a question that will haunt the Pastor for the rest of the film – “Will God Forgive us?” – in reference to what we’ve done to God’s creation.

 

This is not the first time Schrader has made a film about a man in crisis – slowly circling the drain into despair and perhaps going to strike out in violence. In fact, it’s kind of a Schrader specialty in films like Taxi Driver, Light Sleeper, Affliction et al. But I don’t think he’s ever done one in quite the same way. He uses voiceover extensively throughout the film – with Toller’s journal providing us insight into his thoughts - in a nod not only to Schrader’s own work, but to Bresson’s The Diary of a Country Priest. The film really is locked into Toller’s subjective point-of-view throughout – but not so much so that the other characters disappear, or become one note. There is no doubt that Seyfried’s Mary operates on a symbolic level (naming her Mary isn’t exactly subtle) – but Seyfried makes her more complex than a symbol as well. Like Iris, the teenage prostitute brilliantly played by Jodie Foster in Taxi Driver, the film is well aware of the way the protagonist sees her, but also who she is as a person. The most surprising piece of casting is Cedric the Entertainer as Jeffers – who is excellent here. Yes, to a certain extent, Jeffers is a sellout – a man as beholden to special interests and donors – but as he explains to Toller at one point, he’s also living in the real world. He does good work, he brings people to the lord, and if he has to go soft on a few issues, than so be it. The film never takes the easy way out – never looks down on him as somehow worse than Toller, and for that matter, never looks at Toller as a potential martyred saint.

 

As Toller, Hawke gives what is probably the best performance of his career. It is a tortured performance to be sure – one in which even at the beginning he is suffering and in pain – he knows he is ill, perhaps with something that will kill him, but he pushes off going to the doctor. He also pushes away the one other person – Esther (Victoria Hill) who seems to care about him. He wants to be alone in his suffering. He isn’t Travis Bickle – the Taxi Driver protagonist who cannot make connections with others, but something different – he doesn’t really want those connections. His connection with Mary may save him – but it’s deeper than that.

 

There are two sequences in First Reformed that will likely dictate how you respond to the movie as a whole (spoiler alert). The first comes when Mary tells Toller about something she and Michael used to do that she calls the “Magical Mystery Tour” – where they lay on top of each other – fully clothed – and try to get as much body contact as possible. The scene starts out strangely, and yet beautifully – Mary’s hair falling across Toller’s face – before both of them levitate from the floor, their bodies the floating above the world, where Toller can still only manage to see the destruction, not the beauty, or what is floating over. It’s something that could save him, but he cannot quite see it for what’s there. The other is the end of the film – which Schrader leaves ambiguous. There are two possible readings to that scene – and yet, on a certain level, I’m not quite sure it matters which one you choose – they are both hopeful endings in their own way.

 

First Reformed is a brilliant film on several levels. Yes, the film is completely plugged into current issues – not just environmental issues, but also political ones in terms of how we approach discourse and certainty. And yet, it also feels timeless in a way, because it isn’t beholden to the specific outrages of the day. It is Schrader’s masterpiece – the best film of the year so far, and the best of his career. And one I cannot wait to see again.

Friday, September 29, 2017

Classic Movie Review: Hardcore (1979)

Hardcore (1979)

Directed by: Paul Schrader.

Written by: Paul Schrader.

Starring: George C. Scott (Jake VanDorn), Peter Boyle (Andy Mast), Season Hubley (Niki), Dick Sargent (Wes DeJong), Leonard Gaines (Ramada), Dave Nichols (Kurt), Gary Graham (Tod), Larry Block (Detective Burrows), Marc Alaimo (Ratan), Leslie Ackerman (Felice), Charlotte McGinnis (Beatrice), Ilah Davis (Kristen Van Dorn), Paul Marin (Joe Van Dorn), Will Walker (Jism Jim).

 

John Ford’s The Searchers hangs heavily over quite a few of the films written or directed (or both) by Paul Schrader. Ford’s story, of an obsessive quest by John Wayne’s Ethan Edwards – a Civil War veteran, who no longer recognizes the world around him – to find his kidnapped niece is one that the “hero” of Taxi Driver, Travis Bickle - an increasingly alienated Vietnam war vet - can relate to – as he sets about saving a child prostitute (played by Jodie Foster). Ethan Edwards and Travis Bickle are two of the most famous characters in American film – but Jake VanDorn, the “hero” of Hardcore is very much like them. He lives an ordered life in Grand Rapids Michigan – he is a member of the Christian reform church – as Schrader was growing up – and he is raising his daughter, Kristen (Illah Davis) by himself (we will eventually find out what happened to his wife – well, sort of). On a trip to California, Kristen goes missing – and obviously, Jake wants to find her. He hires a detective – Andy Mast (Peter Boyle), who is at least somewhat shady, but he does “find” Kristen – not in person, but on film. The film is a low rent porn film – and Kristen seems like a willing participant. Jake will travel back to California, and sink into the world of sex shops, porn films and prostitutes all in an attempt to save his daughter. Like Edwards and Bickle however, VanDorn never stops and asks himself a very basic question: Does the young woman he’s trying to save, want to be saved?

 

George C. Scott is at the center of the movie, and it really is one of his best performances. He plays VanDorn as a quiet man – one we do, at least initially, sympathize with. He runs his business, and basically lives a quiet ordered life. He doesn’t drink or smoke or swear – but he’s also not really trying to force his tightly held religious beliefs onto anyone, outside his family anyway. He is a quiet man, who keeps to himself – he doesn’t much understand the world outside his bubble – and he doesn’t much care about that either. It’s only when his daughter goes missing that he leaps into action to try and get her back. Throughout the film though, we do start to question a little bit his motives. He never shares any memories about Kristen – never talks about who she is as a person, or what she means to him. He is almost completely emotionally shut down. The poster has the tagline “Oh my god, that’s my daughter!” – but VanDorn never actually says that in the movie. When he is shown the movie with his daughter in it, he’s quiet – he covers his eyes and leaves. When he confronts Mast about the movie later, he doesn’t talk about his daughter as much as he talks about Mast – and how he must have enjoyed showing him that movie.

 

In California, VanDorn goes “undercover” to try and find his daughter – after it becomes clear to him that acting and dressing like himself will simply get everyone in this sleazy underworld think he’s a cop. He frequents sex shops and peep shows (apparently, Schrader insisted in shooting in the real business he portrays – something Scott says if he knew, he wouldn’t have made the movie – and this led to a rocky relationship between Schrader and Scott – although Scott’s unease in those places works for the movie, whether it was real or acted). He meets with porn producers, puts out a phony add looking for talent, and follows one lead after another, down one rabbit hole after another, each darker than the last. He finally teams up with Niki (Season Hubley), a young sex worker herself, who knows some people, who she thinks know Kristen. Their relationship is the best, deepest one in the movie. Niki is the only person who VanDorn opens up to at all – revealing his religious beliefs, and what really happened to his wife (kind of) – whereas Niki opens his eyes a little bit to the reality of what she does, and why. For a time, he becomes a surrogate father to her – although she correctly reads what the reality of the situation is going to be when it ends.

 

As many, including Roger Ebert, have pointed out – the end of the Hardcore is a little bit of a mess (spoiler alert). Schrader had always planned on VanDorn never finding Kristen – instead, he learns that she died in a car accident, and he slinks home a broken man. For whatever reason, he changed the end – but to make it fit in terms of plot, he needed to add in a previously unseen villain, as well as some violent action. The conversation that VanDorn and his daughter end up having is the most awkward and unconvincing in the film – it tries to assign a reason as to why she left, and a reason why she’ll come back with him. The Searchers and Taxi Driver both (smartly) avoided this problem – neither Natalie Wood or Jodie Foster have to say anything after being “rescued” – those films, instead, allow their parents to  do the talking, even if it’s clear they don’t understand their children (as it is here as well). But it’s not quite fair to describe the ending of Hardcore as a forced happy ending either. The final shot of the movie makes it clear that despite everything he has previously said, VanDorn will be yet another man who abandons Niki – making him less principled than he thinks he is – and the fact that he’s going to go home with Kristen will make it much harder for him to return to his bubble – which he could have done had she died.  Ethan and Travis get to live with their fantasies – VanDorn won’t have that luxury. (end spoilers).

 

Despite its flaws, Hardcore is one of Schrader’s best, and most complete, directorial efforts. As a director, he has been uneven to be sure – but he is hardly ever boring. Hardcore explores religion, masculinity, sexuality, pornography and many of Schrader’s pet themes. It’s one of his best films, and deserves to be more widely seen and discussed than it is.

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Movie Review: Dog Eat Dog

Dog Eat Dog

Directed by: Paul Schrader.

Written by: Matthew Wilder based on the novel by Edward Bunker.

Starring: Nicolas Cage (Troy), Willem Dafoe (Mad Dog), Christopher Matthew Cook (Diesel), Omar J. Dorsey (Moon Man), Louisa Krause (Zoe), Melissa Bolona (Lina), Reynaldo Gallegos (Chepe), Chelcie Melton (Sheila), Bruce Reizen (Maurie), Ali Wasdovich (Melissa), Louis Perez (Mike Brennan), Magi Avila (Nanny), Paul Schrader (El Greco).

 

The opening scene of Paul Schrader’s Dog Eat Dog is far and away the best part of the movie – mainly because it’s so weird, so strange and told completely without context, that you cannot help but be drawn in. In it, Willem Dafoe plays Mad Dog – completely high out of his mind on drugs (hence the crazy color scheme Schrader shoots in), embroiled in a domestic squabble with his girlfriend – who doesn’t want him there, but then relents – and then kicks him out again when she discovers he has been looking at internet porn. Mad Dog then lives up to his name, and murders not only his girlfriend but her teenage daughter, for no real reason. It’s all so strange, you cannot look away.

 

Unfortunately, the rest of the movie is nowhere near that entertaining – and the film is pretty much a grim slog from there on. It turns out that Mad Dog isn’t even the main character of this film – that’s Troy (Nicolas Cage), the leader of a trio of ex-cons including Mad Dog and Diesel (Christopher Matthew Cook), out of jail for the first time in years, and trying to make a living. We see them doing nickel and dime stuff – robbing a drug dealer for example – before they are given a chance to earn some real. A gangster owes another gangster $4 million, and won’t pay. He is willing to give Troy and company $750K to kidnap his 1 year old son and hold him for ransom. Troy knows immediately this is a dumb idea – and so does Diesel. Mad Dog doesn’t know much of anything – he’s basically a puppy dog, as likely to like your face as bite you – but they agree to do it anyway. Why? Because, if they don’t, there isn’t a movie. Or perhaps because this is a Paul Schrader movie – and his characters often engage in missions they know aren’t likely to work out. The difference is in most of his films, there is a reason they do it anyway – here, not so much.

 

Schrader, of course, is the talented screenwriter – known for some of his work with Martin Scorsese – Taxi Driver, The Last Temptation of Christ and Bringing Out the Dead for example, who has also had a fine directing career stretching back to the 1970s that touch on some of the same ground as his films with Scorsese, even if they are less well known. Schrader has always had more trouble getting his films made, and more fights with studios even when he does. For instance, he was replaced on the Exorcist prequel after he made the whole movie – and Renny Harlin was brought into re-shoot it. His version: Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist was eventually released – and while it was better than what Harlin made, it wasn’t very good. Recently, he told everyone not see Dying of the Light (2014) – also starring Cage – because the film was taken away from him, re-edited, etc. His highly publicized film, The Canyons, with Lindsay Lohan and porn star James Deen (pre-rape allegations) didn’t do much to revitalize anyone’s career.

 

Dog Eat Dog won’t do that either. The film kind of feels like all those countless Tarantino clones we all suffered through for about 10 years after Pulp Fiction – as the film is trying to be funny, and perhaps a little bonkers and insane, but never gets there. The film’s treatment of women borders on misogynistic – they are basically seen as little more than sex objects – either uncaring or stupid (there is one exception – a woman Diesel talks into coming back to his room, but then doesn’t know what to do with). The plan, of course, goes completely awry – and the end devolves into violence, as we know it must. But while that is common for a Schrader film, I don’t think he ever really figures out the tone of the movie. From the get go, Willem Dafoe seems to have decided to be the batshit crazy one, which means Nicolas Cage tries to play his character as more normal – which hurts the end of the film, when all of a sudden, he’s going a little nuts again. Schrader excels as a downbeat tone and energy – an air of inevitability, than the films end where they must, and happy endings were never possible. The problem is he’s stuck trying to make a bonkers exploitation film, and doesn’t really know how to do it.

 

That Paul Schrader loves films is undeniable – and give the guy credit, that he’s still plugging away at 70, trying to do something different. But we’re fairly far removed now from his best work – and even some very good work (I quite liked The Walker from 2007 – and I heard the following year’s Adam Resurrected was good as well, although I have yet to catch up with it). Will I continue to watch Schrader films, in the hopes of something as good as Affliction or Auto Focus again? Sure. But I’m not optimistic.

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Movie Review: The Canyons

The Canyons
Directed by: Paul Schrader.
Written by: Bret Easton Ellis.
Starring: Lindsay Lohan (Tara), James Deen (Christian), Nolan Funk (Ryan), Amanda Brooks (Gina), Tenille Houston (Cynthia), Gus Van Sant (Dr. Campbell).

There is a reason why Lindsay Lohan was a movie star before she became a punch line – and Paul Schrader’s The Canyons show why that is. Movie stars are often not the best actors in the world – but the ones who have that innate, un-teachable ability to draw attention to themselves, even if they’re not doing anything. This has nothing to do with looks – some gorgeous people have zero charisma on screen, and you forget about them immediately. It’s that elusive term “star quality” that no one can quite define. Lohan has that quality. She often isn’t doing very much in The Canyons – she seems to be “posing” at practically every turn in the movie. A few years of hard living have aged her – her raspy voice has only gotten more strained. And yet, Lohan is a star – or at least knows how to be one. Whenever she’s onscreen in The Canyons, I couldn’t look away.

Now, perhaps Lohan was helped by a few factors – the first being that her co-stars have almost zero personality. Porn star James Deen has the blank look of, well, a porn star. He is effective in his early scenes as his Christian isn’t required to be anything early in the film other than a spoiled, selfish sex addict – which he can play. Whenever Deen is onscreen, you get the feeling that he could go from doing just about anything to having sex in the blink of an eye – because, again, in porn, isn’t that what they do? But as the movie progresses, and the film desperately tries to add some layers to Christian – or least watch him devolve into the psychopath we initially think he maybe – Deen proves why he is in porn in the first place – he just isn’t a very good actor. The other co-star is played by Nolan Funk – and if you haven’t heard the name before, you’re not alone. He’s an unknown, and based on his blank, lifeless performance in The Canyons, he’ll probably stay that way.

The other thing that helps Lohan stand out is that the movie that surrounds her just isn’t very good. In many ways, it is a throwback to the 1980s – which isn’t surprising since much of Schrader and writer Bret Easton Ellis’ best known work, is from that decade. Everything from the visual look to the score to even the fact that Schrader and Ellis are attempting to make an “erotic thriller” at all screams 1980s. This is an extremely cynical film – perhaps even misanthropic – and it fits in nicely alongside such Ellis works as Less Than Zero or American Psycho – and is perhaps a darker version of a film like Schrader’s American Gigolo, although of all Schrader’s films, it’s probably most similar to Auto Focus (2002) about the lonely, empty life of TV’s Bob Crane – who was murdered after years of wallowing in sex addiction.

The film centers on yet another of Ellis’ patented dead inside, spoiled rich kids. Deen’s Christian doesn’t do anything, and doesn’t want to do anything – but he’s financing a low budget slasher film to get daddy off his back about not doing anything. All he wants to do is connect with strangers on the internet, and get them to come over to his mansion and engage in anonymous sex with him and his girlfriend Tara (Lohan). The movie opens with a dinner with Christian, Tara and Christian’s assistant Gina (Amanda Brooks) and her boyfriend Ryan (Funk) – an “actor” who works as a bartender because he cannot get acting jobs. But Gina has gotten him cast in the slasher movie. It isn’t long before we discover that Ryan used to date Tara – and now they’ve been conducting an affair behind their significant others backs for the last month. Tara left because she wanted security and money – and Ryan was never going to be able to offer that. Christian really shouldn’t care about Tara’s affair – after all, they engage in anonymous sex all the time, and he’s having his own affair with Cynthia (Tenille Houstan) – but Christian needs to be in control. The entire movie actually hinges on a four way sex scene involving Christian, Tara and two people we never see in another scene in the movie, where Tara turns the tables on him – and he realizes that she is actually in control. This is what makes him devolve into the violent psycho we know from the beginning of the movie he will become.

It would be easy to sneer at The Canyons – to dismiss as having a “cold deadness” to it, as one staffer at a film festival said when they rejected the film. Or to simply say it manages to be both over the top and ridiculous and dull at the same time. After all, in a movie with this much sex and violence in it, you would at least think it had the makings of a guilty pleasure, right? And there’s very little joy to be had in watching The Canyons.

Yet all of that seems to be deliberate on the parts of Schrader and Ellis. Surely, these two very talented men could have made a guilty pleasure, erotic thriller had they wanted to. They didn’t want to – the deadness to the film is not a flaw, but an artistic choice. The movie shows, at various points, a bunch of old, abandoned, dilapidated movie theaters – and in one particularly on the nose scene, has Lohan pretty much dismiss movies altogether. The point seems to be that the characters, still involved in the movie industry, are dead inside, and the industry itself is dead or dying. Schrader has pretty much said as much multiple times over the last decade or so – and Ellis’ cynicism stretches back to the 1980s.

So no, it’s not the cold, deadness of The Canyons that ultimately sinks the movie – it’s the fact that Schrader and Ellis don’t really have much of any real interest to say about the characters in their movie other than the most obvious, surface level observation. None of the characters in the movie is the least bit sympathetic – which wouldn’t be a problem if they were even remotely interesting. Good actors, or movie stars, may have been able to paper over the wafer thin characters – Lohan certainly manages the trick pretty well throughout the movie. But Deen and Funk aren’t able to muster anything of interest.

I took some heat last year for liking David Cronenberg’s Cosmopolis – which is a film whose themes aren’t all that dissimilar to those raised in The Canyons – and features a similar performance of that by Lohan in this movie by Robert Pattinson. I’m still not sure if either of these people can actually act (in Lohan’s case, it’s a question of whether she can STILL act, as at one she certainly could). But they hold the screen – they are interesting screen presences, in The Canyons and Cosmopolis, they are excellent as the dead inside characters they are playing. The difference between The Canyons and Cosmopolis, is that Cronenberg’s film was fascinating and engrossing on a scene by scene basis – the conversations were deliberating distancing, but extremely well acted by the characters, and the deadness of that film seemed appropriate given the Wall Street subject matter. I may not have liked any of the characters in Cosmopolis – but they fascinated me, and had something to say, and the film’s points about money and power were appropriate. That is what The Canyons is missing – a reason to spend time with its emotionally dead characters or take what the film is saying about the film industry seriously. I respect what Schrader and Ellis were trying to accomplish with The Canyons – and admired Lohan’s performance in the movie, which is as good as could be expected – but ultimately I think they come quite far short of their aim.

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Ranking the Paul Schrader Films I've Seen

Paul Schrader will most likely be best remembered as the screenwriter for three of Martin Scorsese’s best films – Taxi Driver (1976), Raging Bull (1980) and The Last Temptation of Christ (1988). But his career is obviously greater than those three films – from his fine screenplays of other director’s work like Rolling Thunder (1977) and Mosquito Coast (1986), along with his other screenplay for Scorsese – Bringing Out the Dead (1999). He has also directed 18 films – the latest being The Canyons – opening this week in theaters and on demand. While Schrader has never gotten quite the same praise for his directorial efforts as he has for those screenplays for Scorsese, his filmography is quite strong – and he certainly qualifies as an auteur. I titled this post the films of Paul Schrader that I have seen, because while I’ve only seen 11 of his directorial efforts and have missed 6 – Cat People (1982), Light of Day (1987), The Comfort of Strangers (1990), Witch Hunt (1994), Forever Mine (1999) and Adam Resurrected (2008). That’s a third of his filmography, so obviously I have some work to do to catch up. But on the eve of the release of his latest film, I thought I should take some time to acknowledge a fairly underrated filmography.

11. Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist (2005)

The story of Schrader’s awkwardly titled Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist is well known – the studio hired Schrader to make a Prequel to the famed horror movie – he did, and they hated it. They considered it too slow and ceberal, and not the horror movie they wanted, so they took the movie away from Schrader, jettisoned most of the footage, recast some roles, and gave the film to Renny Harlin, who made Exorcist: The Beginning. After spending millions on the two versions, and having it still in the red after Harlin’s film was done it’s theatrical run, the studio relented, and barely released Schrader’s version – in an effort to make a least little money off of it. I’ve now spent most of my space talking about the backstory to the movie rather than the movie itself – and there’s a reason for that. It just isn’t very good. I appreciate the fact that Schrader takes the premise seriously, which is probably what the studio didn’t like (but should have expected had they seen anything Schrader has ever done before), but the film is still dull, and rather unremarkable. Is it better than Harlin’s version? Yes, but not by that much, although they are very different films based on the same basic premise. If they were better movies, it would be fascinating to watch them back to back to see the differences. But they’re not, so both films have largely already been forgotten – and that’s probably for the best.

10. Touch (1997)

Strangely, although the film couldn’t be more different than Dominion, Touch suffers the same basic problem – that Schrader takes it a little too seriously. Here we have a movie based on an Elmore Leonard novel – with all of his trademark wit – that doesn’t really play like a comedy. Part of that is because it’s a bizarre novel by Leonard in the first place – instead of his usual criminals, Touch is about a strange young man (Skeet Ulrich) who has Stigmata – and the people who meet and try to exploit him. The film seems caught between the world of Leonard – in which this could be an amusing religious satire – and Schrader – who tries harder to take some of the questions of faith in the movie seriously, which I don’t think Leonard ever intended. This makes Touch a very odd movie – not successful really, but not boring either.

9. Patty Hearst (1988)

Patty Hearst is an odd film, but perhaps that is what this very odd story deserves. We all know the story of Heart – she was kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army, really just an odd collection of misguided young people under the power of their leader, kept in a closet for weeks, and then ends up joining their “revolution” – even to the point of brandishing a machinegun at a bank robbery. Schrader’s film is clearly in sympathy with Hearst – he buys her story that she was essentially brainwashed into doing what she did, and the way Schrader presents it, you’d have a tough time arguing that. Yet what makes the film odd is that for such a sensational, unbelievable story, Schrader has made a subdued film – one that you could argue is dull. What isn’t dull is Miranda Richardson’s great performance as Hearst – which is remarkably subtle – so subtle in fact, at times she appears to be doing nothing. I’m not sure Patty Hearst is really a good film, but again, it’s an interesting one – and one you won’t likely forget.

8. The Walker (2007)

The Walker is the story of a man who everyone sees as frivolous and a failure when compared to his “great” father, who in reality, is a far greater, more moral person. It stars Woody Harrelson, in one of his best performances, as the son of a famous Senator, who really hasn’t done much with his life. He is gay and spends most of his time going on “dates” with the wives of powerful Washington men – accompanying them to parties or the theater, when their husbands are too busy to. And then, he becomes involved in a murder investigation because of one of those women, and then becomes the prime suspect. The film is more of a character study of Harrelson’s character than a murder mystery – but the murder mystery is necessary in order for us, and for Harrelson’s character himself, to see just who this character is. It isn’t one of Schrader’s best films – but it is a very good one, and it deserves to be seen by more people.

7. American Gigolo (1980)

American Gigolo is every inch a Paul Schrader with one major difference – the ending of this film is upbeat. This is another of what Schrader calls his “Man in a Room”  movies, this one involving Richard Gere, as a young gigolo who specializes in pleasing middle aged women. He’s very good at his job – and takes pride in it. While outwardly, he appears to be charming and likable, he really is another of Schrader’s lonely characters – craving human contact, and yet not quite sure how to get that legimately, so he hides behind his profession to get it. That is until he meets Lauren Hutton – as a Senator’s wife. Her character is not as well defined as perhaps she could be, but everything else in the movie – including the murder investigation (this is clearly a pre-cursor to films like Light Sleeper and The Walker) are handled well. Does the upbeat ending work? I’m not sure, but considering that Schrader usually ends his films on a down note, it is a welcome respite.

6. Light Sleeper (1992)

Light Sleeper is one of the saddest films about drug addiction you will ever see. It stars Willem Dafoe in an excellent performance as a former addict, now clean for a few years, who still works in the drug business – going to the home of his clients to drop off their fix. Why does he do this? After years of being an addict, what other job could he possibly get? He gets along with his boss, Susan Sarandon. Like The Walker, the film is a character study more than it is about it’s plot – and there is a plot, about an old flame of Dafoe’s, another drug addict, and her death – that Dafoe gets drawn into. Some will complain that the ending of the movie is basically the same ending as Schrader wrote for Taxi Driver. It’s not an unfair complaint, but the ending works for this film, as it did for the previous one. And, as I said, the movie isn’t about its plot – about these two people, Dafoe and Sarandon, their relationship, and the two performances couldn’t be better.

5. Auto Focus (2002)

Auto Focus is a sad movie about sex addiction. It stars Greg Kinnear in a remarkable performance as Bob Crane – star of TV’s Hogan’s Heroes – whose career crashed and burned after the show went off the air, and then he descended into his own personal hell as a sex addict, before ended up being murdered by his running mate – played in an exceptionally creepy performance by Willem Dafoe. There is a lot of sex in Auto Focus, but no joy, not eroticism. Crane is famous, and finds getting women to sleep with him is easy. He and Dafoe’s character spend time in strip clubs and bars, and often film their exploits. Why? Why not? Some complained that Auto Focus was a shallow film, but that’s not accurate. It’s a remarkably

4. Blue Collar (1978)
In the same week that the city of Detroit declared bankruptcy, I find myself writing about Schrader’s debut film – Blue Collar – that takes place in Detroit, and shows just how corrupt were. It stars Richard Pryor, Harvey Keitel and Yapphet Kotto as three assembly line workers in the auto plants, who are essentially tired of being squeezed by both sides – management on one side, the union on the other – and decide to take matters into their own hands and rob the safe in the Union office – what they find is both more and less than what they expected. The film is brilliantly acted by the three leads – you expect that from actors like Keitel and Kotto, but it is really Pryor who is the star here – still at times funny, but not in the way we’re used to seeing him. This is a film full of anger, and the film does become violent, but as it goes along, it also becomes more morally complex –as the men have to decide what to do. You don’t hear much about Blue Collar anymore – it’s another of those great 1970s films that has been forgotten – but it’s worth tracking down. Right from his first directing effort, Schrader showed he was a fine filmmaker – and one willing to follow the story where it should go, and not the way Hollywood usually wants them to go.

3. Hardcore (1979)

After writing Taxi Driver for Scorsese and Rolling Thunder for John Flynn, I guess Schrader wanted to make a similar movie himself –and he does so in Hardcore, the most underrated film of his career, and one of the more personal ones. The film stars the great George C. Scott as a strict Calvinist (the same religion Schrader himself was raised in), who discovers his daughter has gotten involved in the porn industry – and heads to California to try and “rescue” her. Along the way, he meets a young prostitute – and the two bond. It’s there relationship that is really the heart of Hardcore – he is the one man who doesn’t just see her as a sex object, she gives him the freedom to open up in a way he never has before. The flaw in the movie is the ending – which is fairly standard issue stuff, even if it ends on a bittersweet moment. I almost think the film would have been better had Scott never found his daughter – and if he tried to make the most of it with his new “surrogate” daughter instead. Still, a flawed ending(that Schrader said in Film Comment recently he was forced to change) isn’t enough for me to not love Hardcore, which is a personal movie to me in other ways as well.

2. Affliction (1998)

Affliction is perhaps the most perfect film of Schrader’s career (not, obviously, in my opinion the best, but the least flawed). It stars Nick Nolte in his greatest performance as a lazy, alcoholic Sheriff who is still terrified of his abusive, alcoholic father – played in an Oscar winning performance by James Coburn. Affliction points to the types of roles Nolte, no longer a leading man, has excelled at in the last 15 years – flawed men, beaten down by life and their own demons, but men who despite outward apperances, and past behavior, are still decent. Like many of Schrader’s films, there is a murder in Affliction – one that snaps Nolte out of his slumber, but the movie isn’t about the murder - I can barely remember the details of the murder in this film. What I will never forget is the performances by Nolte and Coburn, one as a man still suffering from the effects of child abuse decades later, and one who is still a big, mean, petulant bully. Coburn said that this was the greatest role of his career – one of the few that actually required him to act. And act he does. Nolte probably should have won an Oscar for this performance as well (out of the nominees, he was probably the best). These two towering performances are at the heart of Schrader’s film – a great one.

1. Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters (1985)

 Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters is a completely unconventional film biography, but probably the only way to effectively tell the story of it’s title character – the famed Japanese writer Yukio Mishima, who in 1970, along with his private army, would storm an army base, take a General hostage, address the troops and the commit seppuku, all in an effort to restore the Emperor to power – something even the Emperor did not want. Schrader’s film tells Mishima’s life story in starkly different styles – black and white flashbacks, that show a sickly, overprotected child, who becomes a sexually confused body builder and writer, in highly stylized color sequences, shot on a sound stage, recreating the events of three of Schrader’s novels, and then in more natural color, depicting the last day of his life. Like Todd Haynes’ Bob Dylan biopic I’m Not There (2007), Schrader doesn’t want to make a standard issue biopic, but wants to explore the different aspects of Mishima’s character – although this time, I do think it adds up to a coherent whole, unlike Haynes’ film, where not adding up to a coherent whole is part of the point. You’re on dangerous ground when you try too hard to make an artist’s work reflect who they are as a person, which Schrader does here, but the overall effect works remarkably well. Schrader himself considers this his best directorial effort – and I agree wholeheartedly.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)