PERFECT (1985)

Directed By: James Bridges

Written By: James Bridges and Aaron Latham

Based on Articles By: Aaron Latham 

Cinematography: Gordon Willis 

Editor: Jeff Gourson 

Cast: John Travolta, Jamie Lee Curtis, Marilu Henner, Jann Wenner, Laraine Newman, Anne De Salvo, Kenneth Welsh, Chelsea Field, David Paymer

Fed up with writing obituaries for a local New Jersey newspaper, the inquisitive and ambitious journalist, Adam Lawrence, finally gets his big break, when–as a Rolling Stone reporter–gets to interview a well-off entrepreneur accused of drug-dealing. However, one brief look at the tight-bodied members of a modern gym will have Adam itching to write an exposé on the latest craze of fitness and health centres, where aerobics instructors like the ferociously-astonishing, Jessie, are the absolute stars. But, Jessie, really despises interviewers. Will she ever let him into her sultry world of cool music, high-energy exercise, and perfection?


————————————————————————

One could see the appeal of this movie at the time. as more revolving around the romance between the two leads played by John Travolta and Jamie Lee Curtis. You need to fill the time of this movie that is way too long.

This film is over two hours long and the tale could’ve been told and 90 minutes. so instead of just a romance, the film also wants to talk about journalistic responsibility not only that but how to build a story.

As the film tries to show, yes there is a reporter trying to get the truth out to the people and tell a story, but also how the story is only the view of the reporter and might not tell the full story or is edited so that details are left out, and also the aftermath that the story can do two people who never intended originally to be victims.

One can see why John Travolta chose this movie as it’s by James Bridges, who also directed him in his head urban cowboy so this is another kind of down and dirty romance. Only this is given more of a flashy treatment as it is tying for rolling stone magazine, for which John Travolta is a reporter of and , the editor and chief of the magazine at the time Jan wiener even plays himself a version of himself under a different name.

The script was also written by written by the actual writer that John Travolta character is based on who wrote a story about sports clubs or aerobics clubs being the new singles club so it all feels like an in-house production.

I will say that Jamie Lee Curtis looks fantastic in the movie and her character is so cool and has such a fashionable look that you just wish her character was in a different and better film. 

John Travolta tries his best and makes his character charismatic and dramatic, but he doesn’t make him interesting.

That is the problem with this film at first, watching this film as a look back at the fashions and mentality of the times, but it moves along so slowly that even any campiness factor within the film slowly drains away until your hit with what is supposed to be drama but he just doesn’t seem in the right way that the film is hoping it will just want resolution as you’re wondering where is this movie going to go?

Seem to have a lot going for at first it has some unbilled cameos by Lauren Hutton and Carly Simon and it seems like a typically streamline film that was made to be tied into a fan, but then also tried to have some substance and that might be the problem is that that substance dragged down the film that not that it wouldn’t necessarily have been good Even without the substance, but it could be forgiven for naïveness

So give credit for at least trying to be worth something.

The film is fascinating to watch though after a while it’s feels a little monotonous, almost like a sitcom where you wait for the two leads to finally get together and then they do and then the show kind of runs out of steam as it doesn’t know what else to do or focus on , watching just to see where it’s going to go if you’re a Die Hard that’s what it feels like watching this film. It goes on for way too long and so many characters consequences and plots that don’t seem to go anywhere or are introduced but not more depth.

For instance, the Lorraine Newman character seems like the one chance for the film to actually have a character of death who has tragic ramifications around her and offers some traumatic consequences, but the film seems to hint at these prospects and then totally drops them so that just becomes another background character that we do with.

It’s not exactly the same with Mary Lou character who is Bill heavily but is given very little to do more than maybe be in the background of scenes even though she looks great too in this film as much as Jamie Lee Curtis, but other than just being another body in the background She doesn’t have much to do.

I’m sure this film has its fans and Jamie Lee Curtis and John Travolta still defended though this was a flop a big one for the studio and John Travolta who seem to not start another film for another four years after this film so he did kind of a hit though again I think everyone is proud of the film, at least attempted to even if it didn’t do it successfully.

I would say the warnings but watch at your own risk. It’s not the worst thing in the world, but it’s reputation proceeds and there is a reason for that there is some decent stuff in here, but you have to get through so much bad stuff just to get to it, including a ridiculously long aerobics scene where John Travolta just keeps thrusting his hips endlessly.

The one aspect of the film is that it has so many aerobics and workout scenes that this film under normal circumstances could’ve been a musical if you just take all the aerobic scenes and made them into song and dance productions it seems it wants to be a musical, but physically, it’s a romantic drama about reporting and aerobics.

Grade: D+

BAD MANNERS (1984)

Directed By: Robert Houston 

Written By: Robert Houston and Joseph Kwong 

Cinematography: Jan De Bont

Editor: Barry Zetlin

Cast: Pamela Segall, Joey Coleman, George Olden, Michael Hentz, Christopher Brown, Anne DeSalvo, Martin Mull, Karen Black, Kimmy Robertson, Susan Ruttan, Edy Williams, Stephen Stucker

Four teens on the run from an orphanage spring a fellow orphan recently adopted by a rich family, then trash the whole house.


This is a film I remember watching and liking quite a bit when I was a kid probably around eight years old, which is what strikes at the heart of this film who is this film really marketed towards it is too adult to truly be for children and to juvenile to really be for adults 18 even though most of the characters look to be just entering their teens and the material throughout is way too adult. In fact, it’s a rated R film.

This is a long way of saying they wouldn’t make a film like this today. The film is just trashy, sleazy, gross, and in very bad taste, but strangely it has charm.

At the heart of it, it’s very punk rock as it showcases, a rebellious youthful spirit against the more selfish superficial, and exploitation of adults. Not to mention everything moving along into chaos.

The film shows some adults in particular at the orphanage have a psychotherapist, who only wants to talk about sex to the young children there and seems to be very into bondage

The orphanage rundown prison or who uses a cattle pro and all of the teachers seem to be nuns

The film has two nude scenes. unnecessary, but we’re kind of in at the time and probably helped get more eyes on the film of whichever audience. They intended the teens and the adults giving them a reason to watch it as I might have done the research and saw in the rating it’s rated R for you know, graphic violence, nudity sexual situations, and language only here with more nudity and language

It doesn’t really have any sex in it luckily but there is just a certain vibe to it. That feels like anything taboo will be at least hint or watching it now it’s amazed that it even got made.

as I will admit at the time, one of the reasons, I probably became a fan of this film was Pamela Segall who knows who now goes by Pamela Adlon, who is in a bunch of movies I saw on cable GREASE 2 is where I first saw her and then this film and then the movie SOMETHING SPECIAL a more teenage appropriate movie. Though not as wild. Even later in her career, playing the tough gal usually but one who is down to earth and could definitely hang with the men on equal footing while also being noticeably attractive. Which has made me a lifelong fan of hers.

One of the problems of the movies is that you hate most of the characters or dislike them, as even the kids aren’t exactly likable. They all seem very troubled and while you want them to win, you probably wouldn’t want to take care of any of them or be in charge of any of them, but as the movie tries to keep us, and if they wanna act like they are adults

As the kids are just unruly and seem to want to always break the rules and cause trouble, and they all have different character types not clearly defined, but rambunctious

It just makes me wonder what there was as a respectable cast of Martin Mull, Anne DeSalvo and Karen Black in it, apparently, all are here cashing checks, but they still give their all in their performances. 

I will admit Martin Mull  is also another big pole for me to watch a film even when I was a kid I was fascinated by him or the characters he played.

The film was even shot by renowned future cinematographer and filmmaker Jan De Bont (SPEED) 

None of the actors who played the main gang of kids really appeared in too many future film or television roles. Though Joey Coleman, who played Whitey was in the documentary and open secret about child abuse, and pedophilia in Hollywood.

It is also one of the rare roles of Stephen Stucker outside of the AIRPLANE spoof movies. Playing a similar over the top comedic role. 

on the one hand, I admire that this film got made at all as it just shows how wild the 1980s were when it came to so-called teen or youth oriented films. The film certainly isn’t well but it is a fascinating watch for what they did and get away with at the time.

as a childhood memory of entertainment, I am shocked that my parents let me watch this many times, but also it kind of has a special place in my heart. I know it’s nostalgia isn’t always the greatest especially when it comes to something that might be an inferior product, but this stays with me, I wouldn’t necessarily recommend it but for those who look for more trashy Cinema, I would say give it a chance or give it a look

Grade: C 

FEAR, ANXIETY & DEPRESSION (1989)

Written & Directed By: Todd Solondz 
Cinematography: Stefan Czapsky 
Editor: Peter Austin, Emily Paine & Barry Rubinow

Cast: Todd Solondz, Max Cantor, Alexandra Gersten, Jane Hamper, Stanley Tucci, Anne De Salvo, Jill Wisoff, Kathleen Gati

Ira is a nervous playwright waiting and hoping to succeed with his art, which he takes it very seriously. But following his dreams and ambitions isn’t something easy to do, especially when he has to consider the points of view his family, his artist friends and his girlfriend will provide to him whenever he exposes his incomprehensible works of art.


Finally got a chance to see writer/director Todd Solondz’s long-lost (for me) first film. This Great white whale of mine 

He has disavowed the film Claiming he felt like creative control was taken away from him.

One might enable to see why. Even though it isn’t a train wreck. It is actually entertaining in a goofy, surrealistic way. It still has the same themes as his later films. Exactly what the title lets you know. 

Only here he is the star as with his early Short films. It’s hard not to think that these films are autobiographical. As this ends a one of era again and he never appears in any of his films ever again.

As in future films, there seems to either be surrogates or he just writes more for ensembles and wanted to make films about characters and less making it seem about himself. 

This film obviously Comes out Indebted to Woody Allen as his character is definitely like one of Woody’s, a man who seems to be romantic and constantly Full of anxiety, nebbish, and strives for more. Who isn’t happy in his current life and then once he loses it realizes how good he had it. 

Though not as grand in scope this film reminds me of a lower-budgeted I HEART HUCKABEES more for its zany surreal comedic bits at times and its lightness and bitter comedic tone.

As most of the characters talk about being real artists but are aloof and pretentious and either needy or predatory.

Junk is the perfect femme fatale. As she lets you know what she is all about but the lead character stays enamored of her for her looks and what he eyes as tough attitude when she is just rude. Though He thinks her mysterious as she is the type of person he has never encountered. So she is all new to him. Treating him badly but he keeps coming back for more.

While he treats a woman who is head over heel for him badly the same way junk treats him.

He is a character. Struggling play-write who constantly seems to lose while those around him keep seeming to become successful. Like a high school friend who decided to write as a hobby become the toast of Broadway. While he gets a bad review in the village voice that everyone seems To read.

Or his best friend who hates his writing but encourages him. Who always seems To date or seduce whoever he seems to be interested in or pining for.

Even when junk Offers herself to him sexually he Messes it all up before he can go through with the deed. Or when he gets the girl

Of his dreams how she seems to Tolerate him but still Pine for her asshole ex. He seems to bring this misery at times upon himself.

Though no matter what it never becomes completely depressing as the film Keeps the mood and material goofy and silly. Even though it offers up a sad ending it ends with a little hope. That includes a rare happy ending.

So while a sadder woody Allen-Ish film a pleasing one and fascinating to see where his career began and see the seeds of future films and style.

The film also has a nice look at classic New York around 1989 mainly Greenwich village before it Became so gentrified 

I can identify with him and his films as I feel like what I write is similar and that most of my Early films or projects usually

Are more extensions of daydreams or exaggerated feelings and my self-consciousness put out there. Not to mention having humor about and bringing up uncomfortable subjects that are a part of life that involve characters trying to be good but are awkward in their own skin especially socially. 

As they have Consciences here everybody seems to get by seemingly normal without realizing at times how ridiculous or Cruel they are naturally

Grade: C+