FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
When an exhausted, insecure, emotionally volatile singer named the Rose (Bette Midler) pleads unsuccessfully for a break in touring from her harsh manager (Alan Bates), she runs away with and falls for a chauffeur (Fredric Forrest) who wants to help rescue her from her chaotic life — but Rose is drawn back time and again both to Bates and to the allure of acceptance and adoration from her fans.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Alan Bates Films
• Bette Midler Films
• Downward Spiral
• Fredric Forrest Films
• Harry Dean Stanton Films
• Singers

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary’s strongly worded review of this film — which chronicles “the last days in the life of a fictional rock superstar… patterned on the ill-fated Janis Joplin” — put me off from watching it for years. He opens by writing, “Some day a money-mad producer will make a film about the last days of John Belushi; it will be about as unenjoyable as this film”, and later he adds that “this film is for masochists only”. He writes that “it’s hard to watch one awful thing after another happen to Midler: not only is she self-destructive, but everyone she trusts lets her down, walks out on her, or exploits her.” He posits that “the movie should have been about an hour shorter,” but since “the filmmakers weren’t satisfied having individuals hurt Midler just once”, they “bring them back to hurt her again”. He concedes that “Midler gives a great performance and does a terrific job singing rock songs (as well as the haunting title ballad),” but has nothing else positive to say.

While I’m in agreement (of course) that this film offers up a deeply distressing narrative — it’s not one to watch when you’re in the mood for something light-hearted — I disagree with Peary’s framing. Midler’s character — a “vulnerable, burned-out singer who is loved by her fans but suffers loneliness because she hasn’t a man to love and protect her”, and thus “drinks heavily, takes too many drugs, and picks up men” — is clearly a complex individual who makes life challenging for those around her. The moment she first speaks harshly to Forrest is truly shocking:

She causes him to flee in (rightful) self-preservation to a nearby male-only bath-house, which Midler enters without hesitation:

The Rose’s life is shown as an endless and exhausting push and pull between her tentative acceptance of love and joy, and her fears that she’s not worthy, thus leading her to make bad or misguided choices time and again. Underlying all is her seriously dysfunctional and co-dependent relationship with short-sighted Bates, who doesn’t seem to realize that all humans need periods of rest and recovery to stay functional and (ahem) money-generating.

Forrest, meanwhile, is an admirably complex character — someone who is living out his own secret life of rebellion, and has “hangs-ups of his own”.

Thankfully, David Keith’s kind soldier-turned-bodyguard:

… serves as welcome relief from the litany of troubled and/or malicious men Midler encounters — including Harry Dean Stanton in a bit role early on as a mean-spirited musician.

Peary also neglects to discuss how beautifully filmed this picture is (especially evident in Blu-Ray). Director Mark Rydell, working with DP Vilmos Zsigmond, presents a vibrantly saturated world of concert halls, bars, and various other locales, including Midler’s economically depressed home-town.

Meanwhile, Midler’s performance really is spectacular: her Oscar nomination was deserved, and it’s too bad she never had a chance to shine like this (cinematically-speaking) again. She plays every single scene she’s in (which is many or most) as though she’s living out the Rose’s heartbreak, exhaustion, insecurity, and exuberance in real-time. It’s astonishing how electric she is on stage (it makes sense her fans adore her), and how easily she slips into realistic despair. While not all scenes work as well as others, the arc of this story coheres just fine — and I disagree with Peary that it should have been an hour shorter.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Bette Midler as the Rose (nominated as one of the Best Actresses of the Year in Peary’s Alternate Oscars)
  
• Fredric Forrest as Dyer
  
• David Keith as Mal
  
• Stunning cinematography
  
  
  
• Fine location shooting
  
• Many gut-wrenching moments
  
  
• Powerful concert sequences
  
  

Must See?
Yes, for Midler’s Oscar-nominated performance and as an all-around powerful show.

Categories

• Noteworthy Performance(s)
• Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

• IMDb entry
• DVD Talk Review
• Q Network Review
• Spinning Image Review
• NY Times Original Review

Synopsis:
When a jazz pianist (David Hemmings) witnesses the murder of a psychic (Macha Meril), he enlists help from a feisty reporter (Daria Nicolodi) in tracking down the mysterious serial killer.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Amateur Sleuths
• Dario Argento Films
• Horror Films
• Serial Killers

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “imaginatively directed” horror film by Dario Argento “is extremely exciting,” with “the mystery itself” interesting given “there is an abundance of clues [and] the murders are suspenseful and properly gruesome.” He argues this “may be Argento’s most stylish film: his music is loud; his colors are bright, but he also makes use of shadows and darkness”, and “he makes great use of a fluid camera… but also gives you chills with extreme close-ups of eyeballs:

… weird props, etc.” He adds that Argento “gives class to what could have been another sleazy slasher movie by having: Hemmings play classical music:

… the mystery center on a painting” (as was the case in Argento’s The Bird With the Crystal Plumage [1970]), “his characters… educated, and his scenes set in art schools, libraries, and large rooms with tasteful decor.”

Finally, Peary notes that the film features “excellent use of props (paintings, mirrors, dolls, knives, clothes, etc.)”:

… as well as “striking nocturnal shots of deserted streets”.

While giallo films aren’t a personal favorite, I can appreciate Argento’s artistry here, and consider this a must-see simply for its cult status.

Note: For me, part of being a film fanatic is trying to understand why others deeply enjoy a certain genre of film that doesn’t necessarily appeal to me. To that end, I highly recommend The Maniac’s clear and thorough video overview of this film, contextualizing it within the history of giallo films.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Striking cinematography and sets
  
• Many memorable scenes
  
  

Must See?
Yes, for its cult status.

Categories

• Cult Movie

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Combustible Celluloid Review
• TCM Article
• Q Network Review
• Classic Horror Review
• TV Guide Review
• Mondo Digital Review
• Jigsaw Film Lounge Review
• The Maniac Video Review
• DrumDums Review

Synopsis:
A group of female prisoners — Alcott (Roberta Collins), Bodine (Pat Woodell), Marnie (Judy Brown), and Grear (Pam Grier) [whose heroin-addicted girlfriend Harrad (Brooke Mills) is in dire straits] — plot to escape from a prison in the Philippines run by a sadistic warden (Kathryn Loder), and receive support from a pair of fruit vendors (Sid Haig and Jerry Frank).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Escape
• Pam Grier Films
• Prisoners
• Strong Females

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary posits that this “first of the women-in-prison genre” — “directed by Jack Hill and produced by Jane Schaffer for Roger Corman’s New World Pictures” — is “the best outside of Jonathan Demme’s Caged Heat.” He notes that it “created the formula for later films by mixing R-rated sex and violence… with feminism: women bond together for survival, women are not helpless and passive.” He argues that “Roberta Collins and Pam Grier” — “two future superstars of the sexploitation genre”:

— are “reasons enough to see this film”, given that they “will take only so much humiliation, abuse, and torture”. While this film is competently directed and features spunky performances — including by Barbara Steele-look-alike (Loder):

… it’s not must-see viewing by anyone except fans of the WIP genre.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Some effective direction
  
  
  

Must See?
No, though it’s work a look for its historical status as a trend-setting women-in-prison film.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TV Guide Review
• Spinning Image Review

Synopsis:
When the leader (Roger Hill) of New York’s largest gang is murdered by a fellow gang leader (David Patrick Kelly) at an all-city gathering, the innocent leader of the Warriors (Dorsey Wright) is killed in wrongful retaliation and the remainder of the gang — now led by Swan (David Beck) — is pursued across the city. During their harrowing attempt to make it back home to Coney Island, the Warriors meet a beautiful young woman (Deborah Van Valkenburgh) who falls for Swan, and must battle numerous other outrageously dressed gangs — including the skinhead Turnball A.C.s, the Baseball Furies, the Punks, and the all-female Lizzies.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Gangs
• New York City
• Walter Hill Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary describes “Walter Hill’s nifty, stylized, heart-pounding action movie” as “set in a surreal, fantasy New York, a playground for numerous tribes (called gangs) which stake out territories and parade around in garish identifying costumes, brandishing weapons and spray paint with which to decorate everything in their paths.” He notes that this is a “dream world, an enormous arena of parks and empty subway tunnels, the perfect obstacle course”, with “the subway trains — neutral territory in Sol Yurick’s much different… source novel — Hill’s bases, one for each baseline.” He points out that “the police are another tribe, the Men in Blue who serve as umpires and remove all rule breakers from the game”, and that “there is even a play-by-play announcer, a female deejay who reports the Warriors’ progress” and refers to their gang as “a minor-league team”. Peary reminds us that “the film is bloodless” and the “violence is cartoonlike, with every brutally beaten character feeling fine immediately after” — a notable fact, given that “this film was the object of a huge anti-violence-in-film campaign due to some incidents in theaters in which it played”.

Peary elaborates on this film in his first Cult Movies book, where he describes in detail the many differences between it and the original novel. He writes that while “The Warriors, artistically, is an uneven film to say the least”, it “is so full of unbridled energy and drive, with frenetic pacing from beginning to end, that it’s hard not to root… for it to succeed.” While “it’s a film that’ll make you cringe at times”, you’ll “forgive the shortcomings and praise the exciting camerawork, the excellent use of music, and the oddly conceived performance of David Patrick Kelly, the best wacko villain since Andy Robinson in Dirty Harry (1971).”

Indeed, there’s much to admire and enjoy about this fast-paced flick, including the “first rate” choreography of the fight scenes, the stylized costumes (especially those of the Furies), and highly effective use of New York shooting locales. This unique cult favorite remains well worth a look.

Note: Peary understandably fails to point out the nifty comic-strip transitions added in the 2005 director’s cut, which heighten the cartoonish and playful nature of the story.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Andrew Laszlo’s cinematography
  
  
• Effective use of New York locales
  
  
• Plenty of memorable moments
  
• The creative comic strip transitions (added in 2005)
  
• Barry De Vorzon’s synthesized score

Must See?
Yes, as a genuine cult classic.

Categories

• Cult Movie

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• TCM Article
• Q Network Review

Synopsis:
A 7-year-old orphan named P.S. (Nicholas Gledhill) who has lived with his poor but kind aunt (Robyn Nevins) and uncle (Peter Whitford) for years is forced to go spend time with his wealthy, emotionally reserved Aunt Vanessa (Wendy Hughes) when his absentee father (John Hargreaves) decides this may be best for him — but P.S. misses his old life, and struggles to make his wishes known to the adults around him.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Adoption
• Australian Films
• Class Relations
• Orphans
• Raising Kids

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “sleeper from Australia” — which “seems to have profoundly affected everyone who has seen it” — “effectively conveys the trauma suffered by a child who is shuttled back and forth between two homes, without having any say in what is best for him… Everything he is told is biased; nothing he does is correct in either household… [and] he is told by each aunt to keep secrets from the other”, leading to him being “confused, scared, and miserable.” Peary points out that the “tragedy is that everyone acts at their worst”, with “even the sweet little boy resort[ing] to cruel manipulation of the adults by the film’s end” (one doesn’t blame him in the slightest). Peary argues that this “important subject matter has, surprisingly, never been handled well until this film” (really?), and that the picture features “excellent acting — young Gledhill will capture your heart — and solid direction by Carl Schultz.” I’m in agreement with Peary’s review, and was pleasantly surprised to revisit this evocatively filmed historical drama, filled with unusual characterizations — “Hughes’s character is… well-meaning in regard to her nephew, but is incapable of expressing love or warmth” — and deep empathy for a child’s perspective on life. One could easily imagine Joan Crawford in Hughes’s role, and other elements of the film — including its rather melodramatic final half-hour — hearken back to the golden age of classic cinema as well.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Nicholas Gledhill as P.S.
  
• Wendy Hughes as Aunt Vanessa
  
• Robyn Nevins as Aunt Lila
  
• Beautiful cinematography and production design
  
• Fine direction
  

Must See?
Yes, as a unique and satisfying film.

Categories

• Good Show

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Spinning Image Review
• Chicago Reader Capsule Review
• TV Guide Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
A hustler (Joe Dallesandro) whose wife (Geraldine Smith) has requested money for an abortion for her girlfriend (Patti D’Arbanville) engages in numerous adventures throughout the day, including hooking up with a young john (John Christian), posing nude for an older artist (Maurice Barddell), giving advice to a new hustler (Barry Brown), making out with his former girlfriend (Geri Miller), and requesting money from a friendly Korean War vet (Louis Waldron).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Counterculture
• Paul Morrissey Films
• Prostitutes and Gigolos

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “early attempt by Andy Warhol” (directed by Paul Morrissey) “to cross over from strictly underground to more commercial movies” features “no real story” but is instead “just a series of vignettes shot on New York streets and inside apartments, with Warhol regular Joe Dallesandro either hustling gays in order to get money for his disgruntled wife… or meeting and having sex with his weird friends.” He points out that it’s filled with techniques — including “a cinema verite camera style, improvisation, [and] intentionally sloppy jump-cut editing — that were unique in the commercial cinema of the day”, and equally “unusual” were the film’s themes: “homosexuality, transvestitism, casual sex, [and] male prostitution”, all meant to “subvert bourgeois sensibilities.” Peary writes that Dallesandro — who “is his young, likable self” — has “several amusing scenes with oddball characters, particularly a sequence with a philosophical artist” and “a sex scene with his wife when she asks what he wants her to do most and he says his laundry”. I’ll admit to quickly tiring of Morrissey’s “sloppy jump-cut editing”, but otherwise becoming oddly absorbed by this glimpse into “the peculiar lifestyle of a fringe element of the counterculture.”

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Some effective neo-realist footage in New York
  
• Joe’s encounters with a Greek-loving artist
  

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a look as Warhol’s breakthrough feature film.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• TV Guide Review

Synopsis:
When a new principal (Mary Woronov) arrives at a rock ‘n roll-obsessed high school, she vows to make life even stricter and less pleasant for its students — especially Riff Randall (P.J. Soles), a hardcore Ramones lover. Meanwhile, a “love broker” (Clint Howard) promises to help a socially awkward football team captain (Vincent Van Patten) get a date, while also helping Riff’s nerdy best friend (Dey Young) to catch Van Patten’s eye.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Comedy
• Dick Miller Films
• Generation Gap
• High School
• Obsessive Fans
• Rock ‘n Roll

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that Rock ‘n’ Roll High School — “directed by Allan Arkush and [uncredited] Joe Dante” — is the “prime example of a picture that was designed to be a cult movie,” given that “New World [Pictures] premiered it as a midnight movie, hoping that it would attract fans of its musical stars… as well as college-age viewers who were curious about any midnight movies”. He writes that “a strong following has kept it one of the most popular of the midnight movies”, but I’m curious if that designation still stands. Peary notes that the film is “full of nonsensical humor”, but “lacks diabolically conceived outrageousness and sick humor” — indeed, he argues it “needs more bawdiness and, better, raunchiness in spots”: while it’s “fun watching fascist monitors demand hall passes, watching rebellious students throwing ‘Tuesday Surprise’ at the cooks, and Woronov threatening Soles with ‘detention for life!'”, there’s “not enough of this.” He asserts that the “best thing about this film is the high-spirited cast headed by Soles, bebopping and high-kicking non-stop,” and notes that the Ramones “are amusing in this film and fun to watch while performing”. Discussed in further detail in Peary’s first Cult Movies book.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• A colorful and energetic satire
  
  
  
  

Must See?
No, though it’s certainly worth a one-time look for its cult status.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• Spinning Image Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
A sociopathic James Dean-wannabe (Martin Sheen) falls for a baton-twirling 15-year-old (Sissy Spacek), and kills her father (Warren Oates) when he refuses to allow them to date one another. Soon the couple are on the lam, but the killings continue.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Criminal Couple On the Run
• Martin Sheen Films
• Outlaws
• Serial Killers
• Sissy Spacek Films
• Warren Oates Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary is not a big fan of this “meticulously directed” but “too self-consciously arty” debut film by Terence Malick — based on the “intriguing real-life story” of “the infamous and unmotivated Charles Starkweather–Caril Fugate murder spree of 1958″ — about “an impressionable 15-year-old from Fort Dupree, South Dakota, who accompanies her new, older boyfriend… on his Midwest murder spree and becomes [the] object of a nationwide manhunt”. He writes that while it’s a “trifle boring”, it does feature “captivating performances by Spacek and Sheen” and “stunning photography of the rugged landscape”. In his analysis, Peary focuses primarily on the first-person perspective of Holly (Spacek), who “has no capacity for distinguishing between reality and fantasy or right and wrong”, and “is in essence an unformed character, willing to be led in any direction, by anyone who pays attention to her.” He posits that her “haunting, emotionless, bizarre purple-prose narration makes it appear as if she were trying to compose a story of her own life that’s fitting for one of [the] magazines she reads”, and adds that “nothing that happens on their journey… is real to her — even the people Kit [Sheen] murders are just characters in her story”.

Peary argues that this film “is a grim study of two… products of an American society that, during the apathetic, lethargic Eisenhower era, is so emotionally, morally, and culturally bankrupt that it not only spawns and nurtures killers but makes them folk heroes as well.” (However, given that every era seems to spawn such warped individuals, I’m not sure this analysis is quite accurate.) He writes that the murders are “properly deglamorized” by Malick, and are “a function of their yearning to escape the vacuum that is their world.” Indeed, Kit’s “obsession with leaving behind a record of his life at every stop” (a nice narrative touch) “is his misguided attempt to remind people he was special in an era of conformity.” Peary concludes his review by noting the film is “more than worthwhile” and “has a cult among critics who consider it an important, original film”. In his Cult Movies book, he further praises Malick’s “wonderful attention not only to the plants and trees of the landscape but to nature’s sounds, like the swirling breezes and even the chirping crickets”, and reiterates again that “the visuals are extraordinary: the enormous sky and the large full moon and red clouds that fill it; indoor settings lit by the sun filtering through the windows; great gobs of dust sweeping across the barren land at twilight.”

In Cult Movies, Peary also provides an extended comparative analysis of Badlands with Pretty Poison (1968) — a connection I wouldn’t necessarily have made (I’m more apt to think of Bonnie and Clyde), but does make sense given they’re both films “in which a director intends his characters to embody a sociological ‘sickness’ that is spreading through America’s heartland.” As Peary writes, both girls are first seen doing something innocent and all-American (baton twirling, marching while carrying a flag), and are attracted to an older stranger to whom they lose their virginity. Both “have strict single parents who order [the] male suitors to stay away from their daughters or face harsh consequences”, and “the murder sequences” of these parents “begin much the same way.” However, after this, the films clearly diverge, with Kit and Holly not “wavering in the least from what we already know about them and expect of them.” He argues they “lack the unpredictability, the intelligence, the spark, and the emotion that make” the characters in Pretty Poison “so interesting to watch.” Indeed, as Peary writes, we find out by the end of Badlands that these two murderous individuals are simply “dull, empty people.”

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Beautiful cinematography
  
  
• Fine location shooting
  
• George Tipton’s score

Must See?
Yes, as a visually impressive debut by an expressive director.

Categories

• Important Director

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• TV Guide Review
• Moria Review
• Spinning Image Review
• NY Times Original Review

Synopsis:
When a male assassin (Perry King) arrives at her house, a housewife (Carroll Baker) running an electrolysis trade and an all-female murder-for-hire business out of her home finds her life disrupted, as her dumpy daughter-in-law (Susan Tyrell) with a fussy baby becomes increasingly distressed about the level of meanness and violence all around her, and a corrupt cop (Charles McGregor) pressures Baker into giving him the name of a perpetrator.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Black Comedy
• Carroll Baker Films
• Hit Men

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “satirical look at a completely rotten society” — “perhaps the most ridiculous film ever distributed by a Hollywood company (Roger Corman’s New World Pictures)” — is “also the only Andy Warhol film to at least ‘look’ like a mainstream film.” He points out that 26-year-old director “Jed Johnson wisely kept his characters under tight control, making sure they delivered their preposterous dialogue… in a very off-key manner,” and as a result, “this absurd black comedy” — which “deserves more of a cult than it has” — “beats the odds and works beautifully”. He notes that “the main thrust of the humor has less to do with the overtly outrageous violent acts than with characters’ simply being mean to one another or pulling cruel jokes to intimidate those people they don’t like.” Interestingly, “nothing is taken seriously except a poignant scene between King and an autistic boy,” leading Peary to argue that “unlike John Waters, Warhol doesn’t treat truly sensitive subjects irresponsibly” (well, it’s all relative, I guess!).

Peary goes into further detail about this absurdly dark comedy in his first Cult Movies book, where he points out “it has always been the intention of Warhol and his directors to ‘disturb’ the American audience’s movie-watching sensibilities as conditioned over the years by the dominant Hollywood product.” Warhol forces us “to accept his redefinition of cinema” — indeed, his characters “are so nasty that they’d give that Richard Widmark villain of Kiss of Death (1947), who kicks an old lady in a wheelchair down a flight of stairs, a good run for his money.” For instance, “working on a contract for Mrs. Aiken, P.G. [Stefania Casini] lowers a car on a garage mechanic’s legs”; a mother (Susan Blond) who’s “too impatient to wait for the hired assassins” “tosses her crying baby out the window herself; Glenda [Geraldine Smith] and Marsha [Maria Smith] even go so far as to stab a dog with a sharp knife.” And that’s not even mentioning the wanton pyromania that goes on in both a movie house and a car. I’m curious how many film fanatics these days are familiar with and/or interested in Warhol’s work, given that more recent directors have continued to push the envelop in terms of what’s “acceptable” to put on screen or not — however, Warhol’s film-making factory remains an important enough part of underground cinema history that I believe his major films (like this one) should continue to be one-time must-see viewing.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Carroll Baker as Mrs. Aiken
  
• Susan Tyrrell as Mary Aiken
  
• Many bizarrely memorable scenes
  
  

Must See?
Yes, once, for its cult status.

Categories

• Cult Movie

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Spinning Image Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
A virginal young man (Bud Cort) living in a bomb shelter in the Houston Astrodome receives support from his guardian angel (Sally Kellerman) to build a pair of wings that will allow him to fly. Meanwhile, a rash of strange murders — all involving bird shit splatted on awful people — occurs across the city, leading a California detective named Shaft (Michael Murphy) to be called in to help. When an Astrodome tour guide (Shelley Duvall) with a cool racing car meets Brewster (Cort) and initiates a romance with him, events take an even stranger turn.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Black Comedy
• Bud Cort Films
• Detectives and Private Eyes
• Inventors
• Michael Murphy Films
• Robert Altman Films
• Sally Kellerman Films
• Serial Killers
• Shelley Duvall Films
• Virginity

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that “prior to his success in Harold and Maude, Bud Cort had the title role in this earlier cult comedy,” a “twisted fairytale” by Robert Altman (scripted by Doran William Cannon of Skidoo infamy) “about a gentle young man” whose “mother-protector (Sally Kellerman) … has brought him up to believe that the way for him to achieve ‘freedom’ (what all young people wanted in 1970) is to learn to fly.” He notes that this “crazy black comedy-satire doesn’t hold up as well as Altman’s other early films”, and that “much of the sick humor seems tasteless where once it was funny”; however, he concedes it’s “still an original, full of enjoyable quirky moments”, and points out that “Altman’s unusual storytelling methods, including the intertwining storylines, anticipated Nashville.” I’m not personally a fan of Brewster McCloud — which, as DVD Savant writes, “is less of a story than a collection of ideas flying in loose formation”; however, the overall quirkiness and uniqueness of the film — including Duvall’s inimitable debut presence — make it worth a one-time look by all film fanatics.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Quirky performances across the board
  
  
  
• Many memorable scenes and images
  
  
  
• The final flight sequence
  

Must See?
Yes, once, simply as a unique cult favorite.

Categories

• Cult Movie
• Important Director

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Combustible Celluloid Review
• Roger Ebert’s Review
• Moria Review
• TCM Article
• DVD Savant Review