Reader Request: Rants on "Myra Breckinridge"

Before I even popped in Michael Sarne’s 1970 film Myra Breckinridge, I was totally expecting some kind of simplistic, crowd pleasing film chock full of delicious camp moments. After the first scene, in which Myron Breckinridge (played by film critic Rex Reed) undergoes a sex-change operation in a heavily stylized hospital room straight out of All That Jazz, I figured that the film might be a little artier than I expected. Twenty minutes in, after a scene in which Myron receives oral sex from his post-operation alter ego Myra (played fabulously by Raquel Welch), I had no idea what was going on and decided to just go with the flow.

The story of Myra Breckinridge is actually pretty straight forward: Myra returns from her sex-change operation to her Uncle Buck’s (John Huston) acting school and, claiming to be Myron’s widow, tries to claim her part of his interest in the school. He tries to delay her claim so he can speak to his lawyers by offering her a teaching position at the school. She develops a crush on one of the dim-witted students, which leads to a shocking scene in which she sodomizes him with a strap-on dildo (yes, you read that right). Myra feels guilty and eventually passes him onto horny super agent Leticia Van Allen (Mae West). By the end, as Uncle Buck desperately tries to fight Myra to keep her away from his money, she reveals to him that she is really Myron and shows them her penis.

Based on the controversial book by renowned author Gore Vidal, it would make sense for Myra Breckinridge to be a little on the artier side. Unfortunately, problems arise nearly every time it breaks from the story to try to make an artistic point. One example is the few times that both Myron and Myra appear in the same scene. I’m sure there is some metaphorical point to be made from this about how a part of Myron is still living with Myra or something to that effect, but Sarne doesn’t do a good job explaining or setting this up- it seems like he just appears out of nowhere. Another example is the aforementioned oral sex scene with Myron and Myra. During the middle of it, Myron has the fantasy/dream in which a hot blonde woman sexily offers him a wide selection of food from a long buffet table. I can’t even fathom what Sarne was attempting to do with scene, but what he created definitely doesn’t work.

Another problem with Myra Breckinridge is the Leticia Van Allen character. Although the role is tailor made for Mae West (making her "return" to the screen after a 37 year absence) and she is quite funny, Leticia doesn’t seem to fit into the structure of the film. The only times that she is even minorly important are when she appears at the acting school for about a minute and when she takes the male student off of Myra’s hands- and these moments are unnecessary as it is. My guess is that she was a minor character in the book, but had to be made larger to appease the diva West. And why the hell did she sing during that award show?

Although Myra Breckinridge has many problems, there are a couple of redeeming factors. One of them has to be Raquel Welch’s fabulous performance. What makes it so refreshing is that instead of the usual 70’s Method style, Welch uses the 40’s style of star charisma- an era she absolutely adores. She takes no prisoners and seems to be having the time of her life with this role (although the episode of Backstory that appears on this disc says otherwise).

One of the best scenes in the whole film has to be the previously mentioned scene where Myra puts on a strap-on and practically anally rapes the student she has the hots for. Even today, after seeing my fair share of shocking and strange sex scenes (even living through the Cronenberg version of Crash), the scene still stunned me for all of it’s graphicness without even showing anything. Throughout much of the film, Sarne slips in clips of old 20th Century Fox films for no other reason, it seems, than to highlight Myra’s love of the era. But, during this scene, the clips actually seem to serve a purpose as they provide a running commentary. There’s even one towards the end that is utterly brilliant: in the clip Oliver Hardy laments to Stan Laurel something to the effect of "It hurt me more than it hurt him." It fits so easily into the scene that it almost seems that it was written specifically for it.

In the end, Myra Breckinridge is full of faults, but thanks to a couple of brilliant parts, it is not unwatchable and actually a little bit of fun.

My Rating: ***

Reader Request: Rants on “Pokémon: The First Movie”

When I first saw Pokémon: The First Movie in the movie theater when I was about ten years old, I’d never thought I would see the day when I would have to sit through it again. But here I am, a 19 year old college sophomore, watching this damn movie again. But c’est la vie.

The structure of Pokémon: The First Movie is basically just like any TV-to-film adaptation; it is nothing more than one extended episode. What sets it apart from the TV series is the dark and serious (for a kid-oriented cartoon, anyway) opening sequence. In it, we learn that a new Pokémon named Mewtwo has been genetically engineered from the DNA of Mew. While being studied by some scientists, Mewtwo ponders some deep thoughts (What am I? Am I real? What is life?- shit like that) before being persuaded to leave the scientists and become an equal with some random trainer. The trainer is basically a douchebag and tells Mewtwo that Pokémon can never be "equal" to humans. Mewtwo goes apeshit crazy and starts demolishing everything in his path and ventures on his own.

But don’t worry- it doesn’t stay this dark for too long. Before you know it, the film cuts to Ash, Misty and Brock eating lunch in the park. A different random trainer suddenly comes up to Ash and challenges him to a duel- which of course Ash wins. Now this is something about Ash and his Pokémon that has always bugged me: why is it that his shitty Squirtle and Bulbasaur can defeat such enormous and highly evolved Pokémon every single time? I know that technically Ash is a great trainer or something and that his love for them can overcome everything, blah blah blah, but it really makes no sense. How would Squirtle’s attack in which a little trickle of water comes out of his mouth cause more damage than some 500 pound Pokémon lunging on top of him?

Eventually, Ash and company get an invitation to meet and battle with one of the most powerful- and mysterious- trainers. He immediately accepts and they are off to catch a boat where this trainer lives. Following him is the best characters from the TV show: Jessie, James and Meowth from Team Rocket. They are such enormous divas (with perfect hair) who will stop at nothing to try to catch Ash’s Pikachu. When they get to the boat dock, the storm of the century breaks out and no boats can leave. A couple trainers (including Ash and company) decide to brave the storm and use their Pokémon to get across to the island.

Once on the island, they meet this mysterious trainer and guess who it turns out to be…Mewtwo, of course! What a plot twist I didn’t see coming. Immediately, these cocky trainers want to fight Mewtwo, but they are quickly defeated by his powerful psychic powers. Then they get this brilliant idea that since Mewtwo is a Pokémon, they can capture him. All of them throw their Pokéballs at him, but it doesn’t work. I don’t know what these dumbasses were thinking, because they had just seen Mewtwo annihilate that Gyrados. And even the stupidest person knows that you have to weaken a Pokémon before you can capture it (Duh!)

Next, Mewtwo brings out his own Pokémon to battle and his Blastoise, Charizard and Venusaur quickly defeat the other trainers’ weaker Blastoise, Charizard and Venusaur. In compensation for his victory, Mewtwo decides to claim these fallen Pokémon as his own. I thought this was completely fair (he did whip their asses) but then he decides that he needs to capture every trainers’ Pokémon with these inescapable black Pokéballs. Ash tries to save Pikachu, but in the end these Pokéballs are just too powerful.

But why does Mewtwo want all of these Pokémon? While all of this has been going on, Jessie, James and Meowth have wandered into Mewtwo’s lab and discovered that Mewtwo has a machine that can make exact replicas of any Pokémon placed in it. While these scenes are pretty funny (I love the send up of the TV show where as the Pokémon pass through the cloning machine we see their shadows on a screen and James cries out "Who’s that Pokémon?" while Jessie replies "It’s Pikachu!") they reveal a fatal flaw in the film’s story. Why would Mewtwo, who feels bitter and angry about being created from Mew, want to clone all of these other Pokémon and continue this bitterness among them? Not only is it selfish, it doesn’t fit in with the beginning at all.

Eventually, after he is done cloning them, Mewtwo returns the stolen Pokémon to their trainers and all is happy…for a couple of seconds. Mew, who had been popping up briefly beforehand, shows up and Mewtwo gets pissed and wants to prove that he is superior to the original. So they start battling and, before you know it, all of the other Pokémon (original versus clone) start fighting. This probably the best scene in the whole damn film for two reasons: First, there is this cute shot where both of the Psyducks bitch slap each other without much enthusiasm or energy. Second, there is this great line from one of the random trainers: "Pokémon aren’t meant to fight…like this." It’s perfect because it makes absolutely no sense. When are they meant to fight? For meaningless battles with random trainers who just pop up out of nowhere (like Ash’s battle in the beginning)? What makes that any different than the fight going on right now?

Just when things are looking as grim as they could possibly be, things get worse for Ash. He gets in the way of one of Mewtwo's attacks and goes down like Paris Hilton after a couple of drinks. Pikachu rushes after him, hoping he can save him, but it seems that it is too late. Mewtwo is touched by this gesture and immediately stops fighting, delivers a moving monologue that felt like something out of Crash about how people shouldn't discriminate and then finally bring Ash back to life. Then everything goes back to the way things were and everyone is farting rainbows and getting high on life.

While not as horrible as it could have been, something got lost in translation between the light, carefree and easy to handle TV show and this dark, heavy-handed and preachy. As much as I don't like the show, I'd take it any day over this film.

My Rating: **

Reader Request: Rants on "Dear Frankie"

When I first read the overly-sentimental plot of Shona Auerbach’s 2004 film Dear Frankie, I thought that there was no way in hell that I was going to enjoy this film. Sentimental films and I just don’t get along- it’s a sad fact since a good many Hollywood dramas heavily rely on this tactic, but I’ve learned to accept it. Imagine my surprise, however, when it turns out that Dear Frankie isn’t as bad as I predicted. The beginning is a bit rocky, full of every single-mother-who-won’t-settle-down cliché in the book. We see Lizzie (Emily Mortimer), her deaf son Frankie (of course he has a physical handicap- nothing like bludgeoning the audience to death) and her mom packing up their belongings and we get the feeling that this has become the norm for this family. And just when you think the parallels between this and every Tumbleweed and Chocolat-esque film you’ve ever seen are unending, Auerbach also throws in the Mask scene in which Lizzie insists to Frankie’s teacher that "she doesn’t want him treated any differently" because he’s deaf and "there’s nothing wrong with his brain."

But I’m digressing. The whole point of the film lies in the fact that Lizzie has been sending letters to Frankie, pretending to be his father away at sea (Frankie’s father is really an abusive prick who’s trying to avoid). This trick has worked for years, until one of Frankie’s classmates tells him that his father’s ship will be docking in town and Frankie becomes really anxious to meet his father. Lizzie, being the good, nurturing mother that she is, has to go out and find a stranger to pretend to be Frankie’s father (What mother wouldn’t do that for her child?).

It turns out that Lizzie’s boss knows a man who would be perfect for the job. Enter a hunky Gerard Butler (the man from both The Phantom of the Opera and 300) and it seems like our problem is solved. In my head, however, this scene in which these two characters meet is one of the biggest problems in the whole film. As Lizzie explains the situation to Butler, we realize how preposterous this idea is (I think even Lizzie realizes it) and that this situation would only work in a movie. In real life, any normal person would probably run off to call the loony bin to come capture Lizzie because she is freaking nuts. Naturally, in the movie world, this doesn’t happen and we must suspend disbelief for a little while.

So Frankie and the Gerard Butler character (he’s never really given a name) meet and eventually (or should I say predictably) Butler comes to love Frankie like he popped him out of his uterus within a few measly hours. With his "father’s" strength behind him, Frankie becomes good at football and even blocks a ball at one point for dear old daddy. Even Lizzie seems to be falling for him, but his leave is coming to an end and he’s forced to bid adieu to the family.

The film doesn’t end there, but I really feel that it can’t all be summarized in one rant. If you really want to know, go out and rent the film because for all of my bitching about it, Dear Frankie is actually a pretty decent film. Its sentimentality is more of the British stiff-upper-lip variety instead of the so-unsubtle-it’s-annoying American variety, so that makes the film go down a lot easier. Emily Mortimer is pretty solid as Lizzie, not exactly award-worthy, but another fine performance to add to Bright Young Things and Match Point. If your type of film is a quiet, character-driven melodrama with out any of the histrionics, then go seek out Dear Frankie. If not, at least it’s better than sitting through your average Hollywood crap.

My Rating: *** ½

I'm Your Genie Tonight

I've been feeling kind of blah about the entries I've written in the past few weeks and I feel like I haven't written anything you are excited about. So, I thought about it and I decided to do something different. In the comments, please tell me a movie you would like for me to rant on and I will do it. Your wish is my command. I only have a couple of requests: Please don't make me sit through Gigli, From Justin to Kelly or 2001: A Space Odyssey again (Those were painful enough the first time). Other than that, pick any movie you can think of and I will do a special rant on it. Thanks for your help!