SCHWARZENEGGER SWEEPS: Red Sonja (1985)

In the 1970s, in the pages of their popular “Conan” comics, Marvel Comics introduced a character named Red Sonja. Though loosely inspired by a Robert E. Howard character named Red Sonya, this Sonja was different and shared a universe with Conan. (The character’s literary origins and legal ownership get kind of complicated after that.) Sonja, probably due to her curvaceous body and infamous chain-mail bikini, became popular enough to hold down her own series. This is probably why de Laurentiis productions, hot off the success of their “Conan” films, decided to give Red Sonja her own movie. Despite the connection, “Red Sonja” was a box office bomb and received acidic reviews. Even Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has appeared in a few stinkers, considers it his worst movie. But is the movie really all that bad?

The movie’s generic fantasy plot certainly doesn’t do it any favors. Red Sonja’s origin – a goddess granting her fighting prowess after her family is killed and she’s raped by marauders – is awkwardly brushed over in the opening minutes. After that, the film gets down to business. There’s a MacGuffin, a magical stone with nebulous world-conquering abilities. There’s a stock villain, a vain lesbian queen who hates Sonja because she scarred her face and rejected her romantic advances. After being properly trained in the art of combat, Sonja sets after the queen and the stone. Along the way, she teams up with an annoying boy prince, his bodyguard, and a character that is basically Conan the Barbarian but, for legal reasons, technically isn’t.

At the time of release, “Red Sonja” was widely criticized for its lead actress’ wooden performance. The film was the screen debut of Dutch supermodel Brigitte Nielsen. Nielsen certainly has the Amazonian features associated with the character. However, her thin and muscular body is a bad match for Sonja’s notoriously voluptuous figure. Accordingly, the film doesn’t attempt to get Nielsen in the chain-mail bikini, instead settling for a leather skirt/armor combo. As a further disservice, the film saddles Brigitte with a ridiculous red mullet. To be totally fair, Nielsen isn’t great in the part. She makes a clumsy attempt to hide her natural Dutch accent. Her line-reading is frequently flat. However, Nielsen isn’t terrible either. As an action hero, she works fine. She leaps, tumbles, and swings a sword confidentially. As far as first time roles go, she’s better then Arnold was in “Hercules in New York.” Given a second chance, Nielsen probably would have evolved into a decent movie star.

Speaking of Schwarzenegger! Disappointed with “Conan the Destroyer,” Arnold signed onto “Red Sonja” believing his part would basically be a cameo. Instead, he was on set for four weeks playing the secondary lead. He even gets top billing on the DVD! Despite probably being annoyed while filming, Arnold remains a professional. Arnold plays an adventurer named Kalidor, who is Conan in everything but name. (A popular fan theory believes that Kalidor actually is Conan and the barbarian is merely traveling under an alias.) Despite some awkward dialogue, Arnold seems more invested in the material then he was in “The Destroyer.” He’s only on screen for about half the movie but he makes the most of it. As always, he brings a lot of humor to the proceedings, especially when wrestling a mechanical sea serpent. Schwarzenegger actually shares decent chemistry with Nielsen. The scene where the two have an extended sword fight is easily the high-light of the film. Though Arnold keeps his shirt on the entire time, denying us a perfect Schwarzenegger performance.

Probably the weakest part of “Red Sonja,” as in “Conan the Destroyer,” is its cheesy, occasionally annoying comic relief characters. On her adventure, Sonja runs into Tarn and his body guard Falkon. Tarn is a boy prince and is as haughty, conceited, and obnoxious as that suggested. The character softens as the movie does on, eventually proving himself useful, but I question his introduction into the plot. Falkon isn’t much better, acting goofy and swinging a giant bone. At least the movie has a decent villain. Sandahl Bergman was offered the lead part but turned it down, deciding it was too similar to Valeria. Instead, she plays the wicked Queen Gedren. A stereotypical evil lesbian, part of Gedren’s hatred of Sonja is motivated by her spurning her sexual advances. Her vanity is also a stock female villain characteristic. Bergman’s performance is suitably ridiculous. If she had a villainous mustache to twirl, you know she would.

The action scenes in “Red Sonja” are still pretty good. As I said, Nielsen is competent as a swordsman. A sword fight with a sexist Viking king is a good moment. Kalidor provides plenty of horse top hacking and slashing, sending decapitated heads sailing into the air. The fight with the mechanical sea serpent is ridiculous but mildly amusing. If nothing else, it’s memorable. The conclusion, which has the heroes infiltrating the villain’s lair, is decent. Arnold gets more fun moments here, when he leaps upon a broken table or holds a split beam up with his head. The final duel between Sonja and Gedren is a fine wrap-up to the film.

Though “Red Sonja” is a cheesy film, it obviously wasn’t a cheap one. The sets and special effects are actually quite impressive. Next to the Asian ring where Sonja trains is a giant statue of a stone king. The bridge across a gorge is made up of dinosaur bones, a nice touch. The bad guy keeps the film’s MacGuffin in a striking room full of candles. The villain’s lair is actually a great set, full of arching hallways and red torches. The music is also way better then it has any right to be. Though it’s not equal to Basil Poledouris’ work on the “Conan” films, Ennio Morricone’s score has plenty of sweeping themes and adventurous suites. With its decent action, wonderful sets, and impressive music, “Red Sonja” probably would’ve been a lot better without any dialogue at all.

Sorry, Arnie. This isn’t your worst movie by a mile. Though it’s cheesy as hell and features some embarrassing comic relief and stiff acting, “Red Sonja” is still a mildly entertaining sword and sorcery flick. It’s better then “Conan the Destroyer,” at the very least. [6/10]

[THE SIGNS OF SCHWARZENEGGER: 3 outta 5]
[X] Performs Ridiculous Feat(s) of Strength
[] Says, “I’ll be back.”
[] Shows Off Buffness
[X] Unnecessarily Violent Opponent Dispatch
[X] Wields A Big Gun or Sword With One Arm

SCHWARZENEGGER SWEEPS: Conan the Destroyer (1984)

From the beginning, “Conan the Barbarian” was planned as an on-going series. John Milius envisioned the series as a James Bond-style franchise, with a new film every few years. The first movie promised that more stories would be told. When the first “Conan” was a hit, that dream seemed close to being realized. A sequel was immediately greenlit. “Conan the Destroyer” rolled out in 1984. However, Milius was unavailable to direct and the studio made the unfathomable decision that the sex and blood filled “Conan” should become a kid-friendly blockbuster. The result disappointed fans and Schwarzenegger himself, who swore off playing the barbarian again, bringing “Conan’s” adventures to an abrupt end.

The first disappointing thing about “Conan the Destroyer” is that it fits the iconic hero into a more typical fantasy plot line. Conan, still acting as a thief and an adventurer, is lured into a plot by the duplicitous Queen Taramis. Taramis sends Conan and his buddies on a two-part fetch quest. The barbarian is sent to find a magical stone, which can only be held by the virginal Princess Jehnna. Once the stone is retried, it will lead the way towards the mystical horn of the kingdom’s dead god Dagoth, which they plan to resurrect. Unbeknownst to Conan, Jehnna, and the others, Taramis plans to betray the heroes and sacrifice Jehnna to Dagoth. Conan discovers this betrayal only after retrieving the MacGuffins, forcing him into the villain’s lair to save the girl and kill the monster.

Nowadays, it seems impossible that a film with as many dismemberments and bare titties as “Conan the Barbarian” could ever be construed as kid’s entertainment. But this was the eighties, a different time, when similarly graphic films like “Rambo” or “RoboCop” got Saturday morning cartoon shows and toy lines. And the first film was popular with young boys. Missing the point that all the sex and violence was maybe the reason it was popular with young boys, the producers decided the sequel would make even more money if it featured less of these things. Though they were technically right, the softer content is what the film is most heavily criticized for. Though apparently bloodier action scenes were filmed, along with a love scene between Conan and Queen Tamaris, the finished film was cut down to a PG rating. Now, keep in mind, this was a PG back in 1984. The film still features way more decapitations and hacking/slashing then would ever fly in that rating today. Yet it's still considerably less then the last time.

It’s not just the lack of killin’ and fuckin’ that makes “The Destroyer” a disappointment. The tone has been dumbed down in other ways too. The sequel has a more generic fantasy plot line, with a magical MacGuffin to be retrieved, monsters to kill, and phantasmagorical fantasy playing a bigger role in general. It’s hard to imagine the first “Conan” film featuring a crystal palace, a magical pterodactyl, and not one but two monsters to be killed. Most annoyingly, Conan is given a comic relief sidekick. Malak, played by Tracey Walter, is a thief, a swindler, and a goofball. He frequently cracks lame jokes and makes belabored references to his extended family. Worst, he frequently gets the characters we care about nearly killed by screwing around during the action scenes. Princess Jehnna, played by Olivia d’Abo, is nearly as annoying. She’s a damsel in distress and her childish infatuation with Conan isn’t very compelling. The worst part is that Conan and Mako’s wizard are both turned into jokers. Conan gets drunk, stumbles around, and acts dumber then last time. Mako, meanwhile, has to be rescued from a cartoonish set of cannibals. It’s all pretty dire.

Having said that, “Conan the Destroyer” isn’t entirely without merit. Basil Poledoris contributes another fantastic score. The action is generally competent. A duel between Conan and a Rawhead Rex-resembling lizard wizard takes place in a mirrored hall and quickly gets silly. However, the barbarian’s sword otherwise remains strong. The opening fight scene against a group of horseback attackers is well shot and makes good use of a set of nets. Conan’s stabbing and slicing is dramatically shot. A sword fight with one of the queen’s armored henchman is actually quite exciting and features some Mr. Olympus-worthy posing from Arnold. Too much of the film takes place in non-distinct temples and ruins but I do like the tunnel-bound escape. The final raid on the castle is decent too, Bombaata and Conan getting a good fight to themselves. Unfortunately, the movie concludes with a lackluster fight between our hero and the reawaken monster Dagoth. Played by an uncredited Andre the Giant, the monster awkwardly fumbles around inside a heavy, constraining suit. People who mock Arnold’s acting ability should see how hard he tries to sell the ridiculous, Carlo Rambaldi-designed creature as a viable threat.

Another aspect of “Conan the Destroyer” I don’t totally dislike is the supporting cast it throws together. No, not Malak or Princess Jehnna. They all suck. I’m referring to the new adventurers Conan meets up with. Mako is back and, though the material isn’t as dignified as last time, he still gives a focused performance. Infamously, notorious horn dog Walt Chamberlain, in his only film role, was cast as the protector of Princess Jehnna’s virginity. Chamberlain is an even stiffer actor then Arnold but he has a similar physical screen presence. There’s also a certain novelty to seeing another person tower over Schwarzenegger. Grace Jones plays an Amazon, naturally, and her wild-eyed performance and enthusiastic fight scenes is one of the few high-lights of the movie. Former Ursa Sarah Douglas plays the evil queen, presumably because Meg Foster was busy that day, and does just fine. As for Arnold, his accent is clearer, his acting is more self-assured, and his comic timing is even better. He might not have had much interest in the script but, always a professional, Arnold never lets it show.

Despite making more money then the first one, “Conan the Destroyer” did not lead on to more Conan movies. A third adventure, “Conan the Conqueror,” was planned but the less-then-enthusiastic reception of this one and Arnold’s reluctance to return sunk it. (It would, years later, resurface as “Kull the Conqueror.”) An inevitable kid’s cartoon, a syndicated live-action show, a quasi-spin-off movie I’ll be discussing tomorrow, and a lackluster reboot would follow, none of them generating much interest. Now, there’s rumblings that Schwarzenegger might return for a thirty years later sequel, which has also been bandied about for some time. If “The Legend of Conan” is made, it’ll ignore “Conan the Destroyer.” Probably a good decision. Though the movie is not a total disaster, it doesn’t remotely live up to the original and is generally a mediocre affair. [5/10]

[THE SIGNS OF SCHWARZENEGGER: 4 outta 5]
[X] Performs Ridiculous Feat(s) of Strength
[] Says, “I’ll be back.”
[X] Shows Off Buffness
[X] Unnecessarily Violent Opponent Dispatch
[X] Wields A Big Gun or Sword With One Arm

SCHWARZENEGGER SWEEPS: Conan the Barbarian (1982)

In the early seventies, producers Edward Summer and Edward R. Pressman had the idea to adapt Robert L. Howard’s “Conan” stories to the screen. Howard’s pulp novels had remained popular through the decades and Marvel’s comic adaptations made Conan bigger then ever before. Pre-production was an extended process, preventing the film from being made until the early eighties. There were legal issues to settle. Oliver Stone wrote a bonkers, cocaine-influenced, hugely ambitious screenplay that ultimately wasn’t used. Eventually, Hollywood tough guy John Milius would direct with mega-producer Dino De Laurentiis putting up the money. Throughout the troubled pre-production of “Conan the Barbarian,” one name remained consistent: Arnold Schwarzenegger. After seeing his posturing, posing performance in “Pumping Iron,” the filmmakers agreed that the Austrian bodybuilder was the only man who could play Conan. Arnold, as much a savvy businessman as anything else, realized the character could make him an internationally recognized name. He was right. “Conan the Barbarian” is the beginning of a golden age of cinema, the Age of Arnold.

Milius’ film doesn’t follow the plot of any one Howard story. Instead, he takes many elements from Howard’s texts – not even limiting himself to Conan stories – and combines it with a bunch of new ideas. The film is quite literally an origin story. It begins with Conan as a young boy, raised in his village by his father and mother. A rampaging band of marauders, led by wizard Thulsa Doom, raids the village, killing the boy’s parents, and taking him capture. He grows up a slave, molding his muscular frame on the Wheel of Pain. He becomes a gladiator, learning the art of killing. He earns his freedom, becomes a thief, meets a merry band of fellow adventurers, and sets about finding Thulsa Doom and avenging his family’s death.

As originally envisioned by Oliver Stone, “Conan the Barbarian” was to be a four hour epic. John Milius’ goals for the film were no less ambitious. Milius approached Howard’s character as a Wagnerian epic. With opera in mind, the film is frequently short on dialogue. Conan doesn’t speak until the twenty minute mark and is a man of action, not words, for the whole of the film. The exposition falls to an omniscient narrator, played by an appropriately sage-like Mako. As the titular character doesn’t talk much, “Conan” is instead powered by Basil Poledouris’ incomparable score. The punishing percussion provides the film’s epic but tribal tone while the soaring brass creates the feeling of high adventure. Frequently, Conan is silent, such as when killing in the gladiator pit or exploring an Atlantian tomb, but Poledouris’ music fills the audience in. Is it exaggerating to say it’s the greatest adventure score of all time? Maybe but it’s certainly one of my favorites.

Meanwhile, the film’s themes are no less epic. As a boy, Conan’s father tells him of the Riddle of Steel, that his sword is the only thing in this world that won’t let him down. That philosophy sees Conan through when he’s killing the shit out of other gladiators. When he confronts Thulsa Doom, the wizard tells him that steel is weak and flesh is stronger. In the end, Conan realizes they are both wrong. The will, the individual’s drive to meet his goal and defeat his enemies, is the most powerful thing in the world. Moreover, the movie is not short on epic fantasy situations. A hero is brought back from the dead, among swirling ghosts. There are magical diamonds to steal, towers to scale, witches, wizards, epic quests, big ass swords, giant snakes, orgy pits, and worldly travel.

Even at the beginning of his career, haters were talking shit about Arnold Schwarzenegger. Reviews at the time frequently said his performance was one-note, wooden, or badly hampered by his still-heavy accent. These views ignored the actor’s obvious command of the screen. The moment we first see Arnold is when he lifts his heavy brow from the Wheel of Pain. His face framed by a mane of hair, he stares intensely ahead, establishing the character’s drive. Arnold carries that intensity with him throughout the entire film, when slicing apart enemies or riding towards adventure. That the character is mostly silent isn’t a problem, as Arnold is mostly a physical performer. Schwarzenegger’s soon-to-be trademark humor also works well, when punching out a camel, informing others of Crom’s strength, or falling face down in his gruel. Considering how iconic that accent is now, it’s hard to laugh at it. A modern viewer simply understands that this is just how Arnold, and by association Conan, sounds. He even manages to generate some much-needed pathos, when praying to his god, to grant him revenge. In short, Arnold is perfect in the part.

It doesn’t hurt that the Austrian is back-up by a prime supporting cast. For the rest of Conan’s band, Milius made the decision to also cast untrained actors. Gerry Lopez, as Conan’s best bro Subotai, was a surfer before this. Sandahl Bergman, as Conan’s one true love Valeria, was primarily a dancer. Just as Milius got a naturalistic but oddly powerful performance out of Schwarzenegger, Bergman and Lopez do fine. Bergman is especially eye-catching, her valkyrie-esque beauty being perfect for the part. Valeria is as steely as her lover but Bergman infuses the part with a quiet humor. More importantly, she seems to be genuinely in love with Conan. Lopez, meanwhile, is also funny when verbally sparring with his friend. Yet I’m also sort of touched during the moment when he cries for his friend that cannot. Further supporting the leads are an experienced cast of character actors. James Earl Jones is eerily convincing as the leader of a snake-worshipping cult, mad with power. He treats the material with utmost seriousness, making Thulsa Doom an intimidating, frightening presence. Mako is well cast as the wise wizard, as is Max von Sydow as a king tired of his crown.

If everything else didn’t work, “Conan the Barbarian” would still be a bad ass action flick. The film is full of gory violence, explicit sex, and copious nudity, at levels unseen in a mainstream blockbuster in 1982. The battle scenes are brutal. Conan cleaves through enemies as a gladiator. He cuts a giant snake’s fucking head off. He interrupts an orgy, clad in striking black body paint, and slices through the leather clad guards. He even upturns the human soup at the chamber’s center. The climatic battle in a stone circle is especially riveting, with Conan knocking his pursuers off their horses or impaling them with booby traps. As for the nudity, the film doesn’t let an oppretunity for a bare pair of breasts to go by. Bergman, special guest witch Cassandra Gava, and a few random female sacrifices and orgy attendants bare their chests. It would not be inaccurate to describe “Conan the Barbarian” as a juvenile male power fantasy. Yet it’s hard to criticize a film that gives the audience exactly what they want.

Along with its adolescent attitudes comes some arguably troubling politics. It’s not impossible to find crossovers between Conan fans and Objectivists. Hardcore Howard heads even dismiss 1982’s “Conan” because its version of the barbarian is not sufficiently individualistic. At the time of its release, before the internet caused Ayn Rand to butt her head into practically any discussion, the film was accused of being fascist. It starts with a quote from Nietzsche, stars a blonde Aryan ubermensch, and features a hero that doesn’t fight for the greater good but his own revenge. This was the beginning of the eighties, before every action movies was like this. I don’t see anything especially fascist or Randian about Conan’s quest. He’s not the kind of hero to fight to save the world and that’s fine. Not every hero should. I can even overlook a super-white protagonist chopping a black villain’s head off. However, the movie’s treatment of women hasn’t aged the best. Most of them are winches, whores, thieves, or fodder. One is a blood-sucking succubus that, after Conan bones her, gets tossed into a fire. Even Valeria, otherwise a strong female character, falls in love with Conan at first sight, gets naked, and winds up dead. Then there’s Milius’ obvious anti-hippy sentiment, when Conan infiltrates and mocks a cult of back-to-the-Earth flower children. Most of this comes with the time period and the territory and doesn’t diminish the film’s entertainment value.

“Conan the Barbarian” is a blood-soaked sex-and-violence extravaganza. It’s also an appealingly epic fantasy adventure, with great production values, an iconic cast, incredible music, and a straightforward storyline. It would define the cinematic fantasy genre for quite some time, spawning hordes of imitators with names like “Deathstalker,” “Ator,” or “Yor.” It would even influence children’s media, such as “He-Man.” More important then all of this, it’s the movie that made Arnold Schwarzenegger a star and a household name. That alone makes it pretty great and we’re lucky that the movie is pretty great in most every other way too. [9/10]


[THE SIGNS OF SCHWARZENEGGER: 4 outta 5]
[X] Performs Ridiculous Feat(s) of Strength
[] Says, “I’ll be back.”
[X] Shows Off Buffness
[X] Unnecessarily Violent Opponent Dispatch
[X] Wields A Big Gun or Sword With One Arm

SCHWARZENEGGER SWEEPS: Hercules in New York (1969)

As a young boy in Austria, Arnold Schwarzenegger was inspired by the “Hercules” films of Steve Reeves and Reg Park, fostering an interest in bodybuilding and a wish to, one day, play the Greek hero. At only 22 years old, Arnold got that wish. Park, in particular, was a close friend and personal mentor of Schwarzenegger. When the script for “Hercules in New York” crossed whatever the equivalent of Arnold’s desk was in the late sixties, Reg Brown was the one that talked him into taking the part. Alternatively known as “Hercules Goes Bananas,” it was the bodybuilder’s first film. It’s also one that he would quickly come to regret. The movie is mostly forgotten today. When it’s remembered at all, it’s as a punchline, the embarrassing beginning of an action icon’s career.

After living on Mount Olympus for thousands of years, Hercules has grown bored of being a god. He begs his father to let him visit Earth. At first, Zeus refuses but after listening to him whine for a while, dad zaps his son down to New York City. Once in the Big Apple, Hercules quickly has a series of misadventures. He befriends a pretzel salesman, gets into shenanigans with the locals, performs ridiculous feats of strength, meets a mythology professor, and romances the man’s daughter. The residents of Olympus conspire to get Hercules back while the demi-god also crosses paths with some gangsters.

Still in his early twenties and already a four-time Mr. Universe winner, “Hercules in New York” is Arnold Schwarzenegger’s notorious debut role. Because of his ridiculous last name, he was credited as “Arnold Strong.” Because of his ridiculous accent, his performance was dubbed when the film was first released. The DVD restores Arnold’s original voice. During this viewing, I sometimes wished I was watching the dubbed version instead. Arnold is incredibly stiff, visibly bored and obviously uncomfortable throughout most of the film. About the only time he seems relaxed is when he takes his shirt off and poses. Considering his only experience at the time was as a bodybuilder, this isn’t surprising. His accent is indeed frequently indecipherable, the star mumbling his words and slurring his dialogue. Occasionally, you see the briefest glimmer of the humor and charisma that would make Schwarzenegger a huge star, when he’s throwing a discus or flirting with his female co-star. Mostly, this is Arnold the Superstar in his embryo phase, totally unformed, unpolished, and undisciplined.

The movie’s production values are miniscule. Mt. Olympus, as displayed here, seems to be the front lawn of some local millionaire's mansion. There’s a few scattered topiaries, a veranda or two. As far as the realm of the gods go, it’s not the most impressive sight. A handful of bored looking actors lounge about in white togas. Zeus wears a fake beard and carries a small, metal lightening bolt. The movie barely has a plot. The tiny bit of story the script provides revolves around Zeus threatening to send Nemesis, goddess of vengeance, down to Earth. This barely comes into play. He also threatens to banish Hercules to Hades’ realm. Hades shows up, dresses as a foppish dandy, talks to some gangsters, and then vanishes. This subplot is especially baffling, basically padding out the screenplay. Mercury attempts to talk Hercules back but he refuses, another needless story step. Most of these plots are motivated by Juno, Zeus’ wife who is perpetually hateful of Hercules. Now, any Greek mythology nerds reading this will notice something wrong with that sentence. Yes, “Hercules in New York” freely mixes Greek and Roman names. This bothers me far more then it should. 

“Hercules in New York” is supposed to a comedy, I think. There’s some signs that these events are supposed to be humorous. When descending from Mt. Olympus, Hercules/Arnold waves at an old woman on an airplane, which made me chuckle. Mostly, the movie is a fish-out-of-water comedy. Hercules clashes with the locals, not understanding that he has to pay for a cab ride or can’t just lift a guy into the air for little to no reason. He frequently references being a legendary figure, name-dropping the other gods. Those around him either respond with complete misunderstanding or total bafflement. None of these moments present laughs. The film is done in such a flat manner that it barely registers that these are jokes at all. “Hercules in New York” is only 92 minutes long but it feels waaaaay longer then that. It is one of the most laugh-free “comedies” I’ve ever seen.

Okay, but how does it fare as an “action” film? Not much better. The direction is weirdly shaky at times, many scenes shot in a first-person perspective. Arnold wrestles some guys on a dock, tossing them around. The plot has Hercules entering a career as a pro-wrestler. Bizarrely, there are no actual wrestling sequences anywhere in the movie. The only time Hercules' athleticism becomes important is during a weight-lifting event at the very end. There’s a chariot ride through the streets of New York, a moment that was mildly diverting enough to make the poster. The climax is a brief tussle in some sort of factory between Arnie and a handful of gangsters, concluding with him pushing over some large barrels. The most delirious moment in “Hercules in New York,” the only time it rises from “tedious bad” to “unintentionally funny bad,” is when Hercules wrestles an escaped bear. However, the bear is played by a man in the most unconvincing bear suit I’ve ever seen. I honestly thought it was a gorilla suit at first, that’s how bad it is.

The second star of “Hercules In New York” is Arnold Stang as Pretzie, the pretzel salesman the demi-god befriends. Stang was apparently a Borsch Belt comedic actor of some notoriety that I have absolutely no familiarity with. He strikes me as a slightly kookier, less funny Don Knots. Anyway, Stang does he best to bounce comedy off Arnold, who is amazingly unresponsive. The script frequently forgets about Stang’s character, its focus shifting to other characters. After Hercules returns to Olympus, Stang begins to miss the guy. Amusingly, a voice that does not even remotely sound like Arnold comes over the radio, claiming to be Hercules, assuring Stang that they can be together whenever they want. Ooookay. The rest of the cast is as flat and forgettable as anything else in the film, though I sort of liked Deborah Loomis as Helen, Hercules’ love interest. “Return of the Living Dead’s” James Karen plays her dad, by the way.

There’s not a whole lot to say about “Hercules in New York.” It’s not funny, thus failing as a comedy. It features no exciting action, thus failing as an action film. Since Arnold is so obviously a beginner, a massive man of muscles with zero on-screen charisma, it’s not even very interesting as an Arnold movie. It’s mostly just a weird footnote in the guy’s career, an unglamorous minor stop on a road to far more notable, wider success. Considering Stallone got his start in porn, I guess it could have been worst. [3/10]

[THE SIGNS OF SCHWARZENEGGER: 2 outta 5]
[X] Performs Ridiculous Feat(s) of Strength
[] Says, “I’ll be back.”
[X] Shows Off Buffness
[] Unnecessarily Violent Opponent Dispatch
[] Wields A Big Gun or Sword With One Arm

SCHWARZENEGGER SWEEPS: Pumping Iron (1977)

I have no interest in sports competition, much less one as niche as body-building. Yet I came to watch “Pumping Iron” for one name: Arnold Schwarzenegger, the most movie-starry of all the great movie stars. Arnold had appeared in a handful of films before, some of them more notable then others. However, “Pumping Iron” was his break-out movie, the first true goal-post on his road towards becoming the highest grossing star of his time. That a documentary, already a niche genre, about bodybuilding, an even more obscure profession, became a wide-reaching success at all is a testament to the strength of the film and the magnetism of its leading characters.

The film follows four competitors in the two biggest body-building competitions, the amateur Mr. Universe contest and the professional Mr. Olympia contest. In the run-up to Mr. Universe, we spent time with Mike Katz, a long-time competitor, former football player, and a family man. We also meet his rival, the young Ken Waller. More of the film is focused on the duel for the title of Mr. Olympia between reigning champ Arnold Schwarzenegger, up-and-coming dark horse Lou Ferrigno, and the lighter weight Franco Columbu. The rivalry between the boisterous Schwarzenegger and the soft-spoken Ferrigno forms the backbone of the film.

In “Pumping Iron,” Arnold fills a role that he would fall into a few times in his early career: That of the villain. It’s become well-known over the years that “Pumping Iron” is more “docudrama” then straight-up “documentary.” The film purposely builds a dramatic plot. Schwarzenegger has admitted that one story he shares in the film, of skipping his father’s funeral so he could participate in a body-building contest, was made up. Arnold, already a star in the field of bodybuilding and eager to become a movie star, was more then willing to play the role of the proud, unflappable winner. This is the earliest glimpse we get at Arnold’s movie star persona. The Austrian Oak tells outrageous stories, infamously comparing “the pump” to an orgasm. He undermines his competitors psychologically, flaunting his incredible confidence and his shit-eating grin. Yes, Arnold is a dick in “Pumping Iron.” The way he’s seen treating Lou Ferrigno, passive-aggressively insulting him and his dad, even in the minutes leading up to the show, is shitty behavior. Yet, as in real life, Arnold’s disreputable behavior can’t mask his utter charm. His incredible screen presence and overwhelming charisma makes it impossible not to like him.

When focused on Arnold, “Pumping Iron” is the story of how a winner becomes a winner through pure talent and vicious personal sabotage. When focused on the other bodybuilders, “Pumping Iron” is a story of would-be winners coping with failure. Mike Katz’ story is so affecting. As he relates his life story, you really want to see him win. When he doesn’t, the massive, musclebound man is fighting back tears. He tries to be a good sport, attempting to shake the actual winner’s hand, but you can tell he’s crestfallen. Similarly, Lou Ferrigno's failure to dethrone Arnold seems to be an issue, not of skill, but confidence. Ferrigno’s trainer is his father. Though he gives him words of encouragement, there’s something misleading, mean-spirited, about what he says. All of Lou’s family acts like that, egging his training on in a very aggressive way. When Lou doesn’t win, what he says basically boils down to “there’s always next year.” But behind his eyes, you can see how disappointed and upset he is. Just as a documentary about the dispiriting blows of being a perpetual runner-up, “Pumping Iron” is impressive.

When “Pumping Iron” sheds its plotting is when the film just focuses on the guys in the gym. The movie doesn’t dissuade the narcissistic, homoerotic underpinnings of body building. The movie even plays with it, as the very first scene is of Arnold and Lou training with a ballerina. You see Arnold showing a novice body-builder the ways of the sport. As an outsider looking into the world of body building, what struck me is how committed the participants are to this sport. One of Arnold’s partners does reps until he literally collapses to the floor. The men groan, scream, and screw their faces up in agony while working out. The huge, protruding veins on their arms and bodies are nothing short of grotesque. Arnold and others say they aim to replicate the physique of classical sculpture, pushing the human form to its limit. To me, extreme body building such as this seems to me to be an extended, willing act of self-mutilation. The film is a testament to the insane places determination can take people.

The final scene of “Pumping Iron,” after Arnold has won the Mr. Olympia prize once again and announced his retirement from the sport, has the winner and Lou riding in a car together. The competition is over but the two are still preening, still snipping at each other. For some, the competition never ends. It’s a fascinating documentary about extreme body modification and the wages of winning and losing. As a Schwarzenegger fan, it’s even better, seeing the origins of his career and persona. A star is born. [7/10]

[THE SIGNS OF SCHWARZENEGGER: 2 outta 5]
[X] Performs Ridiculous Feat(s) of Strength
[] Says, “I’ll be back.”
[X] Shows Off Buffness
[] Unnecessarily Violent Opponent Dispatch
[] Wields A Big Gun or Sword With One Arm

 

WELCOME TO SCHWARZENEGGER SWEEPS!

I have this wacky theory. Please humor me: Arnold Schwarzenegger is the last movie star. Let me explain. The public conception of what a movie star is was formed in the forties and fifties. When I use the phrase “movie star,” I’m referring to something very specific. A star is someone who extends beyond being a mere actor and becomes an icon. A movie star has mannerisms, vocal tics, fashions, and trademarks that are immediately recognizable. If you walk with a cowboy gait and speak in a slow drawl, everyone knows that’s John Wayne. If a girl push her dress down when there’s a gush a wind, preferably while giggling girlishly or seductively, everyone knows that’s Marilyn Monroe. And if you pump your biceps while speaking in a thick Austrian accent, everyone knows that’s Arnold Schwarzenegger. Even if you’ve never seen any of the movies those people are in, you know who they are.

Yes, I really am elevating Arnold Schwarzenegger to the same cultural status as Charlie Chaplin, Greta Garbo, Humphrey Bogart, James Cagney, Judy Garland, Clark Gable, Sean Connery, Charlton Heston, Julie Andrews, Jack Nicholson, Arnold's most prominent rival Sylvester Stallone, and many others. When I say Schwarzenegger is the last movie star, I’m not saying he’s the last star to become a huge box office draw. That’s obviously not true. I’m saying he’s the last star to make a definite, long-term effect on the vast pop culture sphere. You could make the case for Tom Cruise or Will Smith. But does anyone immediately recognize a Tom Cruise or Will Smith impersonation? Will people be cracking Jennifer Lawrence jokes in twenty years? During his political career, there were many jokes that Schwarzenegger wanted to become president. Ultimately, that wasn’t necessary. Arnold is already as famous as any president. His popularity has already outlived several administrations.

Arnold’s most lasting contribution to cinema – Nay, the world! – is being the ultimate eighties action hero. The action genre is different today. We can CGI any schlub into an explosion. That’s fine. However, these days, unless you’re a superhero or an old-timer, the modern action hero is harder to define. There’s a distressing trend though. Hollywood action hero frequently are a generic, interchangeable guy with a buff body, a shaved head, usually an Australian accent, and names like Jai Courtney and Sullivan Stapleton. Back in the eighties, even the worst action heroes had more personality like these guys.

The eighties made action movies like no other decade. Not everyone loves these sorts of movies. I get that. The movies’ entertainment value and their dumbness usually go hand in hand. For we aficionados of the genre, it has everything we love about action movies: Big muscles, big guns, big explosions, questionable acting abilities, piles of dead bodies, R ratings, and a fine layer of ridiculous cheesiness to make it all go down easily. And Arnold was the unchallenged king of that type of movie, starring in many of the best examples.

So welcome to SCHWARZENEGGER SWEEPS! Film Thoughts doesn’t usually do theme weeks. I’m not planning on starting now. Originally meant to go for seven days, my research into the oeuvre of Arnold grew ever larger. How did you ever expect me to choose between “Red Sonja” and “Red Heat?” So for the next fourteen days, I will be reviewing a movie starring everyone’s favorite Austrian. This will not be a comprehensive journey. Many of Arnold’s most iconic roles and movies, including arguably his trademark series, will be saved for future Director Report Cards, some of them coming sooner then later. This decision left me with the odds and ends of Schwarzenegger’s career, some of them forgettable, some of them fascinating. Either way, we’ll do a good job of tracking the body-builder’s road to stardom, his golden age, and the various rises and falls that followed.

Last month, I watched all the James Bond movies. At the end of every review, I included a checklist of stats, an idea gratuitously stolen from AllOuttaBubbleGum, a website devoted to action movies and one of my favorites. It may not surprise you to hear that AOBG, as we regulars call it, also has a check list for Arnold Schwarzenegger. So each review during the Sweeps will be accompanied by The Signs of Schwarzenegger, five frequent trademarks of the star. They are, as follows:

[THE SIGNS OF SCHWARZENEGGER]
[] Performs Ridiculous Feat(s) of Strength
[] Says, “I’ll be back.”
[] Shows Off Buffness
[] Unnecessarily Violent Opponent Dispatch
[] Wields A Big Gun or Sword With One Arm

So kick back, light a stogie, and let off some steam. Somewhere, somehow, someone had to go on a journey to the center of Arnold Schwarzenegger. This looks like a job for Film Thoughts!

Recent Watches: It Follows (2015)

Last year, two independent horror films began to catch the attention of reviewers on the festival circuit. The first of which was “The Babadook,” which was hailed as the scariest horror film in a long time. I saw that film last October and loved it. Sneaking up behind Jennifer Kent’s masterpiece was “It Follows,” an American film from David Robert Mitchell. Mitchell’s film also received rave reviews. Unlike the Australian film, “It Follows” became a word-of-mouth hit during its initial limited release. It was so successful that the now-standard video-on-demand release was held off in favor of a wider theatrical release. So, for the first time in a while, I was able to see a tiny, critically praised horror film at the theater. “It Follows” is a less personal film then “The Babadook” but is arguably the scarier one. Both, in time, are likely to gain reputations as classics of the genre.

Jay is a fairly normal young woman, a college student who is pretty in an unobtrusive, girl-next-door way. She lives with her mother and her younger sister. Jay’s best friends, Kelly and Paul, always seem to be visiting. Jay is also dating a handsome but down-to-earth guy named Hugh. After having sex with Hugh for the first time, in the back seat of her car, Jay is told a terrible secret. Hugh is cursed to be followed by a supernatural entity, invisible to everyone else, that will slowly but surely pursue him, unstopping. It can appear as anybody, its physical appearance always shifting. When it catches you, it will kill you. The only way to pass the curse on is to have sex with someone. But this is a brief reprieve. As soon as your last sexual partner is killed, the creature will be back on your trail. Jay is the monster's next target. Working together with her friends and sister, she tries as hard as she can to dissuade or defeat the entity. Yet it still follows her.

“It Follows” has already been compared to “Halloween” and other classic John Carpenter films. It’s an apt comparison. Like Carpenter, David Robert Mitchell understands the importance of establishing his setting. Specifically, the mundane quality of that setting. “It Follows” is set in an achingly ordinary small town, a nice suburb outside Detroit. The first half-hour of the film is almost too slow, as we watch the kids go about their dull, everyday lives. Though there are cell phones and E-readers, there’s a distinct retro quality to the film. All the cars are older makes. There’s always a black-and-white monster movie on TV. The small town seems set in a simpler, less complicated time. Horror films like “It Follows,” “Halloween,” and most everything Stephen King has written function on establishing normalcy. Once the everyday quality of the setting is understood, it can be subverted as off-putting and horrifying. “It Follows” gets this rule innately and uses it to great effect.

Most horror films build suspense before blowing it off with a shock or a jump scare. They’ll then start over. “It Follows” builds. And builds. The image of a person slowly walking towards you, eyes focused ahead, unwavering, is a simple but surprisingly effective device. Giving the titular It the ability to assume any form was a brilliant move. Now, any person walking down the street could suddenly be a threat, a slowly approaching omen of doom. “It Follows” does build towards major shocks. Jay is confronted in her kitchen by It, as a half-nude, urinating women. Not long after, the being suddenly appears behind her sister in a halfway, this time as a towering man. Unlike most horror films, “It Follows” doesn’t defuse its suspense at any point. It continues to build, never letting up. The movie creates an ever-tightening sense of dread. This is best illustrated when Jay drives away from her home, seeing It, this time as a naked old man, standing on her roof, looking down. Amazingly, the movie doesn’t collapse under its own weight. “It Follows” remains constantly, consistently creepy and frequently becomes full-blown frightening, such as an intense encounter on a beach or the poolside finale.

Though it’s still a recent film, much has already been written about “It Follows’” supposed subtext. The curse has frequently been compared to an STD, passed along by sex, grafting terror, guilt, and shame onto a normal teenage life. You can see the film that way but I feel that reading is a bit simplistic. I see the film as being about making a horrible mistake that haunts you for the rest of your life. Whether or not the monster is banished at the end is left somewhat ambiguous. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter. Jay and her friends are going to be looking over their shoulders as long as they live. They’ll never sleep soundly again and they’ll always wonder if It could be around the next corner, slowly but surely advancing on them. (The director, by the way, has rejected deeper readings of the film, saying it’s meant to be a cinematic nightmare and nothing more.) To his further credit, Mitchell never attempts to explain the monster or provide any concrete origin for it. He also never cheats. We’re never led to believe that Jay is crazy or imaging. There’s no tedious chapter where her friends don’t believe her. The monster, fantastic as it is, is taken as a fact, as real and unavoidable as death.

These days, “throwback horror” could really be a genre all by its self. Over the last half-decade, there have been lots of indie horror films outfitted with intentionally retro, synth-driven soundtracks. Because I like retro, synth-driven soundtracks, I usually like these. However, it does sometimes make movies feel like a game of “spot the reference.” “It Follows” has a synth-driven soundtrack. However, Rich Vreeland’s work is distinct, different from the kind of electronic scores heard in eighties flicks, and stands on its own as a piece of music. It manages to be Carpenter-esque without being blatantly derivative of Carpenter. The constantly vibrating drone of the soundtrack also helps establishes the film’s overlaying tone of dread. “It Follows” is also handsomely directed, Mitchell and his team creating some beautiful images. The cast is capable as well. After her supporting role in “The Guest” and her star turn here, Maika Monroe is well on her way to becoming an iconic scream queen. I also liked Bailey Spry as the somewhat clueless Annie and Keir Gilchrist as the sad sack best friend Paul.

“It Follows” is an astonishingly effective horror film, cultivating a persistent tone of dread and an unshakable creepiness. It’s also beautifully constructed, successfully creating a very specific setting. The threat is original and convincingly pulled off. Moreover, the movie is scary without relying on cheap jump scares or lame clichés. It does it the old fashion way: With atmosphere, characters, music, and creative writing. If this one doesn’t convince jaded horror fans that the genre is still full of possibilities, then they’re beyond help. [9/10]