Wild Wild West (1999)

When I was in middle school, we got a new principal.  I think the first interaction I had with her was her coming up and hugging me.  It was is if she were treating us like third graders.  It didn’t make much sense until we found out that she had been teaching at an elementary school the year before.  It took her some time to overcome force of habit.

I thought of that when I saw Wild Wild West.  It’s as if the writers were used to writing movies for small children and this was their first attempt at writing for adults.  Many of the scenarios seem intended for more for adult audiences, but the overall sense of the movie seems to be geared towards a less-sophisticated audience.  (I wouldn’t say it’s geared towards teenagers, but it’s close.)

The movie starts out with James West and Artemus Gordon both looking for one General McGrath.  He’s wanted for murder.  Gordon is inside a brothel dressed as a woman.  West arrives later, having chased a carriage filled with nitroglycerin.  (West, of course, stops the nitroglycerin from going over a cliff at the last moment.)  Arresting McGrath doesn’t go so well.  He escapes and the nitroglycerin is pushed into the building, starting a fire with both West and Gordon still in the building.

The next scene has Gordon and West meeting with President Ulysses S. Grant, both apparently unscathed.  Apparently, McGrath is part of a larger plot.  All anyone knows at the moment is that several top scientists have been kidnapped.  They pursue a lead to New Orleans; Dr. Arliss Loveless is hosting a party there.  In the mansion where the party is being held, West and Gordon find Rita Escobar.  She claims her father is one of the kidnapped scientists.

It turns out that Loveless is the one behind everything.  His plan is to get President Grant to hand over all of America’s land.  He’ll give back certain territories various parties, such as giving back the former colonies to Britain.  He’ll keep the northwest area of the United States for himself to rule over.  The only catch is that Grant won’t surrender.  What follows is a sort of cat-and-mouse game, eventually resulting in Loveless‘s defeat.

I’m not sure exactly where the movie fails.  Will Smith and Kevin Kline play West and Gordon, respectively.  I can’t put it on the acting, though.  The same goes for the directing.  Barry Sonnenfeld also directed the Men in Black movies, which I liked.

I think it has more to do with the writing.   Salma Hayek is given very little to do Rita Escobar other than stand there and look pretty.  She’s not even a McGuffin.  Her character probably could have been written out with very minor changes to the plot.  There are also a few scenes where West and Loveless talk to each other.  Instead of anything useful, the two just insult each other.  West makes jokes about Loveless not having legs and Loveless makes crude remarks about West’s race.  It’s not entirely out of character, but it’s also not entirely necessary or funny.  (On that note, there’s also an Asian character, who’s last name is East, which sets up an obligatory East-meets-West joke.)

I don’t really feel guilty about giving away some of the jokes, as I’m going to have to recommend skipping this movie.  Rather than worry what would happen if you saw it anyway, I’d rather explain why it’s something you’d want to miss out on.  I kind of wish I had been given that warning, myself.  The movie is billed as a comedy, but wasn’t really funny about it.  It felt like a lot of the jokes tried too hard or missed the mark.  I kept watching the movie thinking Salma Hayek could have done better.  Then it occurred to me that this applied to everything about the movie.  There are so many better movies out there.  You shouldn’t have a problem finding one.

IMDb page

Blade Runner (1982)

The first time I saw Blade Runner was many years ago and it had narration.  The narration was from the theatrical cut and has been removed from all subsequent cuts.  I remember liking the narration and that others didn’t.  Not liking the narration seems to have the overwhelming majority when it comes to opinion, which is what makes the theatrical version somewhat difficult to come by.

Either way, the basic story is the same.  Rick Deckard is brought out of retirement to hunt down four individuals.  Why are any the four individuals so important?  They’re replicants, or artificial people made for off-world labor.  They’re not allowed back on Earth.  Deckard is what’s called a blade runner.  He hunts down and ‘retires’ replicants.  The four replicants are the top of the line, so they need the best blade runner out there.

The movie has gained cult status in the years following its release.  It’s known for being very dark and with good reason.  Aside from the violence, which I’ll get to, I don’t think there were many scenes with daylight.  Everything seems to be at night, which makes the illuminated billboards (and product placement) stand out a little more.  As if that weren’t enough, it seems that it’s almost always raining in the Los Angeles of the future.

As for the violence, replicants aren’t very well liked.  They’re given a four-year life span so as not to develop pesky emotions or personalities.  Deckard is allowed to kill with extreme prejudice, which he does in two cases.  A third is killed by Rachael, who is most likely a replicant, herself.

This is where it the lines get blurry.  It seems that normally, replicants are given the skills they need to do their jobs.  With such a short amount of life, one would assume that there’s no time to waste with training.  It’s possible, as with Rachael, to implant a real person’s actual memories.  Does that make Rachael any less of a person than the person she’s based on?

When I first watched Blade Runner, I saw it mostly as an action movie.  You have a police officer hunting down four criminals with the express purpose of killing them.  It wasn’t until I got older that I began to see some of the finer details.  You don’t actually call killing a replicant what it is.  Instead, you say you’re retiring them, as they’re nothing more than a product of the Tyrell Corporation.  Their entire existence is to go into situations too hazardous for humans.  They’re disposable.

If that’s true, what do you call a replicant that thinks she’s a real person?  Is she any less disposable because she seems real?  Is she any more deserving of life because she’s pretty?  Then, there’s Deckard himself.  It’s implied that he may be a replicant, too.

One thing that confused me, though, is that the movie seems to go back and forth between calling them robots and people.  At least one of the makers are referred to as a genetic engineer.  They seem to be made from organically grown parts.  I’m not sure if the brains are organic, though.  It is entirely possible that the brains are mechanical.  It‘s ambiguous, as they’re not really clones and not exactly robots.

The version I got was The Final Cut, which was the last version released.  There is an Ultimate Edition, which contains several version.  I’m not sure how many of the seven different cuts are available, but it seems that if I want the narration, this will have to be the version I have to buy.  I would like to see the theatrical cut to see how well it holds up.  I’m not sure I’d get it any time soon, as it can be a bit tedious for me to watch the same movie twice in such a short time span.  I may wait to see if it becomes available streaming or at the library.

IMDb page

Harry and the Hendersons (1987)

As a child, well before everyone had a decent camera in their phone, I thought it impossible that a creature like Bigfoot could go unnoticed.  You’d think with humanity constantly encroaching on every corner of the planet, someone would have found a Bigfoot community or something.  All we have are a few fuzzy photographs and vague molds of footprints of what people claim are the hairy cryptoid.  Yes, new species are discovered all the time, but nothing as big as this.  Thus, it comes as a surprise when the Henderson family hits one with their car.  Twice.

The father, George, gets out and assumes that the creature is dead.  The only thing to do is take Bigfoot home and see what their options are.  No easy task, considering how big Bigfoot is.  George Henderson is played by John Lithgow.  Lithgow is a tall guy at 6' 4".  Bigfoot is taller.  Bigfoot is played by Kevin Peter Hall, who stood 7' 2½".  This makes it hard to lift him onto the car, to say nothing of where they’ll put him when they get home.

When Bigfoot wakes up, he goes through the house and destroys a good portion of it.  He also tries to bury George’s hunting trophies in the back yard.  It takes a while for the Hendersons to realize that Bigfoot isn’t that dangerous.  They decide to let him stay, even calling him Harry.  They eventually realize that Harry has to go back; he has no place in a major city.  Dr. Wallace Wrightwood is willing to help once he realizes that Harry does exist.  Jacques Lafleur, however, is hot on Harry’s trail and will stop at nothing to get his prize.

The movie is generally safe for older children.  Harry goes from being frightened and defensive to sweet and friendly pretty early on, so any really scary scenes will be in the beginning of the film.  Much of the humor is slapstick, though.  Harry is every bit as clumsy as you’d expect, which is understandable.  He’s out of his element.  George teaches Harry to sit.  When Harry does sit, it’s often with destructive consequences, like destroying a table or putting a hole in the floor.

There’s also the moral dilemma.  George sees dollar signs, but the rest of the family sees him as a living creature.  George eventually comes around, realizing the he’s not even sure who to turn Harry over to.  Is it fair to make money off of a living creature, especially knowing that they’d be poked and prodded?  The alternative is to keep him trapped in a house that’s too small for him and hope they can find food for him.  It doesn’t help that neighbors would likely not understand.

Interestingly, they did make this into a TV sitcom.  I never saw it, but I do vaguely recall hearing about it.  I actually ran for 72 episodes over three seasons.  I’m assuming that the show would have used a plot similar to ALF, in that Harry would have been confined to the house.  I might check that out if it ever comes on Netflix.  One thought crossed my mind while watching the movie, though:  What would have happened if Syfy had gotten their hands on the script?


IMDb page