I just saw Ghosts of Mars this past weekend. What a steaming turd of a movie that was. The only redeeming quality was the presence of that gorgeous specimen of a woman, Natasha Hentstridge. The acting was mediocre at best, but even putting in Peter O’Toole, Tom Hanks and digging up Richard Burton wouldn’t have been enough to breathe life into this stinker. No, not even that well known rapper/actor could save it (What the hell was his name anyhow? Iceberg or Mojo or something?) How in the hell do rappers even get cast in movies in the first place? Do they “act” for free? Regardless, move in general = Utter dreck.
Earlier, there was Vampires. Oh. My. God. What the hell was THAT? I shut it off after about 30 and had to resist the urge to scoop out my eyes out with a mellon baller. God damn, that movie sucked. Note to self: Any movie with Daniel Baldwin = Steer Clear!
I don’t know… maybe I’m a bit of a sucker for horror or suspense movies from big names. As a teen, I enjoyed The Thing and Prince of Darkness. However, Carpenter’s movies have flatlined so badly lately I don’t think I’m going to give them another try.
I think John Carpenter does well with what he has. He’s given shoestring budgets, so he has to make it up by being writer, director and musical score composer himself. With all that going on, of course the movie will suffer. And when all you can afford is ‘C’ talent*, it only makes things worse.
*James Woods was signed for Vampire$, and later the budget was cut nearly in half (from the DVD commentary). After his paycheck, it’s fortunate they didn’t use dimestore fake teeth and McD’s ketchup packs for special effects. Most of his movies are made on so small a budget he couldn’t afford Kurt Russell’s personal assistant anymore.
The same way Madonna, Harry Connick, Jr. and Whitney Houston get cast in movies. Sometimes, in the case of Ice Cube (the person to whom you were referring) and Master P, for example, they produce their own.
Well the guy made Halloween for like $2500 or something, and that was one of the best Horror movies of all-time. Not sure what’s happened in recent years. The guy definitely needs to get out of the movie-making business, that’s for sure.
While I admit I did not think much of his last two films, I still think he has not run empty yet. Recently, he talked of retiring, which I wrote to his website and protested. The guy still gets props for avoiding the usual big budget, nonsuspense, CGIfests that ther “big” names are shoveling as fast as a Korean “Art” dept. can hammer them out. I dont know about you, but if I wanted a computer game, I would buy one. Fellows like John Carpenter, Lloyd Kaufman, and a select few others actually come to the table with something resembling films, unlike Paul W.S. Anderson or those Matrix guys. Long live truly INDEPENDENT cinema.
I don’t care if a movie is “independent,” (which, incidentally, was Industry winner for Most Meaningless Buzzword of 1996) I don’t care how big or small the budget is. I don’t care if the special effects are done on a computer, against a blue screen, or via hand-puppet. All I want is a movie that is interesting, though-provoking, and fun to watch. John Carpenter hasn’t made a movie that qualifies for a single one of those categories since 1988. Give it up, John. The magic is gone.
Now, I thought In the Mouth of Madness and Memoirs of an Invisible Man were both quite watchable films, though the latter wasn’t really what I look for in a Carpenter movie. It’s true that his work started to come off the rails right around They Live, a film many have defended as a scathing social satire of the Reagan era, which doesn’t really make up for the fact that it’s not a very good movie. Hell of a disappointment after Prince of Darkness, a film that, despite having nothing to do with the works of H.P. Lovecraft, still manages to be one of the best Lovecraft films ever made. Even Escape from L.A. had a few (alas, too few) memorable and effective bits. And whatever one may say about Vampire$, it’s important to remember that the John Steakley novel it was based on is even worse. The fact that the book was even published, much less considered as movie material, stands as a grim testament to the popularity of wretched vampire fiction during the early 90’s, and thus is probably a more telling commentary on the Reagan/Bush era than They Live could ever hope to be.
Yeah, it’s hard to understand how such a great run of 80’s films could just dry up like that. Big Trouble in Little China, Escape from New York, The Thing… man, what a streak. It could happen again, I tell myself. I still have hope for Carpenter. But then, I’m still waiting for that next big horror epic from George Romero, so…
Wow, I didn’t realize They Live was a John Carpenter movie. Maybe it would have been a little better with Kurt Russel in the title role instead of Rowdy Roddy Piper!!
One bit of “trivia” from Vampires…Gene Siskel seriously thought James Woods was robbed of an Oscar nomination in that movie! I about fell out of my chair when he suggested this in their annual “If We Picked the Oscars…” show that year. This was one of his last shows, though, so I really started wondering if the brain tumor had affected his judgement.
There are two types of independent cinema, the grade Z stuff made for about ten bucks, a format that saw the best effort from Trey Parker and Matt Stone outlside of bad animation, and that other crap that abused the name independent. This last group was used for acting class for has-beens or to give mainstream stars a chance to play characters that would give their usual pathetic sheeplike followers nightmares. Independent became a buzzword for bad-actor-races-for-Oscar-gold. Mr. Carpenter has not sunk to that level, yet.
Heck, I didn’t realize that he did Memoirs of an Invisibile Man. Very un-Carpenter film. So, move my date of incipent suckitude to '92. That’s still more than a decade of drek (although Escape from LA did have its moments, and had one of the best movie endings I’ve ever seen.)
And John Steakley’s novel was pretty good. Way better than the movie, although that’s pretty faint praise.
There were some nice moments on GoM. I liked when Natasha Henstridge was having flashbacks of being a Martian, which were apparently very angry sheep of some kind. It reminded me strongly of the scene in the Quatermass movie about the alien crickets found in a London subway that turn out to be Martians, where the Girl telepathically remembers the Martians running around with explosions. Except that the Qatermass imagery was so bad it was funny – looked like something the gang at MST3K would have kludged together overnight – whereas the GoM imagery had a definite quality of alienness to it, though I can’t say exactly what it was.
As for Vampires, ANY movie that gets Sheryl Lee naked, gagged and tied to a bed is a GOOD movie by definition.
But the worst part of Vampires, to me at least, wasn’t the special effects or casting but the ridiculous romance subplot between Baldwin and Lee’s characters, which made MacLeod’s relationship in Highlander II seem plausible in comparison. That’s not the fault of a low budget. Does anyone know if it something left over from the novel, and if so, did it actually make sense there?
Carpenter should re-consider his enstrangement from cocaine. According to lots of tell-all interviews with his co-workers, he had quite a bit of a cocaine habit back in the early 80’s. Coincidentally (or not? I think not) this time was his golden period, where he cranked out good movies left and right-----“The Fog”, “Escape From New York”, “The Thing”, “Christine”, and “Big Trouble In Little China”. Hell, even “Starman”, which was ridiculed by his fans on initial release, looks pretty good now compared to “Ghosts Of Mars”.
Then, bam----he quits the coke, and what do you get? “They Live”, “Memoirs Of An Invisable Man”, “Escape From L.A.”, “Vampires”, etc.
He will live longer (and healthier) though, so it’s all good.
I would still group “They Live” as one of his better films. It was just an enjoyable ass kickcking movie. I wouldn’t expect anything more woth Rowdy Roddy Piper in the lead.
In case other Americans don’t know what you’re talking about, it was released as Five Million Years to Earth in the USA. I liked that movie, but I was only about 8 years old when I saw it.
I likedFive Million Years To Earth too. It was flawed, but it had some creepy moments. Thinking about it, Ghosts was pretty much a remake of FMYTE. The plots are pretty much identical, as I shall demonstrate in the following spoiler tag:
[spoiler]Both movies run as follows:
Underground exploration reveals ancient Martian artifact created by violent race of Martians. Psychic contagion from said artifact drives human into insanely violent, aggressive behavior, forcing characters to search desperately for a cure to the contagion.
There’s also the parallelism between the subway locale in FMYTE and the train route in Ghosts. And the parallel vision of the ancient Martians by the respective female leads that I’ve already made.
[/spoiler]
I don’t see how it could be considered anything other than a remake, under the circumstances.
With all that going on, of course the movie will suffer. And when all you can afford is ‘C’ talent*, it only makes things worse.