ju s t o u t ▼ Jan u a ry 0 . 1 9 9 9 ▼ 2 5
T he G ood ,
L
ast year’s examination of 1993’s cin­
ematic landscape was divided into
three categories: The good, the bad,
and the ugly. The good was repre­
sented by such movies as The Wed­
ding Banquet, Schindler’s List, The Ballad o f
Little Jo, and Like Water fo r Chocolate. The bad
included Amos & Andrew, Robin Hood: Men in
Tights, Rock Hudson's Home Videos, and Last
Action Hero. The ugly— which were, disturb-
¡nenia
ingly, good movies that were rendered almost
unwatchable due to an intense and unnecessary
degree of violence— included Kalifornia, Bad
Lieutenant, Boxing Helena, Reservoir Dogs and
Dead Alive.
Looking over the list of
nearly 100 movies I’ve seen
in 1994, some were so bad
they tended to sink to the
very bottom of a multicol­
ored concoction like rocks.
The larger number of mov­
ies tend to float like fluffy
foam in the middle, as a
buffer between good and bad.
At best, they were pleasantly
entertaining; at worst, they
contained enjoyable perfor­
mances that made me over­
look weak plots, poor direc­
tion, and/or predictable situ­
ations. The smallest number
of movies make it to the top,
like cream. All the elements
of these movies come to­
gether in a way that allows
the viewer to appreciate a
filmmakers’ exploration of
themes within relationships,
politics, religion and art. And
if these particular films don’t
quite provide the entertain­
ment that so many seem to
demand of their movies, they
can be very enlightening and
educational. These films also
embody the standards against
which so many others are
measured.
My list for 1994 (in al­
phabetical order):
The good...
Boys Life', Clerks; Four
Weddings and a Funeral',
Fresh', Go Fish, Heavenly Creatures', Hoop
Dreams', Oleana', Philadelphia', The Adventures
o f Priscilla, Queen o f the Desert; and Quiz Show.
the bad...
Angels in the Outfield, Blankman, Greedy, I ’ll
Do Any thing, Low Down Dirty Shame, Milk Money,
Only You, Radioland Murders, Renaissance Man,
and With Honors.
and the ugly (or simply problematic)
Crooklyn, Forrest Gump, In the House o f the
Spirits, Natural Bom Killers, The Professional,
Pulp Fiction, and Six Degrees o f Separation.
P
hiladelphia (which was officially released at
the end of last year but most people saw it at
the beginning of this year) and Quiz Show are
the only two traditional Hollywood productions
listed among my favorite movies of the year.
Some of the movies listed—Boys Life, three short
coming out films by three young gay men; Clerks,
a hilariously dry day-in-the-life film about conve­
nience store clerks; Go Fish, a contemporary look
at the state of lesbian relationships; and Oleana,
David Mamet’s thought-provoking examination
and the
the
B ad ,
U gly
The films of 1994 offer a kaleidoscope o f human experiences
▼
by Rupert Kinnard
of sexual harassment as intellectual and class
harassment—were smaller and more innovative
forms of filmmaking. Most of these films, along
with Fresh, a different and riveting retelling of the
kid-in-the- ’ hood-gets-over-agai nst-all-odds story,
weren’t as widely hyped as the bigger Hollywood
movies but are highly recommended as video
rentals. Heavenly Creatures (which, amazingly,
was directed by the same man who directed Dead
Alive last year) blew me away with stunning
visuals and the depiction of passion between two
young women obsessed with one another. Hoop
Dreams (which is a shoo-in for this year’s Acad­
emy Award for best documentary) and the instant
cult classic Priscilla, Queen o f the Desert were
both wonderful and deserved every bit of praise
that has been heaped upon them. Four Weddings
and a Funeral was one of my favorites, partially
because of the posi­
tive light in which a
gay relationship was
presented in the midst
of other viable rela­
tionships.
As far as those
movies I’ve listed as
bad, you probably
don’teven remember
them because they all
cam e and went
quickly, if not pain­
lessly. I have to de­
fend the fact that I
even saw them by
saying a number of them were free screenings.
Nevertheless, don’t let an evening of not knowing
what to pick out at your local video store lead you
to choosing any of these stinkers. They were
basically a waste of time.
The movies listed as ugly are problematic for
various reasons but absolutely cannot be dismissed
as merely good or bad movies. They probably end
up as the best of the “middle ground” movies. Like
last year’s larger number of “ugly movies,” there
were a number of films which featured violence
levels turned up so high it was hard to look beyond
the gore to appreciate what the filmmaker might
have been trying to convey.
Natural Born Killers was such an assault on
the senses it left filmgoers divided between those
who thought director Oliver Stone was saying
something profound about violence in our society
and those who thought Stone was like a kid glee­
fully playing in a mud bath, with violence as the
mud. The Professional was a story about a paid
assassin befriending a young girl, and 1 knew it
would be violent. But the degree to which the film
seemed to glorify
the violence dis­
turbed me. I found
myself not wanting
to be lured into
thinking that an as­
sassin should end
up being the “good
guy.” Of course,
the rave of the year
has been Pulp Fic­
tion. In the end, I
can’t help but won­
der: Are we so
starved for rich dia­
logue, quirky char­
acters, and nonlinear storytelling that we can jus­
tify being bombarded by the type of violence that
happens in this film? And yet, I did enjoy the
unique thrill of Pulp Fiction as a cinematic roller
coaster. Spike Lee’s Crooklyn was an entertaining
Of course, the rave of the year
has been Pulp Fiction. In the
end, I can 7 help but wonder:
Are we so starved for rich
dialogue, quirky characters, and
nonlinear storytelling that we
can justify being bombarded by
the type of violence that
happens in this film?
examination of the ’70s through the experiences
of a close-knit African American family. It was
hard to totally enjoy the movie because Lee’s
homophobia reared its head once again. Likewise,
a wonderfully complex film such as Six Degrees o f
Separation was marred by its clichld treatment of
an apparently straight man committing suicide
after having sex with another man. In the House o f
the Spirits, with its all-star cast (Glenn Close,
Antonio Banderas, Meryl Streep, Jeremy Irons,
and Winona Ryder), was one of those rare films
that 1 felt was such an over-acted, predictable,
overly dramatic soap opera of a movie, it became
one of the campiest movies of the year. As far as
Forrest Gump is concerned, I actually do think it
was one of the best films of the year, but when a
film becomes so popular and exploited it really
leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The country went
through “Forrest G um pm ania”— spawning
bumper stickers, soundtracks, sound bites, paro­
dies and toys. But the U.S.
cinema’s golden-boy-of-
thc-moment, Tom Hanks,
was a marvel to watch.
Other movies of inter­
est during the past year
were movies that dealt with
sexual politics in some
way: Spanking the Mon­
key (masturbation and in­
cest), Sirens (sexual re­
pression and liberation),
Barcelona (sexual obses­
sion), Savage N ights
(sexual responsibility in
the age of AIDS), The Boys
o f St. Vincent (chi Id sexual
molestation in the Catho­
lic church), and the docu­
mentary Sex, Drugs and
Democracy were all rivet­
ing and insightful. Just
Like a Woman (a lightcr-
than-light wisp of a film
about cross-dressing) was
good for a few laughs, but
that was about it.
Other honorable men­
tions for favorite movies
of the year would be Mi
Vida Loca, a wonderful
Latina girls-in-the-’hood
film; Fear o f a Black Hat,
a stinging parody of the
world of gangsta rap; Eat
Drink Man Woman, Ed
Wood, Roman Polanski’s
Bitter Moon', Interview
with the Vampire', Bullets
O ver Broadw ay, The
Shawshank Redemption, Bhaji on the Beach, and
the delightfully mysterious Widows’ Peak.
he biggest challenge of the exercise of pick­
ing the best films of 1994 lies in choosing
what I consider to be the best movie of the
year. It’s really difficult because of the variety of
movies that made my list of favorites. But, for
sheer emotional impact and cinematic accomplish­
ment, I have to go with the documentary.
Hoop Dreams is a stunning film. Four years in
the making, it actually follows two young African
American men through their lives as they cling to
basketball as a way to achieve their dreams. It’s a
close look at families, relationships, human aspira­
tions, and the society in which we live. It is literally
a slice of life. I found it riveting and thoroughly
enjoyable. I suppose I can bear such horrible mov­
ies as Low Down Dirty Shame when I think there
might be another movie of Hoop Dreams' integrity
right around the comer.
In the end, the movies I tend to really appreciate
are films that illuminate our perceptions of the
human spirit. I go to movies as my primary form of
escapism, but I also go to take part in the kaleido­
scope of human experiences.
T