tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4032450846239938332.post4177875325603378393..comments2024-01-25T05:48:13.938-06:00Comments on Mad Mad Mad Mad Movies: Steel and Lace (1991): or, Die, Yuppie Scum!The Vicar of VHShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06832137990485130735noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4032450846239938332.post-18574930579305241752009-09-29T11:27:01.615-05:002009-09-29T11:27:01.615-05:00@Geo--You make excellent, salient points about the...@Geo--You make excellent, salient points about the differences between the 70s and 90s...and your loglines had me LOLing. Bravo!<br /><br />Sadly, you're right about the MMMMMild Psychosis of much of the 90s (a phrase I'm hereby stealing whole cloth), and the examples like Luther and S&L are few and far between. However, to be fair, at least 90 percent of everything is crap. It's my life's work to dig in the trash piles of cinematic history and do my best to separate the tasty truffles from the turds. ;)<br /><br />In conclusion: Stacy Haiduk is smokin' hawt. <br /><br />Thanks for playing!The Vicar of VHShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06832137990485130735noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4032450846239938332.post-13871174273871827532009-09-28T21:53:39.213-05:002009-09-28T21:53:39.213-05:00Okay, Vicar, I know I’ve said here before that in ...Okay, Vicar, I know I’ve said here before that in my opinion the Golden Age of MmmmMovies was the ‘70s, and that by the ‘90s, the MmmMadness had dissipated to a mere MmmMild Psychosis. But you make a good argument with your reviews of both “Steel and Lace”, and “Luther the Geek” (and if that’s not a double feature to roast your eyeballs then there’s no help for you in this world, my friend) that MmmMadness was alive and well in the closing years of the Millennium.<br />One significant difference in the decades’ fare, though:<br />In the 70’s, story was for the most part superfluous -- an afterthought if it occurred at all. Recall the works of the titans of the era -- the Francos, the Rollins, the Luigi Batzellas. With the exception of the singular “Burly Bard”, Mr. Paul Naschy, story was usually subservient to the stream of whacked-out and titillating images.<br />But in the 90’s, story became king. Consider the following: Take “Luther” and “Steel” and write a logline for each. I offer my beggarly attempts below as examples…<br />LtG: Callously spurned by Ruth Buzzy shortly after his release from a mental ward, Luther, a semi-professional geek sidelined by said unfortunate incarceration, goes on a murderous rampage, finally paying the ultimate price for his propensity to poultry.<br />SaL: Alison, aspiring L.A. artist, makes a whopper of a mistake when she goes sleuthing after the killer of a gang of yuppie rapists -- a killer she believes to be the gang's own leader -- not knowing the real villain to be the uber-deadly fem-bot fashioned by the mulleted brother of one of the gang's victims.<br />I’m struck by the implied journey in each narrative, by the probing exploration of cultural values, by the assertive demand in each for the viewer’s emotional commitment. And finally, I’m overwhelmed by the inevitability of the heroes’ fate -- their seeming pre-destiny -- but a fate in fact skillfully crafted by the knowing screenwriters.<br />You’ve blessed me with a new appreciation, dear Vicar. And I thank you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com