Airheads (1994)

THE AMP'S ARE ON BUT NOBODY'S HOME

In the early 90s, there was a run on comedies aimed at the so-called “MTV Generation”. The timing of this was likely an attempt to cash in on the popularity of the Mike Judge cartoon Beavis and Butt-head and Mike Myers’ hit Wayne’s World, both from 1992. Now that a new demographic had been identified as viable target, Hollywood naturally set their sights on them. Some were of a more straight dramatic measure, but music was a big draw. Musicians were making cameos left, right and centre in these films, and amongst the titles released was Airheads.

Chazz (Brendan), Rex (Steve Buscemi) and Pip (Adam Sandler) are a band, The Lone Rangers, trying to cut into the music business. Hoping for a big break, they sneak into a radio station to get their demo tape played, but end up taking everyone hostage with fake guns when the DJ refuses to play it.

Airheads was the debut script from writer Rich Wilkes, whose work has always reflected his growing up in L.A. and a deep connection to music. It’s a rather odd beast, being that it’s not completely stupid, but not entirely smart either. It’s satirical, but also quite scattergun in choosing its satirical targets. It’s got a definite desire to “say something” to its audience, but seems a little at a loss at times as to what to say. It’s very self-aware, but still lacks a full sense of maturity. It’s plot is cobbled together from a variety of other, better films, but still exudes enough of its own personality to work. Wilkes seems to know from the get-go that the film won’t really be taken seriously, because the characters themselves aren’t taken that seriously. They yell, they stomp, they decry, and they’re pretty stupid, but they’ve got drive and passion and a need to be heard.

Wilkes also knows who these characters are, which does make them much easier to take. An older writer, less familiar with the audience demographic, would probably have relied on some pretty stock characterisations, and it would have just felt false. Not to say that Wilkes’ creations are completely realistic, but they feel much firmer with him. There is perhaps a degree of sexism going on, though. Really the only females we’ve got are Chazz’s girlfriend Kayla and station employee Suzzi, both of whom are a bit broadly written. Kayla is meant to be the strong female presence, but comes off more as a whack-job bitch, and Suzzi is your run-of-the-mill bimbo.

Michael Lehmann, best known for directing Heathers back 1988, does a good job of keeping the pace up the picture. There’s a very slight thematic connection there, looking into untapped youthful angst. Let’s be clear, Heathers does it so much better and is an infinitely better film, but it’s a point that occasionally raises its head here and there in Airheads. He also gets the odd filmic references and “inspirations”, doing what he can to subtly play them up. For example, when Ernie Hudson’s beat cop is trying to negotiate with the band, he has the occasional standoff with the SWAT leader. It’s Die Hard writ in comedy, and Lehmann plays on this very well. He also handles his cast very well, never entirely letting it go far enough to become as ridiculous as it sometimes threatens to become.

The cast do a great job, with a memorable performance given in almost every role. Brendan Fraser brings his great appeal and likability to Chazz. A common complaint at the time was that he was too likable to make Chazz any kind of threat, but many forget that there’s a past to Chazz that is entirely at odds with how he is now, and Fraser is believable as both. In him, you can see how one became the other. Steve Buscemi gives a great largely deadpan performance, and nicely evokes Rex’s slightly aggressive arrogance. Adam Sandler, here before he really hit big, plays a prototype of the kind of character that he would get much mileage out of later on (quite, nice, kind of stupid guy who can freak out with the best of them), but never distracts from the whole. He remains quite sheepish for the most of the film, which makes him much more appealing. Joe Mantegna actually gives Ian some depth, being the once-passionate DJ and music fan, now relegated to watching his beloved medium get taken over by idiots and gimmick acts. Mantegna carries a weariness on him in the role, though he’s still the owner of the old rebellious spirit. Michael McKean, in another mild joke of the movie, does a great, cowardly rat as the station manager; Judd Nelson sports slicked hair, an unsettling smirk and even more unsettling facial hair as the slimeball record exec; David Arquette is a mild comedy gem; Michael Richards plays to his physical comedy strengths; Reg E. Cathey plays the Angry Black Man to a tee; and Nina Siemaszko shows off some great comedy skills, though she is much better than this role.

I mentioned earlier the scattergun nature of Airheads. Given that it is a satire, at least in part, it is something of a misstep that they seem unsure as to what to satirise. There are swings taken at the record industry and the soulless execs at the heart of it, at the spiritless bands that employ gimmicks to make it instead of meaningful music, at the radio stations who keep great bands from being bigger because of label pressure… at the world in general, it would seem. However, on an equal footing, the film knows better than to simply call our heroes actual heroes. It’s aware of the idiocy of their plan. Chazz himself seems to be aware that he is nothing particularly special in the rock scene. It’s not without the sense of irony that, for all of the band’s desire to become stars without resorting to a gimmick, they end up hitting the biggest gimmick of all when they accidentally take everyone hostage.

The biggest thing to take from Airheads, though, is not a failure to adequately aim and fire the satire gun. It’s even really that it is speaking to a particular disaffected generation. The thing that comes across strongest from the film is the innate desire to express oneself, and that is what lies at the heart of not just music, but any art form. Everyone feels things and the also feel the need to express those feelings. Sometimes it’s good, sometimes it’s bad, sometimes it’s eloquence itself, sometimes it’s useless gibberish, sometimes it’s inspiring, sometimes it’s hideously destructive, but it is the root of anything anyone has ever done to make their mark on the world. It almost doesn’t matter what their song is like, so long as they get their chance to be heard. Though, for the record, I like the song.

Airheads is great fun, and has a great spirit to it. It is easy to see why many don’t like and largely dismiss the movie, because it is riddled with faults that should my most measures cripple it. However, this is, to some degree, a good evocation of the kind of erratic nature of a youth who wants nothing more than to say something and be heard, but remains without much of clue as to what to say. It’s certainly not got all the brains in the world, but it does have a lot of heart.

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (1994)

FINALLY, A COMEDY THAT WILL CHANGE THE WAY YOU THINK, THE WAY YOU FEEL, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY... THE WAY YOU DRESS.

Australia had quite the run of decent little comedies in the early part of the 90s. Strictly Ballroom introduced the world to ballroom dancing and Baz Luhrmann, Muriel’s Wedding gave Toni Collette the shot she needed to reach a wider audience and, in 1994, writer-director Stephan Elliott brought the world The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, a road movie that, in the pantheon of road movies, was pretty unique.

With the offer of a show in the far off Alice Springs, two drag queens - Tick/Mitzi (Hugo Weaving) and Adam/Felicia (Guy Pearce) - and a transsexual - Bernadette (Terence Stamp) - buy a bus and head out across the Australian outback. Each has their own reason for going, but their encounters along the way serve as a test to both themselves and the people they meet.

Stephan Elliott’s script is a deceptively layered piece. With all of the high camp and flamboyance in the film, it’s easy to overlook some of the more subtle aspects of each character. Tick is dealing with the impending fear of meeting his son, worried that he’ll embarrass the boy, or himself. Bernadette is not just in mourning, but has also grown weary in a life where she constantly has to defend herself against others. Adam is almost without any sense of depth at all, being all mouth and attitude, which is exactly what gets him, and others, in trouble with people. It’s Elliott’s attempt to utilise both the heights of stereotypes and the depths of real people. It may not always be successful, but it’s certainly interesting. Also, some of the putdowns in this film are hilarious. For example:

“Stop flexing your muscles, you big pile of budgie turd,” or

“One more push, I'm gonna to smack his face so hard he’ll have to stick his toothbrush up his arse to clean his teeth!”

The only people in the world who have better threats and insults than flamboyant gay men are angry Scottish politicos. This rather wicked humour goes even darker in some moments, such as Adam’s flashback to his uncle, which starts off in one direction, but changes at the last to very amusing effect.

Visually, Elliott fully embraces the theatricality of Priscilla, almost to the point of it being like a series of music videos, or the most ambitious drag act ever filmed. It’s sometimes absurd, even cartoonish, but it still seems weirdly grounded in a way. As odd as it is to see someone is full sequined regalia lip-synching to opera on top of a moving bus in the middle of the desert, it still seems perfectly acceptable that this is what they would do. The colour palette, as you’d probably expect, is vivid and flamboyant. The vibrancy of the costumes (Oscar-winning costumes at that) are matched only by the stunning Australian landscape.

The trio of lead actors in this film are superb. Terence Stamp, whose face has always carried that look of someone who’s seen a lot, captures Bernadette’s world-weary side, but also gives her a dignity that elevates her above the norm, even when taking part in a drinking contest. There’s an air of class about Bernadette, and much of the credit goes to Stamp. Hugo Weaving brings an understated sense of duality to Tick, who’s comfortable enough with what he does in his own world, but shows signs of unease when he feels he may have to explain the complicated nature of his lifestyle to his son. It’s his shift from a showier body language to more obviously restrained mannerisms that make it work. Guy Pearce, still holding some of the pretty boy status from the Australian soaps, is the one who looks the best in a dress, but more than that, he totally gets the catty nature of Adam. Complete with a slightly nasal voice, he’s the closest that comes to gay stereotype, but therein lies the character. Adam is that guy who fully embraces people’s expectations of being gay, mainly because he likes to rile people up. It might come back to bite him, but his enjoyment is more important to him.

I’ve been trying to sort out in my head just what exactly the projected endgame was for Priscilla. It has all the lavish pantomime and joyous theatricality of a gay pride parade, but where those marches are about putting the full measure of the explosive vibrancy of that lifestyle into a context that forces to people to deal with it and come to terms with it (apologies if that makes it sound overly aggressive), Priscilla can’t really boast that same effect. Since it’s a film, people choose whether they want to be exposed to it or not, and in that respect, you may just end up talking to people who are, in all likelihood, on your side anyway. If you’re seeking to convince other people of the legitimacy of your viewpoint, such as the perceived notions of gender, you kind of need them to be there. Otherwise, you’re just wasting your breath… but maybe that’s the point with Priscilla.

To be gay almost any time was probably never the easiest thing to deal with, but it was a particularly grim time in the 80s, at the height of the AIDS epidemic. With gay men and women still trying to fight for acceptance in society, along comes a global health disaster, which gets quickly associated with them and they become ostracized further. Then in the early 90s, things began to look a little better. In the world of theatre and film, more positive and sympathetic portrayals of men and women in the LGBT community began to have a significant effect. A huge step in this was Tony Kushner’s incredibly successful 1991 play Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes, effectively acting as an equivalent to Shylock’s “if you prick us, do we not bleed” speech for the gay populace of the country. However, where Angels in America was an assertion for their right to exist, Priscilla is the assertion to enjoy that existence. By using the stereotypes that had become demonised in the previous decade, it tries to remind the LGBT community of the joys they used to take in their lives. It’s a pride parade for those whose pride had taken a bad hit.

Then again, maybe all of this, by which I mean my above thoughts, is just kind of misinformed and patronising. Maybe I’ve completely missed the point of the film, if indeed there was one. I don’t know. This is just what I came up with after spending a couple of hours thinking about the film.

Priscilla is kind of a weird movie, but unashamedly so. It’s very funny, sometimes sad, pleasingly mean and can be quite uplifting. It may be mildly episodic, and have the occasional moments where it doesn’t quite have the impact that it shoots for, but it’s really great fun to watch. Plus, there were a lot of people who, after watching this film, felt like it was okay to be gay again. By that measure alone, Priscilla deserves respect.

Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994)

HE'S THE BEST THERE IS! (ACTUALLY, HE'S THE ONLY ONE THERE IS.)

Character comedy is one of the quickest ways to make someone a star, mainly for those who come from America’s premier comedy showcase, Saturday Night Live. Both Mike Myers and Will Ferrell have each made a sound career of bringing whatever characters they think of to life on the big screen. Though never an official part of the SNL cast, in 1994, Jim Carrey launched himself into the stratosphere with his comedy Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, directed by Tom Shadyac. Essentially a vehicle for Carrey to show off his particular brand of insane, limb-flailing comedy skills, his career took off instantly and he’s never looked back since.

When the Miami Dolphins’ team mascot, a dolphin named Snowflake, is stolen just weeks before Superbowl, the management call in a pet detective – the incredibly bizarre Ace Ventura (Jim Carrey). As Ace follows the few clues he has to find out who took the mascot and why, matters escalate as the Dolphins’ Head of Operation ends up dead and their star quarterback is kidnapped.

What do you say about something like Ace Ventura: Pet Detective? Treating it as a film is almost taking it too seriously. It’s really just a collection of scenes strung together by a narrative thread of questionable strength for the purposes of making someone a star. It would be regarded as a vanity project if it weren’t for the fact that, at the time, no one really knew who Jim Carrey was. In fact, many thought this was his first film, despite previous roles in The Dead Pool, Once Bitten, Peggy Sue Got Married and Earth Girls Are Easy. Given that Carrey is the central… well, really the only focus of the movie, Shadyac’s direction is entirely geared towards giving him the stage. There’s little in the way of real direction throughout the film. It’s mainly about pointing the camera at its star and trying to keep up. There are moments of humour found outside of Carrey’s performance, like the use of the song from The Crying Game to amusing effect, but then there is some rather shameless product placement (Isotoners anyone?). In all, Ace Ventura could probably have been directed by anyone, so long as they knew their place. This wasn’t Carrey’s first film, but everyone knew that it was his film.

I hesitate to use phrases like “comedy tour de force”, mainly because they seem like they were invented solely to get some critic’s name on the poster, but it kind of applies here. Not to say that this stems from the unbridled popularity of the character (most loved him, many didn’t), but it’s more that Ace Ventura is a complete comedy package. Everything about him is geared to be funny, and replicated to some degree by those without a personality of their own (like me in high school). He looks like he dresses in the dark, his hair seems to be what happens when the brain explodes, his expressions are peculiar, his behaviour is insane, and his dialogue is a constant stream of blather… and Carrey commits to absolutely every aspect. He holds back nothing, constantly going for the joke, be it a well-timed one-liner or a maelstrom of physical insanity. Not only is this an incredibly impressive performance, it’s an incredibly brave one. If Ace Ventura hadn’t been the hit that it was, Jim Carrey could have been forever relegated to the straight-to-video world, alongside Pauly Shore. However, the enormous commercial success of Ace Ventura, plus the release of The Mask and Dumb & Dumber in that same year, elevated Carrey to instant star status and he’s been there ever since. So not only is he very talented, he’s also incredibly smart, and maybe a bit lucky, too.

There should be some concern over a degree of homophobia or transphobia from the film, though. Whilst I doubt that it’s ever meant to be mean-spirited or judgemental of the transgender community, the reaction of the lead character, and many others later on, to the news of one person’s transgender status is a tad severe, even if it’s just playing the whole thing for laughs. As I said, I don’t think that anyone involved in the film meant any harm. As a sneaky foreshadowing of this plot point, there are clues dotted around that are clearly coming from a juvenile mindset. That particular character’s office has two apples and a banana strategically placed on their desk, for God’s sake. That’s stuff that kids do. It’s immature certainly, but it isn’t intended to offend.

Still, it’s no fun to feel laughed at for something so personal. The fact that it’s so easily dismissed as “a bit of harmless fun” should maybe be the real cause for concern. For someone to feel legitimately victimised on some level is bad enough; worse when such feelings are shrugged off as being too sensitive or touchy on the subject; worse still when people feel they can’t say anything for fear of offending someone. This is the prickly world of comedy… it’s all subjective. For my part, these considerations never even occurred to me when I first saw this film back in the day, but then again, I’m not 11 anymore. It didn’t ruin things for me, but it did give me pause.

Whilst the movie perhaps works best in the 11 to 25 age range (I laughed way more then than I did now), it’s still got some laughs to be had. The story is a pretty standard mystery shtick, but that’s not really what Ace Ventura is about. It’s all about seeing what kind of cartoonish anarchy Jim Carrey can create in any given situation, and that’s just exactly how it should be taken – as a live action cartoon. The character may grate on some, but there’s no denying Carrey’s skill in character immersion or the returns of his first big hit. It’s fluff, but it’s still occasionally funny fluff.

Above the Rim (1994)

THE HARDEST PART OF WINNING IS CHOOSING SIDES
In the early part of the 90s, there was a run of inner-city dramas, thanks mainly to Spike Lee leading the way through the 80s. As such, there was now a market for films like Menace II Society, Boyz n the Hood, New Jack City, Sugar Hill, Friday and so on. There were some common tropes and themes in these movies, amongst the most common being basketball, crime and the desire to make it out of the hood. For Jeff Pollack’s 1994 debut as director and co-writer, he took on these elements and gave us Above the Rim.

Kyle (Duane Martin) is a promising young basketball star looking to use his talent to make to the big leagues, but his quick temper often gets in the way. Looking for a shortcut, he falls in with Birdie (Tupac Shakur), a local drug dealer who wants Kyle’s talent to win him money. Meanwhile, Birdie’s big brother Shep (Leon), a troubled former basketball star now employed as a security guard, tries to keep Kyle on the right track.

The strongest thing that this film has going for it is its cast. There isn’t really a poor player there, and collectively they raise the game of the whole movie. Duane Martin convinces as the brash and arrogant, but talented young Kyle; Leon’s onscreen presence raises what could have been a rather bland role to another level; and Tupac Shakur, who has proved his worth as an actor on more than one occasion, brings a needed edge to Birdie… even if it’s not exactly a stretch for him to play a criminal thug.

Decent work comes from the supporting cast, too. Marlon Wayans does funny and pitiful as only he can; Wood Harris’ Motaw is a suitably threatening figure as Birdie’s right hand man; Bernie Mac makes a decent impression, even if his character is really only there to be abused; and Tonya Pinkins is solid as Kyle’s mother.

Probably the strongest aspect to the film, though, is the soundtrack. It may put off some who don't care for rap or hip hop, but it's an incredibly strong collection of work and probably amongst the best soundtracks of the 90s. If you're old enough to remember when MTV actually played music, it's pretty much a guarantee you will have heard 'Regulate', the moody song of gangland life from Warren G and Nate Dog. The soundtrack is unquestionably better than the film it's attached to.

For the good points to be had in Above the Rim, there are also some pretty bad points. The script is rife with cliché, so you pretty much always know where each scene is going to go. As such, relationships are not subject to any great surprises either.

Also, there are some technical issues throughout, primarily with sound, so the dialogue in some scenes is difficult to hear, such as the opening sequence or anytime we’re in Birdie’s club. As it is though, these can be mostly chalked up to the relative inexperience of Pollack as a writer and director, the kind of thing that should get better over time.

Perhaps the biggest problem in the film is the manner in which everything gets tied up in the end. Kyle’s hot-headed ways seem to resolve themselves a little too quickly, as does Shep’s difficulty with his past, so it feels like the filmmakers had maybe become a little impatient to get things over with. Also, the use of violence as a way of resolving issues is a little unsettling, which again likely comes from the lack of a real ending. If there had just been an extra 15 or 20 minutes to allow things to play out in a more considered manner, it may have felt a bit more satisfying.

Above the Rim is a decent enough flick. The cast is strong, the energy’s pretty good and the basketball scenes are done well. It does have more than its fair share of clichés going, there’s the odd misstep on the technical side of things and it all feels a little rushed to end. However, it does manage to be a rather effective little basketball movie. It’s not for everyone, but if this is your kind of thing, check it out.