Day 75: I Don't Get That Feeling Filling A Cavity!

BEST WORST MOVIE (2010)
Directed by Michael Stephenson

What would you say is the worst movie ever made?  Last week, I discovered my contender for that spot.  But is there any movie you've ever seen that, despite its myriad flaws, you can't help but love it?  For some, it's The Rocky Horror Picture Show, for others, Ed Wood Jr.'s Plan 9 From Outer Space (though I personally prefer Bride of the Monster.  I'm a sucker for Bela Lugosi).  For a good many people, that honor goes to Troll 2.


Made in 1989 by Italian director Claudio Fragasso and starring a group of Utah locals, Troll 2 has garnered the reputation of the "Worst Movie Ever Made," earning the "top" spot on IMDb's "Bottom 100" list at one point (as of today, it's still on the list at #76).  It was never released in theaters, but instead went straight to video and HBO.  Though the actors were all amateurs, there were a couple who entertained dreams of Hollywood super-stardom.  When they saw the finished film, however, their hopes were dashed.  Everyone agreed: this movie stinks.

However, the film was not a total loss.  Years later, fans of the film held midnight screenings and even full-blown parties built around it.  It's cult of fans are just as dedicated as any the Rocky Horror crowd could boast.  So when word of this reached Michael Stephenson - who played the young Joshua Waits in Troll 2 - he decided to make a documentary about the fans.

Along for the ride, he brought George Hardy, who played his father in the film.  George, an affable dentist now living in Alabama, is more than happy to join him.  They round up the rest of the cast and even the director, and tour the United States and Canada, making appearances at screenings.  And when word gets out that the cast and director will be there, the screenings sell out quickly.

This film touches on a lot of subjects, not the least of which is the effect that this new-found celebrity has on these yokels who appeared in a bad movie nearly 20 years earlier.  George seems to embrace it at first, but after a disastrous trip to England (apparently, it's not as big a hit over there), he is brought back down to earth, realizing his place is in the dentist's chair, not on the big screen (though he wouldn't rule out doing another film).  But George isn't the only eccentric in the cast.  Don Packard, who played the store owner in the film, was on leave from a mental institution when he auditioned.  Margo Prey, who played Diana Waits, has been caring for her ailing mother and hasn't acted in years (that whole scene looked like something out of a suburban Grey Gardens).  But all of them (save Margo) got together for the screenings, and everyone had a great time.

But the question that they really only touch on is this: what is it about these movies that make us love them so much?  On the surface, they're terrible, and yet they endear themselves to us.  Well, I can't speak for Troll 2, as I've never seen it.  But there are some turkeys that I love (including, but not limited to: Bride of the Monster, The Room, Hook, etc.).  I can really only say that the reason I love them is either because 1) I loved them as a child and never really let go of that love or 2) There is a kind of naive enthusiasm behind them, where the film-makers may not have been talented, but they were sincere and were having fun.  And if that fun and/or sincerity makes it to the screen, then they must have done something right.  Even if they did end up making what amounts to an unintentional comedy.

You would think that everyone involved would be glad that their crappy little film has garnered such a cult following, but director Claudio Fragasso comes across as more than a little bitter when he finds out about his movie's status "Worst Ever."  He argues that he made a good film, but the actors screwed it up.  Or he blamed the language barrier.  Or the crew.  Or pretty much everyone but himself.  Instead of saying, "I learned from my mistakes, and I can now watch Troll 2 and chuckle a little bit," he insists that his movie was a good one and all the critics are wrong.  It's a surprisingly bitter note in an otherwise upbeat and strangely heartwarming movie.

But as good as this doc was, it doesn't make me want to watch Troll 2.  Sorry.

Day 74: Let Them Hate Me, So Long As They Fear Me

CALIGULA (1979)
Directed by Tinto Brass (credited for "Principal Photography") and Bob Guccione ("Additional Scenes")
Starring: Malcolm McDowell, Helen Mirren, Peter O'Toole, John Gielgud, Teresa Ann Savoy

I hate the way my mind works sometimes.  I haven't made a post here in almost two whole months, as I've been moving cross-country and getting myself situated.  When I remembered this little project of mine, I felt I couldn't just come back with any old film.  No, I needed to make a splash.  I needed to come back with something big.

And now, I'm wishing I hadn't.

I knew going in that this movie was going to bet a tough one.  What else should I have expected from a film that Roger Ebert called "utterly worthless, shameful trash."?  Just how tough it was going to be came as a surprise.

To truly understand this disaster, we have to go back to its very inception.  See, back in the day, author and screenwriter Gore Vidal was working on a script for a film on the life of Caligula Caesar, based on an unmade TV mini-series by Roberto Rossellini.  Of course, you can't make a movie without money, so Vidal went to Penthouse magazine founder and publisher Bob Guccione.  And this was the film's most costly mistake.  Guccione, naturally, wanted to sex up the script a bit, but he also wanted to make it more like the sword-and-sandal epics of the 50's and 60's.  It was to be a spectacle of lavish proportions that would be a bit sexier than audiences of the time were used to.  Guccione hired Tinto Brass to direct and the production would be designed by Fellini's art director Danilo Donati.  Acting heavyweights Malcolm McDowell, Peter O'Toole and John Gielgud were hired.  The production was to be begin in 1976 and was slated for a 1977 release.  Sounds like any other production so far, right?  Just go and make the movie.

Not so fast.  Vidal rewrote the script five times, which delayed production; he was banned from the set for arguing with Brass.  Maria Schneider, who had been cast as Drusilla, balked at the amount of nudity and sex in the film and was replaced by Teresa Ann Savoy.  Brass' rough-and-tumble shooting style didn't allow Donati to finish his sets in time, which resulted in more script changes.  Brass and Guccione would argue over the sexual content of the film so, of course, more changes and more delays.  After principal photography was completed, Guccione took over post-production.  He went back and shot several minutes of hardcore orgy footage (something he had not discussed with Brass), and basically took over the editing process himself.  Vidal and Brass both disowned the film.  And it didn't debut until 1979.

But I'm willing to bet that the process of making this film, as unpleasant as it was, was nothing compared to actually sitting through it.  For the moment, I'm going to put the porno stuff aside and just focus on what a terribly sloppy movie this is.  A lot of the blame for that has to go to Guccione himself, who was inexperienced at film-making of any kind.  He chose shots that were out of focus.  He chose takes of the actors giving extremely over-the-top performances.  There is zero continuity.  Nothing makes any sense whatsoever.  The actors, for their part, give it their all, except for John Gielgud, who played Nerva.  It is painfully obvious that he was just there for the paycheck.  Though his death scene, where he had slashed his wrists in a bath, was very well-done.  Maybe that's because I envied him at that point.  Malcolm McDowell is simply recreating the role of Alex, from A Clockwork Orange, only in a toga instead of a codpiece.  Peter O'Toole, who played Caligula's syphilis-ridden uncle Tiberias, gives one of the strangest performance I think I've ever seen.  Rumors of him being drunk on the set are rampant, and I believe it.  If I had to work on this movie, I'd be drunk on set, too.

Now this movie would have been bad enough as it is, but then there's the orgy scenes.  There is nothing tasteful about them.  It's just straight-up porn.  And it's not even simulated, as more mainstream films usually do.  It's all there and it's all real.  And there's really no point to it.  It doesn't move the story along (assuming this movie has a story) and it's not even very well made.  It's...well, it's porn.  The only difference is that the pizza guy and the pool cleaner are wearing sandals.

This is the first movie I've done for this project that has absolutely no redeeming qualities.  And the thing is, it's not just bad - it's insulting.  There is no excuse for this movie; it's not a "historical drama," or a "classical epic."  It's not even a good porno!  And yet it was made and marketed in such a way as to make the audience think it was all these things and more.  "It wasn't just a movie, it was a cultural event!  It broke down barriers!  It was an act against censorship!"  No.  No, it wasn't.  It wasn't any of those things.  If anything, it was the single biggest case for censorship ever made.  And it's not a terrible movie because it's a porno.  It's a terrible movie for trying to tell the audience it was more than that; and for thinking that hiding behind respected actors and millions of dollars could make it anything more than it is.

But in the interest of saying something nice......the sets were good.