THE LAST AMERICAN HERO (1973, Lamont Johnson)

 

* * 

A man can drive cars real good. According to this movie, that is a heroic act.

Starring  Jeff Bridges, Valerie Perrine, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Gary Busey

Written by  William Roberts, William Kerby

Produced by  William Roberts, John Cutts

Duration  95 minutes

If I had been born with the surname 'American', which movies would I be reviewing for this blog?

Let's see, there's American ULTRA, GANGSTER, PIE (plus sequels), GRAFFITI, SNIPER, HUSTLER, BEAUTY, PSYCHO, DREAMZ, BUFFALO, HAUNTING, WET HOT SUMMER, GIGOLO, HISTORY X, NINJA (plus sequels), PRESIDENT, SPLENDOR ...

Or what about 'America' instead? I wonder if former Ugly Betty star America Ferrera needs a hobby? She could line up things like COMING TO AMERICA, MADE IN AMERICA, ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA ...

Of course, when a movie has a title like THE LAST AMERICAN HERO, using both 'last' and 'American', the point is moot. It's even happened once already.

One thing to get out the way is I don't approve of our current normalisation of the word 'hero', either in society or in movies. It's like the abuse of the word 'awesome'. Sunsets are awesome, the unfathomable hugeness of the universe is awesome. A new range of McDonald's burgers is not awesome. Neither is Jack Black voicing a panda who learns kung-fu. 

So, how is this movie using the word 'hero'? Is it sincere or is it sarcastic? Maybe it dodges the issue altogether?

Well, I can sum up its position in a word: driving. We open with Jeff Bridges driving – fast. Hurtling from the police like he's robbed a bank, but actually just because he likes to go very fast and since he's being chased is accelerating even faster to escape. Jeff's heading home to his cranky mama; he also has a brother, who's played by a young Gary Busey (aged 29; Bridges was a mere pup at 24). And right after pulling up at their ramshackle shack, having successfully outmaneuvered the copper, he's chirping at his family about 'supercharging' the thing that enables his driving: his car.

Now, I am not a car person. If heroism is going to be attributed to the ability to successfully manipulate an automobile, then I am unlikely to be impressed. And so it follows that I was not.

Next, there's driving. Yes, driving – more driving. And skidding! Though the woods, away from another cop car, at dusk (I think - it could have just been poorly lit). Jeff driving really fast while singing along to country music. There's more bloody driving even than in Bridges' other car movie, Francis Ford Coppola's TUCKER: THE MAN AND HIS DREAM. Vroom-vroom.

Now, THE LAST AMERICAN HERO is based on an article by Tom Wolfe, about real-life speed-freak Junior Jackson. It was Wolfe who dubbed Jackson an 'American hero'. (Although it could have been a hyperbolic sub-editor.) And having now sat through the whole film, I'm still struggling to pin down what it is that makes this brash moron a hero, however thin the definition of the word may be today.

Beyond the automobile action, there is a plot. Jackson's papa gets banged up for distilling moonshine. Junior then stumbles into supporting the family with his four-wheeled talents: first in a demolition derby, then by winning races against other cars going around in a big circle while spectators stand on the roofs of their trailers hollering, formally known as NASCAR.

Look, it's definitely good that he goes off to earn money for the family, what with their breadwinner locked up and all. But wouldn't it have helped even more if he'd already been gainfully employed before disaster struck? I do think that heroism takes a little more than supporting your loved ones with your income. That's just called 'earning a living' and 'being a responsible adult'.

But actual displays of heroism? I was kept waiting. Would he drive his car into a burning building to rescue the inhabitants? Would he donate his winnings to rebuild an orphanage that was bombed during a genocide?

No. Nothing like that. He just wins a couple of races.

It's strange seeing actors like Bridges and Busey, now so firmly ingrained as cranky old guys, as 20-somethings. Then again, some actors seem like they were never young in the first place: your Gene Hackmans and Morgan Freemans and Lance Henricksens. But beyond that mild point of interest, and a few amusing putdowns uttered by Junior to various dimwitted hicks (usually prefixed or suffixed with the word 'boy'), THE LAST AMERICAN SO-CALLED HERO never gripped me – or, I guess I should say, got under my bonnet or injected my fuel or ... whatever.

And as far as movies based on magazine articles go, I prefer TOP GUN, BOOGIE NIGHTS, DOG DAY AFTERNOON, THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS, THE INSIDER ... Even THE BONFIRE OF THE VANITIES (also from the writings of Tom Wolfe) boasted one of those great extended Brian de Palma takes.

Two stars out of five.

Valid use of the word ‘last’?  Hard to quantify, since I'm disputing the use of the word 'hero' altogether.

What would a movie called THE FIRST AMERICAN HERO be about?  George Washington?

Previously:  HITLER: THE LAST TEN DAYS

Next time:  THE LAST SHIFT

Check out my books:  Jonathanlastauthor.com

HITLER: THE LAST TEN DAYS (1973, Ennio De Concini)

 

* * 

It's time to hunker in the Führerbunker. The end is nigh and Adolf's facing it 30 feet underground.

Starring  Alec Guinness, Simon Ward, Adolfo Celi, Diane Cilento, Gabriele Ferzetti

Written by  Gerhard Boldt, Ennio De Concini, Maria Pia Fusco, Ivan Moffat, Wolfgang Reinhardt   

Produced by  Wolfgang Reinhardt

Duration  105 minutes   

 

I don’t know about you, but when I watch a movie about an historical figure, I'm hoping to find something out about them. Which, sure enough, invariably happens. But not always to a satisfactory degree.

Biopics can be notoriously loose with the ol' facts. A common inaccuracy is to skim over less savoury aspects of the subject's life so as to paint them in a better light. This sometimes comes at the behest of surviving family members – look out for a familiar surname in the credits. Or the truth may have been bent for purely narrative reasons: conflating events, combining characters, fiddling with the timeline, that sort of thing.

This of course assumes that you are covering the person's whole life, like in a GANDHI or a RAY – an approach so memorably parodied in WALK HARD: THE DEWEY COX STORY. With such a long period to trawl though, it's no surprise that these kinds of projects end up relying heavily on montages. But sometimes they go too far, making the whole movie seem like a trailer, only giving shallow insight into the subject matter. I'm thinking of Baz Luhrmann's off-puttingly hyperactive ELVIS, which frustrated me to the point of actually turning it off. (A rare movie that feels like a feature-length trailer but actually pulls it off is GOODFELLAS.)

A more popular biopic tactic in recent years has been to home in on a significant event in the protagonist's life, like with Winston Churchill in THE DARKEST HOUR. Churchill's refusal to seek a peace treaty with the Nazis in 1940 was a microcosm of his overall character, making sense as a focus for the man at large.

And so to the movie we have here, concerning Winston's old WWII adversary. Judging by that title, HITLER: THE LAST TEN DAYS is clearly going to be taking the snapshot approach. And you've got to think: well, of course that's what they did. What else could they have done? A cradle-to-grave examination inevitably humanises the subject by looking at the childhood reasons behind an adult's actions. Has there ever been a Hitler movie like this? Could (or indeed should) there ever be?

Many an actor has played him, but no one to my knowledge has given Adolf the straight-up, decades-spanning, warts-and-all Mahatma Gandhi/Ray Charles treatment.

Let's see, there's been:

Charlie Chaplin – THE GREAT DICTATOR (1940): A parody, in which Chaplin calls himself 'Adenoid Hynkel'. Also, it was released when the Second World War was still raging on (just like CASABLANCA was).

Anthony Hopkins – THE BUNKER (1981): Seemingly shares the exact same concept as LAST TEN DAYS.

Ian McKellen – COUNTDOWN TO WAR (1989): Recounts the events between the Nazis invading Czechoslovakia and the UK declaring war on Germany. So, another contained period, albeit longer (six months) and earlier (the start of the war, instead of the end).

Steven Berkoff – War and Remembrance (TV) (1989): Starts in December 1941 and ends in August 1945, so spanning four years. But Hitler isn't the focus; he just pops up here and there while we follow the fortunes of an American family during the war.

Robert Carlyle – Hitler: The Rise of Evil (TV) (2003): Would seem to be the one exception here, starting as it does in 1899 with Adolf as barely a (Hitler) youth. However, it ends in 1934, when he's just come to power, stopping short of showing what he ends up actually doing with that power.

Bruno Ganz – DOWNFALL (2004): This one definitely has the exact same setup as LAST TEN DAYS – and I've actually seen it! Plus we've all seen the meme-worthy clips of Ganz' ranting performance.

Taika Waititi – JOJO RABBIT (2019): Another parody. I would have watched this one too, if Waititi hadn't irritated me so much in FREE GUY that I've avoided him ever since.

So then, here we have THE LAST TEN DAYS. Do we learn much about Hitler this time round? Well, not really, I'm afraid.

Playing the famous dictator this time is Sir Alec Guinness. He still has that familiar STAR WARS/BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI voice – this is one of those movies where everyone speaks in English and with their native accent.

We do get a bit of general backstory at the beginning, for anyone who was asleep during GCSE History. Hitler's rise to power, National Socialism, WWII, Germany's ultimate defeat. The expository voiceover is by someone who sounds like Guinness, which is a little confusing, as I don't think it's supposed to be Adolf reminiscing from beyond the grave. 

Then we're swiftly down into the Führerbunker, where we stay for the duration.

Now, one imagines being stuck underground in the 1940s would be kind of dull. And so it proves, with LAST TEN DAYS failing to make the tedium in any way compelling. I was reminded of Sam Mendes's JARHEAD. That was a war film about soldiers who don't see any action and so get bored and frustrated; unfortunately, Mendes made the experience of watching this happening very boring and frustrating.

What happens down in the bunker? Well, the Nazis have regular meetings where they confirm that the Allies are still moving closer and so they are pretty much fucked.

Adolf celebrates his 56th birthday, and we are treated to the tyrant grinning with glee as a parade of deferential soldiers and womenfolk hand him gifts. There are children down in this bunker, but der Führer is the biggest kid of all. Bless.

There are lots of scenes of people talking about battles going on elsewhere, out of sight. Which, again: kind of boring. The guy who plays the caretaker in THE SHINING and the dad in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE is in there; so is Joss Ackland of LETHAL WEAPON 2 and BILL AND TED'S BOGUS JOURNEY fame. So that's nice.

And of course Adolf rants and raves now and again, like he's still at the Nuremberg rally. He also reveals a humbler side, declaring, "I'm not Jesus Christ," before swiftly adding, "a genius yes – but Christ? Not quite."

My verdict for if you want to find out about the real character or life of Adolf Hitler? Stick to The History Channel or whatever.

Two out of five stars.

Valid use of the word ‘last’?  Can't argue on this occasion, although the glacial pace makes it feel like 100 days rather than only a week and a half.

What would a movie called HITLER: THE FIRST TEN DAYS be about? Unless he was some kind of blatantly evil, Damian-from-THE-OMEN devil-child, probably nothing very interesting. 

Previously:  INSIDIOUS: THE LAST KEY

Next time:  THE LAST AMERICAN HERO

Check out my books:  Jonathanlastauthor.com

INSIDIOUS: THE LAST KEY (2018, Adam Robitel)

 

* * * 

Medium Elise Rainier lends her particular set of skills to another poltergeist scenario – and gets maximum trouble for her efforts.

Starring  Lin Shaye, Angus Sampson, Leigh Whannell, Spencer Locke, Caitlin Gerard, Bruce Davison

Written by  Leigh Whannell   

Produced by  Jason Blum, Oren Peli, James Wan, Leigh Whannell

Duration  104 minutes

 

Sometime in 2026 will see the release of THREAD: AN INSIDIOUS TALE, a spin-off of the INSIDIOUS film series. Meanwhile, a crossover of INSIDIOUS and SINISTER, both properties of Blumhouse Productions, has long been rumoured.

I can't help thinking that spinning-off or crossing-over (over-crossing?) has, over the years, tended to be more of a TV thing. The most famous small screen example has to be Frasier, coming from Cheers. But the tradition goes back a lot further. Happy Days, for example, birthed no less than six other shows, to varying degrees of success. Indeed, the spin-off matching the popularity of its originator is far from guaranteed: hit Friends begat dud Joey; Baywatch Nights was no Baywatch. And then of course you have all the myriad incarnations of CSI and NCIS – the latter already being a spin-off of Naval drama JAG.

Movie spin-offs used to be less common, although of course are increasingly so these days, owing to the superhero boom. 1978's SUPERMAN led (eventually) to SUPERGIRL in 1984, but the less said about that the better. More recently, FURIOSA was "a MAD MAX saga"; THIS IS 40 served as only a "sort-of sequel" to KNOCKED UP; US MARSHALLS followed the antagonist from THE FUGITIVE, rather than the hero; the CREED movies spawned off from ROCKY.

Crossovers, meanwhile, have historically tended to be Universal/Hammer horror pictures, with various monsters or monster hunters popping up in each other's films. GODZILLA and KING KONG are keeping this tradition alive today, as FREDDY VS JASON did with a two different monsters a couple of decades ago.

Meanwhile, what we have here is actually the fourth film in the 'main' INSIDIOUS series. Although, wait a sec, it's actually the second chronologically, since the third one was a prequel to the second one, and so THE LAST KEY takes place somewhere between the third and first ones. Glad we cleared that up. Hey, at least it's not as complicated as those CONJURING movies, which have so many instalments and spin-offs (the NUN films, the ANNABELLE films) that they've earned the term 'shared universe', previously only the domain of comic book movies.

Anyway, THE LAST KEY opens on a creepy prison in 1950s' New Mexico. Creepier still is a little girl, Elise, daughter of the warden – the family live in a house onsite, like caretakers in a school, or that Nazi family in THE ZONE OF INTEREST. Elise knows when someone's getting a blast from the electric chair next door, and not through the lights blinking on and off like you'd expect – early points for not using that hackneyed trope, by the way.

Her mother recognises that Elise has a gift and reassures her; pop is less open-minded, preferring the approach of beating her and locking her in the cellar. But Mom doesn't realise the extent of the girl's abilities: Elise doesn't just sense that a criminal has passed, she's actually then visited by their ghost. And boy do they love to congregate in that basement and make themselves known to the poor, terrified girl.

Such childhood trauma shapes Elise into eventually becoming seventy-something Lin Shaye – this franchise's MVP, having appeared in every instalment. Shaye is the one who can genuinely see spirits in a paranormal investigation team that also comprises two whacky, nerdy colleagues: Tucker (Angus Sampson, long hair and beard) and Specs (Leigh Whannell, wearer of specs, and also sometime INSIDIOUS director and/or writer).

When the team are summoned to Elise's old home by the current owner to deal with some demons, it's Elise who has to confront her own demons – from her past. (She also has to confront plenty of current demons, too; by which of course I mean those who are currently haunting the house in the present day.)

Now, I had seen this movie before. Also definitely the first two, and probably the third – I can't be sure, but it seems inconceivable that I would skip an entry. Anyway, I remember liking it well enough, but there's since been a fifth, THE RED DOOR, directed by early franchise star Patrick Wilson, and it hasn't crossed my radar to watch that one. I couldn't remember why I'd bowed out at this stage of the franchise, but rewatching THE LAST KEY it soon became clear.

"She's psychic; we're sidekicks," is how Tucker introduces the team to their new client, with a rehearsed delivery modelled on one of those melodramatic movie trailer voiceovers. It of course falls flat; just another zany quirk from the goofy geeks who lug around all the infrared cameras and sound equipment. They also embarrass themselves in their attempts to flirt with the local girls, exchange cringeworthy banter while studying grainy monitors in the dark, etc.

Yes, this is one of those horror movies that feels it must balance the scares with some shoe-horned in comic relief. This tends to be a huge turn-off for me: I felt that Joran Peele's universally lauded GET OUT was derailed by Daniel Kaluuya's comedy best friend's efforts to track him down. Similarly, David Gordon Green's HALLOWEEN trilogy too often undercut its tension with cheap laughs. And what do these two films have in common? Filmmakers with a background in comedy.

Director Adam Robitel doesn't have that excuse here. But, in fact, I was pleasantly surprised when watching this time to find that the film actually survives its tonal mishmash. Our pals Tucker and Specs don't manage to fatally unbalance the creepiness, and the sincere efforts of classy veteran Shaye stop it from ever wobbling completely off the tracks.

INSIDIOUS: THE LAST KEY ends up being a spooky good time. If you ever come across it on a late-night streaming browse, you could do much worse. And if I'm ever flicking through one of those same lists and coming across part five, I can see myself hitting 'OK' on the remote. Probably.

Three stars out of five. 

 

Valid use of the word ‘last’?  It’s less about a key, more a demon called ‘Keyface’. Which is scarier than it sounds. Also, the house is in Five Keys, Mexico. So I guess, technically … no?

What would a movie called THE FIRST KEY be about?  “Theodorus of Samos in the 6th century BC invented the first key, according to Pliny the Elder.” So says City Security (“The magazine to improve your security know-how”) – and who are we to disagree with them? Or, indeed, your man Pliny?

 

Previously:  THE LAST KING OF SCOTLAND

Next time:  HITLER: THE LAST TEN DAYS

Check out my books:  Jonathanlastauthor.com