Smith's Verdict

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

“1, 2, Freddy’s coming for you…3, 4, better lock your door…5, 6, grab your crucifix…7, 8, gonna stay up late…9, 10, never sleep again…”

There’s a true boogeyman haunting the dreams of young people, and his name is Freddy—Fred Krueger, to be exact. With a horribly burned face and sporting a dirty red-and-green sweater, a Fedora, and gloves with knives for fingers, he’s the man of your (bad) dreams. But if he kills you in your dream, he actually kills you in reality, which pits the kids who dream about him into real danger. That’s the basic idea for Wes Craven’s “A Nightmare on Elm Street,” a surprisingly-effective slasher film with the most intriguing premise of the lot and more to offer than such films as “Friday the 13^th.”

The movie is about a group of typical teenagers whose dreams are invaded by the supernatural boogeyman, Freddy (Robert Englund). It begins as Tina (Amanda Wyss) wakes up from one of these shockers only to find evidence that…maybe it wasn’t a dream.

Dun-dun-DUNNNNNN!!!

Tina tells her friend Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) about the dream, only to discover that she too dreamed about the same “creep.” (And one look on Nancy’s boyfriend Glen’s face indicates that he had the same dream as well.) That night, as she enjoys a rousing night of pleasure with her boyfriend Rod (Nick Corri), she then falls victim to Freddy and is ripped to shreds. (This is yet another example of how sex leads to death in horror movies.) Rod is sent to jail on a murder charge, although Nancy doesn’t quite believe he did it, as her nightmares only get worse and worse. She becomes convinced that Freddy is responsible for her friend’s death, and finds that she, Glen (Johnny Depp, in his first big-screen role), or Rod may be next. So the best way to stay alive is not to fall asleep.

The “nightmare” gimmick is usually not an effective element for a horror film because you see very often a scene in which a character dreams of certain doom and then wakes up in a cold sweat. Come on, who are they trying to fool, especially when it usually occurs early in the movie? It’s a tired, predictable, overdone gimmick that just doesn’t work anymore. But “A Nightmare on Elm Street” centers an entire movie around that element, in that even though you know for sure (and the characters know for sure) that there are many dream sequences, that is where the terror happens: in the notion that the doom in the nightmare becomes the doom in reality. But also, there are some parts (especially in the final act) in which no one, particularly the audience, surely knows what is real and what isn’t. The movie walks that fine line between fantasy and reality mostly, and that’s where the chills come from—uncertainty, suspense, and toying with expectations.

There are enough necessary (sometimes unnecessary) jolts and chills to make horror-film buffs tense, but it’s also a story that makes you really think about the situation. There’s a lot that people can read in the psychology of this idea (such as the notion that Craven based this idea from children who died in their sleep), and also how the gimmick can work in this movie. That way, audiences are attentive and interpreting.

The horribly-scarred Freddy Krueger has of course grown to become an iconic figure in the horror-film genre, thanks to his taking center-stage in the “Nightmare on Elm Street” sequels. Unlike “Halloween’s” Michael Myers/The Shape or “Friday the 13^th’s” Jason Voorhees, Freddy does not wear a mask and is not silent. He has a sick, twisted personality that goes with his sick psychoticism. This is a truly an iconic horror-movie villain. But he’s not the center of this original “Nightmare on Elm Street” film, necessarily—he’s just more like the looming demon waiting to strike. We get part of a backstory, but that’s all we know about him in this movie. This makes it more effective, but the less we know about the killer that was Freddy Krueger, the more creepy he is. (The sequels, however, go into more detail stating more of his story and why he’s able to haunt dreams, which doesn’t make him scarier.)

“A Nightmare on Elm Street” is more about Nancy and how she tries to figure out how to save herself, even if it means trying to stay awake. Her police lieutenant father, Donald (John Saxon), is too much of a hardass to pay attention because he’s more concerned about keeping the small community, where they all live, safe from danger. Little does he know that his own daughter’s subconscious is the greater danger. But Nancy’s mother (Ronee Blakley) actually does know something about Freddy and eventually tells her what happened to him and why he’s after certain young targets. Nancy decides to fight back and find a way to bring Freddy out of the dream world and into the real world so he can be stopped.

There are some effectively chilling sequences that occur in these nightmares (one of the most memorable involves a bathtub transforming into a bottomless pit), and like just about every good horror film, the terror is present thanks to a good deal of attention to atmosphere. The lighting is effectively done whenever the dream calls for a certain way. The special effects are good. And the music score is efficiently eerie for the movie.

“A Nightmare on Elm Street” is an effective horror film. The ideas are interesting, the tension is existent, and Nancy as a heroine is not a dumb, screaming idiot (she’s smart and resourceful), therefore able for us to like and root for her. I’m not quite sure I follow the ending, but I guess the point is to leave things open for interpretation. Craven does the material well, as it really seems he gets the genre and knows what his audience wants while also giving them something more in return. It’s a nicely-done chiller.

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

“Electric Dreams” takes a story about as old and as predictable as a romance could get and adds new twists to create a delightful movie. You know that old story of how boy meets girl, boy gets help from his buddy to impress her, and buddy becomes jealous to see how well the boy and girl are getting along? What if the buddy was a computer? Yes, there’s a love triangle in this movie in which the third wheel is a computer.

The computer falls in love. Now, that’s a wonderful idea for a movie. Not only does the computer fall in love, but it also gets jealous—jealous enough to try everything it can to get its owner out of the picture so it can have the girl to itself.

The owner is a shy nerdy guy named Miles, played by Lenny von Dohlen in a likable performance. He buys himself a home computer to get things organized for him, since everyone else has their own pocket organizers. It’s tough trying to get it to work at first, but he soon gets the gist of it…or so he thinks.

Enter the woman who moves into Miles’ apartment building—a fetching cellist, played by Virginia Madsen. Miles feels something for her, and the feeling is mutual. They go out a few times. But what neither of them realize is that the woman thinks that Miles can create great music. You see, earlier in the movie, as the computer gains its “brain” (whatever), it eavesdrops on the woman’s cello practice through a ventilation duct and plays musical notes by itself to follow along, in a duet that is easily the movie’s best scene.

But Miles realizes that the computer talks and has a mind of its own and asks it to create a love song for his new girlfriend. After wrongfully guessing what it sees on TV is appropriate for lyrics and rhythm, Miles helps it out with his own feelings. The result is a beautiful song that Miles takes the credit for, which makes the computer jealous because the computer has fallen in love.

Just thinking about the plotline makes me smile and the movie is just as winning, although maybe a little silly in most eyes, as it goes along. There’s an MTV-style as it goes with its song sequences (particularly with the duet, the love song, and the title song at the end) that gives the movie its energy, but what really makes “Electric Dreams” a nice movie are the central elements, like the actors and the computer. Lenny von Dohlen and Virginia Madsen are great together and separate. Von Dohlen does a good job as this wimpy nerd, and Madsen plays her character as attractive, but not shallow.

But credit should also be given to how well the filmmakers did with the computer. With wonderful voice acting by Bud Cort as the computer’s voice, this is a self-learning computer with a personality of its own. It not only makes for effective comedy, but also for really touching moments, particularly in the final act of the movie.

“Electric Dreams” has an innocence and charm within its characters, the direction, and that wonderful computer that gives me reason to recommend it to those who could use a nice-enough love story. I mean, how often do you come across the rivalry between a man and a machine over the woman they both love?

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

“Up the Creek” is among the “slob comedies” that has been around since 1978’s “Animal House” introduced a group of slobs who got laughs just for being what they were. It even features actors from some of those said “slob comedies”—Tim Matheson and Stephen Furst from “Animal House,” Dan Monahan from “Porky’s,” and Sandy Helberg from “History of the World: Part 1.” The film borrows elements from “Animal House,” “Porky’s,” and maybe even “Meatballs”—we have competition between colleges, booze, parties, bare-chested women, casual sex, and psychopathic enemies. So basically, “Up the Creek” has all the ingredients of a “slob comedy” but the surprise is that it’s still funny and I liked it. It’s not up there with “Animal House,” but it’s much better than “Porky’s.” It’s stupid, but a likable kind of stupid.

In the movie, four students of Lepetomane University (which is said to be “the single worst educational institution in the country”) are chosen by the dean to race in an intercollegiate whitewater rafting race. These four are told that if they win, they are granted a degree of their choice.

These central characters are the usual types—the Relaxed but Wisecracking Leader (Tim Matheson), the Overweight Eating Slob (Stephen Furst), the Horny Ladykiller (Dan Monahan—don’t worry; he’s more likable here than in “Porky’s”), and the Nervous Nerd (Sandy Helberg). The opening scenes aren’t particularly subtle. They each try to shoot a morning crow with different weapons only to hit other things (and people) and in another scene, when the fat guy throws his sandwich out the car window, it hits a motorcyclist and causes him to lose control and fall off the road. But hey, that’s supposed to happen in movies like these, right?

Even though these guys are types, they are quite likable and play their parts with a good deal of enthusiasm. Tim Matheson, in particular, keeps his charm from “Animal House” and has a nice relationship with the Blonde Babe (Jennifer Runyon)…or as nice as a relationship can be in a movie like this.

The rivals of the race are the defending champions from a military academy, who is later disqualified after a terrible sabotage attempt (I love how it goes wrong—the Leader of the good guys throws the grenade back at the thrower saying, “Hey you dropped this”). So they go through ridiculous lengths just to throw off the good guys as revenge for…not being sabotaged? I dunno. Another rival group is from the Ivy League, who of course are blond and everyone’s favorite.

The race is amusing and fun to watch—real effort was put into the filming of the protagonists going through some tough whitewater rapids. Tricky photography and cinematography was used to make those scenes seem real. The amusing bits are when the rival teams are trying their hardest to throw off the protagonists—the Ivy League even has torpedoes. But it wouldn’t be a positive slob comedy if the slobs didn’t find their way back up, now would it?

Uh-oh! I cannot believe I almost forgot to mention the best character in the movie—a smart dog named Chuck, played by Jake (he deserves credit). He understands human emotions and may even be smarter than anyone else in the movie. The movie’s best scene is when the military academy team kidnaps one of the heroes and Chuck has to play charades to tell the others where he is. I loved that scene, I liked “Up the Creek.” It’s silly, goofy, idiotic, and predictable, but it’s still quite funny.

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

Here’s another risqué comedy about young people who break the rules and often talk vulgarly. When done right (like “Animal House” and to a lighter extent, “Risky Business”), it can be less raunchy than it sounds. But when done wrong (“Porky’s,” “Porky’s II,” “Where the Boys Are 84”—I could go on and on, but I won’t for space), they can be real scuzz-pits. Then you have “Revenge of the Nerds”—that’s a clever title for a movie and a clever idea. This is a raunchy comedy that doesn’t focus on the slobs or the jocks, but the nerds—the geeky, twerpy guys who are smart but socially awkward. This film does not take place in the real world—this is a movie in which all jocks are stereotypical jerks who, of course, are the most-loved ones on college campus, and also know nerds when they see them wearing glasses or sporting pocket protectors on their shirt pockets. Oh, and most of the “nerds” are freshmen, which makes it hard to believe. No introduction necessary—they just shout “nerd” at you and make your life miserable. It doesn’t matter what you do; you will always be a nerd to them.

Just describing that one detail of “Revenge of the Nerds” makes it seem ridiculously stupid. But this is a surprise—yes, it features stereotypical jocks (and nerds, for that matter) and quite a lot of female nudity from the sexiest sorority girls. But it also features enough laughs and enough likable lead characters (the nerds) that I’m recommending the film. It’s stupid, but it’s playfully stupid.

So anyway, the trouble starts when the jocks’ idiotic behavior burns their frat house to the ground and the jocks invade the freshmen’s dorms, forcing the “nerds” to sleep in the gym. Then, when the nerds (I hate to call them this) have an opportunity to make into the only fraternity that’s left for them—an all-African-American fraternity called Lambda—those dumb jocks ruin their chances by crashing their party and humiliating them. This will not do. It’s time to stand up and retaliate. Led by Louis (Robert Carradine) and Gilbert (Anthony Edwards), the nerds panty-raid the jocks’ favorite sorority house, install hidden cameras in their dorm rooms, and put “liquid heat” in the jocks’ jockstraps. And if they win the Homecoming decathlon at school, they can take over the jock fraternity.

At that point, the film is predictable, but it’s honest and displays the message that nerds are people too. Some of the nerds are types—we have the slob, the horny Asian, the gay African-American, and the weak nerd—but the two leads, Louis and Gilbert, seem like real people and do earn our sympathies. The jocks—this includes the football coach, played over-the-top by John Goodman—are types, like I said. But in this case, they deserve their comeuppance. I know I smiled when seeing them in pain after the nerds put liquid heat in their jockstraps.

Some of “Revenge of the Nerds” is funny and some of it is heroic. That’s a good enough mix for me to recommend the film without going too crazy over it.

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

There’s a beautiful movie surrounding Alan Parker’s fantasy-drama “Birdy,” and it just needs to be found. But as it is, it’s still intriguing, strange, and surprisingly moving, given its subject matter. It’s about two friends from South Philadelphia who have served in the Vietnam War—one of them, Al (Nicolas Cage), is called to a mental institution to try and reach his best friend, nicknamed “Birdy” (Matthew Modine), who is trapped inside of his own mind. If Birdy is proven mentally unstable, he will be taken away.

There’s nothing new to be said about the Vietnam War here, but that isn’t important. What is important is the friendship between these two friends who wind up serving in it. They both arrive back, scarred—one physically (Al has disfigured his face, so he keeps bandages covering most of it), the other mentally. Most of their story is told in flashback sequences as we see what led to this. The boys grew up in South Philadelphia. Al is a smooth guy with self-confidence and a natural ability to pick up women. Birdy is a different story—he’s an oddball who is weirdly fascinated with birds and dreams of flying himself. He has a pet canary, he has a pigeon suit to try and capture pigeons (while hanging upside down from elevated tracks), creates an ornithopter (a small flying device), and even some homemade wings to try out in hopes of flying.

Al and Birdy become great friends, as we see in the flashbacks. Although, they become somewhat separated by their pursuits for different things—for Al, it’s more women; for Birdy, it’s a further obsession with flying. But they’re still good friends with each other and share some unique adventures together.

In the present time, however, Birdy has apparently been pushed over the edge, presumably because of his experience in the war. He’s at the point where he actually thinks he’s a caged bird, with his cell as his cage. He looks sideways, looks longingly at the window to see birds fly free, has his head cocked to the side, and doesn’t even say a word. Al is trying to reach him by making him remember the good times they had together and make sure he’s not crazy, but he is not sure what he’s thinking, or even if he’s thinking.

“Birdy” is successful in its storytelling, as it doesn’t tell the story in chronological order, rather than let us figure out for ourselves in what order these events—past and present—happened so we can understand a certain thing about the other. It’s fascinating that way. We also get some deeply effective moments that go deep into Birdy’s perception. We can understand how much he wants to fly, and notice his “transformation” as it continues to develop. We realize his love for birds, as well as his hopes of being free to fly out of this miserable world he lives in, what with a difficult mother and other people (including a girl Al pushes him into dating) calling him weird. This Birdy is quite a terrific character, and played so well by Matthew Modine. I’m surprised his performance wasn’t nominated for an Oscar—I really think it’s an Oscar-caliber performance.

I get the feeling there was a lot more to “Birdy” than what was ultimately released to cinemas and home media. There are many parts of the movie that either feel rushed or not developed at all. For example, in an early flashback scene showing when the two boys first meet, it’s a misunderstanding and then a bit of confusion. Then, we get a montage of the two boys hanging out together, as if all of a sudden, they’re just best friends now. We never saw what made them really connect with each other in the first place. So in that way it is somewhat hard to believe that Al would hang out with Birdy all this time, despite his odd obsession with birds and flying. I also could have used more of Al teaching Birdy to be more sociable in high school. And I also would have loved to see how these two reacted to serving in Vietnam—we only get just a few brief scenes, and that’s not particularly good enough. And the ending is just too ambiguous—it was as if I was reliving my thoughts on the anticlimactic ending for “An American Werewolf in London.” What I’m saying is I could have used a lot more of this material, and that’s saying something, especially considering that this movie is two hours long. I would have watched an extra half-hour if they had something to deliver.