Hey, folks. Capone in Chicago here, with a couple of films that are making their way into art houses around America this week (maybe even taking up one whole screen at a multiplex near you). Do your part to support these films, or at least the good ones…
THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE
It's rare that I will ever enter critical discussions of films armed with statements about how critics who don't like certain films simply "didn't get it" or are "too old" to appreciate a certain work. All of the attacks on Roger Ebert's stance on KICK-ASS may be strangely prudish for such a liberal-minded writer, but he's certainly not the only one who didn't enjoy the film, and I don't think his opinions have anything to do with his age or ability to "get it." That being said, I will go to the mat defending my love of director Tom Six's THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE, a sickening bit of brilliance that approaches the mad scientist genre with complete abandon and pure artistry. The movie also comes across as being made by a filmmaker who has an uncontrollable fear of doctors, in particular, surgeons. And above all other things, horror films at their best are born from (and tap into) the things that scare us the most.
Penetrating and exemplifying THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE's sweeping feelings of paranoia is a performance that I'm nominating for best screen villain of the year so far (actually, I first saw this film last year, so maybe he's not in contention): Dieter Laser plays Dr. Heiter--the pronunciation is close to "hater," which is awesome--a renowned German surgeon who has grown bored with his specialty of separating Siamese twins and in his retirement has moved on to something fare more sinister. When we meet him, he's sitting in his car staring at a photo of what appears to be one dog sniffing the butt of another, but that's not quite what it is. He's weeping because he misses his doggies, and somehow his pain is fueling his determination to kidnap three subjects and perform the most unspeakable surgery on them that I can imagine. Making Heiter a German immediately opens up all types of Nazi-experiment parallels that director Six would never discourage you from considering. The skin on Laser's face seems to be actively pulling itself back, exaggerating his features like a grotesque mask. And the doctor has two emotions: insane and slightly more insane. He's a marvel, like Udo Kier without the subtlety.
Eventually the doctor gets his hands on two traveling college students, getting lost in Europe and breaking down near the doctor's home. The doctor drugs them, yells at them, and straps them to gurneys, where they are eventually joined by a Japanese man. In vivid detail and with some of the funniest medical drawings you will ever see in your life, the doctor explains his plans to link these three poor unfortunates into a single creature, or more specifically, he wants to link their digestive tracks into a single one. Whatever you're imagining right now, THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE is probably a bit worse, although strangely enough, the film is light on blood and nudity. It's actually quite an achievement how much Six does not show us, but still gets his point across. The first time you get a sense that his single digestive track is at work will be a defining moment in your life.
THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE isn't meant to be scary, but there is a mild amount of tension as the subjects attempt multiple escapes, and the cops arrive at the doctor's door looking for the missing Americans. I think Six's intent is more celebratory. There's an outside chance that there's something horribly wrong with my sense of humor, but I found this film funny, even in those moments where I thought I might gag. Six is testing limits of taste, but he's also redefining what constitutes fun at the movies. I had a blast watching this deviant piece of cinema. There's nothing artificial about the film; he isn't going for an overly Gothy look or tone. I think in a weird way the director is having fun exorcising his demons. In my best and worst of 2009 list, I created a separate category for THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE: Most Fucked-Up Movie I Saw in 2009. Upon a recent second viewing, I stand by that declaration. And I believe from this time forward, the world will be made up of two different kinds of people in my world: those who love and embrace THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE and those who don't. Dr. Heiter will go into my treasure chest of film villains that will give me bad dreams, and that's a good thing. I dare you to go and not have a good time, even if you run vomiting from the theater.
BABIES
I don't know if it has any true artistic value, but the French nature film BABIES from director Thomas Balmes sure is adorable. This is an almost impossible film to review because it's an un-narrated, inoffensive look at the way newborns are raised in different corners of the globe. If one thing is revealed through watching this film, it's that children in the "civilized" world are far more sheltered and pampered than babies in Namibia or Mongolia, who are regularly exposed to farm animals, crawling around the dirt, and the most non-babyproofed conditions you'll ever see. Yet somehow those babies seem to develop at the same pace as those in Tokyo or San Francisco. I'll admit to being somewhat fascinated watching each child develop certain motor skill and cognitive abilities in ways that seem dictated by their environments. Beyond that, I marveled at how the filmmakers lucked out by picking four newborns that turned into the cutest kids in both hemispheres.
I'm truly hoping against hope that BABIES does not become some kind of phenomenon. Sure, it's safe to take grandmom to, but it's hardly they type of film to get excited about. Actually, this is a case where narration might have helped me appreciate what I was watching a bit more. Although the film only covers a little more than a year in the lives of these children (from birth to first steps, according to the press notes), it might be have interesting to hear some specific observations about each baby's development. My guess is that regardless of the living conditions, kids that age progress at about the same rate, but that's just me guessing.
Of course, that's the person in me talking who would actually appreciate some educational value in his documentary choices. I understand that not all docs have to be loaded with information that I can actually do something with, but BABIES seems like the worst kind of blatant pandering. Beyond that, I'm not sure what else to say. If your only criteria is cooing over cute kids, you'll be in heaven watching this one. If you require something of substance, look just about anywhere else. It's your call, but I believe your time and money could be spent better.
THE GOOD HEART
Although far from a flawless film, French writer-director Dagur Kari's English-language feature debut THE GOOD HEART is grounded in an exceptionally strong performance by the always-reliable Brian Cox, who stars as bar owner Jacques, a grizzled old New Yorker who has frequent heart attacks and is basically waiting to die--even accelerating the process by excessive smoking and drinking. But when he realizes that his establishment might fall into the wrong hands after he dies, he befriends a young homeless man named Lucas (Paul Dano) and trains him in the fine art of running a dive bar. His life lessons to Lucas are priceless, but when a stranded flight attendant (the lovely French actress Isild Le Besco of GIRLS CAN'T SWIM) walks into Lucas' life, she unknowingly threatens to throw off Jacques' months of planning and training, since he firmly believes women don't belong in bars.
Cox would really have try to give a bad performance at this stage in his career, and while Jacques may not be his most subtle performance, he breathes life into this dying man. Jacques will not die quietly, even if he seems to be going willingly. Dano is hit and miss most of the time. When he's good (as he was in THERE WILL BE BLOOD), he's fantastic. In THE GOOD HEART, he's a bit of a pushover, although his behavior at the beginning of the film--after a failed suicide attempt--is a bit more energetic and captivating than in later scenes. I'm afraid Le Besco's performance doesn't add a thing to the proceedings, which is a shame because I've seen her do great work in her native language, but with regards to her presence in this film, I'll have to side with Jacques that she's an unnecessary distraction.
The film's climax is more than a little predictable, but it's still fairly moving. I suppose the same can be said for the entire film, which rates at about the level of an interesting curiosity and a must see for those devout Brian Cox fans in the audience. There are some rudimentary attempts at life lessons scattered throughout the work, but most fall flat or rarely rise above the level of cliche. Beyond that, there are better art-house films to check out in the world, and I recommend most of those over THE GOOD HEART.
-- Capone
capone@aintitcool.com
Follow Me On Twitter
