Vampire's Kiss (1989)

Hey guys! Long time, no see. During this quarantine, I've been spending my weeks finishing up my novel and now that is finished, I'm back in the game! In preparation for the upcoming Vampire Chronicles review, I thought I take a look into the Nicolas Cage oddity that is Vampire's Kiss.
This may sound weird but I first watched this movie when I was a mere ten years old, something I wasn't supposed to be watching at that age, but don't worry, it was on the USA channel late one night. I...just didn't know what to think of this movie. It was one of those movies I can't quite put my finger on.
So I looked at this movie again for over a couple years and to my surprise, I found out that this was actually marketed as a comedy. Sure, Nicolas Cage is over-the-top and zany in this, but this movie is far from a comedy. It's, to be fair, quite disturbing.
It's more in the guise of a psychological thriller where you don't know what's real or not and towards the end, it turns into full-on horror. I could easily compare it to George A. Romero's Martin, as the horror in the movie is less mystical and more realistic.
Now this is going to be a long review and there's also going to be a bit of psychoanalysis of the 80s yuppie culture. So, brace yourselves, this is going to be a bumpy ride.

The Story: Peter Loew is a stereotypical arrogant yuppie who works in a literary agency in New York City. He usually spends his time club-hopping, picking up women, so on and so forth until he meets a woman that takes his life a turn for the worse.
Okay, I'm going to dedicate all my time to the examination of Nicolas Cage's performance and the character of Peter.

Right of the bat, he is already seeing a therapist and might have been seeing her for a while I presume. He usually boasts about his sexual conquests, his issues at work, yadda, yadda, yadda. Until he talks about one incident where he and his date Jackie encounter a vampire bat which oddly sexually arouses him.

As he continues to date Jackie, Peter suddenly becomes detached, standing her up at an art museum. This moment shows that he is completely unable to have a genuine relationship with a woman and might have slight misogynistic views of them.

This is when he runs into Rachel, a mysterious woman he meets at the bar.

During a sexual tryst, Rachel reveals himself to be a vampire and bites him on the neck. This is where Peter's mental state begins to deteriorate.

Now let's get into the subject of Rachel. This movie is clearly set in a world where vampires don't exist but Rachel is, in fact, a "vampire." An energy vampire. Yes, it is indicated at the start of the movie Peter is mentally ill but he doesn't start losing his rocker until he meets Rachel.

Patricia Arquette was originally set to play the role of Rachel but due to possible scheduling conflicts she wasn't available, so Jennifer Beals was cast. Although I do see Patricia Arquette in a role like this, Jennifer Beals does have an alluring presence about her that makes the role work. Nicolas Cage and Jennifer Beals reportedly didn't get along on set but I feel like the tension between them is what makes their chemistry palpable, considering that Beals is playing a vampiress that is literally sucking the life out of him.

Although Peter tries to make it up to Jackie, Rachel seems to get a hold on him. She may not be there physically but she is there mentally. Therefore, Peter is around her every whim.

It puzzles me that this movie is labeled a comedy. Sure, I did laugh at Nicolas Cage's overly hammy acting, whether intentional or not, but the treatment of Alva, I do not find funny at all. It was really hard to watch. Seeing this poor woman abused at the hand of her boss. It's extremely touchy and relatable to me because anybody in that situation would quit and report Peter's ass. Unfortunately for Alva, she has an overbearing mom who insists she must work to get ahead of her working-class situation. So, Alva has put up with Peter's bullshit throughout the duration of the movie.

On top of that, nobody seems to come to her aid. For instance, there's a scene where Peter is laughing and joking with his colleagues about him basically terrorizing Alva because of a missing file from 25 years ago. This guy actually chases her down all the way to the ladies' room with everyone in sight yet no one helps her and even his co-workers don't see it as a big deal. It showcases the toxic masculinity that these men have and how they treat their secretaries. Of course, this was the 80s which was way before MeToo.

It seems that Peter gets off on torturing Alva in amidst to his attraction to her. Her meekness is what excites his dominance, and therefore, he takes things too far.
Maria Conchita Alonso is mostly known for starring in action movies such as The Running Man and Predator 2. Here, she plays a put-upon secretary, which is far from her tough action roles. She is heartbreaking as Alva and is one of the few sympathetic characters in the film. By the climax, Peter does the unthinkable to her...

Lastly, we have Peter's therapist, Dr. Glaser, played by veteran actress Elizabeth Ashely, who's in a way, takes the role of Peter's conscience. She comes off like a mother figure, something that probably disturbs her. As a patient, Peter is a handful and is easily the most emotionally unstable. It's even to the point where Peter wakes her up in the middle of the night, (while having a rendezvous with her boy toy, no less) clearly showing that she's not always there to fix things for him until it's too late.

And now, we finally get to discuss Nicolas Cage's performance. It is out of this world. Though, there were many other actors considered for this role. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone, of all people, were considered. While Arnold and Sylvester can be good with what they're given, this would have not been it. There is also Actor Judd Nelson, who I can definitely see playing a character like this. Just like Nicolas Cage, he is a very method actor and would've pulled this role off splendidly.

But nothing tops above Nicolas Cage. He puts in his ALL. He even eats a live cockroach just to prove how much of a committed actor he is. His agent was hesitant about him taking on a project like this because, by that time his career was on a high, starring in critically-acclaimed films like Raising Arizona and the oscar-nominated Moonstruck, though, Nicolas Cage thought this project "spoke" to him more. How I describe his performance in the movie is a cross between an unhinged James Cagney and an outlandish Peter Lorre. Let me demonstrate by showing this: And Scene.
See what I mean? This is the Nicolas Cage we've come to know. And it's one of those moments in film where everybody else acts completely normal while the one main character is the one who's cartoonish and wacky.

I find his performance to be both hilarious and terrifying. Yes, I said terrifying. There is a point in the movie where Peter becomes less of an over-the-top goofball and way more threatening.

First and foremost, he definitely crosses the line when he sexually assaults Alva, his long-suffering secretary. Poor, poor Alva.

Then he really goes off his rocker and actually kills a woman at a club with a neck bite. When I first saw this, it caught me by surprise. This legitimately scared me and I was totally creeped out by Nicolas Cage for the rest of the movie.

This is when Peter starts to look more like a deranged Reinfeld than a suave, seductive vampire. Metaphorically, he is a man that literally turns into a monster. But the deep end of this character is his hostility towards women and that he can't seem to find the right one. Just pay attention to how all the women of his life tend to look-alike, which could be judged on possibly either having a distant mother figure or a woman he madly fell in love with that somehow broke his heart. Peter believes that if he finds true love, he'll be cured of his vampire curse. Even when he's talking to his therapist to where she sets him up with a potential love interest, ultimately, he doesn't get along with her from the start.

This all plays out in his disillusioned mind, however, and it gets to the point where he loses his grip on reality.

Through his fragile state of mind, Peter carries a huge wooden stake, and just when Alva's brother comes to defend her, Peter gives him the opportunity to impale him through the heart, instantly killing him.
This movie was...interesting. It was unlike anything I've ever seen as a kid and since then I've been checking out some weird arthouse films that are similar in tone. The movie has a very David Lynchian vibe to it. Ironically, a year later, Nicolas Cage would actually star in the David Lynch film, Wild at Heart. After that, Nicolas Cage continues to take more risks as an actor, which he associates with his unique acting style.
So, is it for everybody? I don't know but I still think it's an interesting psychological thriller that was pretty underrated for its time.
My Last Word: It's up to you. It's one of those movies where you have to wrap your head around though it's a definite must-watch.

Martin (1977)

I'll explain my absence later in the next review but I was inspired to write about this one particular movie. In preparation for the upcoming Vampire Chronicles review, I would like to discuss the underrated George A. Romero film, Martin.
Just like the undertones of Anne Rice's Vampire novels, it delves into the nihilistic and almost human side of the vampire lore. However, in the film Martin, it takes a more realistic approach. Yeah, it's one of those movies. It's much more on the psychological side of things where you question if the events of the film are real or not, but it's all left up to interpretation.

The story is about Martin, a socially awkward teen who happens to be a homicidal serial killer targeting women for their blood. He comes to live with his paranoid cousin Tateh Cuda, who believes him to be this ancient vampire and is intent on destroying him.

Cuda seems to have an old school approach to religion and it's indicated, he too, might have a mental illness.

His exasperated granddaughter Christine (played by George A. Romero's Wife) tries to debunk his claims but Cuda is very stubborn in his beliefs.

In a pivotal scene, George A. Romero makes a cameo as a priest. He comes off this laid-back, chill type of guy and even laughs at Cuda's zealous delusions. Even though he is told that exorcisms are unorthodox, Cuda still attempts to exorcise Martin but to no avail.

Meanwhile, it shows that Martin has a difficult time coping with his depression, which drives him to hunt for blood. He often daydreams in a black and white romanticized world and is clearly losing his grip on reality. As a way to escape boredom, he makes frequent phone calls to a radio talk show where refers to himself as the "the count."

During his run as a grocery delivery boy, he spots a woman at the store and decides to follow her all the way home. He even pretends to be a deaf, homeless boy in order to scope out her house. He now knows the woman has a husband who is planning to go on a business trip. But the real kicker is once he breaks inside, he catches the woman in bed with another man! This sort of screws up Martin's plan, which becomes one of the most suspenseful scenes in the movie. It was intense! But Martin somehow is able to sedate the man, rending him unconscious and easily kills him. After that, he goes back to where he started and goes after the woman, leaving her in a dazed state.

Martin soon begins an affair with a dissatisfied housewife Abbie. I found their relationship rather touching if not sad. It's sort of like they're the same people from different worlds to which it's impossible for Martin to have any true bond with anyone. It's one of the most interesting parts of the movie that ends in tragedy.
Now that he's in a relationship with Abbie, Martin begins to lose the urge to target other women and doesn't crave as much blood.

This all happens when Christine is at her breaking point, fed up with her grandfather's meddling in her life, prompting to leave off with her emotionally available boyfriend played by a young Tom Savini.
So this leaves Martin alone with Cuda, who suspicions of him grow stronger.
Martin decides to get one last hit of blood where he targets two homeless men but after the deed is done, he's caught in the crossfire in between a police stakeout where he miraculously escapes. Unfortunately, once he arrives at Abbie's house, she is found dead in a bathtub, having committed suicide.
Martin begins to reflect, making one last phone call to the radio talk show.

As he is sound asleep, Martin is suddenly awakened by Cuda, who blames him for Abbie's death, eventually staking him in the heart in a gory fashion. And...that's how the movie ends. Just like that.
The film has an overall gritty feel to it. It's not glamorous nor sexy.

The film's setting is mainly working-middle class where it showcases Martin walking aimlessly and listlessly around the desolate streets of Pittsburgh, encapsulating the film's depressing nature.

What's interesting is that the film came around the time when Interview with the Vampire was first published, oddly sharing the same similarities to the 1994 film such as when Martin discusses his daily life to the radio DJ. Martin's backstory is vague though the mystery surrounding him is what makes the film work.

Even though it is set in the real world, the film still has that gothic horror sense to it. Especially in the black and white daydreams of Maritn, where it's played out like a typical old school horror movie. 

The gore effects by master effects artist Tom Savini looks unbelievably gory for its time. Especially when it shows Martin slitting the arms of his victims. It looks painful to watch.

And One last thing, I thought the acting was incredibly good for a low budget movie. It all felt...natural, as if they are real people, going through real issues where none of it feels far-fetched. 

When I first watched this, I thought I was in for an exploitative, grindhouse sort of movie but... I was pleasantly surprised.

It's a deep, poetic film that makes you think about the complexities of human beings where you can separate the soul of the monster with a very haunting music score that sets the mood for what the film unfolds.

It's a tragic story about a young man struggling to cope with the world around him, going into a path of mayhem to quench his thirst which ultimately leads him to his end. 

It shows that George A. Romero can do more than just zombie films. He can write and direct stories that bring on a fresh take of the modern-day monster.

My Last Word: A Must See.

Love (a celebration of romance)

Love is a strange thing, such a beautiful thing. Love could make you go crazy. It can make you dream of a world that you can only see. That you can only feel. To feel and embrace the arms of your lover, to let it be known that what's inside you is alive. Catching the ecstasy of romance, to look into your eyes of your true twin flame. Where two souls meet binded together by through venus tides, surrending to the power of love where intensity rise. Sex. Passion. Love. It flows. It molds. The threshold of euphoria bursting with delight. Love is a feeling. That's new. That's fresh. It takes you and fulfills you. Love is unexplainable. Love is unpredictable. Love...is irresistible.

She-Devil (1989)

This movie has been a childhood favorite of mine. I guess of how much it played on Lifetime. Although I've seen this countless times, it has come to my astonishment that this movie was actually based on a British novel, which spawned a mini-series back in 1986. The novel and mini-series are much darker in tone, contrasting to this version's more lighter, softer approach.
Now before I go on, I would like to make a disclaimer:
I know many of you heard the controversies surrounding Roseanne. Although she is known for her outspoken, unapologetic nature, my mom and I actually admired her. When we watched her tv show, It felt so real as if it spoke to us somehow. And dare I say it, Roseanne was one of those people I found fascinating as a kid. You don't have to "like" her, that's not the point of the conversation, I'm just saying there was a reason why she was so popular back in her day. There weren't that many female comedians who broke the mold back in the '80s, which of course lead her to star in this film.
Then we have the legendary Meryl Streep in her first-ever comedic role and she is quite good and I found her enjoyable. It would've been a plus if she was nominated for a golden globe but I'll save my roses for her later because there is a lot to talk about when it comes to Meryl Streep's performance but now I want to get into the whole meat of the story.

Let's start by explaining the plot. It starts like this: Ruth is a frumpy, homely housewife who feels neglected by her husband Bob (Bobbo in the novel and the miniseries) who happens to have an affair with best-selling romance novelist Mary Fisher.

After having a terrible family dinner with her in-laws, causing Bob to leave off with Mary Fisher, Ruth plans her revenge on both of them.

This is where I talk about both the 1989 movie and the 1986 miniseries that came before it. Many of the elements have changed and most of the scenes left out from the novel can be seen in the 1986 version which is a more faithful adaptation.

Ruth, played by both Roseanne and Julie T. Wallace, starts off as a clumsy, abnormally tall housewife who feels unloved, always slaving herself doing the chores, and looking after the children as her husband carouses around in his office and second apartment. She goes over the edge once her husband reveals to her about his affair with Mary Fisher and suggests they have an open marriage, which means a marriage of convenience. Ruth soon unleashes her bottled up emotions while preparing dinner for her in-laws, embarrassing Bob in the process. In a fit of rage, he says how inadequate she is compared to Mary Fisher, his prim, perfect, fashionably elegant, thin AND short mistress. This is Ruth's boiling point. She writes down a list where she plans her revenge on Mary Fisher; she'll save Bobbo for later. This includes her career, her establishment, her looks, and, most specifically, her life.

In the BBC version, let's just say that Ruth is ruthless at her attempts at ruining Mary Fisher's life. The journey to get there takes much longer. This all happens in a span of seven to eight years! Yeesh! That takes a lot of commitment. What makes this entertaining is that she goes through various disguises and even gets to seduce a few men along the way. Not only that, she actually studies accounting to screw over her husband's bank assets and fundings to his private account to claim as her own,  making HER wealthy. This soon goes into a greater plan, which I will discuss later into the review.
Further down the line, she is able to pose as a nurse in order to release Mary Fisher's rambunctious mother from a retirement home, befriends a female nurse from a psych ward to collaborate on building a business for unemployed women, seduces the judge handling Bob's case, coaxing him to sentence Bob for seven years, seduce a catholic priest to mess with Mary Fisher's mental state just in time to meet her final goal.

Julie T. Wallace was intimidating as Ruth yet she's easy to root for at the same time by conveying the hurt and turmoil of the character, vying for her revenge and power. This version of Ruth doesn't' take things lightly and there's even an indication that she hates her domestic life as she wiling abandons her own children to reconstruct the life that she wants. She's more obsessed with Mary Fisher. Fascinated by her glamourous life where she constantly buys her romance novels as escapism. But that admiration soon turns to hate as Ruth does anything she can to destroy Mary Fisher's paradise. Like I said the BBC version is really, really dark and plays out more like a melodrama.

Let's cut to the 1989 movie. Ruth is still homely but has more a motherly, softer shape instead of the abnormally tall, amazonian appearance she has in both the novel and 1986 version. It makes sense that Roseanne was cast in the role because at the time she was dubbed "The Domestic Goddess" because of her comedic tales of her mundane life as a lower-middle-class matriarch, which parallels to Ruth's less glamourous life as a suburban housewife. I would say that Roseanne is having the time of her life and is very much different from her role as everybody's favorite fishwife Rosanne Connor.

She gets to play a woman who embodies her own power and uses it for destruction and reconstruction as she becomes the voice for women all across New York City. Ruth is less of the hard-edged anti-hero and is played more comedically to where her act of revenge is much more slapsticky and mischevious. For example, instead of seducing a male judge, she recruits one of her Vesta Rose employees to assign a female judge in place of a male judge for Bob's case, which I thought was clever. There's even a scene where she does cry and misses her children, showing her soft side. Also at the beginning of the film, she is way too concerned about the standards of beauty and how she would look next to her tall, blond, handsome husband. But as she builds a business of her own, makes new friends along the way, and pretty much becomes a trailblazer for women in the workforce, she finally accepts herself and becomes beautiful in her own right.
For a movie that came out thirty years ago, that is awe-inspiring to me.

Now let's get to Mary Fisher, the object of Ruth's obsession.

As a romance novelist, Mary often thinks of herself as one of her lovestruck heroines, bouncing from lover to lover, including her manservant Garcia, and lives at The Hightower by The Sea. She is everything that Ruth isn't. She has her own career, which she built on her own, she's rich, she's elegant, and most of all, she's beautiful, thin, AND short. This makes Ruth very resentful of her and by the time Bob leaves off into her Hightower by the Sea, the destruction of Mary Fisher begins.

In both the novel and the BBC miniseries with actress Patricia Hodge in the role of Mary Fisher, throughout her troubles, Mary is a bit passive, just letting things happen without taking any control. Her mom reveals everything about her, including her real age and first marriage, Garcia, her manservant, seems disinterested in her, then she is forced to play stepmother to her lover's kids, her book sales dwindling, and she tries to become a born-again catholic, but then that fails once she has an affair with the priest who's consulting her. Which seems to be her final downfall. Patricia Hodge was good at challenging the vulnerability of the character but still was able to solidify Mary's dignity through her crumbling self-importance. The circumstances surrounding Mary Fisher is pretty tragic. She is a woman who lives in this golden, glittery facade, only to have her foundation shattered; leaving her in a hopeless state.
This plays out differently in the 1989 version.

First of all, Let's talk about Meryl Streep's amazing performance.

She is hilarious as Mary Fisher, playing a woman who thinks she has it together but doesn't, and, for a second there, Meryl actually makes the character a bit sympathetic. But, at the same time, there is a pivotal point in the movie where she actually fights to take control of her life.
Patricia Hodge sort of portrays the character in this wispy, lovelorn way and pretty much in the role of damsel in distress when she really doesn't have to be, which in turn affects her writing skills.
Meryl Streep, however, portrays Mary realistically right off the bat. When things get pushed too far, she puts her foot down.

She shuts her mother up, holds down the kids with an iron fist, fires Garcia, and shows Bob who's boss once he's caught cheating. This version gains points for me because the filmmakers were able to make Mary a more progressive character. Even though she's experiencing what Ruth went through, drowning into the bowels of domestic life with an unfaithful lover to the point of affecting her writing abilities, it shows that she's had enough with the bullshit and as a woman of the 80s, who would blame her?

Last but not least, we have Bob, the unfaithful philander. It shows that he is unsatisfied with his marriage. Not particularly happy in his gated suburban home with his homely wife. He is often the man who wants excitement, danger, a thrill to spice up his libido.

He thought he found his match in the glamorous, sophisticated Mary Fisher, but when it comes to Bob and beautiful women, he's like a kid in a candy store.

Although Bob is still a jerk in the 1989 movie, it's more so played for laughs. However, in the 1986 BBC series, he is rather emotionally abusive towards Ruth. He sort of gaslights her into having an "open" marriage and says right to her face that he sees her more as a friend, even though, he's married to her. It's no secret that he'd only married Ruth because of an unexpected pregnancy. Fed up with her constant clumsiness and inadequacy, he leaves her for Mary Fisher. Therefore, this leads to Ruth to uncover some secrets about Bob while on her revenge plot. It just so happens that Bob, who owns his own accounting firm, steals from his clients. This happens around the time where Bob is getting kind of bored of Mary Fisher and their sex life isn't what it use to be, so he does what he does best.

That's when Ruth is able to recruit a sexy, young secretary through the Vesta Rose employment agency in order to entice Bob. This is where it gets Bob in trouble to where Ruth coaxes the young woman to declare her love to him when the affair goes too deep. Once he figures out what he has gotten himself into, he fires her, claiming that she seduced him. Fetching.

This leaves the young woman full of tears and anguish. So as a way to make it up to her, Ruth helps her out by drawing out half a billion dollars from his clients' account to his "Switzerland" account making them rich, which then gets Bob arrested for fraud. In the BBC series, Bob is sentenced to seven years while in the 1989 movie, Bob is sentenced to eighteen months, which I think is pretty tame for somebody who committed fraud. In the BBC series, the downfall of Bob is quite tragic.
Dennis Waterman as Bob was actually perfectly cast as we see the seven years of depression and loneliness that Bob suffers through, making him downtrodden and pitiful, even though it's impossible to feel sorry for him.

Ed Begley Jr., on the other hand, is much more bumbling with his approach of Bob. It plays out it in a way for the audience to not outright despise him, but rather laugh at his misfortunes instead.
Anywho, when it comes to Bob, he embodies the reputation of a man who lives by his own rules, but in the end, it bites him in the ass HARD.

In terms of the writing, I thought the novel and BBC series was much better in regard. It plays out like a series of misadventures involving Ruth and I found that exciting. Just to see her portraying these different characters and switch out identities while running into various people, changing their lives and changing who they are, is quite fascinating to watch. The novel and BBC series also have a bit of magical realism to it when it comes to Ruth's she-devil powers, to which her plan works perfectly in her favor.
This, of course, is going to lead to spoilers. So, ladies and gents, before I go deep into this review, I advise you to either read the novel, watch the BBC series on either Youtube or find on home media, or you can watch the 1989 version, which is available on Amazon Prime.

*spoilers*

So it turns out that Ruth's grand scheme is to become...Mary Fisher herself! Yes, I said it. She gets Bob put in jail for seven years so she can buy enough time to get multiple surgeries to mold herself into the ideal woman she wants to be. Meanwhile, the real Mary Fisher wethers away, dying from cancer. As the old Mary Fisher dies, Ruth takes her place as the new Mary, taking over her Hightower by the Sea, her manservant Garcia, and even Bob once he's released from jail, putting him through sexual torture. 

I wasn't lying when I said the original source material was dark.

But the 1989 movie takes a different route.

Once it's revealed that Bob not only cheated on her but stole millions from her and her friends, Mary Fisher breaks up with him and fires him. And I'm just so glad that she's able to come to her senses and say, 'you're not only out of the job but you're out of this relationship, too.' In this version, it shows that Mary's life was good before she met Bob, therefore, leading her to find that solace again, and, as a reward, she becomes a better writer for it. So instead of the bad experiences literally killing her, it humbles her, wherein the end she is open to new love. 

And instead of Ruth going through great lengths to become Mary Fisher, she learns to accept herself, to where now, she becomes a leader in the workforce. 

The final image of Roseanne walking down the streets with her Vesta Rose clients trailing behind her had always been ingrained in my mind. Truly, truly, awe-inspiring.

I definitely recommend both versions. The Life and Loves of a She-Devil is like watching a really addictive prime time soap while 1989 She-Devil is a hilarious comedy about the clash of two very different women. There are both good in their own right and does a great job at feminist storytelling, especially at the highlight of 'girls can do anything' era.

My last word for both adaptations: A Must See!