APPENDIX: CABLE AND THE 2000S.

The last network telefilm of the nineties was something called Miracle on the 17^th Green. Keeping in line with television’s now-vast TVM history, this Christmas-y CBS special starred Robert Urich, an actor who appeared in over two dozen small screen films. Miracle is also an adaptation, presenting another strong commonality in the small screen film; and, it attempted to pluck a few heartstrings by incorporating a few well-worn tropes of the holidays. Aren’t TVMs all about familiarity?

As the new millennium dawned, TV movies of all sorts continued to find their way into our living rooms, although the bulk of the genre moved into cable, where less restrictions allow filmmakers to throw in an extra curse word or tantalize with a little more skin. And while the networks trudge on, the telefilm presence on free TV has sadly dwindled.

There were some notable exceptions to this rule, and a lot of the old school B-movie fun could be found on CBS around the mid-2000s when they attempted to re-energize the Movie of the Week brand with a couple of over-the-top entries. In 2005, Locusts featured Lucy Lawless battling a swarm of nasty buggers, and Spring Break Shark Attack let lots of horrible CGI chomp away at a young, nubile cast (and it was awesome). The disaster miniseries found a nice resurgence in 10.5 (2004), Category 7: The End of the World (2005), and Meteor (2009). Heck, even The Poseidon Adventure rocked the high seas once again in an all-star miniseries that aired on NBC in 2005.

While cheap effects and larger than life scenarios fought for Nielsen ratings, cable channels were picking up steam. Although Lifetime had been airing original telefilms since the nineties, television for women really came into its own with a ridiculous amount of by-the-numbers productions that might not be terribly creative, but definitely pleased audiences who love these types of thrillers (myself included). The SyFy channel also enjoyed an amazing number of premieres and built a niche for itself that continues to bring in viewers.

However, it’s pay cable that tends to receive all the kudos. Huge, cinematic productions like Angels in America (2003) and, more recently, The Normal Heart (2014) are critically acclaimed epics. What makes them different is that they are allotted much bigger budgets, can step outside of the FCC’s ongoing list of sanctions, concentrating on creativity. Yet, despite the constant uphill battle the networks face with viewership, every so often they take a risk. In 2014 NBC tried their hand at a four-hour remake of Rosemary’s Baby.

This appendix is a simple alphabetical hodgepodge of post-2000 and made for cable titles with no theme or system, but is meant to represent the wide array of telefilms that still exist, in some form, to this day. That’s a good feeling.

12 ANGRY MEN

Director: William Friedkin

Starring: George C. Scott, Ossie Davis, James Gandolfini, Hume Cronyn

Airdate: August 17, 1997 Network: Showtime

In this remake, a jury convenes to decide the fate of a young man.

A young man on trial is accused of murdering his father. Possibly facing the death penalty, his life is in the hands of twelve jurors who retire to a closed room on a stiflingly hot day to deliberate a verdict. The decision must be unanimous, and almost is, but for one man who’s procrastinations and suppositions will push the other eleven to the limits of their patience, and will force them to question the nature of everything they believe—not just about the case—but themselves.

Arguably one of the most popular dramatic plays of the twentieth century, one of the great virtues of writer Reginald Rose’s masterpiece is that given the brilliance of the dialog and the simplicity of its one room setting, it’s almost impossible to screw up. Still, it is with great relief that although this adaptation never threatens to eclipse the much beloved 1957 cinema version (which ironically disappointed at the box office but found its audience through subsequent airings on television), this made for TV movie remains an accomplished and worthwhile production in its own right and proudly does justice to the source material, which Rose himself modernized, without tampering.

Like the original, it boasts an impressive cast that combines veteran actors alongside contemporary talent. Big names such as Jack Lemmon, Armin Mueller-Stahl and Edward James Olmos all provide solid performances and a pre-Sopranos James Gandolfini notably shines. But, it’s George C. Scott in an award winning role as the angriest juror, struggling to conceal his personal regrets behind a veil of prejudice, that steals the show, providing much of the simmering intensity—ever threatening to explode—that helps keep the near two-hour pace feeling lean and mean. Perhaps the real crime most worthy of discussion is precisely how under-appreciated this movie is for being a genuine late-career highlight for director William Friedkin. His brilliant craftsmanship here being far better utilized than much of his work of the past two decades, and at its best, he is able to evoke the dramatic tension between human relations that made his celebrated output in the seventies so compelling.

It’s a bona fide rare gem. Rare that it should exist at all (dialog heavy remakes of box office under-achievers, however beloved, are fairly uncommon); rare that it should be as good as it is; and finally, rare to see a cast of this caliber and diversity (who would ever expect to see Tony Danza and Hume Cronyn share a screen?!) come together without the reliance of inflated budgets and silly CGI set-pieces. It’s better than that. It’s a classy production starring a wealth of big screen names in the twilight of their careers but still in fine form and with their talents unwithered, or, in other words, perfect television. [Kevin Hilton]

AN AMISH MURDER

Director: Stephen Gyllenhaal

Starring: Neve Campbell, Christian Campbell, C. Thomas Howell, Katy Grabstas

Airdate: January 6, 2013 Network: Lifetime

Returning to her hometown, a young police officer is faced with finding the man who is killing young women in the community.

A small Amish community lives under the shadow of terror. A killer is preying on the town’s young women, and the clues disturbingly echo the trademarks of a murderer that was brought to justice sixteen years previously. Into this otherwise peaceful community arrives Detective Kate Burkholder (Campbell), a native of the town, who, as a child, was forced to flee the local way of life and thus moved to the big city. Estranged as an outsider and hunting a killer as deceptive as he is lethal, Kate must try to put old demons to rest and confront the dark secrets of her own past in order to solve both the case and the crises of her own identity.

Awarded some modest hype and interest upon its premiere and produced as a standalone movie that, if successful, would have served as a backdoor pilot to a series, it’s easy to see why this looked so promising a prospect, and yet, couldn’t help but miss the mark so flagrantly.

The cast is ably led (but sadly, not quite commanded enough) by Neve Campbell, who has always appeared more comfortable on the big screen than the medium that launched her career. However, this is not the case for eighties-teen-heartthrob-turned-‘Where are they now?’ column regular C. Thomas Howell, who steals the show in a small but crucial role as Kate’s law enforcement colleague who may, or may not, have his own personal demons to keep in check.

The wintry setting, the sense of isolation and the fascinating Amish way of life are all executed well by journeyman director Stephen Gyllenhaal (father of acting siblings Jake and Maggie), but what the movie fails to do is ratchet up any sense of suspense, instead misplacing the focus too heavily on insinuating Kate’s romantic interests past and present, thus becoming all too touchy-feely for a movie that’s very title suggests something more grisly and unusual.

In short, pretensions to repeating the winning formula of Peter Weir’s Witness soon give way to the limitations of making family entertainment for the masses, revealing instead an underwhelming mix of Father Dowling Mysteries and Midsomer Murders, that is a serviceable distraction, but a huge disappointment considering what could have been, especially given the tantalizing subject matter and Hollywood caliber cast. A shame. [Kevin Hilton]

THE BIRDS II: LAND’S END

Director: Rick Rosenthal (as Alan Smithee)

Starring: Brad Johnson, Chelsea Field, James Naughton, Tippi Hedren

Airdate: March 19, 1994 Network: Showtime

A family relocate to a quaint seaside town, only to find their newfound peace disrupted by a series of inexplicable bird attacks.

Sequels to Hitchcock movies are rare. Popular ones, rarer still. Of the very few that exist, The Birds II is easily the most despised, which is all the more impressive, since most people have never heard of it and few have actually suffered through its running time.

So, is it as bad as all that? Well, yes and no. On a technical level, it’s a stinker from start to finish. The dialog is woeful, the characters and the situations are embarrassingly clichéd and it seems to lack any discernible attempt at direction whatsoever (with Rosenthal insisting on the Director’s Guild pseudonym of Alan Smithee in an effort to distance himself from the finished product entirely). But having said all that, it does have some merits.

It’s fast paced, surprisingly grisly and has capable enough lead turns by Brad Johnson and Chelsea Field as the terror-struck couple. They are ably supported by James Naughton, who is particularly good as a photographer trying to open up the cracks in their less than idyllic marriage, and there’s even a welcome cameo role for the original’s heroine, Tippi Hedren, who in a frustratingly nonsensical move does not reprise her most famous character, but instead, plays someone new.

Released a year after the world had experienced the thrills of Jurassic Park (1993), it’s impossible to believe that the studio realistically believed that a flock of seagulls causing havoc would make the same impact as they had thirty years earlier. And, as such, it’s hard not to feel sorry for those involved as they try in earnest to make the best of a bad job.

Hard to find and perhaps not worth the effort, but one for the curious Hitchcock fan, if only to put at the very bottom of their pecking order! [Kevin Hilton]

THE BLING RING

Director: Michael Lembeck

Starring: Austin Butler, Yin Chang, Tom Irwin, Sebastian Sozzi

Airdate: September 26, 2011 Network: Lifetime

A group of privileged teens literally attempt to break into the world of the rich and famous by plundering their property.

Zack Garvey (Butler) is a new kid in school. Socially awkward, his only wish is to be popular and to gain acceptance for the first time in his life. However, his path takes a twisted turn when he falls in with the wrong crowd, who begin to employ both his smarts and his inside information to break into the homes of celebrities in order to get rich and experience a taste of the high life for themselves. Flush from the success of their bounties, their notoriety bumps them up the social ladder. But as their escapades become more frequent, the risks begin to increase and very soon “The Bling Ring” find themselves knee-deep in trouble as the authorities begin to close in on their illicit, and suddenly very famous, after school activities.

A true story that occurred in the Hollywood Hills and made headlines throughout 2008 and 2009, was then quickly adapted into this TV movie in 2011, and revisited again on the big screen in 2013, The Bling Ring is that curious little story that seems to demand far more of the spotlight than it deserves. As such, it’s difficult to balance objectively the merits of the film with the details of the real-life drama that inspired it.

On the surface, this is a tale about a motley crew of would-be yuppie teens, stealing from yuppie celebrities and then… actually, that’s pretty much it. No doubt there is a deeper statement begging to be made about how thin the line is now drawn between infamy and celebrity, but sadly this theme isn’t explored, merely hinted at. The result is that we get a glimpse at a sort of purse snatching Breakfast Club, or selfish Robin Hoods in designer shades, if you will. But somehow, one feels it’s a lost opportunity to elaborate on what might best be described as the “franchised dis-enfranchised”; the kind of fashion-slaved youths that first appeared in the eighties in the written works of Bret Easton Ellis, and, frighteningly, seem to be reaching a zenith in today’s popular culture.

As for the production, there’s nothing wrong with the performances here; in fact, the young cast that make up the disparate gang of thieves all provide solid turns, which is commendable, given that none of the characters are particularly likeable. If anything, the fact that they appear to be over privileged brats to begin with, only serves to make their inevitable downfall all the more satisfying, although this was probably not the filmmakers’ intention. The chief narrative fault is actually in the rendering of the adult characters. The audience is invited to see things from the point of view of both the parents and the police as they attempt to apprehend the criminals. But, somehow, the portrayals feel too extreme, that is to say, extremely stupid or extremely annoying. And not much in between. They’re simply sounding boards for the young protagonists to rage against. In the end, you want the teens to get caught, but not by the bumbling idiots that we are told (via the bland wraparound narrative device) are eventually going to get them.

Ironically, it’s like watching a ninety-minute episode of MTV’s Cribs just after the house has been burgled. There’s still the attractive people and everything looks fancy, but there’s really nothing to see here, and finally, you wonder what the point of it all was in the first place. [Kevin Hilton]

CAST A DEADLY SPELL

Director: Martin Campbell

Starring: Fred Ward, David Warner, Julianne Moore, Clancy Brown

Airdate: 9/9/1991 Network: HBO

An alternate 1940s Los Angeles. The practice of magic is commonplace, but detective Harry Philip Lovecraft prefers to keep things real.

Hired by the wealthy and mysterious Amos Hackshaw to locate and retrieve a highly valuable tome called the Necronomicon, Detective Lovecraft soon finds himself engaged in a deadly power struggle being waged in the criminal underworld of the city. Now all he has to do is stay alive, follow the clues, trust no one and stop the forces of an ancient evil from engulfing Earth.

A cult favorite for audiences attracted by in-joke references and classic Hollywood noir, HBO’s Cast a Deadly Spell is an affectionate tongue-incheek celebration of two of its most beloved artistic industries—cinema and pulp fiction—combining the two and stirring the pot to produce a harmless commentary on the self-indulging, back-biting, superstitious and just plain strange folk that populate L.A.

It’s the kind of jokey high concept movie that Hollywood loves to throw serious money at, but by doing so, usually end up ruining by forcing the filmmakers to compromise the wild abandon of their vision in favor of more linear storytelling; thankfully, that doesn’t happen here. In fact, if there is to be a chief criticism (though with a film as playful as this—any feels curmudgeonly), it would be that its outpouring of ideas sadly dilute the narrative, and proceedings become a one-note satire, putting it a stone’s throw from the status of a hidden gem that fans claim it to be.

Fred Ward leads the star-studded cast, playing the part of the Bogartarchetype gumshoe to perfection. David Warner and Clancy Brown provide good foil as the larger than life villains and Julianne Moore oozes sex appeal in one of her earliest roles as the de rigueur femme fatale and Lovecraft’s old flame.

In a rare case (at least for TV movies) of there being equally distinguished talent behind the camera as in front of it, producer Gale Anne Hurd (The Terminator, Aliens) and director Martin Campbell (The Mask of Zorro, Casino Royale) prove themselves one hell of a creative team, effortlessly bringing writer Joseph Dougherty’s eclectic vision to life without rendering it an incomprehensible screwball mess. Admittedly, the film lacks any real substance, but it’s a modest price to pay for a good kick of entertainment.

How this madcap production was commissioned is anyone’s guess, but one can fairly surmise it was a labor of love for those involved. In purely stylistic terms, it arguably owes much to the work of B-movie maestro Don Coscarelli (Phantasm, The Beastmaster) as it seamlessly weaves horror, comedy, science fiction, monsters, magic, and above all, sentimentalized history as a platform for the absurd.

Produced at the beginning of the nineties, just before the CGI boom that arrived with Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park, the special effects are surprisingly acceptable, with just the right mix of excellent puppetry and models interspersed with digital work, that, though flawed by today’s standards, fit the bogus schlock period setting to such a degree it almost feels intended.

It doesn’t live up to the fanboy hype, but it is good fun and was deservedly rewarded a sequel—Witch Hunt—in 1994. [Kevin Hilton]

CITIZEN X

Director: Chris Gerolmo

Starring: Stephen Rea, Donald Sutherland, Max von Sydow, Jeffrey DeMunn

Airdate: February 25, 1995 Network: HBO

A true-life story detailing the horrific crimes of serial killer Andrei Chikatilo, and the attempt by the authorities to track him down.

Although the Home Box Office network is known for creating acclaimed, violent episodic dramas like The Sopranos (1999–2007) and The Wire (2002–08), they have also produced a number of television movies that are equally unflinching in exploring potentially contentious subjects. One such film is Citizen X, which focuses on a prominent serial killer case in Soviet Russia from the 1980s and 1990s.

Citizen X begins with credits over a shot of some woods, followed by a tractor driver finding a dead body in a field. The corpse is brought to forensics expert Viktor Burakov (Stephen Rea), who immediately orders the police to search for clues around the field, which reveals multiple dead bodies. Burakov concludes that these bodies are the work of a serial killer and, after meeting a committee of officials, he is made a detective and put in charge of the “killer department” by Colonel Fetisov (Donald Sutherland) to investigate these murders.

The killer is revealed to viewers early on as a seemingly mild-mannered man named Andrei Chikatilo (Jeffrey DeMunn), whose meekness conceals a deeply disturbed mind. He is first shown meeting a girl at a train station, walking with her in the woods and quickly killing her. After this shocking act, Chikatilo is then seen coming home to his wife and children. However, in contrast to Burakov’s happy domestic life, which gives the detective welcome relief from the grim case and his obstructive superiors, Chikatilo is bullied and humiliated at work, and finds no solace with his family.

While the film shows some incidents from the point of view of Chikatilo, the focus is mainly on the work of Burakov and Fetisov. Burakov’s investigations are frequently undermined by administrative intransigence, with particularly fierce resistance from committee member Bondarchuk (Joss Ackland). While Burakov tries vainly to fight a system that hinders his efforts, Fetisov successfully operates in the system, because he understands the workings of the bureaucratic machine. As the investigation continues over many years, Burakov and Fetisov are aided in their work by a psychiatrist, Dr. Alexandr Bukhanovsky (Max von Sydow), who writes a report on the killer, dubbing him “Citizen X.”

The film’s style is restrained for the most part, with scenes playing out with the minimum of stylistic flourishes, yet there are some expressive visual and aural touches. Early on, the focus is on Burakov’s hands as he examines various corpses and dictates his observations soberly into a microphone, the scene concluding with a reveal of his tear-stained face. Later, the sound of a screeching train, a mode of transportation that ties Chikatilo to his crimes, plays over a montage of Burakov’s investigation.

Citizen X appeared in an era that popularized (and arguably glamorized) cinematic serial killers, most famously with Anthony Hopkins’ portrayal of Dr. Hannibal Lector in The Silence of the Lambs (1991). However, Citizen X takes a more restrained tone toward its subject matter, resulting in a somber examination of a serial killer investigation, and showing the impact these crimes have on the investigators. [Martyn Bamber]

CLEAR HISTORY

Director: Greg Mottola

Starring: Larry David, Bill Hader, Phillip Baker Hall, Jon Hamm

Airdate: August 10, 2013 Network: HBO

An ex-Marketing Executive is out for revenge when his old boss moves into the neighborhood.

Nathan Flomm (David) is a Marketing Executive and co-investor in a car company that is on the brink of revolutionizing the automobile. Finding himself intensely dissatisfied with the branding of the new product, he voluntarily resigns. However, by doing so, he makes the biggest mistake of his life. The new model car is a colossal success and Flomm’s self-termination from the company makes national headlines. He leaves his career and reputation in tatters, changes his identity and starts a brand new life, settling quietly in Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts.

Years later, after having found some peace on the island living in obscurity under the name of Rolly DaVore, his tranquil life is again disturbed by the appearance of his previous boss, Will Haney (Hamm). Will is now a multimillionaire who has decided to move into the neighborhood, thus re-instigating Flomm’s sense of injustice, leading him to employ his friends in a scheme of revenge that soon begins to get ever more elaborate, and completely out of control.

Larry David, taking a page from Woody Allen’s book, leads the kind of ridiculously all-star cast that’s borderline show-off; and again, like Allen, wisely decides to write and perform his own character, keeping it close to audience expectations after his long running stint as television’s most popular social agitator. The result is a mixed bag. While it never fails to entertain, it sadly lacks cohesion, feeling like (as it may well be) a sort of collection of left over lines and set-pieces from Curb Your Enthusiasm, or even a “thank you” gift to the fans of his hit series—a noble idea, but not wholly necessary.

The tried-and-tested formula from the TV show guarantees plenty of laughs (with David up to his familiar philosophizing about life’s many frustrations), but delivers absolutely no surprises. Audiences expecting— and not unreasonably—to see the bar raised by David and his collaborators for a movie outing (albeit made for television), may find themselves a little disappointed that the underdog they love to champion is running out of new tricks, and recycling his old ones with almost embarrassing predictability.

The disproportionately (in terms of the material that some of them are provided) glitzy support cast includes other big names from the small screen, including Bill Hader (Saturday Night Live) and Danny McBride (Eastbound and Down). In addition, the already very talented ensemble is augmented by cinema stars such as Kate Hudson and Eva Mendes, who are just fine except for the fact that they are perhaps all too noticeably big fish in a small pond, with little to do but show up every now and then, clearly enthusiastic and pleased to be attached to the project, but ultimately surplus to requirements.

Conversely, the same certainly can’t be said for Michael Keaton, ever impressive and almost unrecognizable in his get-up as a small-town yokel who is quick to befriend our misguided hero in his crusade for payback. It’s a show stealing performance that generously doesn’t steal the show—a wildman role that in a less generous actor’s hands could easily demand too much attention. But Keaton—a veteran and professional, well versed in drama and comedy—proves brilliantly Stanislavski’s observation that there really are no small parts.

Wholly unnecessary, but funny enough to justify the effort, Larry David fans would be remiss to pass it up. Yet, much as it pains me to say it, they’d be wise to curb their expectations. [Kevin Hilton]

GAME CHANGE

Director: Jay Roach

Starring: Julianne Moore, Woody Harrelson, Ed Harris, Peter MacNicol

Airdate: March 10, 2012 Network: HBO

The story of how Sarah Palin might not have been the right choice to run for Vice-President in 2008.

It’s the 2008 US Presidential elections and Republican candidate John McCain is seeking a viable running mate to improve his bid for the White House. At the eleventh hour, McCain’s staff locates and approves Sarah Palin—the Governor of Alaska, and quite possibly the perfect woman for the job. At first look, her personality and her credentials check all the right boxes, but thrust into the lion’s den of national politics and media scrutiny, it slowly begins to unravel that they may have made a huge mistake; and one that threatens not only to ruin their hopes for the Presidency, but also, the reputations of everyone involved in the campaign.

First off, it has to be said that movies based on public figures— especially living ones—are rarely satisfying, and examples in recent years have frequently disappointed. Screen depictions of famous subjects have a tendency to either over-sentimentalize the well-revered (as in Michael Mann’s Ali) or seem produced with the aim of taking cheap-shots at easy targets (Oliver Stone’s W.); which is why it’s so refreshing to find that HBO’s Game Change gets the tone just right.

In a movie set against the backdrop of political agendas and its focus on one that self-destructed so very publicly, writer Danny Strong (having previously penned Recount for the same network, a film that dealt with the aftermath of the 2000 election) has wisely approached the narrative with the utmost respect, not just for the audience, but more importantly, the characters of the subjects he’s dramatizing. The result is that we are treated to an insider’s (although understandably some details are particularly fictitious) view of the debacle that is altogether different from how the media had the rest of the world perceive it.

As is standard for HBO movies, the cast is comprised of actual A-list talent, not simply A-list names. Julianne Moore and Ed Harris give superlative portrayals of Palin and McCain respectively, and received Golden Globes for their efforts, whilst Woody Harrelson (also nominated in a supporting role) has rarely been better.

Arguably, Moore’s performance is the most impressive, effortlessly uniting the disparate strands that we know of Sarah Palin the public figure and creating a character of depth and complexity, that, thankfully, could not be further removed from the ditzy caricature the viewer might reasonably expect. Had the latter been played, it might well have been amusing for a while, but the former is an infinitely braver choice and is executed to perfection, urgently reminding us that, yes, Palin may have been a weak choice as Vice-President, but by no means was she a weak woman. Whilst McCain, here presented as the serene eye of the storm, is equally well serviced by Harris in a suitably restrained performance that is just as memorable, albeit in a quieter, subtler way.

In the hands of lesser talents, Game Change could quite easily have excelled as a monotone political comedy that simply regurgitated the known facts of the true-life farce, but this is a far more ambitious production that is effective on several levels. It’s humorous but does not use comedy as a device. It finger-points how the tactical misjudgments were made, without mockingly pointing its finger.

Apparently Palin and McCain denounced the movie, although reportedly, neither of them actually saw it; which is a shame, because considering how good it is, that’s one mistake too many. [Kevin Hilton]

MAGIC BEYOND WORDS: THE J.K. ROWLING STORY

Director: Paul A. Kaufman

Starring: Poppy Montgomery, Emily Holmes, Janet Kidder and Andy Maton

Airdate: July 18, 2011 Network: Lifetime

Biopic based on the popular author J.K. Rowling, and her rise to fame.

In 1997 the first Harry Potter novel was published. Its unprecedented success would soon make its female author a household name and one of the richest women in the UK. But long before the immense fame and fortune, there was the tumultuous and bittersweet journey of how Joanne Rowling grew up—facing hardships and setbacks along the way—from being a young girl with a dream of being a writer, to becoming a single mother, whose series of books about a boy wizard would inspire both children and adults the world over.

It had to happen sometime. And so it did; timed very neatly with the theatrical release of the final big screen Harry Potter epic, so too arrived this small screen celebration (it’s too shamelessly laudatory to be considered a balanced biopic) of the woman that penned the phenomenon.

Probably of zero interest to children, this is squarely aimed at the older generation of fans and readers, an equally sizeable audience that look up to the achievements of Rowling in much the same way that the kids look up to Harry; that is to say, eyes wide with wonder. In fairness, there is perhaps a reasonably fascinating story to be told about how Rowling—fleeing an abusive relationship to raise a child by herself while living on welfare— was able to find the energies to summon forth one of the most beloved characters of recent literature. But this isn’t it.

Informed from the outset that this is “An Unauthorized Biography,” the sole objective of Magic Beyond Words seems merely to dramatize every character-building moment in her life, with nothing in between, in such a preposterously hamfisted way that in the end, for all its efforts at presenting Rowling as a hardworking, humble woman that went from rags to riches, does nothing so much as put her on a pedestal of Mandela-like proportions. Indeed, this could just as easily have been called, “Rowling: Long Walk to Publication.” Of course, given that she is the main subject, generous amounts of flattery are to be expected, but martyrdom of this kind is cringeworthy.

Doing the best she can with the risibly stilted dialog is Australian actress Poppy Montgomery. Her task of carrying the picture—which she just about does—is hampered by the fact that no attempt whatsoever has been made to flesh out any of the supporting roles, and so it seems that everyone that Rowling ever encountered on her journey to success is either a help or a hindrance. Had she really been surrounded by such one-dimensional people, a fanciful imagination would be a necessity.

Dismissible by most and not nearly weighty enough to interest serious fans of the author, the episodic nature of how events in Rowling’s life are presented does at least lend momentum to an otherwise unwatchable and pandering biopic—one that, despite its best efforts to prove otherwise, somehow feels as invented and contrived as one of Rowling’s own books. [Kevin Hilton]

ROADRACERS

Director: Robert Rodriguez

Starring: David Arquette, John Hawkes, Salma Hayek, William Sadler

Airdate: July 22, 1994 Network: Showtime

Small-town rebel Dude Delaney is caught between his love for rock’n’roll, girlfriend Donna, the corrupt sheriff and his thuggish son.

“Imagine a movie like Grease or Happy Days, but where everyone dies at the end.”¹—That’s how Robert Rodriguez originally pitched his episode of the ‘Rebel Highway’ series to the producers. Made for the Showtime channel in 1994, this series of ten low budget films aimed to remake American International Pictures’ fifties’ B-movies, spiced up for the nineties. It was created and produced by Debra Hill and Lou Arkoff, son of AIP producer Samuel Z. Arkoff, who had worked on the original movies. The directors involved included Joe Dante, William Friedkin and John Milius. When Wes Craven dropped out, Rodriguez was asked to direct Roadracers, but as everyone agreed that the 1959 original was dismal, he wrote a new story and only kept the title (which also happened with other films in the series).

Made between the low budget El Mariachi (1992) and the much bigger Desperado (1995), Roadracers gave Rodriguez his first taste of 35mm film and professional crews—the size and cost of which horrified him. Applying his lean and mean filmmaking style to a heavy, old school TV production set-up, Rodriguez shook it all up to deliver a fun, witty fifties’ teen drama throwback full of youthful energy.

Written fast and furiously with Rodriguez’s rock’n’roller friend Tommy Nix on a road trip down to Mexico, the film clearly riffs off Rebel Without a Cause (1955). David Arquette is Dude Delaney, the town’s rebel picked on by the sheriff and embroiled in a feud with his son, Teddy Leather (Jason Wiles). But sexy girlfriend Donna (Salma Hayek in her first American role) wants him to join a band so they can get out of town. Great support comes from John Hawkes as the goofy best friend obsessed with Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956).

The film has all the conventional elements of a fifties teen B-movie—the rival gangs, the girls, the drag race, the rumble—but it has lots of fun with them. Fetishistic about the cars, the greased hair, the leather jackets and the music of the period, it is also irreverently inventive. The rumble in the ice rink is the most hilarious example of this, and one of the most memorable scenes in the film: as the DJ plays Hasil Adkins’s brilliantly inappropriate No More Hot Dogs (a song in which the Boone County hillbilly fantasizes about decapitating his girlfriend) for “couples’ dance,” Dude uses his hair grease as an incongruous weapon to spectacularly shake off Teddy’s gang on the ice.

The excellent soundtrack also includes Charlie Feathers’ Stutterin’ Cindy, Gene Vincent’s Race With The Devil, which Rodriguez said inspired the film, and Rumble by Link Wray, another key figure for the director, who hoped that his film would help “turn people back onto the legendary guitarist.”² Together with his hyperkinetic editing style, Rodriguez’s genuine love for fifties rock’n’roll is what gives his “rockabilly opera” an authentically raw energy amid all the pastiche.³ [Virginie Sélavy]

SPRING BREAK SHARK ATTACK

Director: Paul Shapiro

Starring: Shannon Lucio, Riley Smith, Justin Baldoni, Brian Brown, Kathy Baker

Airdate: March 20, 2005 Network: CBS

Spring break. Killer sharks. Just when you thought it was safe to turn on your TV…

This no brain entry into the animal (or fish as it were) gone amok genre, which surprisingly popped up on network television in the mid-2000s, contains many of the elements needed to make a decent campy horror flick: pretty girls in bikinis … bad acting … even worse dialog … superfluous subplots … a semi-name actor putting in (one) good day’s work … lots of sharks chowing down on teenagers …

And, my friends, it was heaven.

After a boatload of women—who look like precursors to The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills (and who must surely be sending up Desperate Housewives, which this telefilm ran against)—end up on the bad side of a shark fin, our hero, Danielle (Lucio), is seen lying to her father about where she’ll be during Spring Break before she boldly heads for the white sands of Florida, where she plans to expand her horizons and her legs. After she meets up with her friends, she quickly becomes the object of affection for two men: the pretty hunky but ultra-sleazy J.T. (Baldoni), and the Luke Perry wannabe, Shane (Smith). After a bit of heavy partying Danielle decides love will find a way, but she may not have the time as she soon discovers a school of tiger sharks are chowing away at the baked to perfection teens. I thought only Hammerheads swam in schools… But never you mind, because it’s the more the merrier during this Spring Break Shark Attack.

CBS, a network whose most famous later telefilm output came via the highly regarded Hallmark Hall of Fame series, took a 180 degree turn in 2005 and gave their audiences a bit of a shock when they decided to chase ratings with B-movie magic. Shark Attack was just one of three CBS Movies of the Week that year that were relying on salacious premises and hip actors to attract a new crowd (the other two films were the middling Locusts with Lucy Lawless and Category 6). And they did a good job, too! Three more original TVMs appeared during the next season.

Riffing on fodder that would have been more appropriate on the Sci-Fi/ SyFy Channel, it seems rather odd that this movie made its way all the way up the small screen food chain to a major network—and a network that primarily caters to an older audience. How it ended up there is anyone’s guess but there was something so comforting about curling up to a throwback to the original Movie of the Week. Sure, this flick could never live up to the legendary TVMs of yesteryear, such as Trilogy of Terror or even Shark Kill, but it is heartwarming to see a network put down some change for a fun little horror movie. And, trust me, this was made on spare change. The very sparse special effects look like they were financed on the leftover CGI money from CSI. Yes, the special effects could have been much better, but they are perfectly at home among the tanned bait. [Amanda Reyes]

WHEN A STRANGER CALLS BACK

Director: Fred Walton

Starring: Carol Cane, Charles Durning, Jill Schoelen

Airdate: April 4, 1993 Network: Showtime

A stalker victimizes a teenage babysitter. She escapes, but he remains unapprehended. Years later she fears that he has returned.

When a Stranger Calls Back remains that rarest of things, especially in the horror genre—a sequel that may actually be better than the original. And yet, because of its TV movie standing, it’s rarely seen.

This follow-up to 1979’s When a Stranger Calls (which incidentally deserves its place alongside—and for my money even above—the George C Scott chiller The Changeling [1980] as one of the scariest movies that no one cares to mention) is a much more finely tuned thriller than its predecessor, whose modest reputation was based primarily on it’s terrifying (and often imitated with lesser results) opening sequence.

Unsurprisingly, this movie opens with the same set-up that made the original so effective, and yet, it still holds up. The soft focus, cheaper lighting that is evident in most television movies (particularly from the late eighties and early nineties) means that we feel we are in a slightly warmer environment than the original film, whose look was dark, gritty and a whole lot less stylized. It is now more perhaps like our own homes.

The rest of the movie plays like a much more gripping version of a good Murder, She Wrote episode. That may put people off, but in this case it’s intended as a compliment. The original film was accused by critics of tending, not so much to lose the plot, but to reveal that there simply wasn’t one after the stellar opening sequence was over and done with. Here, it’s as if director Fred Walton (returning again as writer/director) was particularly wary not to repeat the same mistake and invests a lot more in the second and third acts of the picture. He achieves this by bringing back the first movie’s two leads (the ever impressive Carol Kane and the routinely excellent Charles Durning) and this time gives them something to do.

Whereas the opening sequence of the movie is rooted purely in the horror genre, the majority of it plays out like a Thomas Harris thriller, sans the gore. This is, of course, unsurprising, given the Oscar winning success of Silence of the Lambs (1991) just two years previously; its buzz still going strong when this movie was put into production.

At any rate, it would seem that the small screen is the best home for this particular Stranger. It’s high time that audiences forget the nonsense of the big budget Hollywood remake of the original, re-discover this gem, and welcome the stranger back properly. [Kevin Hilton]

WITCH HUNT

Director: Paul Schrader

Starring: Dennis Hopper, Eric Bogosian, Penelope Ann Miller, Julian Sands

Airdate: December 10, 1994 Network: HBO

H. Phillip Lovecraft returns as a private investigator in this cosmic tale of black magic mystery.

In this sequel to the cult favorite Cast a Deadly Spell, Dennis Hopper assumes the role of private eye H. Phillip Lovecraft, this time investigating the mysterious death of a Hollywood film executive at the hands of magic-wielding murderers.

Less fondly remembered than its 1991 predecessor and sorely missing the always underrated Fred Ward in the lead, it would be easy to dismiss Witch Hunt in advance as a cynically produced obligatory sequel-come-rehash that has been shipped out with the added attraction of a star name. But thankfully that’s not the case. Not entirely, anyway.

Whilst one could certainly argue that Ward was a better fit in the lead than Hopper (who seems fairly befuddled throughout) and that the previous movie had a supporting cast better equipped in handling the genre-bending subject matter, this follow-up adventure is in many ways a more focused production, jettisoning the screwball elements of the first and replacing the madcap approach with a breezier pace that’s more in step with the kind of fifties noir films it’s emulating.

The movie’s subplot concerning the government’s attempts to discover and purge all practitioners of magic, riffs effectively on the infamous McCarthy witch hunts that particularly caused a stir throughout Hollywood, and by virtue of this obvious but appropriate subtext, there’s a welcome attempt at gravitas to counterbalance the comic book nonsense that the first film was only too satisfied to revel in.

The best and most interesting thing about Witch Hunt is its direction. Paul Schrader, probably still best known for writing Taxi Driver despite earning his own journeyman status as a filmmaker of similarly gritty projects, is surprisingly assured at delivering what is essentially a straight-up genre film—in the fantasy mold, no less. As such, it remains the most out of kilter work on his filmography, and is worth your attention for that fact alone. As it transpires, it’s actually one of his more fully realized efforts and, contrary to his other works (which tend to engage rather than entertain), is actually a lot of fun.

The special effects that were everywhere in the first film, return in this one; no doubt cutting edge when first released, they now look as crude as Ray Harryhausen’s early ventures with stop-motion, but given the otherworldly premise and setting, the hokeyness—though certainly unintended—almost feels apt.

A fine sequel and companion piece to the original that should please fans of both Lovecraft mythology and retro cool. Thin on plot but full of energy, Schrader’s confident direction results in a thoroughly enjoyable, if not especially noteworthy, slice of small screen entertainment, that, just like its predecessor, still awaits a DVD release. Shame. [Kevin Hilton]

 

1Robert Rodriguez, Roadracers: The Making of a Degenerate Hot Rod Flick, p.3.

2Ibid, p.24.

3Ibid, p.3.