I may be a one-person cult for this picture. I have had a soft spot for it ever since I saw the movie on the late show in 1989. Some of the other reviewers for this title have made a reasonable assertion as to why they don't like SLAMDANCE, and interestingly enough, I understand and agree with their decisions. Yes, this movie is a disjointed mess, but it has a strange beauty on a visceral and emotional level; this sets it apart from way too many films made in the decade which threw everything together in order to seem different, regardless of whether everything gelled.
For instance, this film veers uncomfortably from goofy comedy to more sordid material. However, that makes sense as the central character is a cartoonist- a man-child who teeters between the comic book sensibilities of his work, and the demands of the very adult real world (he seldom lives up to his responsibilities). Mr. Drood is a perpetual screw-up; he was barely supportive of his wife and child, and now must deal with unfathomable emotions since he is now implicated in the murder of a fleeting flame.
I've never been much of a fan of Virginia Madsen, particularly because this classy, slightly mysterious blonde has never been given good material... at least until recently. But Wayne Wang understands her screen presence perfectly. The highlight of the film is Tom Hulce's scenes with her (set in the movie's past). These moments with the femme fatale are beautiful evocations of allure, desire and implicit danger underneath the colourful settings- classic traditions of film noir. With their saturated hues and sexy jazz soundtrack, these moments work on an almost dreamlike approach.
Even though SLAM DANCE is a dog's breakfast of styles and tones, this segment is nonetheless indicative of the film's success on a completely non-literal level. Yes this is another 1980's quirky film which has the obligatory cameo by a punk musician... and the "hip" quotient also given by a Harry Dean Stanton role, but there's just something more about it that makes not just another curiosity piece. The first time I saw it in 1989, I was with two others who didn't like the movie at all. As much as I could understand their reasons why, I still feel that this odd duck of a movie has that special "something"... and I have still felt that after repeated viewings. It either works for you, or it doesn't. It just depends on whether the film hits you on the right emotional level.
If you looked up this title because you have a strange attraction to this picture, you're not alone.
