Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews3
superlee4ever's rating
I loved this film. Not being a swooning Ed Wood Jr. fan, I prefer to appreciate his "boundless enthusiasm" and acknowledge his shortcomings. His movies are fun, but his personal story is one racked with pain. I hoped, and was delighted to find, that this film would be about understanding his turbulent life, rather than simply heaping him with posthumous praise. From beginning to end, this film evolves from a documentary into a mythology, leaving the cast and the viewer unexpectedly connected to each other and to Ed Wood Jr.
What we get are people who knew Ed Wood the best talking about him from all perspectives, positive and negative, and showing us their character as much as Ed's. We get insight into Ed's personal and professional life: from his romances, to his drinking, to his sexuality, to his friends, to his enemies, and even to his film making.
The film itself is shot in a low-budget way that seems done out of respect for Ed, as if using the techniques of most theatrically released movies from 1996 would be disrespectful (sort of like wearing a nicer suit than the President). The set designer uses a sense of humor and also a great deal of insight when matching each cast member with their background.
Fans will be excited to hear personal testimony regarding Ed Wood controversies, and new comers will be amazed that this man was real. The DVD is full of impossible to find gems ("Crossroads of Lorado" and photo galleries), but the real treasure of this film is the surprisingly engaging and interconnected story.
Ed Wood had a habit of defining people through their association with him (for better or worse), to the point where one woman will go down in history as "Swimming Pool Owner" for once letting him and his friends be baptized in her pool. This ability to define a person's legacy comes through universally, as the most amazing effect of the film is to not only give a well rounded idea of the man that was Ed Wood Jr., but also to give a comprehensive view of the community that he created. Somehow, without ever having more that one cast member being interviewed on screen at a time, the connection that Ed Wood created amongst the various people in his life becomes clear, and the viewer is left with great sense of involvement.
Even the title hints at the B-list horror genre, but by the end, we see that even this is a kindness. What begins as unrelated stories by random people ends with the conclusion that all of the cast will be forever weaved into an unpredictably cohesive fabric that history will bring into haunting unity with Wood's legend.
In many ways a living contradiction, Ed Wood Jr. could not be condensed to a single viewpoint. This collaborative effort is the closest to knowing him that we can ever get. Being itself a juxtaposition of themes, it is at once respectful, provocative, thoughtful, gripping, fun, sad, kind, and fulfilling.
What we get are people who knew Ed Wood the best talking about him from all perspectives, positive and negative, and showing us their character as much as Ed's. We get insight into Ed's personal and professional life: from his romances, to his drinking, to his sexuality, to his friends, to his enemies, and even to his film making.
The film itself is shot in a low-budget way that seems done out of respect for Ed, as if using the techniques of most theatrically released movies from 1996 would be disrespectful (sort of like wearing a nicer suit than the President). The set designer uses a sense of humor and also a great deal of insight when matching each cast member with their background.
Fans will be excited to hear personal testimony regarding Ed Wood controversies, and new comers will be amazed that this man was real. The DVD is full of impossible to find gems ("Crossroads of Lorado" and photo galleries), but the real treasure of this film is the surprisingly engaging and interconnected story.
Ed Wood had a habit of defining people through their association with him (for better or worse), to the point where one woman will go down in history as "Swimming Pool Owner" for once letting him and his friends be baptized in her pool. This ability to define a person's legacy comes through universally, as the most amazing effect of the film is to not only give a well rounded idea of the man that was Ed Wood Jr., but also to give a comprehensive view of the community that he created. Somehow, without ever having more that one cast member being interviewed on screen at a time, the connection that Ed Wood created amongst the various people in his life becomes clear, and the viewer is left with great sense of involvement.
Even the title hints at the B-list horror genre, but by the end, we see that even this is a kindness. What begins as unrelated stories by random people ends with the conclusion that all of the cast will be forever weaved into an unpredictably cohesive fabric that history will bring into haunting unity with Wood's legend.
In many ways a living contradiction, Ed Wood Jr. could not be condensed to a single viewpoint. This collaborative effort is the closest to knowing him that we can ever get. Being itself a juxtaposition of themes, it is at once respectful, provocative, thoughtful, gripping, fun, sad, kind, and fulfilling.
I remember seeing the movie when I was just a little boy staying up late at my grandmother's house. It started at 1AM and went to 3AM. The more tired I got, the more dramatic the movie seemed. I guess it was good acting, but I am remembering it from over 15 years ago through the eyes of a 9 year old, and it definitely had a positive moral value. I remember one scene where she went down to the pool to go swimming and left the baby alone, and her mom came home, found the baby alone and yelled at her. That scene made an impression because at that point I was so stupid I thought babies would perish IMMEDIATELY if they were left alone for one second. So I sided with the mother in the conflict, but I guess that was a scene that was meant to make the mother seem "overbearing". Overall, if you have NOTHING else to watch, and it's really late at night, and you're still young enough to think staying up late makes you cool, this movie will kill two hours.
I have only scene the MST3K version of this film, and have watched it probably 10 times. So why did I rate it a one? And if the rating of 1 out of 10 is accurate, why did I watch it ten times? There is a lot of debate about just what makes a really bad movie and why we love to watch them over and over.
Do we feel smarter poking fun at miserable failures? Do we like to see suffering of an artistic mind trying to deliver its best to the world and ultimately producing garbage that is embarrassing because we are ashamed we never took a risk and made a movie, good or bad? Do we just get a kick out of seeing good, decent people try to act, write, direct, or produce and having their greatest failures played for our bemusement time and time again, each viewing like a slap in the face to the work ethic that has built the independent film industry?
1. Kinda. 2. Who cares.
This movie is awful, and there are a lot of posts reiterating that point. I wanted to give readers something new. I have a theory on why this movie is a "1 out of 10" yet I've seen it as many times as my favorite movie, "Forrest Gump". My theory is...
So little happens in this movie that it is hypnotizing. There are long, long gaps in dialog with no action either, so what you are left with is a bleak landscape to watch for 10 or so minutes, and it has a sedating effect to the point where when someone says something, it is startling, almost jarring the viewer out of their trance.
Let me give you and example: Boys get lost and someone has to find them. So there is a line of dialog spoken between the husband and wife before he goes to look for them.
Taking that piece of dialog as a starting point, we get the following time line: Line of Dialogue - 1:01:54 Line Spoken By Actor - 01:03:50 Line Spoken By Narrator 01:08:57 Line Spoken By Narrator 01:11:46 Line of Dialogue 01:12:26
That is 10 minutes and 30 seconds between dialog.
And I don't mean, like, a conversation. I mean they say one line of dialog to their fellow actor and hear one back. Durring the silence, we are seeing hill, valleys, cliffs (that appear constantly our of sync since apparently Yucca Flats is a topographic mobious strip) that are soothing and dull the mind.
That is my explanation for why this particular horrible movie is worth watching 10 times. Come ... let the Beast melt your brain.
Do we feel smarter poking fun at miserable failures? Do we like to see suffering of an artistic mind trying to deliver its best to the world and ultimately producing garbage that is embarrassing because we are ashamed we never took a risk and made a movie, good or bad? Do we just get a kick out of seeing good, decent people try to act, write, direct, or produce and having their greatest failures played for our bemusement time and time again, each viewing like a slap in the face to the work ethic that has built the independent film industry?
1. Kinda. 2. Who cares.
This movie is awful, and there are a lot of posts reiterating that point. I wanted to give readers something new. I have a theory on why this movie is a "1 out of 10" yet I've seen it as many times as my favorite movie, "Forrest Gump". My theory is...
So little happens in this movie that it is hypnotizing. There are long, long gaps in dialog with no action either, so what you are left with is a bleak landscape to watch for 10 or so minutes, and it has a sedating effect to the point where when someone says something, it is startling, almost jarring the viewer out of their trance.
Let me give you and example: Boys get lost and someone has to find them. So there is a line of dialog spoken between the husband and wife before he goes to look for them.
Taking that piece of dialog as a starting point, we get the following time line: Line of Dialogue - 1:01:54 Line Spoken By Actor - 01:03:50 Line Spoken By Narrator 01:08:57 Line Spoken By Narrator 01:11:46 Line of Dialogue 01:12:26
That is 10 minutes and 30 seconds between dialog.
And I don't mean, like, a conversation. I mean they say one line of dialog to their fellow actor and hear one back. Durring the silence, we are seeing hill, valleys, cliffs (that appear constantly our of sync since apparently Yucca Flats is a topographic mobious strip) that are soothing and dull the mind.
That is my explanation for why this particular horrible movie is worth watching 10 times. Come ... let the Beast melt your brain.