(2012) Written and Directed by Don Coscarelli; Based on the
novel by David Wong; Starring: Chase Williamson, Rob Mayes, Paul Giamatti,
Clancy Brown and Glynn Turman;
Available on Blu-ray, DVD and Netflix Streaming
Rating: ***
“Do the bees know that they make the honey for you, or do
they work tirelessly because they think it is their own choice?” – Roger North
(Doug Jones)
If a movie had ever been custom-tailored for the cult movie
crowd, John Dies at the End would be
it. Too esoteric and unconventional for
the multiplex set, it was never destined for mass acceptance. Judging by the ubiquitous banner ads that
appeared on various movie websites over the past several months, John Dies at the End was aimed squarely
at audiences that would flock to the film, based solely on its geek credentials. Starting with a pay-per-view release that prefaced
its theatrical release, the film didn’t exactly set the world on fire, with its
tepid reviews and poor box office showing.
But Don Coscarelli has a built-in audience, myself included, who find
his movies a welcome respite from the usual big-budget, story-by-committee dreck
that the Hollywood blockbuster factory normally turns out.
Combining elements of Fear
and Loathing in Las Vegas with The
Stuff, John Dies at the End
concerns a mysterious, addictive substance, known as Soy Sauce, which heightens
senses and opens doors to parallel worlds. Its effects on users is permanent, leaving
them with the ability to perceive what has remained shrouded from the rest of
the world. Writer/director Coscarelli
explored similar themes in his Phantasm series,
which frequently blurred the line between reality and fantasy.
Coscarelli’s script, based on David Wong’s (aka: Cracked contributor Jason Pargin) hallucinatory
novel of the same name, seems underdeveloped, with weak lead characterizations
and a lack of focus. The protagonists, millennial
slackers Dave (Chase Williamson) and John (Rob Mayes) make Bill and Ted seem
nuanced by comparison. Williamson and Mayes do the best they can with their
underwritten characters. Neither
character possesses a distinct personality; both appear more or less
interchangeable. They simply drift from
one predicament to another, manipulated by the whims of the otherworldly Soy
Sauce. The clever dialogue, peppered
throughout the film, is clearly the script’s greatest asset.
Another high point is the excellent character actor
work. Glynn Turman stands out in a small
but memorable role as the no-nonsense Detective Lawrence Appleton, who’s
determined to eradicate the Soy Sauce and its detrimental effects. Paul Giamatti (who shared executive producer
credits with Coscarelli’s father Dac and Daniel Carey) is also noteworthy, as
skeptical feature reporter Arnie. And be
sure to watch for a nice little cameo by Coscarelli regular Angus Scrimm as
Father Shellnut.
After watching John
Dies at the End, I was left with the impression that Coscarelli either
didn’t go far enough or should have shown a little more restraint. I tend to favor the second assertion. The film suffers in comparison to
Coscarelli’s previous feature, Bubba Ho-Tep, which successfully walked the line between outlandish and poignant. Even with its wild conspiracy theories and
absurd premise, Bubba Ho-Tep managed
to keep everything together, thanks to a clarity of vision and adhering to its
own set of rules. The rules, if they
exist in John Dies at the End, do not
seem to apply. Random stuff happens
frequently, and nothing seems connected.
Because of the film’s dissociative, sporadic nature, it’s more about the
parts than the whole. There are some
undeniably fun bits trapped within this jumbled mess. It’s hard not to laugh when David eschews his
cellphone, in favor of a bratwurst, to speak to his recently deceased friend
John. While the climax is a little
ho-hum, I have to give the film points for the final scene, and the ironic
payoff.
Misgivings aside, it’s virtually impossible for me to
dislike John Dies at the End. Coscarelli
shot for the stars, even if he barely made it out of the clouds. He made a sincere effort to show us something
that hadn’t been seen, throwing as much weird shit at the screen as possible
and seeing what stuck. Yes, the film is
wildly inconsistent, but that describes Coscarelli’s filmography. His overall body of work, while rough around
the edges, frequently delivers more than we get from lesser directors with
bigger budgets. Even if the final
results are a trifle underwhelming, it’s a crazy enough ride, well worth your
time. Unlike its main characters, however,
don’t expect John Dies at the End to
change your life.
Good review Barry. It's a weird movie that I will probably like a lot more if I'm on drugs or drunk with a crowded-bunch of my friends.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Dan! I agree that certain substances would probably just enhance the experience.
DeleteThe trailers of this only had me mildly interested in checking this out but your review makes me want to go watch this. I love watching weird movies
ReplyDeleteWeird, it definitely is. Not Coscarelli's best, but it's worth a look.
ReplyDeleteMy bro is a big fan of the book and refuses to admit that this film exists, let alone watch it. I'm willing to give it a chance though :)
ReplyDeleteTruth be told, I only got halfway through the book, but I'd like to finish it at some point. Maybe it will explain a few loose ends.
ReplyDeleteI've heard only negative things from people who've read the book, and nary a peep from those who haven't, so this didn't sit high on my "to watch" list. Though now it looks like I'll bump it up a bit.
ReplyDeleteI can't help but give it a mild recommendation, thanks to Coscarelli's sincere attempt, but I think the script could have used some more "fleshing out." You won't feel like you wasted 90 minutes of your life... Maybe more like 40. ;)
ReplyDeleteNice Review Barry. Im not sure if I would blame the lack of focus soley on the script or the source novel itself. I'm sure the director tried his best to adapt a book that may be just unadaptable. I agree that it was fun to see someone take chances and put something out there that hasnt been seen before
ReplyDeleteThanks Jason! Some books lend themselves to adaptation a lot more easily, but I agree that this one probably isn't one of them. The movie's still worth a look for the weirdness alone.
Delete