Hit Me With Your Best Shot: Showgirls

The concept of this series is such: I choose a movie. We all choose our favorite shot(s) from said movie. I link up to everyone's choices each Wednesday. It's an eye candy free for all celebrating those single images in movies that we just can't live without. They're either the prettiest, the most telling, personally resonant, quite unexpected or just plain delightful.

Today's episode: Paul Verhoeven's gaudy masterwork SHOWGIRLS (1995). It's loud. It's trashy. It's colorful. It's spectacularly itself. Something all movies should strive to be. So, very briefly, I considered this shot from the opening sequence.


Because the "HUGE" graphic makes me giggle. It can't have been an accident that that's the word that flashes in neon just as Nomi Malone (Elizabeth Berkley) pulls into Las Vegas. "I'm gonna win."

I almost went with anything from Nomi's first performance like these.


I love how distorted and fleshy the first image is (that's the movie, too) and that Nomi is a blur. Isn't she the spazziest (live action) protagonist of all time? She's basically a rampaging toddler and definitely the most inelegant "dancer" ever captured on film. It's not just that famous pool sex scene that's epileptic. This girl seems constantly beset by seizures, whether she's throwing fries, hitting friends, dancing or lapdancing, shoving innocent human resources personnel against walls, eating potato-chips, buying dresses from "ver-sayce" or running out into oncoming traffic (which she does at least twice during the movie). The second image is unexpectedly demure as she prepares to strip. Aren't the pinks and yellows gorgeous? It's not deep focus (shame) but it's wonderfully composed to allow you to see Cristal's (Gina Gershon) volcanic entrance at the same time in the background.

Speaking of backgrounds. There's so much going on in some of the frames, so many characters milling about with their own stories and agendas that I'm not even joking when I say that it occasionally feels like a Robert Altman movie... if the master had constantly snorted cocaine rather than puffed Mary Jane.


Some of the chaotic teeming energy is undoubtedly aided by the use of long takes. Thankfully Verhoeven lets DP Jost Vacano's camera roam around the room in a few key sequences rather than relying on a million edits. We love long takes, yes we do. Way too few filmmakers ever think to use them.

But I finally had to settle on my favorite dance sequence for the best shot. It's the climax of sorts (though Showgirls really doesn't know when to quit -- abbreviate the two major subplots involving a rapist rocker and a womanizing choreographer and the movie is suddenly zippier), which finally brings our two anti-heroines together in costume, though they've rehearsed this number alone before in one of the movie's very best scenes.


To me that just says it all. It's a blue movie (pun intended), the anti-heroines are dressed identically "You and I... we're exactly the same" but their expressions are so different. Cristal is your devious delicious Bitch Goddess (the name of the show within the show), Nomi is the bizarrely innocent whore/plaything.

Come on, slave girl.

Now, this slave girl is about to push her master down those monster stairs but a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do.

You know the best advice I ever got? You're up there on stage, hoping on a spot. Someone gets in your way, step on 'em. If you're the only one left standing there, they hire you.

That's about it. Thank you and good night, ladies and gentlemen. Elvis has left the building.

'...Best Shot' Players
Give it up for these whores dancers! You click the link. You see the post. They show you what you want to see...

• My New Plaid Pants ass + palm trees + vomiting dolphins... "It doesn't suck!"
• Nick's Flick Picks ♪ listen all of y'all this is sabotage!
  
• Antagony & Ecstasy the solar plexus as phallus? Whaaa
• missemmamm honors Nomi's relentless thumbs and (starry) eyes
  
• Stale Popcorn "the creature from Nomi's Lagoon" great writeup
• vg21random believes in the hair & makeup. I agree. (In fact, I 100% believe that this movie deserved a few Oscar nods: makeup and Gina Gershon as Best Supporting Actress being the two most egregious snubs.)
  

 Other Films in This Series

• Angels in America (2003)
• X-Men (2000)
• Bring It On (2000)
• Black Narcissus (1946)
• A Face in the Crowd (1957)
• Pandora's Box (1929)
• Se7en (1995) 
• Requiem for a Dream (2000)

*

Yes, No, Maybe So? Love Ranch

We've been ignoring trailers, so we might play catch up this week. Today's future enticement is the 70s brothel drama Love Ranch. Let's map out what makes us want to see it... and not.

If you'd rather not know the entire story, I'd advise you not to watch this particular trailer and just reading the less revealing text.



Most marketing teams don't realize (or perhaps have statistical evidence to the unfortunate contrary) that a well told concept, plot hook and name actors should be enough to hook your target audience. Why do they always think a point by point three act summary is best?

Do we want to see it?

YES.


The cinema has always had a preoccupation with prostitutes; Movie makers see the kinship between show & 'ho business' as well they should. Despite this infamous love affair, the brothel setting is underused. [This is completely tangential, but wouldn't a fictional brothel series be fascinating in the hands of the right HBO or Showtime creative team? There's more than enough TV shows about cops, lawyers and doctors so why not try some other drama-magnet workplaces! Those aren't the only three places where drama is a given.] Anyway, from the looks of the trailer the art direction (Bruno Rubeo and team), costumes (Melissa Bruning) and overall setting should provide moments of interest even setting aside the unknown quality of the script, directing and acting.

Plus there are the girls they're selling which include Bai Ling, Taryn Manning & Gina Gershon. Taylor Hackford and his casting team definitely weren't afraid of scene stealers when they went to work. Or maybe they knew that with Helen Mirren and Joe Pesci leading, scene stealing is a far less likely outcome than scene tug-of-wars.

NO.

The movies love boxers almost as much as hookers. Perhaps filmmakers see a kinship between show & body-blow business? But do we need both in the same movie? Love Ranch could be two full hours of clichéd story beats since we've got entrepreneurs, whores and boxers all battling it out for screen time and narrative arcs in the same movie. Those are three of the movies most familiar types right there. Explosive clichés are probably buried everywhere in that Nevada sand like so many film-derailing landmines.

MAYBE SO.

The casting intrigues. Helen Mirren is always worth a look (though "accent" work is always hard to adjust to in the time span of a trailer) and perhaps her chemistry with Joe Pesci will be odd couple fascinating? But I worry. I can't say that I'm a huge fan of Joe Pesci. He strikes me as an... um... excessive actor and I have a much easier time with 'over the top' when the performer taking me there has a vagina. It's just how I'm wired.

When it comes to Love Ranch are you a Yes, a No or a Maybe So?
And does 'maybe so' mean "wait for reviews" or "I'll watch it on DVD" for you?

To Sing and Die in L.A.

Glenn from Stale Popcorn here to share some thoughts on 2004, the current year of retrospective here at The Film Experience.

Two of my favourite films from 2004 share Los Angeles as a setting. One is about a serial killer driving around the streets in a taxi while the other is about lesbian musicians trying to catch a break. So the similarities pretty much end there. I like to imagine that they filmed right around the corner from each other and that they accidentally caught each other on film. Hiding in the background.


The first title I speak of is Michael Mann's Collateral. Perhaps the best pure thriller of the decade, the film is noteworthy for many reasons. First and foremost there is the decade-topping cinematography by Paul Cameron and Dion Beebe. Truly an awe-inspiring piece of camerawork there, don't you agree? Expressions like "I've never seen that on screen before" are just kept for James Cameron, okay! But other than that the film is just a really great thriller. Fast-paced, sleek and effective while also giving us plenty in the way of technical and actor prowess. Collateral was originally set in New York City and if it were made in NYC of the 1980s then it could've been just as good, but I think LA was the right home for this one.

The film received an Oscar nomination for Best Editing and Jamie Foxx got nominated for Best Supporting Actor. If I had a say it would've gotten nominations for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Cinematography, Best Editing and, depending on the day, Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress for Foxx and Jada Pinkett-Smith respectively. Depending on the day! My favourite moment of the movie? When Tom Cruise's hired assassin trips over a desk chair! Whoops! It looks so completely by accident and genuine.


The other 2004 LA-set film I wanted to mention was Prey for Rock and Roll. It's not an expertly made film, but it's an entertaining one and one that has an addictive raw edge to its portrayal of a struggling band. Unlike most of these movies where the band or singer is so tailor-made for stardom that you can predict the scene where a record manager spots them, the band in Prey for Rock and Roll, with Gina Gershon on vocals and lead guitar, is exactly the sort of band you'll find struggling to play pub gigs for the rest of their lives.

I particularly like that they sound like they're from the wrong era. Sounding like a mix of Hole and L7 with a bit of Curve thrown in despite being set in the 1980s. Although, while I wasn't in LA at the time, perhaps that's where that style was originating, in which case the film has another interesting dimension. Clam Dandy, the band within the film, probably would have gone on to release one album to immense critical acclaim with a cult following, but would have then followed that with Billboard-seeking mainstream hooks and would eventually peter out before breaking up and forming side-projects. The title track and "Every Six Minutes" are fine examples from the original songs on the soundtrack and even if they aren't presented within the film in any spectacular production numbers, they are great songs to have pop up on an iPod every now and then. Bonus points for Lori Petty!

Nomi & Cristal

I got nothing this afternoon. So, whilst I nibble on doggy chow and hitchhike my way to a press screening, please enjoy this ancient Showgirls illustration brushed by yours truly in college. Should I put it on a t-shirt?

Nomi: ...or a tight top.

Cristal: Mmmm. You like to show em off.

Mystery Women Revealed!!!!!!

Posted by Thombeau von Fabulon.


Thanks to everyone who played our little game. Above are the women we featured, as more or less themselves. Will any of them end up as iconic as the legends they portrayed? Discuss.

Sarah Gina Palin and Our National Nightmare

I love Gina Gershon...

See more Gina Gershon videos at Funny or Die

Always have. Always will. Wish she were a bigger star.

In a mostly unrelated note, last night I watched The Invasion in my hotel room. You know, the reviled one with Nicki Kidman that we've all forgotten about already even though it's only 13 months old (isn't it funny how some movies seem instantly ancient?). The movie isn't sure of what it wants to say about society / humanity / medicine / science / politics but it babbles on relentlessly about them anyway. Still, some of the enduring Body Snatchers horror bleeds through it messy grab bag. Except for the part about fearing falling asleep. The movie keeps saying "don't go to sleep" but in real life it's the Not Waking Up part that's proven to be the real horror -- at least for America. How are the election polls still 50/50? Who can look at the last eight years of failing economy, bad health care systems, misfiring education, religious zealotry, media circus nonsense, meanspirited smug leadership and puritanical hysteria (and I haven't even mentioned the war) and think "yes, we definitely need more of this!" I mean: FUCK!
*