Raising Arizona - "We're Set to Pop Here, Honey."

I’m starting something new with my friend Ben Malcomson this month. On his podcast, Chapters, Ben wanted to start having a movie night once a month or so. He asked me to pick the first movie to discuss, and I went with Raising Arizona. As with the other podcasts I’ve done in the past with Ben and his brother Robie, I’ve written an article as part of my preparation for the show. I’m not sure how much crossover there will be with this and that, so be sure to check out the podcast along with reading my article. And while you’re at it, go ahead and subscribe to Ben’s YouTube channel for the show (I linked to it above, but I’ll also include a link here). That way, you get reminders of all the episodes he does (most of his shows consist of a guest he knows discussing life in general or specific topics like the loss of a loved one). Ben’s podcast is wide-ranging, and you get to hear real stories from real people. And if you subscribe, you’ll also see every time I do a movie episode with him. 

Stupid Smart

Raising Arizona has always stuck with me because of how silly and smart it is at the same time. When I was a kid and watched it, I loved it for the goofy characters, action, accents, and dialogue; it was like a live action cartoon. 

When I watch the film as an adult, I now appreciate all the work the Coen brothers put into the script to make it goofy and profound at the same time. It takes a bit of genius to make something stupid on the surface and brilliant underneath the comedy. They created such an amazing and unique world in their cinematic Arizona that the film can be enjoyed two ways: brain on or off.

My preferred method for watching Raising Arizona is with my brain off. That way, I can just enjoy Nicolas Cage and Holly Hunter going all in with their accents and quirks. An unleashed Cage is always great (though according to some interviews, the Coens had to keep reeling him in), but Holly Hunter gets better every time I watch it. Her bursts of emotion throughout the film (“I love him so much!” and “You son of a bitch!”) are among the funniest moments in the movie.

Then there are the side characters. John Goodman and William Forsythe are the standouts. But Sam McMurray and Frances McDormand are close seconds. And Trey Wilson has some great moments as Nathan Arizona nee Huffheinz. 

Raising Arizona is at its best when you can just sit back and watch all these actors embrace the silliness of the world. But when you turn your brain on, you realize you’re dealing with an actually deep and dark story.

This is a film about a couple that cannot conceive who, in a moment of desperation, decide to kidnap a baby. A bounty hunter called the “lone biker of the apocalypse” shows up to find the baby (for the highest bidder). Hi’s ex-con friends steal the baby and take it with them to a bank robbery, eventually forgetting the child on the roof of the getaway car. And on and on. It takes a very smart script to turn something so dark into a goofy live action cartoon.

Immature Maturity

Focusing on the seriousness of the story of Raising Arizona made me realize just how much this movie is about the two main characters overcoming their immaturity to be able to start a family. It’s a funny film because immature people are funny at times, but that also distracts the viewer from how unfit they are to be parents.

Hi is obviously too immature for a family life. He seems to just be going along with everything to keep Ed happy. When he attempts to steal a baby the first time, it turns into a prolonged skit. It’s funny, but when he reports back to Ed, Hi describes it as “horrifying.” The babies and Glen and Dot’s kids are presented to Hi as complete chaos that he cannot handle. Not to mention he flat out admits he can’t handle it to Glen, and while in prison he tries to argue that being a criminal is a substitute for family life. Speaking of prison, the abduction of the child prompts the “birth” of Gale and Evelle into the situation, further confirming Hi’s inability to live a “normal” life. And then there’s the whole thing of unleashing the lone biker of the apocalypse, but I’ll come back to that in a minute.

Hi is the clearly immature character of the film, but Ed is no more prepared than Hi; she just wants a responsible life more, that doesn’t make her ready for such a life. First off, she married Hi. I’m all about giving people second (or third or fourth or fifth, etc.) chances, but Ed has to know that marrying such a “repeat offender” is a risky bet. And it’s her idea to kidnap a baby. Ed’s no more ready for taking care of the baby than Hi is. Sure, she feeds him a bottle and sings to him a few times, but when Dot shows up asking fairly basic questions about the baby’s shots and future, she’s as clueless as Hi. And she’s partly responsible for unleashing the biker.

The lone biker of the apocalypse is mainly Hi’s demon, since they share a tattoo and Hi envisions unleashing him. But Ed’s decision to steal a baby is the primary factor in unleashing him. There’s also a scene in which Hi seems surprised that Ed can see him, too. I know that the biker actually exists, otherwise the scene between him and Nathan Arizona is impossible. But the world of Raising Arizona is not the real world (just look at how unpopulated the world is during the action sequences, and generally amplified every person seems to be), and I would argue that they literally unleashed the biker into the world with their shared inability to be responsible parents.

Once Hi and Ed defeat the biker, they come to their senses and return the baby. And, taking Nathan’s advice, decide to take a night to decide whether or not they should split up. Based on Hi’s dream, they stay together and end up producing a great family and life together. This is only possible once they’ve both conquered their immaturity. By destroying the biker and Hi making a clear break with Gale and Evelle, they have proven that their past is behind them, and they’re ready to move on and start a family together. 

This is why I love Raising Arizona so much. It’s such a fun, goofy take on the age-old theme of being ready to have kids. As a parent myself, watching this film now adds another level of enjoyment as I realize that, while funny, this film is more about a couple growing past their selfishness so that they can fully commit to taking care of a child.

Why Do I Own This?

I own nearly every Coen Brothers film. They are two of my favorite filmmakers of all time, so of course I own one of their best films.

Random Thoughts / Favorite Quotes

I love nearly every word of dialogue in this film, but writing them does not do it justice. The accents and performances add so much to each line.

I love how Hi pronounces "pennant."

"I tried to stand up and fly straight, but it wasn't easy with that sumbitch Reagan in the White House."

"You ate sand?"

"One day, I decided to make my own crawdad. I threw it in the pot, but without the water. It was just like making popcorn."

"You're not just telling us what we want to hear?"

"No, sir. No way."

"Because we just want to hear the truth."

"Well, then I guess I am telling you what you want to hear."

"Boy, didn't we just tell you not to do that?"

"Yes, sir."

"Okay, then."

"Howdy, Kurt."

Okay, this section is pretty much just going to be every quote in the movie…

"There's this spherical object resting in the highway...and it's not a piece of the car!"

I think The Departed ripped off the beginning of this movie by putting the credits so far into the film.

The sequence with the babies would work just as well as a silent movie.

Something I never noticed until I had kids was how ridiculously huge babies are in movies. These kids are supposed to just home from the hospital, and they're crawling around and everything. I suppose some time may have passed, but the movie makes it seem like Cage kidnaps the kid the day after he reads about them coming home.

Holly Hunter's hysterical "I love him so much" and Cage's response still crack me up.

Who better than John Goodman and William Forsythe to play two metaphorical babies being born in the mud?

"I thought you said your folks was DEAD, H.I."

"We thought Junior should see their final resting place."

"They were jammies. They had Yodas and shit on 'em!"

Nathan Arizona's talk about "leads" reminds me of the cop talking about the Dude's stolen car in The Big Lebowski.

"Awful good cereal flakes, Ms. McDunnough."

"We went to adopt on account that something went wrong with my semen."

"Say, that reminds me."

If you weren't convinced this movie was a live action cartoon already, then you get the bonkers chase sequence out of nowhere, which includes a cop leaning out of a car shooting erratically in a neighborhood.

"Son, you got a panty on your head."

They're argument after Cage robs the convenience store is fucking fantastic. Hunter's line reading of "things have got to chaaaaaaange!" and Cage blaming his criminal nature on coming from a long line of frontiersmen and outdoor types.

"Nathan Junior accepts me for who I am, and I think you better had, too."

"You're young, and you got your health. What do you want with a job?"

Glen has a "Caution: I drive naked" sticker on his car.

Cage scraping his knuckles on the popcorn ceiling during the fight is great.

I'll take this trailer fight over the one in Kill Bill Vol. 2 any day.

The store clerk in this movie is amazing.

"Unless round is funny."

"Well, which is it, young feller? You want I should freeze or drop to the ground?"

The ending reminds me of No Country. It’s a description of a dream (though this one is shown) followed by a mundane line, in this case: “I don’t know. Maybe it was Utah.”

There’s a YouTube video about Hi’s tattoo signifying that he’s part of a white supremacist prison gang called the Woodpeckers. I don’t buy it, mainly because the woodpecker he has tattooed on his arm is the logo called Mr. Horsepower for Clay Smith Cams. The video argues that Hi doesn’t seem to care too much about cars because his own car is so plain. But trust me, there are plenty of poor ass dudes driving shitboxes that are still into cars. I just think retroactively outing characters as racists is the new thing to do (kind of like in the 1990s when it was cool to look back through history and claim every significant figure was secretly gay). The dude in the video makes a decent argument, but I can’t imagine that the Coen brothers had such an intention with the tattoo. I think it was just something they thought a guy like Hi would have, and it worked as a visual signifier that Leonard Smalls (who has the same tattoo) was the human representation of Hi’s unreadiness for “adult” life.

Wild at Heart - "This Whole World's Wild at Heart and Weird on Top."

Wild at Heart, David Lynch’s surreal (what Lynch isn’t surreal except for the aptly titled Straight Story?) Bonnie and Clyde meets Wizard of Oz mash up, is one of my favorite Lynch films. I dig the simplicity of the plot (Sailor [Nicolas Cage] and Lula [Laura Dern] attempt to be together despite jail stints and Lula’s psychotic mother plotting against them with assassins and whatnot). But more than anything, I enjoy the constant movement necessary for a road movie because Lynch never has time to slow down and wallow in the weirdness, and neither does the audience. You’re forced to just go with it, and if you can embrace that, which I did, then it ends being Lynch’s most enjoyable (not necessarily best) film. I bought Wild at Heart a while back and never got around to watching it. After revisiting Lost Highway a few weeks ago, I figured it was time to watch this crazy movie again. Here are my thoughts.  

The Film That Fixed, or Broke, Nicolas Cage

I’ve written more than enough about Nicolas Cage over the years, and at this point it’s become a bit of a cliché to celebrate the craziness of the eccentric actor. Everyone gets it: Cage is crazy, great, terrible, etc. Obviously, I’m a fan, and I do think of him as endlessly entertaining, even when he swings and misses. But when he swings and connects, it’s something very special. Wild at Heart is one of those connections.

At first, I was just going to focus on how David Lynch and Cage are perfect for each other because they’re both so weird, but that’s a bit too obvious. I don’t think I’d be breaking new ground by claiming these two dudes are on the strange side. So I wasn’t going to write about Cage’s performance much at all aside from pointing out a few moments I particularly enjoyed. Then I came across this bit of IMDb trivia: Nic Cage states that Wild at Heart helped him get away from method acting. David Lynch's spontaneous re-writes and the film's odd characters helped him be more playful with acting.

If that bit of trivia is true (for the sake of this article, I’m going to say it is, but I have not come across this fact anywhere else and, actually, the behind-the-scenes stuff I saw brought up how he stayed in character on set, but oh well...), then Wild at Heart is the film that broke, or fixed, Cage. Cage’s method acting had already produced a few great performances (Raising Arizona and Vampire’s Kiss are my favorites leading up to Wild at Heart), but it wasn’t until this movie that you start to see roles in which it seems like Cage is willing to change things up with the characters he portrays. That’s not to say that he didn’t bring something to the parts he played, he obviously did, especially with Vampire’s Kiss. But with Wild at Heart, he was allowed to deviate from the character on the page. 

The best example of this is the inclusion of the snakeskin jacket Cage wears. He asked Lynch if he could wear it in the film, and then it became this recurring element in the movie. It’s not a coincidence that Cage’s line associated with the jacket concerns “individuality” and “personal freedom.” By wearing the jacket in this film, Cage was freed to start altering his roles in the future, for better or worse. 

Certainly part of the reason Cage was/is allowed to do whatever he wants at times is because of his undulating star power. But I think the bigger part is that directors see the value in letting Cage have a bit of freedom. Because of this freedom, we not only get exaggerated moments in big films (his moment dressed as a priest in Face/Off comes to mind), but we also get performances like Deadfall, which feel like complete Cage creations. 

Cage’s performance in Deadfall is why his change after Wild at Heart could be seen as both breaking and fixing him. For me, it fixed him and allowed for his greatest, most entertaining work. For others, his eccentric performances might come across as distracting, over-the-top disasters that ruin the movie. I feel sorry for anyone who feels the latter. I’m glad Cage put on that literal and figurative snakeskin jacket, and I hope he never takes it off. 

Embracing the Oddness

This is only the second time I have seen Wild at Heart, and I had forgotten how darkly funny and wacky this movie was. I found myself simply enjoying the film, which is odd for me, as I tend to try to decipher David Lynch movies.

Normally, the Random Thoughts section for any movie, but especially a David Lynch movie, would be the longest section. But when I got to the end of Wild at Heart, I realized I didn’t stop very often to make note of what was happening while I was watching. I couldn’t believe I had so few random thoughts about this batshit crazy Wizard of Oz sexual fever dream. I think the all out assault of weird shit throughout the film was too much for me to stop and dwell on any of it. I mean, we’re talking about a movie in which a contract killer manager(?) takes a phone call while sitting on the toilet, drinking tea, and watching a nearly naked woman dance for him. When that’s going on in what should be a simple scene, I just can’t stop to try to decipher any of it because by the time I start to have a thought, something else even wackier happens. And that’s why I love this movie. It’s Lynch unhinged just doing whatever the fuck he wants, and I enjoy the film by just embracing the oddness of it rather than allowing myself to be distracted by it.

It’s one of the only weird Lynch movies that I can just turn my brain off and enjoy. I don’t feel the need to “figure” it out. I think it’s his most simply entertaining film, even with it being one of the weirdest at the same time. Even with all the Wizard of Oz stuff, I didn’t feel the need to try to assign each character to their Oz counterpart. It’s just a movie that is heavily influenced by that film to the point that it’s kind of a new, weirder and more adult version of that film.

The fact that this is a kind of version of Wizard of Oz means that the film has to be constantly moving. There’s not much time for Lynch to dwell on anything, no matter how strange and interesting it might be. Wild at Heart comes at you fast, and the two hour run time feels like an hour at most. Because of this, it wasn’t until it was over that I had time to gather my thoughts and consider some of the crazy shit going on in this movie. I wanted to list some of my favorite weird moments:

• Harry Dean Stanton watching a nature show and growling and shit.
• The mom covering herself in lipstick.
• The constant heavy metal riff segue.
• “Fucking field, let’s dance!”
• Willem Dafoe’s fucking teeth.
• Laura Dern just puking on the floor and leaving it.
• Crispin Glover as Cousin Dell...there’s too much going on it that sequence to narrow it down but here goes: dressing as Santa in the middle of the year, living in fear of aliens wearing black rubber gloves, making a hundred sandwiches, putting cockroaches in his underwear and...on his anus, and then disappearing.
• There are plenty of references to Wizard of Oz throughout (with characters even talking about the movie multiple times), but things get truly crazy when Glenda the Good Witch shows up at the end to teach Sailor to embrace love.

And those are just what come to mind right now. I feel like I could make a list like this after each viewing, and it would be totally different. Wild at Heart is the fucked up movie that keeps on giving.

Why Do I Own This?

I buy any David Lynch movie that even remotely interests me because I know I’ll need to see it multiple times to truly appreciate it. I need to watch this one a few more times in the future.

Random Thoughts

Laura Dern always impresses me in her Lynch films. She just seems so at home in her roles, which is incredibly impressive when comparing this role to her part in Blue Velvet. She is convincing as both an innocent all-American small town girl and as an over-sexed Dorothy. I’m glad she finally won an Oscar for Marriage Story, but she deserved one at least thirty years ago.

A good triple feature would be this movie with Raising Arizona and Natural Born Killers. Of course, I’d need a lobotomy after watching all three of those in one day, but the experience would be worth it.

That is quite a beating to start a film. It definitely sets the tone for this fucked up story.

"My snakeskin jacket! Thanks, baby! Did I ever tell you that this here jacket represents a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom?" 

I feel like Cage has said this in his everyday life as well.

...and according to IMDb trivia the jacket was actually Cage's and he asked if he could wear it in the movie.

"Sounds like old Dell was more than just a little bit confused, Peanut."

"Lordy, what was that all about?" I think that could be the tagline for almost every Lynch movie.

Bobby Peru is the skeeziest character Willem Dafoe has ever played, and that's fucking saying something.

..

Crappy Nic Cage Movies that Aren't Actually Crappy #3: "Snake Eyes"

AKA That movie with actor Kevin Dunn and a character named Kevin Dunne but not played by Kevin Dunn.

This is it (for a week). I’m done with Nicolas Cage. Snake Eyes marks the end of my Cage trilogy of movies most critics/people hate that I liked enough to buy. I think I’m going to lose some people with this one, mainly because of the Roger Ebert connection. With Knowing and 8MM, Ebert was on my side, praising the films even more than I do. But with Snake Eyes, I lost him. He hated this movie, mainly because Brian De Palma made it. It’s not that he disliked De Palma, quite the opposite. It’s that De Palma is so talented that such a misfire is doubly disappointing because of the missed opportunity (oddly enough, at 40%, it’s the best reviewed of the trilogy on Rotten Tomatoes). I would argue that De Palma did just fine with this film.

Sure, Snake Eyes will never be brought up with Blow Out, Scarface, Carrie, or The Untouchables (among many others), but I don’t think it’s the black mark on his career that many would have you believe (that would be Mission to Mars [although on second thought, was that as bad as I remember...nope, not going there]). It’s still a compelling conspiracy thriller with plenty of the trademark De Palma style. Plus, Cage gets to sleaze it up, which is always fun. Oh, and apparently a character was based on Donald Trump, so there’s a whole new way to look at this film.

As always, SPOILERS throughout.

The Gimmick

The most memorable aspect of Snake Eyes is that it takes place over the course of one night (nearly in real time) and replays multiple scenes from different perspectives with trademark De Palma camerawork and split screens.

I’m a fan of De Palma’s work, so it’s always interesting to see his style at play, but what works more for me with this film is the single night aspect. I’m not sure why, but stories that are contained within a single day or night interest me. Usually, you see a character change over the course of days, months, or even years. But in a movie like this the change occurs in a single night. Cage is put through a lot as he begins the night trying to help his buddy, the obviously evil Gary Sinise. He starts to take his job as a detective seriously, which unfortunately leads him to realize he’s been betrayed by his obviously evil buddy. And Cage goes from corrupt scumbag cop to decent man. Unrealistic? Yeah, but what a night!

The different perspectives put this one over the top, though. I don’t see how anyone can watch this and not at least appreciate the planning and skill that it took to film this. Not only do the same scenes need to be filmed from different angles, but De Palma also makes most of them long takes, adding to the complexity. I think if you ignore the story (which some will no doubt encourage you to do anyway) and look at this film on a technical level, it’s quite an accomplishment, gimmick or not. That’s enough to make this film worth watching. But there’s so much more.

Sleazy Cage - The Trilogy of Terrible Father Cage

When I went down the rabbit hole of Cage as a husband/father in 8MM, it occurred to me that this trilogy had a common theme: Nicolas Cage is a terrible father and/or husband. In Knowing, we can’t be sure what kind of husband he was before his wife died, but he has definitely checked out as a dad. You can’t be doing too hot as a parent if it’s a good thing that your kid is abducted by aliens at the end. In 8MM, he’s ridiculously absent. His wife is home with a baby, and he takes a months-long porno job as soon as he gets home from a weeks-long job. Chasing down snuff films is not a job for a family man. (By the way, I also own The Family Man, but I don’t know if I’ll ever write about it.) And in Snake Eyes, Cage is cheating on his wife and seems generally annoyed with his son. In fact, the longest conversation he has with his wife is about pizza toppings. It’s not weird for a character in these extreme situations to lose focus on family, but it is odd that it’s not focused on a bit more. At least he appears to have realized his faults at the end of the films, though he gets the promise of a date with Carla Gugino at the end of Snake Eyes, so that’s an odd bit of comeuppance for being a scumbag.

"So I'm Kevin Dunn, but you're playing Kevin Dunne?" "I think so, Gary." "No, you're Gary, I'm Kevin Dunn!" "I'm Kevin Dunne, you're...does your character have a name?" "No, I mean in real life, you're Gary Sinise." "No...we are all Kevin Dunne now..."

Kevin Dunn and Kevin Dunne

I’ve always been a weirdo about actors and knowing their roles. I always checked the credits at the end of movies as a kid to see the names of the actors (I loved it when movies showed a picture of the cast with their name at the end, like in Coming to America). When IMDb became a thing I was in Heaven.

So the first time I watched Snake Eyes, I noticed Kevin Dunn, a character actor I’ve always found amusing. No big deal, Kevin Dunn is in a lot of movies. But then Gary Sinise shows up as...Kevin Dunne. It threw me off at first. So Kevin Dunn is in this movie, and there’s also a character named Kevin Dunne, but Kevin Dunn isn’t playing Kevin Dunne. Huh?

I’m sure it’s one of those weird coincidences, but why didn’t they change the character’s name when they realized what was going on? You can imagine the confusion on the set. According to the trivia section of IMDb, this coincidence led to Kevin Dunn getting Gary Sinise’s hotel room, which was apparently nicer than the one Dunn was meant to have. If that’s true, it’s hilarious. Also, why isn’t Dunn getting put up in decent hotel rooms? He needs good rest as much as Sinise!

"My missile shaped hotel and casino is going to be the biggest, most tremendous, classiest missile-themed establishment ever made!"

Is this a prophetic analysis of the Trump-Russia scandal?

I’m not being too serious with this one, but I did read in the IMDb trivia section that John Heard’s character, Gilbert Powell, was based on Donald Trump. I don’t think it’s a stretch since the character owns a casino and hotel, but in the film he’s also an arms manufacturer with close ties to the Secretary of Defense. The who conspiracy of the movie is that he has the Secretary killed so his faulty missile defense system can be approved, making him enough to money to...build a hotel and casino in the shape of a missile. Yeah, this is based on Trump.

In all seriousness, this is much more fascinating now than it would have been in 1998, when the film was released. So you have Powell, who is manipulating politicians and international diplomacy for his own financial gain...hmm. And once Cage starts digging around, Powell spends the rest of the movie terrified at the idea of an investigation. Here are some elements and lines that fit this theory:

There’s the metaphorical, and literal, storm brewing the entire film, threatening to destroy everything, much like the Russia investigation might destroy the Presidency.

The Secretary of Defense says, “Bert Powell is out of his mind.” This is reminiscent to a number of reports of cabinet members saying similar things about Trump.

Powell at one point yells, “No humiliation, no scandal, no prison!” This could be a Trump tweet.

Someone says there could be “all sorts of indictments.”

It’s a loose connection, sure, but I still think it’s good enough to look into. Of course, the screenwriter had no idea what would eventually happen with Trump. This is just a great example of what can happen when you rewatch a random old movie you own.

Is it crappy?

Nope. As I stated above, this will never be listed among De Palma's best, but that doesn't make it a bad movie. Maybe everyone has the same issue Ebert had: they know De Palma could do better. But that isn't fair. You can't compare every film a director makes to their best work. If you did that, then every director would only have one good film, and everything else is a missed opportunity. That said, I didn't find this to be a missed opportunity. Perhaps the story and characters had flaws, but not enough for me to write this film off. I think De Palma made an entertaining, stylized thriller with his typical impressive camerawork.

Favorite Cage Moments

Cage is pretty cartoonish throughout jumping around and yelling, which is honestly a bit annoying, but when he gets serious he becomes bearable.

If you hated his character, you do get to see him get the shit beat out of him later, which is nice.

He still wears his high school class ring. Awesome.

It’s commented on, but his clothing is ridiculous. He looks like a homeless lounge singer.

Random Thoughts

The storm’s biggest impact was cut? Apparently there’s massive flooding and everything, but De Palma didn’t think it worked, so he scrapped it. There’s evidence in the final film, when Cage mentions, near the end, about being “back in the tunnel, under water.” That’s kind of crazy that such an expensive sequence was shot, and it’s not even included on the DVD.

Carla Gugino is Velma from Scooby Doo for most of this movie.

I wish Stan Shaw was playing the same boxer he played in Harlem Nights.

“There I am just minding my business, writing a letter to my lovely wife…”

The Secretary of Defense tells someone to bring him evidence of a faulty missile defense program at a fight? Or was that Gugino’s idea? I can’t remember. Either way, it’s a very dumb place to share that information.

Not exactly sure how Sinise gets the Palestinian to do his bidding…

Will Smith was courted for Sinise’s role. Makes no sense. Only four years difference with Cage, but in 1998, Cage looks ten years older, at least.

Is it really called Snake Eyes because of Sinise’s (and, later, Cage’s) line and the casino setting? Weak. It seems like the title should have more to do with a conspiracy or an assassination or even boxing. But I can't think of a good one, either.

The end credits reveal is odd, showing the jewelry the redhead was wearing in the column.