Even in an era where caped superheroes dominate the local
movie screens, there’s always room for a good drug movie. Heroin, it seems, is just like Jell-O.
Junkies are, historically speaking, good fodder for movies. I
vaguely remember seeing a late night showing of Frank Sinatra in The Man With The Golden Arm many years
ago. He shivered and perspired, trying
to kick his habit, looking less like a real drug addict and more like modestly
talented actor hoping to impress the Academy voters. Drugstore
Cowboy made junkies look as dumb and desperate as they probably are, with
some surrealism thrown in. Trainspotting turned heroin addiction
into an ugly comedy with a rockin’ soundtrack. To their everlasting credit, the makers of Animals
don’t go in for nightmare imagery or histrionics. Jude and Bobbie, the two main characters, are
just a pair of lost souls being slowly destroyed.
In the wake of those earlier films, viewers might expect to
see at least a few scenes of torment and torture, or hear a few screams of
anguish. But we don’t see the addicts at their worst, just a few scenes of them
shooting up in public toilets. Jude and
Bobbie are not exactly Sid and Nancy.
They pull off some con jobs to get money, but they aren’t the swashbuckling
rebels that have made most drug movies somewhat entertaining. If there’s a resemblance to any couple in
previous drug movies, it’s to Al Pacino and Kitty Wynn, the colorless pair from
Panic in Needle Park (1971).
I mention those previous movies because the druggie film is
a genre in itself, as predictable as film noir or a horror movie, with certain characters
going through the same ordeals as those in previous films. All addicts seem to have the same story: they
get hooked, they enjoy it for a while, they experience some sort of downfall,
and then they try to clean up. Someone dies; someone survives. Animals
is no different than the drug films that came before it, though it’s more low
key. Jude has rotting teeth. Bobbie thinks she has breast cancer. They live in their car and they’re running
out of money. Jude loves her, and often
stares at her with moony eyes. She
appears to love him, too, but she’s harder to pin down. Then again, he gets her to pretend to be an
escort so they can rip off unsuspecting guys.
Is she doing it for him, or the junk?
The movie has a soft-edged, dreamy effect. It never quite gains momentum, and the few dramatic
events are small. The story might have
made an interesting memoir, but as cinema it feels light and airy. Still, it’s more watchable than most of the ‘indy’
stuff that has come down the pike in recent months.
This may be because of the terse screenplay by David
Dastmalchian, who also stars as Jude.
The story was allegedly personal to him, though I don’t know to what
degree. Jude appears to be a naïve bumbler,
quickly coming up with seedy ways to make money even though he claims to have
come from a privileged background. At
one point he wonders how a well-to-do white kid became addicted, ruminating briefly
on his cultured background. He doesn’t go
any deeper than that, which is just as well.
Dastlmalchian and director Collin
Schiffli are more interested in showing people trying to get out of the trap,
than falling into it.
Bobbie is less contemplative than Jude. She’s in love the
way a teenager is in love. She probably loves him because he’s always telling
her how wonderful she is. But she doesn’t take advantage of his worship. She’s a pretty good sport, considering they
spend most of their nights sleeping in the front seat of his old shitbox. At
one point we see Jude straining at the toilet, suffering from
constipation. “How’d it go?” Bobbie asks
later. “Not even an M&M,” he says.
Only a couple truly devoted to each other could engage in such dialog.
As Bobbie, Kim Shaw is playful and believable as an object
of desire. She never seems quite as
smart as Jude, though she proves in the end that she’s a survivor. Jude, though he seems more intelligent,
proves in the end that he’s not as smart as he thinks. Loving Bobbie and trying to maintain a heroin
addiction proves too much for him. I
like the way he takes it, though. He may turn out to be a reasonable, decent man.
Fortunately, neither kid dies. Had this been a 1970s film, one of them would’ve
croaked, to be sure. At the very least,
a baby or a puppy would’ve died.
Instead, it’s 2015 and people are a bit less fatalistic these days. The other curse of indy films circa 2015 is
that the makers of the movie fear going over the top. The film, at times, tries so hard to be
unemotional that it flatlines. This is a
mistake, because Jude and Bobbie are so insipid that there should’ve been
something loud or violent keep us interested. Jude lingers around some shady drug dens, and
has a run in with some cops, but that isn’t enough. Why do we remember Easy Rider? Because
everybody gets blown away in the end.
Still, I liked Animals. It is the movie it wanted to be, and even if
it doesn’t say much, it does so in its own voice.
No comments:
Post a Comment