(originally
published in The Outreach Connection
in July 2001)
I’ve cut down in the
past few years on my movie-related reading, but I still get through enough that
it’s hard for me to be truly surprised by a film. Even at the Toronto film
festival, I’ve generally already read reviews from Cannes or elsewhere for most
of the things I see – although admittedly I’m not as adventurous as I might be
in my selections. But the other day, I was reading the latest issue of the
British movie magazine Sight and Sound
(which by the way, like everything, used to be better in the old days) and I
was amazed to see that the film’s lead review, its “main attraction” for the
month, went to Ginger Snaps, a recent
Canadian film just opening in the UK.
Overlooked movie
I certainly knew
about Ginger Snaps, and I knew it had
received generally positive reviews, but somehow it had never occurred to me I
might actually go and see it. It’s hard to say why. I don’t think it’s much of
a title, and the trailer made it look like Carrie
3 under a different name. But perhaps it’s also that since Ginger Snaps hasn’t opened in the US
yet, I was missing the background whirr of publicity and discussion that almost
subliminally generates a sense of a film in one’s mind. Maybe if the Canadian
cultural mainstream had got behind the film as it does with, say, an Atom
Egoyan project, it wouldn’t have mattered as much. I’m sure I’ve read more
about Egoyan’s next film Ararat in
the Canadian press than about Ginger
Snaps, and the thing doesn’t even come out until next year.
Sight and Sound described Ginger Snaps as a “sparky, sharp film marked by intelligent
dialogue and a complex view of that moment when girls hover on the brink of
womanhood but would rather not take the next step.” This endorsement succeeded
for me where Eye and Now had failed, and I went to see the
film – fortunately still playing at the Carlton – the next day. And the thing
that occurred to me quite early on is now seldom I see horror movies nowadays
(there’s no point pretending Ginger Snaps
isn’t squarely within the horror genre), and if I see them at all, they belong
either to the world of low-budget digital video or to that of high-concept
special effects.
Ginger Snaps reminded me of the experience of watching
something like Kathryn Bigelow’s Near
Dark in 1987 (I’m not sure I have a much more recent example) – it loves
the fact that it’s a horror film, but doesn’t allow that to usurp the
considerations of theme and character, and it has an authentically gritty,
intimate feeling to it. It feels like a real movie. And the fact that it’s
Canadian, of course, is all the better. Egoyan and Cronenberg and Lepage are
all great – well, half-great at least – but Canadian cinema will never achieve
critical mass without a solid base of viable genre movies.
Horror movies
Ginger Snaps is about two outcast teenage sisters, living
in an unidentified, bland Canadian suburb – they do the gothic thing, take
faked snuff photos of each other, and have a suicide pact that’s supposed to
kick in when they’re sixteen. Ginger, the older of the two, is bitten one night
by an unidentified beast that’s been slaughtering the local dogs. Her scars
heal mysteriously quickly, but then they start to sprout thick hairs. Ginger
develops some powerful instincts she’s never had before. She grows a tail. And,
on the night all this starts, she gets her first period, causing some ambiguity
over what’s a symptom of what. The second sister hooks up with a local drug
dealer who’s into mythology and tries to help her figure out a cure, but
meanwhile Ginger is mutating out of control, and infecting the neighborhood as
she goes.
A few weeks ago, for
reasons that are rather obscure, I received a DVD of the Stephen King film Cujo as a gift. I’d never seen it, and
it turns out to be entertaining enough, but it seems very much like an
adaptation of a novel in that it’s full of unresolved, disconnected plot
strands that surely wouldn’t have existed in a screenplay created more
autonomously. I haven’t read King’s book, but I’m guessing that the encounter
with the rabid Cujo must have served there in part as a metaphor, as a mode of
resolution for the various traumas set up earlier. The movie comes over as
forty-five minutes of stilted personal travails resembling outtakes from a
daytime soap opera, followed by forty-five minutes of a crazy dog. The second
half at least is well staged and quite suspenseful, but the overall shape of
the film didn’t make much sense to me.
Positive images
I’m just mentioning Cujo because it’s the last example I
saw, but this messiness seems to be pretty typical of the genre. Ginger Snaps is unusually integrated and
cohesive, whether measured by its preoccupations or its plot. I thought the
movie was at its best when at its most energetically allusive – juxtaposing
menstrual blood with that of Ginger’s victims; or dramatizing how she swings
between fear and revulsion at what’s happening to her, and fully sexualized
divadom where she harnesses the beast and struts her stuff. Her sister - starting off even less well-adjusted than
Ginger – subtly matures through the demands of coping the crisis, setting up a
neat counterpoint in rites of passage. And their mildly deranged (in the sense
that yours probably is too) mother, played by Mimi Rogers, trying hopelessly to
embody a positive image for the kids, contributes a witty portrait of the
future that’s at stake.
Katharine Isabelle
makes a terrific centre for the film as Ginger – she really commands the
screen. Ginger Snaps isn’t perfect
though. Too much perhaps is made of the anonymity of the Ontario suburbs –
things have a rather under-populated, unspecific feeling that at times takes
events too far toward abstraction. And it seems to me that the film ultimately
turns into too much of a pure monster movie, leaving several interesting
strands unresolved, although not to the extent of Cujo. Maybe this is something no horror movie can avoid, however
smart it might be.
Which leaves me with
the mild guilt of having discovered the year’s most enjoyable Canadian film
only by virtue of a British magazine. Well, I’m viewing that as a learning
experience. But maybe I should resubscribe to some of that other stuff I
canceled.
No comments:
Post a Comment