Monday, June 30, 2025

Just This Darkness

Maybe 15 was too young to see BLUE VELVET. But that’s in the past. And I did see that David Lynch film when it came out, at Yonkers Movieland on opening weekend or close to it in the fall of 1986 and all this was at a point when I wasn’t having trouble getting into R-rated movies anymore. It’s very possible that first time was maybe the closest I will ever come to the feeling of seeing PSYCHO when it first opened back in 1960, like seeing into the possible future of what films might become, revealing something completely new and unexpected. I knew then that it was one of the best films I’d ever seen. I still know it now. Returning to the film each time places it once again in the context of David Lynch’s entire career and every time I revisit a David Lynch film it feels like the one that I’m watching is my favorite. But really, it’s probably BLUE VELVET. And MULHOLLAND DRIVE. And the entire run of TWIN PEAKS: THE RETURN. Regardless, every David Lynch film contains a power that can take me back to that certain time in my life I was first discovering it, the way every one of them causes my brain to explode to make it feel like I’m back in a time when I was first discovering certain films and wanted to do nothing more than talk about them endlessly. BLUE VELVET was one of the first of these for me, one of those key films that I saw around this time (BRAZIL was another about six months earlier) that made me think, ‘this is what movies are?’ and it came at an age when I was open to it as well as lucky I didn’t have parents who were against me seeing a film like this. Or more likely that they had other things going on and weren’t paying very close attention.
And now, in the present, David Lynch is gone. It still doesn’t seem right. Several days after it happened back in January, I was flying out of Burbank early one morning but first stopped off at Bob’s Big Boy in Toluca Lake, so early the sun wasn’t up yet, to see the impromptu memorial that had sprouted there and pay my respects. Much of that week was spent thinking about all those ways his films mean so much to me, how much they affected me, how much they continue to stay with me. As awful as his passing was, the overwhelming response of pure love to that tragedy remains just about the most wonderful thing of this horrible year, a reminder of the beauty he inspires in people as things all around us drown in a sewer. That’s what he shows us. The beauty among the ugliness. The light seen in the dark. The love mixed with the hate. The whole world that’s wild at heart and weird on top. And we still see all that in our dreams.
But back to the past, which is also what BLUE VELVET gets me to think about. The town of Lumberton where it’s set feels like a sort of purgatory for its lead character. One of those periods when you’re not in high school or college, where you might find yourself stranded for some months when things haven’t gone the way you wanted, ready to start your life but you’re stuck there walking certain streets where you used to know people only by then they’re all gone. It all ends. The darkness falls. In your mind, in your memory, that town is always going to be the same. That’s how it is for me and the place where I grew up. To this day, it’s hard for me to ever think anything sexual about that place, it never seemed to exist there which maybe is what you’re supposed to think about the town where you grew up anyway. It’s supposed to be the beginning. Writing something on Facebook after he passed, I found myself typing out, “Seeing a David Lynch film for the first time was like seeing what the world could be.” Not should be. Not what it is. But what it sometimes feels like is there, some sort of power in the air that you weren’t aware of, waiting to be discovered. The world that we know is possible, much as we don’t always want to see it.
When his father is hospitalized, college student Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan) returns home to Lumberton, North Carolina to help and work at the family hardware store. One day after visiting the hospital, Jeffrey is walking home through a vacant lot when he discovers a human ear on the ground. Taking it to the police, he meets Detective Williams (George Dickerson) and soon visits him at home to learn more about the case. There he meets his daughter Sandy (Laura Dern) who tips him off about lounge singer Dorothy Vallens (Isabella Rossellini) who may have a connection to what her father is investigating. Still curious, Jeffrey comes up with the idea to sneak into her apartment late at night to learn more and enlists Sandy’s help, but when he gets inside and encounters the woman, he discovers her connection to the terrifying criminal Frank Booth (Dennis Hopper) who may be more dangerous than he ever imagined.
The thing is, so many films fade. You outgrow them, you disconnect from them, they don’t have the power over you they once did. Looking back at it now, 1986 feels like the depths of the decade that was the 80s, some of the biggest films released during that period are forever connected to the cultural rot of the time. BLUE VELVET feels like it’s an integral part of the ‘80s yet defiantly disconnected from the decade, in the dividing line between then and the ‘50s iconography that is there on the edges adding so much that maybe this is the film that should have been called BACK TO THE FUTURE. This is, after all, the film that really has something to say about how one affects the other, how the past wasn’t as sweet as we want to think it was and no matter what has happened since, the future still contains the possibility of hope. On a very basic level the thriller plot of the film is still so enormously effective but the power the entire film holds is so much more than that, still feeling surprising while going so much further than any other film that has tried to do the same and whether the moment becomes a sly joke or the most terrifying sight imaginable the frisson it provides is unlike anything else, all coming together as part of this strange world.
It always feels a little nebulous what stage of life Kyle MacLachlan’s Jeffrey Beaumont is in. Maybe that’s because he’s not sure either. If anything, he’s in a holding pattern, home from school, not sure if he’ll be able to ever go back. Viewing the state his father is in, he needs to suddenly become an adult for the first time and is still trying to put that off as long as possible with this new project he begins for himself. He really has no one to tell him otherwise. You’re older and you suddenly find yourself trying to talk to a father who can’t speak and can’t help while the mother stays focused watching a TV that always seems to contain some sort of noirish crime show playing on it, depicting a life that presumably is far away from the sort of place Lumberton is. And, of course, Jeffrey is bored, just as you’re going to be in a small town, stuck in a place that may as well be a black hole of darkness as seen in the cutaways to the empty sidewalk in front of Jeffrey and Sandy, the trees overhead, the nightmarish darkness of the quiet neighborhood stretching out in front of them forever. The house that he points out where a childhood friend once lived who moved away doesn’t seem to have someone new living there, it just looks abandoned. It’s the end of his childhood and the whole place looks dead to him so naturally he’s going to stumble upon a strange body part lying on the ground. The theme of discovering the ugliness that lies below a tranquil surface almost seems simple now all these years later but it’s something he becomes forced to learn. Maybe in places like that you need to be reminded. “Here’s to an interesting experience,” he says to Sandy as they drink their Heineken at the beginning of it all, when he has no idea what’s coming.
On a very basic level, BLUE VELVET remains an extraordinary film in everything it does, the terror and humor of the world it’s set in, the way things unfold and how far it wants to go. Of course, everything that happens feels like it has some extra level of meaning. At this early stage the idea of narrative is still very much a part of what Lynch is doing. This would become more fractured as time went on and something like LOST HIGHWAY may be a puzzle to decipher but it also is much less of a strict linear plot than this film is. One thing which sets BLUE VELVET apart from all sorts of other thrillers, besides how normal they all seem in comparison, is that Jeffrey Beaumont isn’t thrust into this world against his will. He’s not a Hitchcockian everyman on the run for something he didn’t do, but another Hitchcockian lead like the one in VERTIGO who gets drawn further and further into the story even before he realizes it. Jeffrey didn’t have to get involved with any of this and in that dreamlike way, no matter what he says, it all seems like he does it for some unconscious reason that can never be fully explained. It’s a tone where adhering to a strict version of reality is never the biggest concern so we don’t know specifically what malady befell Jeffrey’s father, we don’t need a scene with a doctor who explains he had a stroke and yadda yadda, just as we don’t know exactly what Frank is inhaling each time he comes into Dorothy’s apartment. We never even have Dorothy explicitly tell us things from her own point of view and how she feels about it. We know enough just from looking at her. It's the imagery and the feeling that matters, not the specifics of the language. And we don’t know why Jeffrey is doing this at first. Maybe he’s just looking for that interesting experience, maybe just wanting to get involved in a Hardy Boys sort of mystery while he’s bored amidst the cheeriness of that hardware store and sitting around at home. Eventually he does say that it’s because this is something that has always been hidden, he’s finding something more than what’s on the surface in his lazy small town where presumably everyone is smiling and cheerful. But he seems to know that the Deep River Apartments nearby over on Lincoln contains a darkness where he shouldn’t go, it’s like that feeling is already inside of him, he’s just never been able to see it up close. When he’s discovered in the closet and Dorothy tells him to get undressed, the framing places her within his raised arm so it’s like she’s already inside of him, and even though we don’t see the full extent of his reaction when Dorothy begins kissing him way down below still holding that knife in her hand ready to use it, we don’t need to. We just know. And she knows what he’s there for.
Dorothy Vallens looks right at home in the beautiful, haunting, alien set of the seedy elegance that is her apartment, where it all gets revealed just as the fantasy she presents singing at The Slow Club. She likes to sing “Blue Velvet,” taking the cheeriness of that song heard at the beginning and turning it into a dark entry for Jeffrey as he wanders into this world, Sandy glancing over at him as he gazes at the older woman, not knowing what he might be thinking, not knowing if he’s a detective or pervert. Whatever Dorothy is ever thinking about seems indescribable, wearing a wig that makes her seem slightly off no matter how much she appears to be the most beautiful woman in the world, absurdly and painfully beautiful, yet there’s something about her that makes you want to look away. Sandy, meanwhile, is the vision of light in another part of Lumberton, introduced emerging from the dark, still going to high school with a presumably normal boyfriend who plays football and for some reason has a Montgomery Clift photo on her wall, making me imagine him turning up on TWIN PEAKS at age 70 if he had lived that long. Sandy has her dreams of love and through that comes her very sincere belief that it can spread into the world but it’s not as easy as she ever thinks, her plan of honking the horn to warn Jeffrey in the apartment is a good one but she can’t warn him about what’s coming. He needs to enter that world on his own. Sandy is the light emerging from the dark, open and honest unlike the cryptic nature of the other woman, willing to fight her way through it and offer forgiveness. When Jeffrey finally hits Dorothy after her protests, it’s what she desperately wants, what she desires, and it turns the two of them into something else altogether. When she’s seen in the light, the only time she’s seen outside during the day, and she still seems unable to keep from thinking of the dark for very long, still forever haunted by what has happened.
Every shot in this film means something, frames of those images in every single scene deserve to be hung on walls, every moment has a power brought to it by Lynch and cinematographer Frederick Elmes that makes almost anything completely haunting, the most off kilter looks at someone’s face become surprising for reasons that are unknown, the most offhand cuts have an indescribably unnerving effect, how the ever-present sound work makes even the smallest things seem ominous, or just something random in the corner of the frame. Whether it’s Dorothy leaning back in ecstasy, everyone lined up in Ben’s apartment, the darkness of Dorothy’s hallway stretching out, all a part of this look at a small town in the service of this version of the time when some people thought American was something it isn’t now. Every look at someone seems to mean something more in particular when Lynch, just as he does in a few other films, gives us close-ups on someone that are almost uncomfortably intimate, in a way that no other director can pull off, and it somehow makes them more hauntingly beautiful than ever. There’s one brief close-up of Laura Dern like this when Jeffrey leaves for the apartment but also so many of Isabella Rossellini, so powerful that maybe they’re what the male gaze is really supposed to be in all its best ways, appropriate for a director who gives us female characters the way he does, accompanied by rumblings in the Alan Splet sound design that come from nowhere making the most beautiful image unnerving in itself just as the music by Angelo Badalamenti and his score gives the movie a soul, whether haunting or angelic, that is almost unexplainable.
The wind blowing in the curtains, resembling Dorothy’s blue velvet robe, makes us feel uneasy for reasons we can’t even express just as so many things in the film do and maybe to fully understand BLUE VELVET you would have to understand why Jeffrey wants to sneak into that apartment and hide in the closet to begin with. That place where he discovers Frank Booth, a nightmare who has come to life, an id, a demon and one who can only come alive in the dark, taking his neighbor out for a joyride. “This is it,” Frank says before a neon sign in the window reading exactly that is seen, one of my favorite offhand laughs in the entire film, and we can only imagine what his relationship with Ben is just as we can imagine the two of them going way back just as we can imagine Hopper and Stockwell knowing each other in Hollywood way back in the ‘50s only adds to this. No moment during the stopover at Ben’s feels in any way rational, just as it feels like the voice responsible for “In Dreams” can only come from the person who appears to be singing it even as we know it’s really Roy Orbison but it still feels possible right up until the spell is suddenly broken. Trapped in this place, it’s easy to believe that the worst can really happen. There’s no way to escape except to continue into the night with Frank and the jump cut removing them all from the frame on his laugh is just as terrifying as that thought. Maybe we all contain this darkness. If someone says they don’t, they’re probably lying. If someone says they don’t, maybe they have it more than anyone. “Now it’s dark,” Frank says so he can come alive. He lives in an industrial area that feels like the literal bowels of the town and even if he is briefly seen during the day, it’s impossible to imagine him or any of these people ever existing before nightfall. There’s so much plot stuff that the movie wisely skips over since we don’t need to hear it and Dorothy’s silent reaction to seeing her son during the “In Dreams” sequence makes it seem like Frank’s entire plan is simply to do the worst thing imaginable, causing a son to no longer love his mother. That’s where the real darkness is. “You’re like me,” which is maybe the most terrifying thing Frank says of all, as if suddenly realizing what Jeffrey is really doing there.
In some ways what the film does is a dry run for what became TWIN PEAKS, a comparison that was obvious when the show premiered and it was easy to imagine Jeffrey Beaumont becoming Dale Cooper, but it’s also a dry run for a lot of things including what kind of filmmaker Lynch was really going to be as the years went on, with the very idea of story mattering less in relation to what he wanted to explore in his art, an idea still developing here even as it feels totally crystalized. The running time of almost exactly two hours gives the impression there was a contractual element to keeping it at such a length but the film is so brilliantly paced and structured that there’s not a moment I would lose. The extensive deleted footage that has appeared on Blu-ray was a revelatory discovery when it first turned up, running about an hour long (the first rough cut was reportedly just under four hours), but as fascinating and as valuable as it all is there’s not a single moment that feels like it should go back in. The film that BLUE VELVET became as it was molded into that two-hour running time, one of the best such jobs ever with editor Dwayne Dunham presumably working closely with Lynch, turned it into exactly what it needed to be.
Even now, even after everything else I’ve discovered in all the years since, it's about as close to a perfect film as I’ve ever seen. The way the story unfolds, the most shocking moments are revealed in a way that lets the viewer find them and understand for themselves what they mean and though it’s also a perfect film to analyze in many ways what the film is also resists doing that since it’s so purely Lynch and what is going on inside his own head so why spoil all the fun. Even after he’s taken on the hellish joyride by Frank, Jeffrey is never really forced to confront all this until the very end when the horror of it all literally shows up in his front yard. On a structural level, when Jeffrey returns to hide in Dorothy’s closet one final time at the end it’s a brilliant way to return to where all this started but it can also be read as symbolic of so many things, a sort of womb to provide a rebirth as a way for him to enter this world that must retreat back to one final time so he can escape. Jeffrey didn’t have to do any of this in the first place, but in the end as he’s faced with the horrific imagery of that tableau of the bodies in Dorothy’s apartment and as the “Love Letters” montage, a love letter coming directly from Frank into the world, brushes past so much plot stuff we don’t need to know, he’s forced. There’s no other way out. In the end the film presents that interesting experience as something he needed to go through, something real which was entirely because of the dreams and desires in his own head. Moving past innocence is inevitable and necessary but it’s always going to be there as a reminder of what the world could be, as it was when we were still children. It’s there in the mirrored perfection of the two families at the end, the fathers and the mothers as well as the two children who are now together as a reminder of this. The robin with the bug in its mouth seen at the end and the strange world it wants to be a part of. Nothing about it seems real but anything from the past we grew up in long ago can be as real in our memories as we want.
Kyle MacLachlan, fully entering the David Lynch universe after his beginnings in DUNE, displays total confidence as Jeffrey showing him as curious and antsy, frightened and determined to enter this world. He’s an everyman eager for things to happen, with a look that makes it seem like he wants to be cooler than this small town drinking his Heineken, and he gets you to believe that he would really attempt to do all this. He carries the film and grounds it, becoming a perfect fusion with Lynch’s view of the world. And the way the phenomenal Laura Dern takes a character who is supposed to be the normal, dull one and gives her passionate life, bringing a level-headed focus that combines rationality and belief in the good. Because of this film and their other work with him, MacLachlan and Dern are like the avatars for the perfect Lynch couple, how he sees all the good in the world. They are the light.
But so much of the talk of the idea of performance here goes beyond simple acting, particularly the way Isabella Rossellini plays Dorothy as haunted and otherworldly, the way she uses her body language, the way she leans forward and reveals her innermost thoughts just by a glance, always compelling, continually fascinating. When Dennis Hopper enters the film for the first time it becomes something else entirely just from the sound of his voice so where he takes this role becomes a place that feels truly demonic even when he suddenly quiets down and no other Hopper performance ever feels truly this dangerous as if the film itself didn’t know he would go this far. Once he’s there, the unexplainable shift that occurs when Dean Stockwell enters makes perfect sense and he clearly belongs near the top of the list of best one-scene performances of all time. Every performance here is a part of such a feeling, no matter how brief. Jack Nance, for the way he tells Jeffrey his name, and Brad Dourif are perfect just as Hope Lange and Priscilla Pointer are in their worlds as well, in each case you know who they are and what they represent immediately. As Detective Williams, George Dickerson underplays his role in just the right way and finds his cinematic immortality in the way he says, “Yes. That’s a human ear, all right.” It’s a steady presence and the sort of thing needed to believe that there might be someone willing to take charge, no matter what’s going on below the surface.
Just like films, memories fade. Some of them stay with you too and they’re not always the things you want to remember. I was lucky. I don’t usually think of my teenage years that way, there was too much to be depressed about a lot of the time and too much to want to escape, but it’s probably true. There was just a lot I had yet to learn. Seeing BLUE VELVET when it first opened all those years ago meant that it gave me plenty of time to think about what the film was, what it meant, plus I got to see it when it was an audience of people going to see the latest critically acclaimed art film, so they weren’t going to approach it with ironic laughter. Nobody told them that’s what people would eventually do, which is what it seems like I hear about every time the film plays in a theater somewhere and I’d rather not find out for myself. Maybe it’s my problem or at least the way my brain is wired so I never think of this film as merely camp and doing that just always seems wrong. Years after I first saw the film, there was the occasional Lynch Encounter around town from afar. A surprise appearance with Laura Dern after a screening of WILD AT HEART hosted by Edgar Wright at the New Beverly, certainly one of the greatest nights ever at that theater. Spotting him at Figaro on Vermont having dinner. Then one day some years back I was walking down Hillhurst, glanced across the street at some people walking into an ice cream shop and realized that one of them was absolutely David Lynch. I crossed the street, went inside and stood behind Lynch with his family as they ordered then got a chocolate cone for myself, thinking about how I had recently seen a 35mm print of DUNE but of course I didn’t say anything to him. I left them alone. And now David Lynch is buried at Hollywood Forever so of course as soon as that news was announced I went over to pay my respects and sit there for a few minutes. I’m sure I’ll stop by again soon. But so much is in the past and it continues to reach out to us. It should never be where we live today but it does help to hold onto that feeling, to remember that these things did happen. These films were made and still mean something to what we became. It's a strange world and it always will be. In the end, try to find love where you can. Find your way out of the darkness.

Thursday, June 5, 2025

Better Than Nothing

There’s only so much to be gained from spending a lot of time thinking about the past, but this attitude can be a problem when writing about movies released long ago. For one thing, Steven Soderbergh is a director who seems to have very clear feelings about each of his films and how they’ve turned out. Based on multiple interviews with him, he seems to have a firm handle on what he’s tried to do throughout his career and is aware of which films may have gone astray for whatever reason. You get the feeling that he’s perfectly happy to talk about these things, but he doesn’t continually obsess over them either. His mind has been made up. The films he’s made recently have all the confidence of a director who has nothing left to prove while still wanting to try new things but is maybe more interested in just enjoying himself. The shipboard drama LET THEM ALL TALK and Covid-era thriller KIMI feel like they’re among the best of this recent batch, two films with very different goals and the only real criticism I have of them is how much they’ve been allowed to basically disappear into streaming unless you know where to look—presumably they’re still where they’re supposed to be, but who can remember these things. Looking over his filmography, there are a few projects I still need to get to, especially some TV stuff, but it gets easy to lose track when streaming is part of it all. His career seems divided into multiple stages now—the acclaim at the start and the fallout, the rebuilding that led to his Oscar, the studio heights of the OCEAN’S series and the George Clooney partnership, the move into digital, his own rumblings on possible retirement and the return from that decision leading into the streaming era. There is a thread that can be found in each of these and it’s almost like by this point I can recognize a scene directed by Steven Soderbergh just by the font usage and naturalism of the room tone but his films also have that controlled sense of genre and the way they present people trying to understand just who can really be trusted, a theme which turns up in a number of his films as he explores the basic idea from all sorts of different angles.
But to use the example of one film in particular, the director has also somewhat famously been dismissive of THE UNDERNEATH, his remake of the noir classic CRISS CROSS, saying that he decided the film was basically DOA in the middle of production even though he had no choice but to proceed forward. Released in the spring of 1995 (Happy 30th!) to a mixed response and little box office, the experience caused Soderbergh to immediately regroup so he could put together what became SCHIZOPOLIS, a no-budget piece of absurdism that he also starred in. Getting his mojo back from that experience led to the run of OUT OF SIGHT, THE LIMEY, ERIN BROCKOVICH, his Best Director Oscar for TRAFFIC and beyond. And much as I like each of these films, I would still willingly tell him that I also like THE UNDERNEATH, really I do, and would do this knowing he’d never agree but the movie still offers a mix of personal style and suspense that remains effective in a way that still feels like it could only have come from him. I can understand feeling that it’s too sleepy, too constrictive, but as a noir story crossed with the aimless mood in the air of what I remember from the mid-90s something about it still clicks for me, the awareness of fucking up in the past which leads to the realization that the only thing left to do is fuck up again. Coming from someone who still worries about doing that sort of thing, it does make a lot of sense. And it even anticipates films by the director he had yet to make so however he feels, it goes perfectly with his body of work that was still to come.
Several years after fleeing Austin due to gambling debts, Michael Chambers (Peter Gallagher) returns to see his mother (Anjanette Comer) and be there for her new marriage to Ed (Paul Dooley), a friendly sort who works for an armored car company where he soon gets Michael a job. Michael’s brother David (Adam Trese) is openly hostile to him but even worse is when he tracks down his ex-wife Rachel (Allison Elliott) who he left behind and is now attached to Tommy (William Fichtner), a nightclub owner with some criminal activity on the side. Michael goes after Rachel again but when they’re caught by Tommy, Michael offers him a plan to rob one of the armored cars, figuring this will be exactly what he needs.
Writing the script for SEX, LIES AND VIDEOTAPE which became his breakthrough along with how he starred in SCHIZOPOLIS with ex-wife Betsy Brantley soon after their marriage ended makes the films directed by Steven Soderbergh sound more personal than maybe the majority of them are, films that maybe explore similar ideas in a way that isn’t always apparent when the focus feels more on genre. THE UNDERNEATH is officially based on the novel “Criss Cross” by Don Tracy but still feels like it’s returning to themes explored in the earlier film, the idea of a man who screwed up big time returning to a place he once knew to sort out what was left behind. And though he wrote the script for THE UNDERNEATH, Writers Guild arbitration dictated sharing the co-screenwriting credit with Daniel Fuchs, screenwriter on the original film of CRISS CROSS back in 1949, which led to Soderbergh ultimately using the pseudonym “Sam Lowry”. It’s a name many will recognize as the main character in BRAZIL, likely a comment on the bureaucracy involved with the decision and that winds up feeling about as personal as anything else in the film. But there is more to THE UNDERNEATH which delivers a very controlled tone all the way through mixing character study in the heist plotline along with the Austin vibe in the air so at the time it felt like the film was nailing something of the feel of the time. It still does even now, at least in the club scenes or maybe the cool indie tone to it all just feels like the time in general but it’s a meshing together of genre and character drama looking to find a personal connection in the material. SEX, LIES AND VIDEOTAPE opens with shots of a road taken from a car in motion and THE UNDERNEATH begins with its main character driving as well, but in the first film it feels all about possibilities while in this one, a film where the very first moment starts its non-linear narrative structure already in the middle before going back, the route has already been planned but the endpoint isn’t leading anywhere good.
And THE UNDERNEATH does feel personal, not just as partly a fatalistic neo-noir redo of SEX, LIES AND VIDEOTAPE in addition to the film it’s an actual remake of but it also anticipates the setup of his own OCEAN’S ELEVEN remake six years later, a film made with much more of a commercial goal in mind but still a heist movie which is ultimately about getting an ex-wife back more than the job in question, the personal crossed with the interest in genre, an issue of motivation that THE UNDERNEATH chooses to be a little murkier about. The obliqueness of the plotting is a big part of it, like how Michael and Rachel were apparently married but if it wasn’t for the presence of a wedding ring we’d never know, not to mention just the simple idea of motivation as well as just who is playing who at any point. If I’m counting right Soderbergh has directed four official remakes in his career, not including a few others that he wrote or produced, and it almost gives the impression of trying to recreate films he has encountered with his own goals in mind, whether this is all coincidence or his own version of auteurism as criticism. But it’s really a film with a focus on one character and his connection to the people close to him, the guilt that comes with that and the easy ways to screw up all those second chances, mixed in with a welcome number of small laughs coming from the clever dialogue for what mostly feels like a quiet, morose film while always aided by the moody Cliff Martinez score. Something about the approach even feels like the nineties or at least my memory of the nineties or maybe it’s the dream of those nineties films when they played in art houses back then, felt in the nightclub scenes which have the vibe of all those people in the moment responding to the music, those days when you don’t know where you’re going, don’t know why you’re there, don’t know why you’re calling someone, with much less to worry about than you realize until you create all those problems for yourself.
In that noir tradition, it’s also a film about refusing to let go of things that you’ve already run away from, trying to move forward but still holding onto what you once had. “I don’t know if getting back with you is a moment of strength or a moment of weakness,” Rachel tells him, unable to decide. Gallagher exudes a sort of cocky intelligence as Michael but one that’s always looking for a short cut, seen reading multiple self-help books in search of the magic answer. But nobody has that answer and no one can let go of those resentments of the past or the dream of that big lottery win which you keep telling yourself is going to come eventually and it really is a film populated by people looking for the winning lottery ticket so they can get that easy money, particularly in the flashbacks of Michael gambling and buying a huge, stupid satellite dish to watch all the games he’s betting on. Rachel is looking to be an actress in the flashbacks, or maybe just the winning lottery ticket of being an actress, but the only big audition we see her preparing for is to be the girl who hosts the nightly number pick. Even Michael’s mother wants her lottery scratch-offs as her wedding day approaches, just in case that big win could still happen. The most decent person in the entire film has the healthiest attitude about the way things turn out in life and even his own big dream is still a modest one. Maybe the second most decent person in the entire film also has a regular job and is smart enough to know that she’s the girl in second place but that’s the way things go sometimes. In the noir tradition, the film really is about wanting more which is always the easiest way to screw things up.
The tone through it all is set by how careful the direction always is down to the framing of every single shot which at least partly seems to be what Soderbergh disliked in his own film the most, looking to ultimately break free from all the constrictions. This is all filtered through his visual and storytelling tricks via a non-linear narrative that jumps from the present tense to flashbacks and flashforwards that detail Michael’s movements on the day of the robbery all done in a way that, helped by film stock and the presence of a beard, feels so assured that it never becomes confusing. If Robert Siodmak’s visual style in CRISS CROSS is a product of German expressionism, then what Soderbergh does here is more like American indie Expressionism, at least it felt that way until PULP FICTION changed everything about how to approach crime dramas then, but here it’s at least doing something with the frame that keeps it always active through a cutting style equally careful about keeping your focus on what’s right there. It’s a reminder of how much of this purely visual approach was still possible when all this was being done on film, not that I want to turn this into a film vs. digital debate, but something really was lost when Soderbergh abandoned the former for the latter and his aesthetic was altered which he seems ok with anyway. But the look he achieved back in the ‘90s is stunning and it’s a gorgeous looking film, shot by Eliot Davis who would do the same on OUT OF SIGHT a few years later, and it almost feels like part of the point of the whole thing was to make it gorgeous looking even if this look became something that kept it distancing. It’s a visual style that pushes the use of colors and the anamorphic frame all through, to make every single image stand out if it can, with enough split diopter shots all through that it feels like Soderbergh was having fun making this film, I just have to take him on his word that he wasn’t. But that kind of framing does give certain moments the classic De Palma feel, along with the diopter-heavy look to an early dinner table conversation that I’m guessing took its inspiration from the framing of the mashed potato scene in Spielberg’s CLOSE ENCOUNTERS. Even a vendor number spotted in giant close-up that figures into the plot is likely an obvious George Lucas reference. And the way the film basically stops dead, in a very effective way, in the aftermath of the big heist with the multiple timelines finally converging during the final third with part of it directly from Michael’s queasy POV which offers no escape, a destination that can only be a dead end with nowhere else to go.
But along with all this is that feeling of a low hum through the entire thing which plays as correctly noir for the nineties, a very different era than the post-war heyday of the genre but people are still trying to find the easiest way to get the payout. “So beneath the apathetic exterior there was actually a raging indifference,” Rachel says to Michael about his behavior which is one way to look at character motivation and the tone of the entire film as well. The harshness of the dialogue that veers into jokiness since people like this are going to make those jokes anyway. “You’re not very present tense,” Michael is also told and the non-linear plotting feels appropriate for a main character who is so unmoored, along with how so much of the film seems to be in the desperation seen in the eyes of various characters who can’t seem to smile unless they know how to fake it. Fittingly, it’s a film with a main character who’s never as cool as he thinks he is, not when he’s placing his bets, not when he’s trying to get Rachel’s attention via cocktail napkin placed under a drink and certainly not when he comes up with the entire stupid plan to begin with. It also feels cynical enough that what happens to the main character barely seems to matter at the end and you could hardly blame someone for not even remembering when he’s last seen since the final moment since the film shortly after moves on to someone else shortly after and then the very end raises a few other questions entirely. The similarities to OCEAN’S ELEVEN are there—we still need to keep straight exactly what is a remake of what here—but to compare the two it’s like with THE UNDERNEATH he was making a mood piece/character study/art film and with OCEAN’S, along with its sequels and a few others he’s made, he wanted to make a movie and that’s where the fun of these things comes from. Maybe it was also the chance to do something like this over again and not only make it more commercial but more human, not so ice cold and fatalistic. It’s a fantasy version of trying to do that sort of thing over to make everything right and the OCEAN’S films certainly have nothing to do with reality but maybe he decided that type of escape is one of the reasons we go to the movies in the first place. With THE UNDERNEATH and its combination of character study of a fuckup and noir thriller to explore how well the genres can mesh it still works and feels like a movie about the possibilities always in front of us, it all just gets screwed up when we can’t get out of our own way. When it comes to these things, there’s no point in going back. You’ll just be fucked over again. Whether it’s by yourself or the person you went back for, it doesn’t make any difference.
Maybe part of it is that overall sense of coolness from the performances which they need to be, where every single smile in the film could be like someone putting on an act. Peter Gallagher (seen recently playing a future version of John Mulaney on his Netflix talk show) lets his eyes do a lot of the work to go with the steadiness in his voice, a man trying to stay focused and convinced that the next bet will finally pay off with Alison Elliott who brings a harsh cool girl vibe to someone keeping her distance from everyone else no matter how close they want to think she is to them. William Fichtner plays the live wire, ready to snap at any moment and he even gets a nervous laugh at one point out of the tiniest head nod. The effectiveness of the supporting cast adds the humanity that isn’t felt as much from the leads including Paul Dooley who is just as warm and welcoming as you want him to be, the total resentment that comes off Adam Trese as the brother, the way Anjanette Comer as the mother always seems to be holding back what she’s really thinking and Joe Chrest as the mysterious Mr. Rodman in the hospital. Elisabeth Shue, months before her Oscar-nominated role in LEAVING LAS VEGAS was seen, is ideally cast as an also-ran girl who we can’t imagine why Michael doesn’t go with her since she seems so right, sensible and charming but never dull. This should be the girl. But that’s not the film the main character chooses to be in. Harry Goaz of TWIN PEAKS is one of the other drivers at the armored truck company, Mike Malone who featured prominently in SCHIZOPOLIS is seen hitting on Alison Elliott, Richard Linklater is the doorman at the club and Shelley Duvall, one of two Altman alums in this along with Dooley, is the nurse in the hospital in a scene which likely took no more than a day to film. There’s also the recently departed Joe Don Baker, RIP, wearing a bolo tie in a key role as the boss at the armored car company that isn’t much more than an extended cameo but his few moments onscreen do give us his cagey presence and smile, reassuring us more than anyone else does which in this film of course means there’s no reason to trust him. I like Baker here more than I like the way his final scene raises more questions than it answers but right now it’s just nice to see him get the very last moment in a film like this. After all, Joe Don Baker getting the last moment in a film is sometimes what cinema is all about.
“Anything’s better than nothing,” Michael says as a reason for doing anything with anybody. It’s one thing to tell yourself when you don’t have any other ideas and that speaks to the malaise felt when there are no better ideas. Looking for more thoughts on the film from Soderbergh, I picked up my copy of “Getting Away With It”, his book consisting of half interviews with Richard Lester/half diary of his activities around 1996, leading up to the beginnings of his involvement with OUT OF SIGHT, only to discover that he barely mentions THE UNDERNEATH at all aside from his horror at having to sit through it at a festival screening in France. It seems obvious that he had already moved on from the film by that point and there wasn’t even anything to say about it anymore. We should all have such a strong work ethic. One of the ways to see the movie has been its inclusion on the Criterion Blu-ray of his 1993 film KING OF THE HILL, which he thinks a little more highly of, making THE UNDERNEATH a literal B-side although the film by itself has since gotten a non-Criterion release on Blu as well. Thinking about all this makes me think about my few brief encounters with Soderbergh through the years one of which was a brief conversation with him at CNN when he was promoting KAFKA but it hasn’t happened anywhere since standing in the popcorn line behind him at the Chinese on opening weekend of THE DEPARTED. All this is in the past, of course. If I ever meet him again, I have a couple of very geeky OCEAN’S questions about those films which I hope he would have the good humor to answer. As of this writing, he’s had two films released in 2025, the horror film PRESENCE (I’ll see it, I swear) and BLACK BAG (minor and enjoyable) with another in the can still to come. As for THE UNDERNEATH, returning to the film again now reminds me of back then, it reminds me of the mistakes I made, it reminds me of the mistakes I could make. But if it’s up to me then I’ll just choose not to live in the sort of noir film that will just lead to more wrong choices. It’s still possible. It’s always possible to change things if you feel that strongly about the direction you’re heading in. Even if you’ve made a film that I’ll be willing to defend as much as THE UNDERNEATH.