Golden, Silver, and Bronze Ages >> View Post
Post By
Superman's Pal

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 5,803
In Reply To

Location: Prague, Bohemia
Member Since: Tue Apr 06, 2010
Posts: 1,966
Subj: Re: a guilty pleasure in the real sense
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2022 at 04:19:33 pm EDT (Viewed 144 times)
Reply Subj: a guilty pleasure in the real sense
Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2022 at 01:30:46 pm EDT (Viewed 136 times)

    I watched this one a couple of years ago and I completely understand what you say in your review. I heard about it on a podcast called "defend your sh@tty taste" and the guy who was talking about it was clearly embarrassed to admit he liked it.

I'm embarrassed to admit I like Heavy Metal. This I found to be more of an interesting character study, not to be liked as much as to ponder.

    Its a pretty interesting story, just nutty enough to be interesting. You can clearly see the world built was the post apocalypse road warrior idea without the cool cars. Interesingy, its after world war 4 rather than 3 as in every other apocalyptic sci-fi.

I don't know if the movie is true to the novella but the novella was written in the 60s I think, and the movie claims WW3 went from the 50s to the 80s or something, so it must have been an alternate universe thing, not just futuristic. For some reason WW3 was a conventional war and WW4 was nuclear. I wonder what the thought process was there?

    But the tone shift is so jarring in the second act that I just dont know what to make of it. I wanted to be back in the barren desert with the scary irradiated screamers whom we never get to see.

Yeah, I like the desert wasteland better than the fake suburban town underground.

    But yeah, its Vic, the protagonist (not hero), who makes it hard to stomach. Its realistic that a guy growing up in this world would be completely free of morals, but its hard to root for him. In a way he is similar to the "hero" in Blood for Dracula, the only other raping "hero" I can think of.

I think "Deathstalker" was another rapey hero. But being raised free of morals is a good way to put it.

    Blood, the dog, is fun in his interactions with Vic. Its hard to tell if they like each other or just need each other (at least until the end). The dog, while well-trained, was hard to believe as it looked bored in most of the scenes.

Yeah I felt like Blood was annoyed with him most of the time. Annoyed to be stuck with him. There's a comment about how Blood lost the ability to track food when he learned to talk. It's funny he keeps trying to educate Vic so he's not stuck with a complete dolt. But where did Blood learn history?

The voice was good but the dog (which is apparently Tiger from The Brady Bunch?) wasn't anything special. But he did have to stand there and take Vic yelling at him a lot without whimpering or running off, that might have been a tough enough feat.

    I can see why the film is a cult favourite because it does feel like it has deep ideas, like how close society would be to collapse and barbarism in a crisis, which feels pretty fresh in 1975. But it just doesnt quite manage to pull it off to my satisfaction.

Yeah. It's more of a curiousity.

    There are some great behind the scenes videos on youtube showing just what a proper nutter Harlan Ellison was on this production.

Ellison a nutter? Sounds about right.

Posted with Google Chrome on Linux
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software