
The Film: Darkman (1990)
The Principals: Liam Neeson, Frances McDormand, Colin Friels, Larry Drake, Ted Raimi, Sam Raimi (director)
The Premise: Peyton Westlake (Neeson) is developing a synthetic skin, but can only get it to last 99 minutes in daylight. He’s dating Julie Hastings (McDormand), who works for Louis Strack Jr. (Friels), and she stumbles across a memorandum that could ruin his career, especially if it got into the hands of Robert G. Durant (Drake), the town’s biggest gangster. Durant shows up at Westlake’s lab and burns it down to get the memo. Westlake survives, but is horribly mutilated. He rebuilds his lab for one purpose: Revenge.

Is It Good?: I recently started dating someone, and one of the joys of being a movie nerd in a new relationship is showing them movies (then again, she writes about movies too, so it’s not like I can force her to watch There Will Be Blood). But even with film lovers, there’s always holes in everyone’s film history and Darkman was one she hadn’t seen before. I’ve always been lightly positive on Raimi’s transitional work – the film that said he could play with studio toys – and we were at Amoeba (in Los Angeles) and they had a used Blu-ray that was factory sealed. I put away Step-Up 3 for next time, and went with Darkman.

Watching it again, I – like always – hoped to fall in love with it. There is nothing wrong with it, and all the elements are there, but I’ve never been the film’s biggest booster. From Danny Elfman’s great score, to the low budget but solid effects work, there’s nothing about the film I actively dislike, and it’s from one of my favorite directors, and is obviously the Rosetta Stone to his Spider-Man films. It’s also piles of fun.

This was Raimi’s split homage to the comic books and the classic monster movie he loved, and it plays like a fun homage piece. Though the film never stops for more than a second to do it, there’s a very explicit reference to The Phantom of the Opera, which is the most obvious influence. The film is also filled with set pieces, from the opening shoot out (with a cameo by Bruce Campbell), to the taking over of Westlake’s lab, to a helicopter chase, the movie was done on the cheap, but looks much bigger than its budget.
I kept trying to figure out why I’ve never loved the movie. Maybe it’s the slightly dour tone, or Raimi’s eccentricities? No, because I love when Raimi goes all whack-a-doodle. I love everything about the movie. I think the problem is that there’s a lot of fun to the movie but there’s nothing going on under the surface but a love of the form of these films . At the time it was a breath of fresh air, and the helicopter chase – while limited to the technology of the time – is still pretty amazing. Though this is obviously a work of love and passion, it doesn’t have the energy – to me – of Evil Dead 2, even if it’s got better performers doing some nutty things. Raimi can do subtext, and I think he’s proved himself a master of many shapes – his A Simple Plan may have never received award love, but is still one of the finest films of the last fifteen years.

It’s weird to want to apologize for liking, not loving, a cult film that the majority of the world could care less about, but I do love Raimi, and this is a weird sticking point for me. And yet I can watch the film easily, and have repeatedly over the years. Such a weird feeling.
Is It Worth a Look: Very much so. Great cast, great fun. Also, well paced, the movie has no bloat, and the third act is virtual constant motion.

Random Anecdotes: John Landis was at the New Beverly to intro An American Werewolf in London, and Edgar Wright talked about how Jenny Agutter (because of AWiL) and Ornella Mutti (because of Flash Gordon) were his two adolescent crushes. Landis mentioned that he had directed Mutti, and had acted with Agutter, and asked the audience if we knew which film. I shouted “Darkman!” and Landis said “We’ve got a nerd in the audience tonight!” John Landis called me a nerd because of Darkman.





4 comments
Well, I love Darkman.
I do agree, it’s not as good as Evil Dead 2, but like you said, it certainly has its moments. My favorite, which I was surprised you left out, was the total nut-ball Weinerville scene where Payton totally loses his shit over the pink elephant. But then, it also has solid action scenes.
But yeah, anyways. I love it. I like to tell people it’s the best comic book movie that is not based on a comic book.
http://wanderingeyes.blip.tv/file/4132578/ darkman in 5 seconds, says it all really
re: random anecdote
I never knew/didnt remember they were doctors in Darkman (looong time since I’ve seen it). Not only did you know that, but you put it to good use. Bravo!
I can’t agree that Raimi can do subtext. The subtext in A Simple Plan comes from the fact that it is written by the same author of the source novel, which is fantastic and rich with subtext. Raimi has stated very clearly that he does not think about subtext, and that he only makes films to entertain. Why any artist would NOT think about subtext, I don’t know. I always think about Panic Room in this way. David Fincher’s films have so much going on under the surface, and every time I rewatch Panic Room, I hope there is something else there. But there just isn’t. I think that any subtext going on in Raimi’s best films come from other writers. Chabon in SpiderMan2, Thornton/Epperson in The Gift, and Scott Smith in A Simple Plan (still Raimi’s masterpiece). Great article by the way. When film critics are so attuned into finding a deeper meaning into films, especially by their favorite directors, it can be frustrating to realize that sometimes there just isn’t anything there. Some films have no subtext, no matter how hard you look. When that happens, you just have to realize why you’re watching a movie in the first place: the experience. And Raimi is all about the thrill of the ride. It is best to just let the odd tone of Darkman to wash over you and take the ride. We can save the film analysis for A Simple Plan.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.