HYAMS, Peter, Dir., “The Relic”, Paramount Pictures/Cloud
Nine Entertainment/Pacific Western Productions, 1996
Everyone
has a movie that makes them feel good. When it’s cold outside and you just want
to snuggle up on the couch with a hot chocolate and a favourite film, everyone
has their ‘go-to’ DVD. For some it’s the BBC’s “Pride and Prejudice”; for others it’s “The Sound of Music”. For me it’s Peter Hyam’s film adaptation of “The Relic”.
(What?
Not snuggly enough for you? Bite me.)
There
are a lot of things that are plenty ludicrous about this film: the premise is
whacky; the McGuffin shouldn’t work; there are some gaffes in the performances.
But still, apart from these things, the rest of it just works. It’s not
anything especially to do with the director, and it’s certainly not the special
effects; it’s the art direction, the actors and, more than anything else, it’s
the writing.
This
film is like a Swiss watch: every beat, every line of dialogue, every piece of
action, dovetails into every other part and the whole just works a treat. That
doesn’t mean that you can coast while the action unfolds: oh no, this is a film
during which you need to pay attention; but, at the end of the day, if you come
away from it saying “What? I don’t get it”, then you’ve got no-one to blame but
yourself.
Let’s
start with the cast. This could have been just another monster flick, but right
from the start, the cast lifts it to another level. The four headline actors
are deluxe thespians, with a wide range of delivery and expertise. When this
film came out, Tom Sizemore wasn’t anybody special; it wasn’t ‘til his run in “Heat” that people sat up and took
notice. Here he has two parts of a role that shouldn’t work together – hard-nose
policeman plus superstitious crank – and he makes it happen. Penelope Anne
Miller has plenty of experience playing the heroine in opposition to unearthly
forces (exemplified by her amazing turn in “The
Shadow”) and I’m guessing that she took what she learnt here about playing
opposite rampaging hulks and put it to good use in “Kindergarten Cop”. She plays Dr Margo Green, an evolutionary biologist
at the Natural History Museum in Chicago, struggling to obtain more funding for
her lab project and dreading the need to schmooze for the cash at an upcoming gala.
Then we get an Oscar® winner: Linda Hunt. As the diminutive head of the Museum,
she could have gone several ways with this role – whiney walkover or
ball-breaking bitch being the two obvious options. Instead, she completely
humanises the character bringing to it a believability and compassion that not
only works, but provides a solid backbone for all the other characters to
bounce off. Finally, there’s James Whitmore as the curmudgeonly head of the
Anthropology Department. Without this guy, our two leads don’t get to word one:
Millers’ Dr Green has no time for superstition and Sizemore’s Sergeant d’Agusta
doesn’t take well to those who dismiss his ‘gut feelings’. Whitmore is the
bridge between them and the source of much humour along the way.
Singling
these four out doesn’t, by any stretch, diminish the support players. There are
many actors in the wings here and each of them has but a handful of lines and some
movement to work with; nevertheless, there’s not a single instance where the player
doesn’t take these broad strokes and breathe life into the role. The trash-talking
coroner; the unscrupulous lab researcher; the Museum’s head of security; the
two kids playing truant in the exhibition; the guy who wrangles the domestid
beetles – every single one makes their character work.
One
of my favourites is the City Mayor who’s an officious jerk, not afraid to throw
his weight around and abuse his power to get what he wants. If you look closely
and jog some brain cells, you’ll recognise him from “Die Hard” as the guy in the aeroplane at the beginning who spots
Bruce Willis’ gun and who tells him to “make fists with his feet” to alleviate
tiredness. He starts off this role as an arrogant son of a bitch but by the end
he’s done a complete 180 and we’re all cheering for him.
If
anything, there’re too many characters here and the sheer excess causes some
detriment. The two ‘coffee cops’, uniformed shmos who share the love of a good
cup of joe, are really wasted: we don’t get enough time with them to really grasp
what they’re all about.They should have been left unsketched and then left to
die dramatically; the extra information about them that we have is too much
with no point. (Sorry: I should have said “spoiler alert” there, I guess; but
seriously, if you can’t see the targets painted on the backs of these guys then
you can’t call yourself a horror movie buff!)
The
art direction and sets in this movie are pretty fantastic. The Museum and the “Superstitions” exhibition which it is
displaying during the film are amazingly detailed and it’s obvious that much
love went into making these backdrops happen. Like most movies of this type (“Alien”; “Deep Blue Sea”; “The Thing”),
the setting becomes the unofficial ‘other character’ in the piece, and it pays
to listen to the information that the actors provide about it. If you miss that
line right at the beginning about the coal tunnels down at the harbour, you’ll
be floundering later on.
My
favourite bad moment in this flick is when the monster slices a SpecOps guy in
half just when we think he’s made it to safety: his buddy takes in what’s left
of him and then, with a ham sandwich tucked firmly into each cheek, emotes to
the back row. ‘Makes me chuckle every time. I guess there’s nothing wrong with Juilliard
handing out wetwork credentials along with acting ones in these straitened
times; it certainly pays to diversify. Oh, and, um, “spoiler alert”.
The
premise of the film is that there’s a fungus with a virus-like ability to blend
the genotypes of creatures which ingest it and then produce an admixture of
phenotypes, a blended aberration known as a ‘chimera’. Such a beastie wriggles
its way into the basement of the Museum of Natural History and starts decimating
the population, driven by a need for hormones to keep it intact, hormones
which, we discover, are found abundantly in the human hypothalamus. Much head
ripping ensues. This is, of course, all bollocks: the actors mutter fervently
about “reverse transcriptase” as much as they can to lend credence to the
theory, but this kind of a genetic nightmare is just not possible. Nevertheless,
it’s one of only two things that the script asks us to take on faith and, in
the end, it’s no more unpalatable than being asked to believe that the moon
turns people into wolves: if you fight too hard against it, you’re not going to
have a good time.
The
other thing that threatens suspension of disbelief is the program that Dr Margo
Green is throwing together with the aid of her grant. It’s a computerised
system which analyses processed DNA samples and identifies the component genetic
sequences found in those scrapings. In terms of the movie working, such a McGuffin
has to be here or the big reveal about the monster would never happen; however,
since my sister has been working on such a device for the last ten years, I’m
in a privileged position to know that such a gizmo was not possible back in
1996. Still, the producers and researchers have done their work here, and,
although it’s anachronistic, it looks and sounds at least credible. Again, if
you want to hang your head and lament Hollywood’s abuse of Science while the
film rolls, go ahead: it’s your dime.
The
special effects are a bit ordinary too, but Stan Winston does his best. There are
a few places where the beastie looks a bit iffy but by that token we might as
well dismiss every film that was made before the advent of CGI. I do have a reservation at the point where
they forget that it’s a gecko’s relatively light weight plus its special toe-pads which allow it to walk on walls, not the
toe-pads alone: a 600 kilogram behemoth won’t creep blithely up a smooth
surface no matter what kind of shoes you give it. But it’s a small quibble.
There
are some moments which make me roll my eyes a bit: the fact that Margo’s
nemesis in the academic grant stakes is Asian, that the black janitor is killed
after smoking pot, and the fact that the monster has to dribble all over Margo
during the final confrontation – this is all just Hollywood playing to
expectations. If Guillermo del Toro had directed this, those two kids who sneak
into the Museum while on the wallaby wouldn’t have come back out in one piece
either – audience expectations certainly didn’t stop him in “Mimic”! If anything, it’s the fact that
this movie doesn’t break any rules or stereotypes which makes it the perfect
haunted house romp. If it had been a teensy bit braver in what it was doing, it
wouldn’t be passing in and out of production as it has over the last few years.
My
boss alerted me to the fact that this DVD was available again a few weeks ago
and I demanded a copy forthwith. Having bought the VHS tape back in 1997, and
not upgraded to DVD during the first release in that format, I was feeling bereft
of my comfort viewing. Now, I no longer have to make do with a lesser vehicle
when I feel like cocooning in my doona and slurping my cocoa. I can unleash the
Kothoga anytime I like!
Four
tentacled horrors.
Ah, the Relic... from back when movies knew what they were and what they wanted. I'd been working at a video rental when this was released, so I remember vividly making up an imaginary subgenre of 'Unintentionally Lovecraftian Pictures'.
ReplyDeleteOctalus comes to mind, totally brainless, but with great tentacle action on an abandoned ship. Deep Star Six and Leviathan could be read in the same manner and, of course, Carpenter's The Thing. Pure Mythos on the Screen, Colour out of Space, anyone?
His latter In the Mouth of Madness didn't credit Lovecraft at all, but wouldn't meet the 'unintentional' criterium.
Sebastian