John Carpenter has a pretty strong reputation in the realm of modern horror. Frankly, I’ve never much cared for his work. I like his subversive leftist tone, and nearly all of his pictures have great individual pieces that are often built on strong ideas. But rarely does he seem able to get a great idea to work for the length of a film. For me, the main exception to this is Big Trouble in Little China (1986) — an utterly preposterous mix of invented Chinese mythology and dubious notions of Chinese magic thrown together with martial arts action, a 2,000-year-old villain, the occasional monster, often hysterically funny and deliberately expository dialogue and a stupefyingly dumb hero (who mostly speaks in outbursts of one-liner braggadocio). For some reason, this all comes together to create a marvelously entertaining movie. It’s one of those movies that flopped originally, but its reputation has grown over the years — probably thanks to home video — and is now considered a cult classic. For once, the accolade is deserved. Unlike most filmmakers who set out to make a kind of ersatz drive-in movie (especially back then), Carpenter actually delivers the essence of enjoyably bad cinema to the screen.
The casting of the film gets most of the credit for the success of this silly story about an ancient magician, Lo Pan (James Hong), who schemes to marry a legendary green-eyed woman in order to become flesh. Hong is perfect as Lo Pan. The same is true of the great Victor Wong as his archenemy Egg Shen. Kim Cattrall gives perhaps the most likable performance of her career. But the real gem here is Kurt Russell as the dim-bulb hero who talks like John Wayne, but is almost totally ineffectual. Russell plays it straight and makes it work. It helps that the dialogue is either clever, intentionally clunky, or amusingly inappropriate for the whole film. (Does anyone really expect the 2,000-year-old Lo Pan to say, “Now, this really pisses me off no end?”) The production design is first rate (there are enough neon lights in Lo Pan’s temple for at least 15 Chinese restaurants), and the simple special effects have a charm that’s totally missing in today’s movies. What more can you ask for? OK, so a six demon bag would be a help, but you’ll have to talk to Egg Shen about that.
Unlike you, I don’t care for horror films, generally, and also don’t go out of my way to see Carpenter’s work. Sure, “Dark Star” was a bolt from the blue, and “They Live” contains the core of an amazing movie [set deep in the heart of a hunk of cheese]. “Escape From New York” is derivative fun, but BTILC is the flat-out bullseye for me too. Appearing as it did, on the heels of Buckaroo Banzai, William D. Richter’s screenplay has more than a little BB DNA mixed in for certain. One can imagine the characters bumping into one another during their respective adventures with nary twitch. I can only echo your appraisal of Kim Cattrall’s one likable performance. Truth be told, I’ve made it a point to avoid her after seeing her on television early in her career. But this one looked so good I couldn’t keep away. A friend and I saw this when it was released and thought it was destined to be the hit of the summer. Apparently it was – only for us!
But this one looked so good I couldn’t keep away. A friend and I saw this when it was released and thought it was destined to be the hit of the summer. Apparently it was – only for us!
But time — and home video — has vindicated your judgment!
One of the most disturbing things I’ve seen on film was a segment of the (I think) Showtime series ‘Masters of Horror’, a tale written and directed by John Carpenter called ‘Cigarette Burns’. Some of the images are indelibly etched in my brain.
A horror tale about a movie that reportedly was only shown one time, resulting in the entire audience going mad in a killing frenzy. Someone is paid to look for it and find it; he does, with freaky results.
Some of the images are indelibly etched in my brain.
Is this a good thing? I haven’t seen this. The only of those “Master of Horror” things I’ve seen is Stuart Gordon’s Dreams in the Witch House. Maybe I could pair the two for a Thursday night.
“Is this a good thing?”
I don’t really know if it is a good thing or not. On the one hand, the story was intriguing and the images powerful, so it definitely rose above many other productions in that regard, but the imagery was also distrubing (although relevant to the story line)).
I would recommend it since you’ve not seen it. IMO, it was arguably the best of the series.