And we’re back to deferring to the Kermodester … or in this case, in a shock twist, completely disagreeing with him to my utmost surprise. He really didn’t like this, and I usually trust him, so I cringed for a good 20 minutes here given dead gags like the “Elfementary School” (haven’t we been told in the first two movies that the elves aren’t children?) etc.

But this one won me over even quicker than the second movie. Martin Short is brilliant as Jack Frost and the basic concept is much more intriguing than the first sequel. Alan Arkin’s facial expressions towards the end, over being “Father-in-law Christmas”, over the Easter bunny and co, and over that line, “They didn’t know about magical hugs,” are just fantastic.

I said I missed the kinda-sorta shameless “creepiness” of the original in part 2 and it’s mostly absent here too. But the hug that warms Jack Frost’s heart here is more than enough to make up for that. For a movie released only last year, the perfect love of that moment really can’t be underestimated. It’s one of those tiny moments that can make me love the worst kind of cheese.

“My name is Reggie. I was an ice-cream vendor by trade. Now … I’m a soldier.”

Don’t worry, I believe you’re allowed to laugh ;)

Much as I expected, I think ultimately this is my favourite of the series. The use of the old footage is almost beautiful. The moment at the end where Mikey appears to speak to himself across time and space feels like the kind of moment the whole series is working to find. How many movies can lay claim to such a moment, the same character played almost 20 years apart by the same actor, and meshing together so seamlessly as it does? I really think people underestimate the magnitude of this aspect of this movie. I only hope that a postBubba Ho-Tep Coscarelli can make “Phantasm V” even better. Listening to the commentaries, it seems there’s still more of the old footage to work into the story.

Incidentally, on those commentaries – I finally listened to them and they’re really nice, with A. Michael Baldwin, Reggie Bannister, Angus Scrimm and Coscarelli dropping in in different combos per movie. There’s not a great deal of new information in there, but you really get a sense of why these movies have always worked, like just how long they’ve known each other etc, “like family” as Scrimm says. And that “wrath of the Tall Man” credit mentioned below – appears at the end of all the movies, I think. I certainly spotted on II and III anyway.

November 14th, 2005:

Like the third movie, this movie manages to keep the same cast together, and adds to that a selection of footage that logically must have been shot for the original but it’s of scenes that would’ve had no place there. Their presence here is almost as bizarre as the whole time-space level this movie adds to the series. This one again is a little more juiced up but there’s a lot more tongue-in-cheek and you can kind of see the Don Coscarelli emerging that eventually made the fantastic Bubba Ho-Tep (I’d previously been kind of bewildered as to how he went from the original schlocky Phantasm to that relatively dreamy, poetic musing on old age).

I don’t know if there are similar things in the credits of the other films in the series, but I happened to notice here that the copyright notice at the end reads, “Unauthorized duplication, distribution or exhibition may result in civil liability, criminal prosecution and the wrath of The Tall Man.” lol The DVD doesn’t even have a trailer but it does have a commentary which, again, I’ve not yet listened to. Bring on Phantasm V!

I noticed a funny parallel between this movie and Almost Famous today, and no it’s not ‘cos I just watched a Cameron Crowe movie, I’d kinda noticed it before … it features a couple of characters, and the same characters at that, that I would love to have in my own life. Every time I see Maggie Gyllenhaal these days I’m reminded of her big sister role in this movie and she is so the ultimate big sister; and Mary McDonnell makes a fantastic mother – I love how she looks at Miss Farmer with such pity after the scene in the principal’s office … you can see so much in her performance of how people, perhaps especially parents, play an awkward role in life while their feelings are just as real as the rest of us – even when she’s cheering her daughter on in the Sparkle Motion dance troupe, you can kinda tell she’s not that behind the whole idea.

The other thing that struck me was how simple the movie really is in the end – I wrote in my journal a while ago about how I bought the Director’s Cut DVD (having already sold my original copy of the Theatrical Cut) and was already ordering another copy of the Theatrical Version only an hour in. I mean, this movie is complex, yeh … but it’s not exactly on the Ingmar Bergman end of the concentration scale. And why did Richard Kelly feel the need to explain it anyway? I think he really took a lot away from the movie with that cut. To me, at least, it seemed like he was saying, “Yeh, I thought about this … a lot ...” And to me, it’s not him who should’ve been thinking about it that much, his job was to come up with the mystery. It’s the audience’s job to think it to death if they want to. It’s like Phantasm in a way, and the Director’s Cut was like one of that movie’s many explanatory sequels.

In its original form, I think this movie is a masterpiece. Every single performance, major to minor role, is absolutely perfect, and there’s love and pain all over the place. Donnie Darko is part plain whacko, part Dennis the Menace, part superhero, part Alex in A Clockwork Orange. And it ends with that unforgettable cover of Tears for Fears’ “Mad World”. It really does get better, and I see more, every time I see it. I’ve only touched the tip of a whole iceberg of thoughts I have in these few paragraphs.

Oh yeh I had intended to put something into this review about how I think it’s about the cycle of violence but I guess this sentence is all you’re gonna get now ‘cos I’ve forgotten anything but the gist of it lol.