I remember seeing the movie when it came out. At the time, it was brilliant. It has not aged particularly well. Not badly, but it does not have the luster it did at the time. I think O'Toole is spectacular (I find this and My Favorite Year two of his best works).
> I think THE STUNT MAN is a really good movie, but it does have its flaws. Many others have pointed them out ever since the film came out. No reason to be a dck to shaggy61 because of them.
I think this has been blown way out of proportion by all parties and should be dropped.
> 1) I don't think that's a satisfactory explanation. It doesn't give a reason why Burt stopped, let Cameron open the door to the car, and then kicked him out of the car without giving him an explanation that a film shoot was in progress. Then Burt Drives back and nearly runs Cameron over? I think the director directed it that way to artificially create suspense in the audience for awhile. It's OK if it's not 100% realistic, but it's too contrived. The way it is shot just creates confusion.
It creates confusion because you don't know then what you learn later. It's not a completely linear story. Here's one clue as to why Burt did what he did: He's a jackass. Imagine that. Someone comes along, hops in his car, and distracts him at a key moment. He responds angrily, and fails to explain the anger to someone who has made an innocent mistake.
Why does this need detailing? Sure, it's not clear why it happened at the time in the movie, but it's mostly explained later on.
> 3) I agree with you here too. Though the scene doesn't work for me that well either because I think Railsback is somewhat miscast. He comes off as too strange and creepy.
I think that's the point. He needs a bit more vulnerability (which would explain everyone's acceptance of him), but it's hard to see it that way. The point is that he's damaged goods. Not a creep, but someone who probably was ok at one time and isn't right now. And yeah, once feminism took care of most of the repression of the female, they decided that women needed to see themselves as constant victims or Feminism would lose its hook. As a result, they've been hyping women-as-male-victims ever since, and both sexes have suffered. Where would women all be without Oxygen and Lifetime? Probably a lot less senselessly paranoid. When Lifetime put out a movie in which the female did something which, had a male done, the male would be in jail (but the female was lauded for), I knew Feminism had jumped the shark.
> 4) Agreed.
Ditto. Sorry, the original complaint shows a measure of cluelessness on the part of the complainant. And I don't mean that insultingly, but as a straight-up observation of relevance to the whole complaint.
> 6) I understand your explanation, but it's still not satisfactory. Eli's reason for wanting a re-shoot seems more like an excuse by the producers of THE STUNT MAN to use the same footage over again instead of having to spend more money shoot a different stunt. All of Eli's talk about only getting one chance to get the shot made me think they were going to shoot a somewhat different stunt -- not the exact same one -- for which they clearly already had usable footage.
You're assuming that angles he deemed critical were not messed up or otherwise interfered with by surrounding events. Adequate to fool the cops, but not sufficient for the cuts Eli wanted, given that he was rather meticulous and demanding.
7) That all sounds rather contrived...
Look the whole point is about the fact that Cameron is DAMAGED. The Vietnam War and the screwups and absurdities which have happened to him afterwards have left him absurdly paranoid and distrustful of everyone around him. The point is that he needed very much to learn to trust people again. By putting him in a situation where he was, in fact, dead without the good will of outsiders, his mind would (hopefully) reset itself. It would not matter if the airhose were cut, since the plan was to save his butt anyhow.
> 8) Most everything about the ending of this film is unsatisfactory. I was completely surprised the film had a "happy" ending and that Eli and Cameron had an "aw shucks, no hard feelings" conversation to end the film. All the flaws in this film could be almost completely forgiven if the film had a tragic or a more confrontational ending. Or a more comic ending. Or any kind of ending with balls. The film's ending has no balls. I figured tragedy and confrontation is what the film was building toward with all the elements of Cameron being a Vietnam vet, being purued by the police, falling in love with a vain actress, and working under a crazy man like Eli.
See above. This was 1980. The Vietnam War was past. A part of this film was the notion that we needed to move on, to stop blaming Vietnam Vets, and to help repair the damage done to them. War has its victims. There's no need to continue the victimization process to add more pain to it. It was time to stop beating ourselves over the head about it.
Like "The Boys In Company C", the movie is a part of acknowledging, in a less heavy-handed way than The Deer Hunter or Apocalypse Now, the problem and promoting a solution: It's over. Let's all move on with life.
> 9) The hair was kind of goofy, but so was the film. Didn't bother me.
Uh, yah. Typical 70s hair styles. Go look at people's prom photos from the time, and tell me it was atypical.
> Another flaw for me in the film is -- how could anyone believe a WWI movie could be set at a place like the Coronado Hotel in San Diego? That place and stretch of beach screams Southern California -- from SOME LIKE IT HOT to BAYWATCH.
Uh, "Baywatch" did not exist at the time, even as a concept in the minds of its creators. Nor did a lot of other usages of the Coronado. As a matter of fact, SLIH is the only one I can think of that predated The Stunt Man.
> Cameron and Eli in prison together also could have made a better and more amusing ending.
And again, though you might see it by now -- totally out of the character and intent of this movie, which was about self-forgiveness for mistakees and embracing and healing the Vietnam Vets. It did not "wimp out" -- it did exactly what its goal was. You just never looked for that to be the goal.
reply
share