Ace in the Hole (Retro)

by Edward Dunn


ACE IN THE HOLE (1951) Passed 111 Minutes Director: Billy Wilder Writers: Billy Wilder, Lesser Samuels, Walter Newman Kirk Douglas, Jan Sterling, Robert Arthur CAST Kirk Douglas...Chuck Tatum Jan Sterling...Lorraine Minosa Robert Arthur...Herbie Cook Porter Hall...Jacob Q. Boot Richard Benedict...Leo Minosa Ray Teal...Sheriff Gus Kretzer Frank Cady...Al Federber John Berkes...Papa Minosa Frances Dominguez...Mama Minosa
The street is a sideshow from the peddler to the corner girl

— The Band, "Life Is a Carnival"

Most of what I know about journalism is from episodes of LOIS & CLARK. There's a lot of flirting between you and a co-reporter, you pretend to not be Superman, and you don't do much typing or journalism of any kind. But it's okay, this was the 90s, nothing real was going on. On a bad day, you may get some sort of Elvis anecdote from your boss. But there's more to journalism than perky tits, or nice dimples…so I've been told. You have backstabbing, career climbing, and inventing stories out of whole cloth. That's where Chuck Tatum comes in.

Tatum doesn't roll into Albuquerque looking for redemption. He arrives broke, on bad tires, fired from eleven papers with a combined circulation of seven million for reasons he'd rather not list. He talks his way into a sixty-dollar-a-week job at the Sun-Bulletin with a pitch that's half résumé and half threat, promising Jacob Q. Boot the best newspaperman he's ever had. He believes it, too, or at least believes he's wasted on a "sun-baked Siberia" with nothing to write about but soapbox derbies and a chicken thief named Schimmelmacher who briefly claimed to be Jesse James. A year into that sentence, bored enough to fantasize out loud about fifty rattlesnakes loose downtown, he gets handed a rattlesnake hunt instead, about as close as this town gets to news. He's not hoping to do good. He's hoping to get out, and that's the question the movie starts circling almost immediately: if somebody does good for bad reasons, what exactly are we supposed to make of the good?

Chuck and Herbie aren't even looking for a story when they find one. They're driving out to cover that rattlesnake hunt, stop for gas, and follow a hunch about an old cliff dwelling up the road, which turns out to have a man buried alive underneath it. The sheriff is tied up at the same rattlesnake hunt, and Tatum figures the doctor probably is too, which leaves nobody at Escudero with any real standing to run things. What's there instead is a deputy sheriff, stalling. "I'm thinking. Don't rush me," he says, to nobody's satisfaction, while Leo sits six hours into a cave-in, his wife running the trading post down the highway and his father answering for him, both stuck right along with him. Tatum takes the flashlight from the deputy's pocket, tells him he's the one going in, and climbs into the mountain himself. It works, immediately, on everyone watching. Papa Minosa starts treating Tatum's word as fact from almost that first afternoon, and he's still doing it later, telling a stranger who asks after Leo, without hesitation, "Not yet. Mr Tatum's down there now with the doctor." It's Tatum's first real demonstration of a pattern the whole movie keeps running: confidence reads as competence, and nobody at Escudero is in any position to ask whether the two have anything to do with each other. The man who steps into the power vacuum first isn't the most qualified person at the scene. He's the one least burdened by doubting himself, which turns out to be close enough.

Tatum makes the same kind of conversion the instant he hears the mountain's real name, and he doesn't even have to be standing there to do it. He's still in the car when he catches the tail end of an argument outside: Papa Minosa pleading for somebody, anybody, to go in after his son, the deputy suggesting the Native guide standing nearby, the guide refusing over what he calls bad spirits, and the deputy waving that off as a shakedown for cash — "What are you holding out for, a couple of bucks?" Then somebody explains what the guide meant: this is the mountain of the seven vultures, sacred ground to the people who buried their dead there four hundred years ago. "It's got a sound to it," Tatum says, and tells Herbie to get a few shots. Something that means grief and reverence to somebody else has, in the space of one overheard sentence, become a headline. Within days the mountain has a tent city growing at its base, license plates rolling in from four states, a family on their way to go fishing deciding this is worth a detour. Vendors sell hot dogs and souvenirs within sight of the drilling, on the same ground as a man who might be dying. Reporters pay a toll to get near him. Put headphones on for this stretch and the sound mix is making its own version of the same argument without a line of dialogue: concession-stand chatter and crowd noise sit right under scenes that are supposed to be about Leo, and his tragedy ends up audibly dissolving into commerce even when the camera isn't pointed at the vendors. THE SIMPSONS runs almost this exact plot as comedy in "Radio Bart": a boy stuck in a well becomes the center of a carnival and a celebrity charity single before the town discovers he's a hoax. ACE IN THE HOLE doesn't get the relief of a punchline, because Leo was never a hoax. Tatum didn't have to invent a trapped man. He only had to notice one.

Zoom back in from the crowd and all that appetite condenses into one man. Before he's ever heard of Leo Minosa, driving out to cover a rattlesnake hunt he resents being assigned to, Tatum spins an entire fantasy out loud: fifty rattlesnakes loose in Albuquerque, the last one caught and hidden in his own desk drawer so nobody else knows the story isn't over, released to the papers only "when I'm good and ready." He's narrating a story that doesn't exist yet, complete with a plan for pacing its release, purely for his own entertainment. Not long after, he's standing at a gas station outside a mountain with a real man buried inside it, and the instinct is already sitting there waiting to be used. Douglas plays the moment it clicks into place with something close to hunger: right before his first climb into the cave, he tells Herbie this is Floyd Collins all over again, the 1925 case where a young Louisville reporter crawled down to interview a trapped man and came out with a Pulitzer. That's the closest thing this film has to Al Pacino's John Milton in THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE, minus the literal contract. Pacino gets to literally be the Devil; the film hands him the reveal and the résumé. Douglas has to generate the same charge out of a man who is, on paper, nothing supernatural: a broke newspaperman with bad tires and a list of firings he doesn't want you asking about. Chuck Tatum becomes appetite with a press card. Leo just happens to be the man waiting inside.

Kretzer doesn't need much convincing. He shows up late, pulled away from a campaign barbecue that had turned into a poker game, clearly annoyed about it, and Tatum's pitch is blunt: cooperate, and the coverage delivers reelection; don't, and Tatum ruins him instead. Kretzer barely blinks. Needled about the hand he walked away from, he waves it off: "This is better. Here we've got an ace in the hole." From there he's not just letting the story happen, he's actively protecting it, keeping every other reporter out of the cave while Tatum comes and goes as he pleases. Ray Teal plays him with exactly the kind of weathered, unhurried authority that reads as trustworthy on sight, which is the whole trick of the performance. Teal spent much of his career playing sheriffs, and he's best remembered as the fundamentally decent Roy Coffee on BONANZA. Kretzer is what that same face looks like when the badge is for sale. He even goes on local television to tell viewers, straight-faced, "I don't want what I'm doing here to influence your vote one little bit," insisting the whole time that he's only there doing his duty as sheriff. Tatum found the power vacuum and climbed into it. Kretzer is the reason it stayed open long enough to kill somebody.

Leave the crowd behind and go all the way back into the cave, and the performance changes register completely. Tatum tells Leo that once he's out, they'll go to New York together, that Leo can stay with him for as long as he wants, that they'll "live it up a little" — specific, generous, entirely unnecessary if the only goal were good copy. Leo asks, "Then I won't be seeing you any more?" — the kind of question a person only asks once they've started counting on an answer. Douglas doesn't play any of this like a con. He plays it like a man planning a real trip. Leo, for his part, has his own version of the same future already worked out: he wants to be free by Friday, their fifth anniversary, so he and Lorraine can start over and maybe even bring her along to New York. Tatum, astonishingly, tries to make part of that come true. Leo has already bought Lorraine a fur stole for their anniversary, and Tatum delivers it for him, then physically forces her to keep it on, staging the marriage Leo still believes he's going to get to save. None of this squares with a man who is, at the same moment, stalling the rescue for more coverage. That's the uncomfortable thing this stretch of the film insists on: lying to somebody and lying to yourself aren't opposites, they're the same skill pointed in two directions, and Tatum seems to want Leo out of that cave alive exactly as much as he wants the story that requires him to stay in it.

Pull back out of the cave and Lorraine is running the opposite calculation. She was trying to leave on the early bus the morning after Leo got trapped, eleven dollars in her pocket, the same plan she'd tried once before, only to have Leo catch up with her outside Dodge City. Tatum talks her out of leaving this time, not with an appeal to loyalty but with arithmetic: crowds mean customers, customers mean money, and walking away now means walking away from a payday. She does the math herself soon enough. Seventy dollars already, a hundred and fifty projected by nightfall, times seven days: more cash than she's ever had at once. When Tatum asks her to be photographed at church with a rosary for the sympathy angle, she refuses on exactly one ground: "Kneeling bags my nylons." It's one of the coldest lines in the film, aimed at her own husband while he's dying underground. Set that next to what Tatum gives Leo, a total stranger with no leverage over him at all: company, cigars, news from outside, and, on one of the worst nights, an old pop song. He gets Leo singing along with him, recalling an Army landing in Italy when one frightened soldier started singing and the rest eventually joined in. It works. Leo calms down enough to laugh. None of this makes Tatum better than Lorraine, exactly, and that isn't really the point. Her selfishness is colder to look at because it's pointed at somebody who's supposed to have her love. His is doing far more damage, and he's the one in the room being kind about it.

This is where the question the movie opened with stops being interesting to ask the old way. Once Smollett's crew assesses the cave-in, he lays out the numbers plainly: shore up the passage they've already got, and Leo could be out in twelve to sixteen hours. Tatum, who has never engineered anything in his life, proposes drilling straight down through solid rock instead. Smollett tells him flatly it isn't necessary. Six or seven days, Tatum is told, maybe more. Kretzer overrules his own contractor to make it happen anyway, reminding Smollett who decides whether he stays a contractor or goes back to driving a truck. There's no ambiguity left in this decision the way there was at the mountain, when Tatum could at least claim he was reacting to a name and an opportunity that were already there. This time the faster option is sitting on the table, explained by an expert, and Tatum argues it away because a twelve-hour rescue doesn't give him a six-day story. The bill for that choice comes due days later, once Leo's fever turns to pneumonia and Tatum finally wants to switch back to the original route. He's told it's gone: the drilling has run too long, the old passage walls are too unstable to shore now, and sending men in to try would bury them along with Leo. The delay didn't just cost time. It sealed off the only other way out. Once a consequence is foreseeable, spelled out by the man whose job it is to know, and chosen anyway, doing good for bad reasons stops covering what's happening. What's happening now is doing harm on purpose, on a schedule, for a byline.

Leo senses the end before anyone tells him. Struggling to breathe through an oxygen line late in the film, he asks for a priest, and Tatum tells him he doesn't need one while the doctor offers a softer version of the same reassurance, insisting he's still got plenty of time. Leo isn't convinced, and neither, privately, is the doctor: stepping outside, he tells Tatum pneumonia will kill Leo within about twelve hours unless he reaches a hospital by morning. Tatum carries that same number straight back into the cave and hands it to Leo as a rescue promise instead of a deadline: you'll be out in twelve hours, hang on. Leo believes him, because Leo has believed him about everything. He doesn't get his twelve hours. That same stretch of night, back at the trading post, is when Lorraine finally stops complying: Tatum forces the fur stole around her shoulders, starts choking her with it when she fights him, and she drives a pair of scissors into his side to make him stop. He doesn't call for help or sit down. He drives straight to the church, gets the priest, and brings Father Diego to Leo for what it was always going to be for: a confession, not a reassurance. Leo goes out still asking whether Lorraine liked her present. Tatum's reaction to the death itself isn't a scramble to protect the story. He walks out, orders the drilling stopped, and announces it to the whole crowd in person, already bleeding from a wound nobody watching him knows about yet, ending on a line that reads as an admission as much as an announcement: "The circus is over." Within minutes the same reporters he'd locked out all week are turning on him, and Nagel fires him outright once rival papers scoop the story he sat on. None of it seems to register the way it would have a week earlier. Stumbling back to his room, Tatum keeps working the phones, trying to sell his editor on the true version of the story he thinks might redeem him: the story behind the story, the reporter who kept a man buried for six days. Nagel assumes he's drunk or crazy and hangs up before Chuck can make him understand. By the time Tatum makes his way back to the Sun-Bulletin, he's walking around with a wound he never once paused for. It plays less like toughness than like a man who has already absorbed the worse injury and doesn't have much attention left over for the smaller one.

By the time Tatum makes it back to the Sun-Bulletin, he's back in the same office he first talked his way into, under the same embroidered sign he once complained "gets in my way" on his way out the door to go make real money with Nagel. It reads TELL THE TRUTH, and it's visible over his shoulder from the moment he stumbles in asking for the one man in this story who seemed to know exactly what he was from the beginning. He puts Herbie at a desk first and tells him to get to work, a small, oddly tender gesture from someone who spent the whole film treating the kid's ambitions as material. Then he finds Boot. What comes out isn't a pitch so much as a final settling of accounts: a thousand dollars a day, the exact rate Nagel was paying for exclusive rights to Leo Minosa, is the number Tatum now takes as proof of what he's worth, no longer a boast made to a skeptical small-town editor over a sixty-dollar-a-week job. And Boot can have all of it for nothing. Set against a whole film of constant sales pitches, this isn't Tatum losing his talent for negotiating. It's the one time he means the number and doesn't want anything back for it, which is either the closest this movie lets him get to redemption or the exact moment a man who spent the film selling himself finally runs out of anything left to sell. Wilder doesn't settle which one it is before Tatum hits the floor.

"Ace in the hole" is poker slang for a hidden advantage, the card nobody else knows you have until you're ready to use it, and Tatum says the phrase himself, describing his arrangement with Kretzer as exactly that kind of advantage. But the metaphor runs deeper than the one line where he says it out loud: Leo is the actual ace, the story nobody else has, rationed out over days instead of revealed all at once because it's worth more the longer Tatum can keep it face-down. The advantage only matters if you eventually cash it in, and by the time Tatum does, holding it too long has turned a story that could have made his career into one that ends it. He overplays his hand in the oldest sense of the phrase: the card that could have gotten him everything is exactly what the wanting cost him. Paramount later retitled and reissued the film as THE BIG CARNIVAL after it started losing money, hoping a friendlier name might turn things around. It didn't work, and there's something almost too perfect about a studio trying to repackage a story about repackaging tragedy into something more palatable, and having that fail for the same reason the story itself predicts. The original title came back eventually; so did the film's reputation, all the way to the National Film Registry in 2017. What hasn't come back is any sense that Tatum was an aberration. In 1951 he could still register as a specific kind of monster, a violation of what journalism was supposed to be. Recognizing his methods now takes less imagination than it used to, not because every reporter is Chuck Tatum, but because turning someone's worst day into everyone else's content, paced to how long the audience keeps watching, no longer needs a movie to invent it. The mountain of the seven vultures was never just a name Tatum found useful. It's what shows up whenever word gets out, and it hasn't needed an invitation in a long time.

Final Verdict: 90 out of 100


The Ox-Bow Incident (Retro)

by Edward Dunn


THE OX-BOW INCIDENT (1943) Passed 75 minutes Director: William A. Wellman Writer: Lamar Trotti, based on the novel by Walter Van Tilburg Clark Henry Fonda, Dana Andrews, Mary Beth Hughes
CAST Henry Fonda...Gil Carter Dana Andrews...Donald Martin Mary Beth Hughes...Rose Mapen Anthony Quinn...Juan Martínez William Eythe...Gerald Tetley Harry Morgan...Art Croft Jane Darwell...Jenny "Ma" Grier Harry Davenport...Arthur Davies Frank Conroy...Major Tetley Marc Lawrence...Jeff Farnley Willard Robertson...Sheriff Risle

My dad once told me about a strange little incident from elementary school. Some field-trip money went missing, the teacher didn't know who had taken it (my bet is the teacher), and rather than wait for evidence, somehow the matter was put to a vote. Every kid in the class voted for my dad. He got in trouble. He was also completely innocent.

The consequences were considerably smaller than those in THE OX-BOW INCIDENT, but the logic isn't all that different. A group of people can become remarkably certain of something simply because everyone around them seems certain too. Once suspicion becomes consensus, consensus has an uncomfortable habit of disguising itself as proof.

THE OX-BOW INCIDENT sounds like it could be a fifties sitcom, the kind where somebody's prize hog wanders into the wrong yard. The real subject is Bridger's Wells, Nevada, 1885, a town so short on things to do that its own bartender sums up the options as eating, sleeping, drinking, playing poker, or fighting. Gil Carter and Art Croft ride in off the winter range and get one of those five almost immediately: Gil ends up trading punches with a local rancher named Farnley, one of four men drinking at the bar, after someone suggests the two outsiders might have something to do with the cattle rustling. Then a rider comes pounding into town with word that Larry Kinkaid's been shot and his herd run off, and the fight stops mattering because everyone finally has somewhere better to put the energy. Arthur Davies, the storekeeper who spends the whole film trying to slow everyone down, tries to buy time with free drinks and an offer of beds for the night. It almost works — until Farnley, still on his horse and now furious over the supposed murder of his friend, announces he knows exactly who's going to handle this. Himself. The men who were thirty seconds from climbing down for a drink ride out after him instead.

Ox-Bow Valley turns up three men, and the screenplay gives each one a completely different reason to be doubted. Donald Martin has a paperwork problem: new to the territory, he bought fifty head from Kinkaid himself only days earlier and never got a bill of sale, which makes him either an unlucky rancher or a very convenient murderer depending on how generous you're feeling. Juan Martinez can't escape being treated as foreign: he's carrying Kinkaid's gun, he won't talk, and when he finally does, it turns out he's understood every word of English the whole time, which the mob reads as one more count against him instead of a man protecting himself from people who've already decided what he is. Alva Hardwicke's problem is his own head: an old man who won't talk, then talks too much, then starts inventing things, so that his unreliability becomes the last piece of evidence, doing double duty as confession and as an excuse to disregard anything he says in his own defense. None of these are the same accusation. A missing receipt, a stranger's gun, and a confused old man's contradictions have nothing to do with each other, and evidence against one man somehow becomes evidence against all three. The mob does the opposite math. Three different kinds of suspicion add up, in their heads, to one certainty, and nobody in the posse seems to notice they've convicted three men for three unrelated reasons and called it the same crime.

Sparks comes along as this posse's unofficial preacher, a role he's mocked into accepting — one that fits him better than the men mocking him intended. He's the one who says it outright: "It's man taking on himself the vengeance of the Lord." When someone in the crowd sneers back that the Lord probably isn't watching this stretch of Nevada, Sparks doesn't flinch. "He marks the sparrow's fall," he answers, meaning God notices even what nobody else bothers to. Then he goes further than argument. He tells Gil Carter he watched his own brother lynched when he was a boy, and that he still dreams about it. Early in PULP FICTION, Jules Winnfield will stand over men about to die and claim precisely the opposite: that a man can be the vengeance of the Lord, that killing someone can itself be the righteous act. OX-BOW doesn't let its own audience feel superior to any of this. The year the film came out, the Tuskegee Institute recorded three lynchings of Black Americans in the United States. Not zero.

Firing squads have traditionally sometimes loaded one rifle with a blank, so every man pulling a trigger can tell himself afterward that his shot might not have been the one that killed anyone. The fiction exists for a reason. The vote Major Tetley calls at Ox-Bow Valley offers no equivalent comfort: every man raising his hand knows exactly what he's voting for, and knows everyone else in the group saw him raise it. Seven don't raise theirs — Davies, Gil, Art, Sparks, Gerald Tetley, and two others — seven people choosing the exposed position over the easy one. It doesn't save the three men. Riding back to town, the posse runs into the sheriff, who tells them Kinkaid is alive, shot but not killed, and that the real thieves are already in custody. Asked how many were in on the hanging, the answer comes back flat: all but seven.

Then Gerald turns on his father. He tells him he saw "the face of a depraved, murderous beast," a man who knew the three men were innocent and forced his son to watch them die anyway. Voting no turns out to be one kind of courage. Picking up a gun and stopping it before it happened would have been another, and Gerald says, to his father's locked door, that he never had it. He calls himself a coward and demands to see his father's face. He doesn't get an answer.

OX-BOW was filmed in the summer of 1942, while Hollywood was working under a War Production Board limit of $5,000 per picture for new set-construction materials, and it shows: the interiors have a hollow, reverb-y quality, and Eastwood would later joke about the film's "plastic rocks." Discussing OX-BOW at an AFI tribute, he argued none of this hurt it, and he's not wrong. Cheap sets don't distance you from a story the way an obviously fake modern effect can; you adjust and keep watching. The fight choreography works on the same principle. Nothing in OX-BOW looks like a western brawl is supposed to look. Punches land as mob scrums, brief and ugly and over before you can admire the staging, which is closer to how an actual fight goes than anything with a stunt coordinator's fingerprints on it. Wellman saves his cleverest trick for the very end, when Gil reads Martin's letter aloud and Art Croft's hat brim blocks Gil's eyes through most of the reading — the only face doing visible work is Croft's, listening. It's characteristic of Wellman, and the effect is specific: a scene that could tip into pure sentimentality, delivered instead through the face of someone reacting to it rather than performing it, which is the harder, better choice.

At thirteen, Eastwood saw Fonda and Andrews in cowboy hats on the marquee and expected a shoot-'em-up. What he got, by his own account, was a downer that had somehow found room for racism, mob violence, and a father who breaks his own son, and it never left him. He wasn't alone in being unprepared for it. OX-BOW was a box-office disappointment on release, and Harry Morgan reportedly worried at the premiere that audiences hadn't enjoyed themselves; Orson Welles supposedly told him they didn't yet realize what they'd seen. In 1968, Eastwood's first Malpaso production took up a version of the question the film leaves open: what happens to the man on the other end of the rope if he survives? HANG 'EM HIGH gives its wrongly lynched hero a badge and sends him after the men who strung him up, on the condition that he bring them back alive, which is OX-BOW's whole argument turned into a job description. HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER, which Eastwood directed himself in 1973, has no interest in that kind of restraint. Its town let its own marshal be whipped to death and did nothing, and the stranger who shows up to settle the account doesn't ask for seven honest men. He has the whole place painted red, renames it Hell, and leaves. OX-BOW leaves a town to reckon with what happens when almost nobody does the right thing. Eastwood's Western answers: fine, here's what it costs when nobody does.

My dad's class never had a rope. That's the whole difference, and it isn't a small one, but the machinery underneath is the same: a room decides it's already sure, and going along costs less than speaking up. OX-BOW won't give you the comfortable version of that story either, where somebody eventually says something and disaster gets averted in time. Seven people voted no. Three men died anyway. The film's harder argument is that dissent isn't enough on its own — the men who survive it don't get off clean either. Gerald doesn't get hanged. He gets a locked door and the knowledge of exactly how much he let happen. Bridger's Wells never changes its name to Hell. It doesn't have to.

Final Verdict: 85 out of 100


Coyote vs. Acme

by Edward Dunn


COYOTE VS. ACME (2026) PG 101 Minutes Director: Dave Green Writer: Samy Burch Will Forte, John Cena, Lana Condor
CAST Will Forte...Kevin Avery John Cena...Buddy Crane Lana Condor...Paige Avery Tone Bell...Sal Maltese P. J. Byrne...Bill Pellicano Martha Kelly...Dottie Jones Luis Guzmán...Judge Eric Bauza...Bugs Bunny / Daffy Duck / Foghorn Leghorn / Porky Pig / Elmer Fudd / Tweety / Road Runner

It's spring of 1998, and I'm on a band field trip to the Bugs Bunny Film Festival at the Neptune Theatre in Seattle. This wasn't a normal field trip. We left school early in a convoy of parents' minivans and didn't get back until well after the final bell. How much of a Looney Tunes geek do you have to be to organize something like that? The answer, apparently, is Mr. Luthans, the band teacher at Gateway Middle School.

At lunch we stop at the Wallingford Dick's Drive-In, where I decide it's an opportune time for a prank. When nobody is paying attention, I walk over to a pay phone, dial 911, and say something ridiculous along the lines of, "Help, there are a hundred fires on 43rd Street." Then I hang up and don't think much of it.

Until a fire truck and several police cars arrive.

I was right about one thing: nobody had seen me make the call. But while the police are investigating, I make the considerably less intelligent decision to tell a couple of friends what I'd done. One says, "That sounds pretty serious." The other says, "I don't know. I think we should say something."

They're messing with me, but I don't know that. "C'mon, guys. You can't say anything."

They don't. So I get away with a crime, climb back into a minivan, and head off to watch Looney Tunes.

At thirteen, I wasn't particularly grateful. I liked Looney Tunes, but sitting through hours of cartoons I'd already seen didn't exactly feel like the opportunity of a lifetime. I was much more interested in getting out of school, hanging around with my friends, and discovering how many times the theater would refill a large popcorn and soda. Nearly thirty years later, I have a little more appreciation for the fact that Mr. Luthans somehow convinced everyone involved that taking the Gateway Middle School band to Seattle to watch Bugs Bunny constituted a field trip.

Walking into COYOTE VS. ACME, I couldn't tell whether I was getting consequence-free slapstick or a movie using Acme as a stand-in for every defense contractor and pharma giant currently in the news. What showed up instead split the difference in a way I didn't expect: charming more than hilarious, and considerably more philosophically load-bearing than a movie built around exploding rocket skates has any obligation to be.

Acme's hidden initiative is called Project Sisyphus. So, in its own way, is Wile E.'s pursuit of the Road Runner — and the film treats the two as opposites rather than synonyms. For Acme, endless suffering is something to exploit: cartoon characters can survive punishment that would kill a human, so their misery becomes another stage of product development. For Wile E., the same endless striving is identity — failure doesn't drain the chase of meaning, because the chase is the only thing he does. He's also the one with the better claim on the myth. Sisyphus got eternity as a punishment; Wile E., a cartoon who's been falling off the same mesa since 1949 and always turns up for the next one, was most of the way there already.

The film seems to know exactly what it's protecting. Jeremy Slater has said that he and James Gunn deliberately kept the character silent and off the fourth wall, wanting the audience to feel him the way you feel a dog rather than laugh at him as a gag machine. A Wile E. who's in on the joke collapses into Bugs Bunny with worse aim. A Wile E. who isn't gets to be Sisyphus.

Kevin's version of the same loop has no myth attached to it, only a business model. Avery, Jones & Maltese doesn't try cases, it settles them — fast, for whatever keeps the lights on — and Kevin has built an entire professional identity around never finding out what happens if he pushes. He admits as much to Wile E. directly, in one of the film's few scenes where the joke stops: he used to have a clear goal too. He used to chase something, until he got burnt out on trying.

Wile E. never has to make that confession. He doesn't carry the memory of having once been a hungrier version of himself. Kevin does, which is worse. Harvard Law put him in the same room as Buddy Crane once; only one of them kept climbing. By the time Kevin is standing in front of Congress explaining why Wile E. deserves anyone's attention, he's really describing the man he stopped being: someone who picks himself back up no matter what happens, unafraid of the very failure Kevin, by his own account, got too scared to risk.

Wile E. pushes the rock without knowing there's a myth attached to it. Kevin has to notice the rock he put down years ago and decide to pick it back up. Both of them end up Sisyphus. Only one of them had to choose it again.

Pull back far enough, and the whole movie is already sitting inside Frazier's original piece, waiting to be inflated. His 1990 New Yorker column is an invented legal filing from an attorney named Harold Schoff in a Tempe, Arizona courtroom, cataloging eighty-five separate Acme purchases gone wrong in legal diction that never winks at how silly its contents are. There's no trial, no firm, no rival lawyer, no Congress, and no Project Sisyphus. But there is this: Schoff argues that Acme holds "a virtual monopoly" over the goods Coyote's work requires, and wonders how a company gets away with victimizing a captive consumer this badly, over and over, with no alternative supplier in sight.

The movie gives Kevin nearly the same argument in front of Congress: Acme has a monopoly over every tool Wile E.'s work requires. So even in Frazier's original joke, this isn't merely a story about a hapless predator buying bad gadgets. It's a story about a captive customer. The movie didn't have to invent that idea. It only had to build a plot large enough to hold it.

None of this works without a cast willing to play it straight. Forte's Kevin runs on a kind of practiced defeat that keeps edging toward Droopy Dog — fitting, since Droopy is also a Tex Avery character, and Forte's flattest line readings land closest to the film's biggest laughs. Cena, playing against his own body for once, turns Buddy Crane's charm into something closer to a weapon: every reassurance he offers sounds like a threat wearing a good suit. Condor's Paige has the most old-fashioned job in the movie, playing the one person onscreen who hasn't given up on any of this yet, and the film needs her to sell that earnestness or the third act collapses. Eric Bauza voices nearly everyone else — Bugs, Daffy, Foghorn, Porky, Elmer, Tweety, the Road Runner — which makes Wile E. the one character even his own voice actor isn't allowed to touch. The silence holds all the way into the sound booth. The one performance that doesn't fully land is Foghorn himself: Bauza gets the cadence, not the burr, and it's specific enough to be worth naming. Foghorn was built off Senator Claghorn, a blowhard radio-politician caricature from the 1940s, which makes it almost too neat that this Foghorn ends up in front of Congress running the exact playbook Claghorn was invented to mock — nothing illegal happened, progress requires sacrifice. Nobody had to invent that irony. Senator Claghorn wrote it eighty years early.

The performances aren't even the deepest cut. The law firm itself, Avery, Jones & Maltese, is a tribute built into the plot rather than dropped in the background: Tex Avery, Chuck Jones, and Michael Maltese, three foundational figures in the Warner cartoon tradition — Jones and Maltese being the pair who created Wile E. and the Road Runner — now running Wile E.'s law firm decades later. Dr. Lorre is a caricature of Peter Lorre, a favorite target of the original shorts' sense of humor. And Wile E.'s business card, Have Brain, Will Travel, is running the same joke Paladin's did on Have Gun – Will Travel, with the weapon swapped for the thing the character was supposed to have all along. A cheaper version of this movie skips all three. This one built its own law firm out of trivia and dared you to notice.

None of this needed a metaphor. In November 2023, Warner Bros. Discovery shelved a finished film that had tested well, the product of years of work from hundreds of people, preferring a roughly $30 million tax write-off to releasing it. It was the third nearly or fully completed movie the studio had killed this way — and this one was already finished when the decision came down. The calculation was never that the film wasn't good. The calculation was that it could be worth more on a different ledger if nobody saw it. That's Project Sisyphus's whole philosophy with the serial numbers filed off: something with real, felt value gets converted into a line on a different kind of ledger, and the conversion is completely legal. Foghorn's own defense to Congress — "nothing we've done today or any other day is illegal" — is available to Warner Bros. Discovery too, word for word.

So which is it, cathartic or subversive? The shelving saga argues both sides at once. It's subversive because the joke was already sitting in the finished film when the studio that financed it went and became the joke's real-world punchline. Project Sisyphus stopped being a premise and started looking like corporate procedure. It's cathartic, though, in a way that should make you a little uneasy. Warner eventually sold the worldwide rights to Ketchup Entertainment for a reported $50 million, and Ketchup turned the whole ugly history into part of the pitch: "The Movie Acme Doesn't Want You to See." The system even found a way to sell us the story of beating the system.

Even the plot won't pick a side. Congress declines to pursue federal charges, an institutional shrug that rhymes uncomfortably with the real studio's calculation, and the movie only gets its ending because someone leaks the evidence and forces a correction nobody official was going to volunteer. Off-screen, the film survived only after public outrage and somebody else finally decided it was worth buying. That's not exactly a hopeful ending. It's a description of how much it can cost to make one of these stories turn out right, on-screen and off.

Nothing about the way the movie looks is chasing this particular year. The desert is the same mesa-and-butte Southwest Chuck Jones was drawing in 1949, unchanged because it never needed updating in the first place. Paige mentions, almost as an aside, that Acme makes her phone too, but the film doesn't linger on a screen long enough to date itself the way most contemporary comedies manage within a year of release. Even the animation was built the old way first: poses sketched by hand before anything got rendered, the CG following the drawing rather than replacing it. None of that guarantees the movie holds up twenty years from now. But it's the kind of choice that ages on its own terms instead of the calendar's, and that's the real difference between a movie that looks dated and one that only looks like it was made a while ago.

The jokes are the one place the movie's ambition doesn't fully follow through. Kevin telling a court stenographer "please don't write that down," three times in a row until the joke is the repetition itself — that's a bit legal comedies have been running since long before this one. So is the ironic flash-cut: someone asks whether Kevin's really taking on the biggest corporation in the world, cut to Kevin, on the news, having done exactly that. These aren't bad jokes. They're jokes any workplace comedy already owns, dropped into a movie that also came up with Project Sisyphus and leaves enough room for a fairly surprising reading of Camus.

The film's thematic imagination and its comedic imagination are operating at two different registers, and only one of them is bespoke. I laughed, reliably, about once every ten minutes — enough that the movie never feels humorless, but not nearly what I expected from Looney Tunes. What you get instead is a movie that thinks harder than it makes you laugh, and that's a real trade, not a wash.

I went into COYOTE VS. ACME the same way I went into that Neptune Theatre field trip at thirteen: mildly obligated, expecting the cartoons I already knew, not much more. What I got instead was a movie that kept turning out to be about the thing right in front of it and something else underneath: a $300 rocket-skate case and a monopoly complaint, a product line and a research program, a cartoon's oldest joke and a myth he'd already been living inside the whole time. None of that stopped it from being a Looney Tunes movie as well, competently silly in exactly the ways the marketing promised, with a Road Runner who still says nothing but beep and still wins every time. It doesn't need the Sisyphus reading to work as a movie. It works better with it, which isn't the same thing as needing it, and that difference is the whole trick.

Somewhere around the fifth rocket sled, I thought about a thirteen-year-old who couldn't have cared less whether Wile E. Coyote ever caught anything, and who definitely wasn't thinking about Camus. I'm not sure he would now, either. But he'd have recognized this ending anyway: the guy who keeps getting back up, for no reason anybody in the audience needs explained to them, because that's the only version of the character anyone would recognize. Warner Bros. tried to bury this movie and failed. Acme keeps selling Wile E. products that fail and keeps getting away with it. He keeps buying them anyway. The people worth rooting for keep losing on schedule and showing up again the next morning. I don't know what that says about the people who keep showing up to watch them. I know I did.

Final Verdict: 89 out of 100


A Simple Plan (Retro)

by Edward Dunn


A SIMPLE PLAN (1998) R 121 Minutes Director: Sam Raimi Writer: Scott B. Smith, based on his novel Bill Paxton, Bridget Fonda, Billy Bob Thornton
CAST Bill Paxton...Hank Mitchell Bridget Fonda...Sarah Mitchell Billy Bob Thornton...Jacob Mitchell Brent Briscoe...Lou Chambers Chelcie Ross...Sheriff Carl Jenkins Becky Ann Baker...Nancy Chambers Gary Cole...Neil Baxter / Vernon Bokovsky

Well, talk about false advertising. I thought this was going to be a movie about my favorite band, SIMPLE PLAN. Sure, the band didn't technically form until after the movie was released, but I figured we'd at least get the early years, when they were still going by Reset. Nope. A SIMPLE PLAN is about two brothers and a guy named Lou who find several million dollars in the woods and proceed to make increasingly terrible decisions about it. Before long, they're on the edge of breaking down, and no one's there to save them.

Three people can't keep a secret — one of the oldest rules in crime fiction — and A SIMPLE PLAN spends its opening minutes establishing that these three were particularly ill-equipped to share one. The film opens on the Mitchell brothers' annual New Year's Eve visit to their parents' grave, and even that ritual isn't as settled as Hank assumes. He finds a flower already planted in the snow and has no idea who left it. Jacob did, on a visit of his own that Hank never knew about, and when Hank asks when he came, Jacob turns defensive fast: "This is the only day we can come here? What the hell's wrong with you?" Lou wasn't even invited to any of this — Jacob only picked him up because he needed a ride home — and the film introduces him mid-urination a few yards from the headstones: "Hey, Jacob! Look! I'm writing my name!" Jacob joins him a moment later. Hank's patience with both of them is visibly running out before they've even left the cemetery. Nobody has found the plane yet. Hank already knows less about his brother than he assumes. The money doesn't put those cracks there. It only finds them.

The debate over what to do with the money doesn't last long. Hank's first instinct is procedural — "Whatever it is, it's a police matter now" — and it survives almost no time against Lou's argument that the dead man in the plane won't mind being robbed and nobody but the three of them will ever know: "Nobody knows about this... but us." It's the exact premise the cemetery scene already spent disproving, and the film knows it even if nobody in the truck does yet. What tips Hank has less to do with greed than the deal he negotiates around it. He'll hold the money through the winter; if the plane turns up in spring with no mention of missing cash, they split it three ways and leave town; if anyone comes looking before then, he burns it. It's a plan built entirely around a hypothetical they've all already decided won't happen. Then they count it. $4,400,000, called out in stacks of ten thousand while Lou pictures a Trans Am and Jacob's ambitions stop at a truck, and by the last stack the money has stopped being a moral problem and started being a number they can each divide by three. They haven't spent a dollar yet, but they've already begun spending it in their heads. Giving the money back was never going to be as hard as giving up what they've already decided it's for.

Sarah's first answer, when Hank poses it as a hypothetical over dinner, is immediate and principled: "Of course not... I wouldn't take it. That's just me." Then he tells her it's real, and principle has to compete with $4.4 million sitting within reach. By the next scene she's already directing what gets returned, what gets hidden, and what Jacob doesn't get to know. The clearest measure of how completely this becomes her default mode comes weeks later, in the hospital, holding their newborn. Handed the baby and told "she's hungry," Sarah starts nursing and, in the same breath, lays out a plan to get Lou drunk enough to talk about Stephanson's death on tape, dressed up as a game — Hank and Jacob taking turns joking about how they'd have done it, Lou going last, the recorder running the whole time. It's the coldest scene in the movie, and it's staged as an act of maternal tenderness. But it's worth granting her something before writing this off as pure calculation: when Hank later threatens to give the money back, her answer is a full accounting of what "normal" would cost them — his dead-end job at the feed mill, her own at the library, Amanda in hand-me-down clothes and someone else's old toys, Jacob alone with his dog in a filthy apartment: "How long do you give him, Hank?" She isn't wrong about any of it. She's only the one willing to turn the arithmetic into a plan instead of a complaint.

Jacob's dog, Mary Beth, is some kind of shepherd mix, scruffy and unglamorous — which suits Jacob fine. For all the ways Hank treats him as someone who needs looking after, Jacob keeps being the one who looks after Hank when it matters. At Lou's house, when Sarah's tape-recording scheme collapses and Lou pulls a gun, Jacob retrieves his rifle from the truck and shoots him before he can kill Hank. It's a terrible act, but the impulse behind it isn't hard to read. It matters more once you know what Jacob wants out of life. Earlier, drunk and happy for one of the only stretches in the whole movie, he lays it out unprompted: buy back the family farm, meet a nice woman, have kids, Sunday dinners with Hank and Sarah and Amanda, drinking on the porch the way their dad used to. It's a plain, specific, entirely reachable version of contentment, and Jacob is the only one of the three men who says out loud that he wants it. By the end, he's also the one who understands that they've made that future impossible. He talks Hank into killing him: "If you love me, Hank, you'll do it." The last thing on his mind isn't the money or the murders. It's making sure Amanda gets the stuffed bear he gave her, the one that used to be his: "You just tell the little girl that... that bear is from me." And he explicitly gives up the whole future he described earlier — "I don't wanna sit around the rest of my life thinking about this shit. I can't do it... Sit on the porch and drink. I can't do it." It's Steinbeck's Lennie and George, except Lennie never got to choose and never understood what was coming. Jacob understands completely and chooses it himself. Hank never even has to ask.

Sarah works out from the bill denominations that this was never an armored-car robbery before Hank does, then connects the ransom story to "Baxter" and places him as Vernon Bokovsky, brother of the man they found in the plane. She calls the sheriff's office to pull Hank out before he ever reaches the woods. Hank doesn't doubt her. He's already weighing different numbers: Jacob's excused with a fake hangover, he's standing next to Carl when the call comes in, and backing out now, as he'd argued to Sarah the night before, would "look suspicious as hell." Even after she tells him flatly that Baxter is going to shoot him, Hank goes anyway — "they're waiting for me, baby, I gotta go" — because leaving looks worse to him than the real risk of staying. It's the same instinct that's driven every decision since the plane: assess whatever's directly in front of him, solve that one problem, and let the next crisis be a future problem. In the woods, Baxter shoots Carl, and it's Hank himself, not Jacob, who ends up killing Baxter. He walks in trying to solve a suspicion problem and walks out with two more bodies to explain — proof that his read on danger was never the issue. He can see a threat coming from a mile off. He's never once been able to see past it to what handling it will cost.

The recorded bill numbers are what finally get the money burned, and it's worth noticing what a relief that must be. An FBI agent lays it out for Hank: they never risked marking the ransom cash outright, not with a kidnapped girl still in play, but a task force recorded roughly one bill in ten before the drop. Spend enough of those hundreds for long enough and eventually one gets noticed. The reasoning is practical, not moral. It's the first practical argument Hank's had in months for doing the thing he probably already needs to do. Sarah begs him not to — they could run, leave the country, go anywhere — and he burns it anyway. By then the sunk cost was never really about the money. What he'd spent to keep it was Jacob, killed by Hank's own hand; Carl, shot by Baxter in the woods Hank walked into against his wife's warning; Lou, shot by Jacob at his own house; and whatever version of the three of them might have existed if Hank had done what he wanted to do at the start and called it in. Burning $4.4 million doesn't buy any of that back. It only proves he can still keep the one promise he made at the start: "If somebody comes searching for the money, I'll burn it." What's left afterward isn't relief. Hank opens the film telling us he was a happy man: a wife, a decent job, neighbors who liked and respected him. He closes it admitting he can go a few days at a time without thinking about the money, the murders, or Jacob — pretending, as he puts it, that "we're just like everyone else." A few days is the best he gets. How could this happen to him?

Final Verdict: 91 out of 100


The Witches (Retro)

by Edward Dunn


THE WITCHES (1990) PG 91 Minutes Director: Nicolas Roeg Writer: Allan Scott Anjelica Huston, Mai Zetterling, Jasen Fisher
CAST Anjelica Huston...Miss Ernst / Grand High Witch Mai Zetterling...Helga Jasen Fisher...Luke Rowan Atkinson...Mr. Stringer Bill Paterson...Mr. Jenkins Brenda Blethyn...Mrs. Jenkins Charlie Potter...Bruno Jenkins Jane Horrocks...Miss Irvine Jim Carter...Head Chef

I'm not a big fan of witches unless they help the Mariners win baseball games, or there's a talking cat hell-bent on world domination. But the spooky witches, the ones who kidnap children and make them disappear? As far as I'm concerned, they can stay in SCARY STORIES TO TELL IN THE DARK.

I was six years old when THE WITCHES came out, and at that age, what I saw in a theater was entirely up to my parents. With three siblings in the mix, we were lucky to make two trips to the movies a year, and 1990 had already spent one on NINJA TURTLES at the now-defunct Snohomish theater — how a place with wooden seats that comfortable went out of business, I still don't understand — and was saving the other for HOME ALONE. THE WITCHES never had a shot. Which was probably for the best, since the imagery would've frightened me. My little sister, I mean.

Luke doesn't get an inciting incident so much as an inciting absence. His parents' deaths are handled almost entirely offhand — dialogue calls it only "an accident," full stop, and the movie moves on. It's restraint you don't expect from a film this eager to show you a woman's face peeling off later, and it works because grief isn't really the scene's subject. The subject is Helga, who becomes parent and mentor in the same motion, arming her newly orphaned grandson with the specialized knowledge he's going to need. There's a Grand High Witch ruling over all the world's witches, and nobody has ever actually seen her. Witches give themselves away through smell, not appearance: clean children smell to a witch like fresh dog's droppings, Helga explains, so the dirtier you are, the safer you are. There's no cauldron anywhere in this mythology, Dahl's or the movie's. Luke's hero training amounts to learning that personal hygiene may get him killed.

By the time Luke and Helga check into the hotel, Rowan Atkinson has already shown up as Mr. Stringer, the manager, and even the witches find him insufferable — one calls him "that ridiculous manager" on her way to drinks. Atkinson plays him exactly the way you'd expect from the guy who'd spend the mid-90s as an easily-flustered police inspector on THE THIN BLUE LINE, years before that show existed to compare him to: pompous, procedural, no match for a grandmother willing to invent a health code violation on the spot. It's a smaller, stiffer performance than Mr. Bean, and that's the point — Stringer's comedy comes from thinking he's in charge of something. Jim Carter runs the kitchen as the Head Chef, two decades before he'd spend six seasons keeping Downton Abbey's below-stairs staff in line as Mr. Carson, and it's funny watching him lose his composure over a mouse in his trousers with the same fussy dignity he'd later bring to Downton's table settings. The animatronic mice came from Jim Henson's Creature Shop, the same workshop that would also give 1990 moviegoers Splinter in NINJA TURTLES. Henson died that May, with THE WITCHES opening in the UK nine days later. Both rodents emerged from the same workshop in the same brief, strange stretch of time — one of them in the movie my family actually went to see.

Nobody at the hotel blinks at the RSPCC either. Mr. Jenkins, working the room, brings up "this RSPCC," only for Miss Ernst herself to start asking what the letters stand for before Miss Irvine quietly feeds her the answer: "Cruelty to Children." Miss Ernst recovers with an "Oh, of course," and everybody goes straight back to networking. Dahl invented the RSPCC himself, incidentally — it's on the door in the book too, not something the movie added — and there's something wonderfully brazen about a society devoted to cruelty to children hiding behind the Royal Society for the Prevention of it. Nobody needs decades of institutional distrust to be suspicious of an organization whose name is that perfectly respectable. It has the same overcompensating quality as Fat Tony's Legitimate Businessman's Social Club: the harder the name insists there's nothing to worry about, the more I start wondering what's happening behind the door. SOUTH PARK pushes the banquet-room version even further: in "Ginger Kids," Cartman's cult books the Sunset Room at the Airport Hilton for sacrifice cages, a lava pit, and a full refreshment buffet, and nobody at the hotel seems particularly interested in the agenda.

By the time Luke gets his shot at the soup, the witches have already told him exactly what they think should happen to him. When they smell him out earlier, the order comes fast: "Search out this small lump of dung! Find it! It must be exterminated immediately!" This isn't a one-scene flourish, either — the Grand High Witch's actual policy for England's children is that they "shall be rubbed out. Destroyed." Regardless of how much Dahl means this as fairy-tale wickedness, "exterminated" is a loaded word to put in your antagonists' mouths for a plan to eliminate every child in a country, and the rhetoric of eradication doesn't stop there. Luke's answer is to turn their own weapon back on them. He empties the stolen bottle of Formula 86 Delayed Action Mouse-Maker into the witches' own soup, and the Grand High Witch spends her last scene as a person becoming exactly what she planned for every child in England.

Dahl hated where the movie ends up, and it's not hard to see why. His own ending doesn't have anyone turning back into a boy. Luke asks Grandmamma how long a mouse-person lives, and she lands on nine years — three times an ordinary mouse's span. That's close enough to what she might have left at eighty-six that Luke realizes they'll grow old together and, not long afterward, die together. "That would be perfect," Grandmamma says, and the book means it as peace, not tragedy. The actual ending isn't the soup or the transformation at all. It's the two of them plotting to raid the Grand High Witch's castle — Formula 86 for her successor and assistants, cats to finish the job — before taking her money-making machine and worldwide records and spending whatever years they have left wiping out witches everywhere. That's the same shared mortality that makes their conversation land so hard, turned into a life's mission. Dahl gives Luke and his grandmother a shared deadline and calls it a happy ending.

The movie can't quite let go of that ending either, even as it works to get away from it. Luke gets almost the same bedside scene: "How long do mice live, grandma?" ... "I really am happy to be a mouse, you know." "I know, my darling." Helga even wonders aloud whether some good witch might change him back, the way Dahl's grandmother never does. Then, inside about two minutes of screen time, one does — off-handedly, with barely a line of dialogue to explain it, cutting straight to a chaotic transformation scene that plays more like a fire alarm than a miracle. Bruno never gets his own version of the scene at all; the last line of dialogue before the credits is Luke calling after Miss Irvine, "Don't forget Bruno!" The address book survives the rewrite too, scaled down to fit the new ending — Dahl's worldwide records become "the name and address of every witch in America," and Luke and Helga are already talking about taking the campaign to New York. It's the same device doing the opposite job in each version: in the book, the list gives two people with limited time left a life's work. In the movie, it feels more like a sequel pitch left over from an ending the film has otherwise decided it doesn't want.

THE WITCHES is an efficient adaptation. Ninety-one minutes covers Helga's backstory, the full hotel plot, two transformations, and a climax without ever feeling like a book being sprinted through — right up until that last stretch, where it suddenly has to solve a problem Dahl never considered a problem in the first place. The camera has its own version of that same overreach. Roeg spent the seventies making DON'T LOOK NOW and THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH, movies where making you visually uncomfortable was part of the point, and he can't fully set that instinct aside here. Half the time it works — a low angle on the Grand High Witch turns an ordinary hallway into something worth flinching from. The other half, the same instinct gets pointed at a kid opening a hotel room door, and the effect is less unsettling than exhausting: style reaching for a reaction the scene hasn't earned. Still, that's a smaller miscalculation than the one the movie saves for its ending. It's a film confident enough to trust Dahl with a woman's face peeling off, and not confident enough to trust him with a boy who stays a mouse.

Final Verdict: 74 out of 100

Sidenote: Yes, I know — the talking cat I was referring to, Salem Saberhagen, is technically a warlock, not a witch. But he was sentenced by the Witches' Council, so I'm counting it.

Salem Saberhagen, Sabrina the Teenage Witch

It's Such a Beautiful Day (Retro)

by Edward Dunn


IT'S SUCH A BEAUTIFUL DAY (2012) NOT RATED 62 Minutes Director: Don Hertzfeldt Writer: Don Hertzfeldt Don Hertzfeldt, Sara Cushman
CAST Don Hertzfeldt...Narrator Sara Cushman...Doctor

A friend of mine once told me that it's all one big day. I wouldn't say I was skeptical, but I did take the time to interrogate the idea — and my friend — a little further. I had questions. What does that even mean? Is this one of those meaningless statements, like "it is what it is"? How is this philosophy supposed to change the way I live my life? I never got the answers I was looking for, but my friend remained confident in the idea, and I remained open to it. It has been sitting on the back burner of my mind ever since. Maybe there's something to this.

Don Hertzfeldt took the long way toward giving that idea somewhere to land. IT'S SUCH A BEAUTIFUL DAY started as three separate shorts made between 2006 and 2011 — EVERYTHING WILL BE OK, I AM SO PROUD OF YOU, and a third that shares its title with the eventual feature — each one existing on its own before Hertzfeldt stitched them into a single film. You can feel the seams if you look for them. Mostly you don't, because the method covers for it: stick figures, hand-drawn frame by frame, occasionally overtaken by bursts of color and abstraction that read less like stylistic flourishes than a mind losing its grip on the wheel. Bill spends his opening minutes failing at the smallest transactions civilization asks of him — mixing up "What's up" with "How's it going," replying "Weh" to a man he can't place, asking the checkout girl "how are you?" right back and getting nothing. None of it is dramatic. All of it is the specific, low-grade humiliation of being a person around other people, and Hertzfeldt trusts that register of embarrassment to carry the comedy for exactly as long as it takes him to need it to carry something else.

The nearest cousins here are SALAD FINGERS, which used similarly scratchy, homemade line work to smuggle real menace into something resembling a children's cartoon gone wrong, and ADVENTURE TIME, built almost entirely out of simple shapes that spent years tucking dementia and grief into its margins. The resemblance stops feeling merely visual. The Ice King's madness, engineered by the very crown that gives him his power, sits close enough to what eventually happens to Bill that one starts illuminating the other. Drawn simply enough, it turns out, almost anything can be made to say the unsayable before an audience notices what it's being told.

The office scenes run the same trick from the other direction: instead of shrinking Bill down to fit an ordinary embarrassment, they blow a coworker's small talk up to the size of a metaphysical crisis and act like nothing happened. A cubicle neighbor mentions twins separated at birth who each grew up to become serial killers, and the narration draws the conclusion before Bill has to: "it was as though they didn't have any choice in what they turned into." Then the coworker gets there in his own words — "Genetics is pretty messed up" — while his gum flies out of his mouth mid-sentence, and that's the whole eulogy for free will.

At lunch, the same guy is onto a physics book that's convinced him time doesn't pass so much as sit there: the past hasn't gone anywhere, the future's already happened, and the present is nothing more than wherever we happen to be standing in a landscape that was always there. Bill tries a joke — he could swear he's heard this somewhere before — and gets nothing back. Two of the largest claims a person can make about a life — that you may not have chosen who you'd become, and that past, present, and future may be less separate than they feel — arrive back to back on an ordinary workday. Put together, they leave an even more unsettling possibility hanging in the air: maybe there was never another version of Bill's life waiting to happen. Hertzfeldt doesn't score either revelation. He lets them sit there next to the gum and the sandwich, daring you to notice how much weight the scene is carrying.

Bill has been lying awake with his eyes open when the scene cuts to a bus stop, where a stranger with a leaf blower is working a few feet away. He doesn't stay a few feet away for long. Over the course of the scene he works his way steadily closer, the blower still running, until he's standing right next to Bill with no acknowledgment that anything about this is strange. It's the kind of bit SEINFELD used to build whole episodes around — an ordinary irritation escalated past the point anyone would tolerate it, played by everyone involved as though nothing is happening. Then, with no transition to soften it, the movie cuts to his grandmother deciding how she'd throw him into a fireplace.

Grandma's own mind is already going by the time we properly meet her. She keeps a preserved cat head in a drawer and wants more of them, from better cats, with cleaner ears and nicer hairdos. It plays as pure whimsy right up until the narration mentions her tumor, her seizures, her dementia — and you realize you've been watching decline the whole time without having the word for it. Then the film hands you her whole family tree in a few dozen lines, and it reads like a country song written by someone who's given up trying to make anything sound sad: her father cut in half by a train while eating an onion, her brother the preacher eventually killed by one too, her little sister dead of yellow fever and, almost in the same breath, on fire. A distant relative abandoned in the woods as a child grew up able to say only the word "Bible" and had a sunflower sprout from his head after he died. Her own mother spent her later years making jam and, with no change in tone, persecuting Jews.

None of it is played entirely as tragedy or entirely as a joke. It's delivered flatly, at the same volume as everything else — the same volume, in fact, as the cubicle guy's line about twins who never had a choice in what they turned into. Bill's illness isn't an anomaly the movie wants you to feel sorry for. It's the latest entry in a ledger that's been running for generations.

His mother's death arrives on an answering machine, delivered with the same affectless calm the movie extends to everything: she'd gone off her medication, the narration says she launched into a fit of senile hysterics, and she was hit by a train — which by now reads less like an isolated tragedy than a family trait. She'd reserved her own plot years in advance to lie beside her parents. A clerical error buries her fifty yards off instead, between a coffin full of rocks and a rich woman's golden retriever. Even the film's dead can't get their paperwork straight.

Bill goes through her storage boxes afterward and finds a hundred-year-old photo album stuffed with relatives he never knew, a few inexplicable photographs of bacon and lumber, and a series of portraits neatly labeled for a future reference nobody ever needed. Buried among them are photos of himself as a boy, and they unsettle him in a way the strangers don't. He'd read somewhere that every cell in the body eventually replaces itself, that a person is really a slow handoff of continuously changing parts. Looking at that kid's face, he can't shake the sense that his own "ridiculous ingrown cells" had long since stolen a dead boy's identity and made a mess of the life that came with it. The movie's question about what makes Bill Bill is already here, posed through flesh and childhood photographs well before memory begins tearing the same identity apart.

Underneath the album is a folder of his mother's own medical records — and clipped to her original diagnosis, a physician's note recommending, in plain language, that she never have a child. A few scenes ago, genetics was a stranger's theory about twins raised apart. Here, it turns out, it already had Bill's name on the paperwork.

Matthew, Bill's hospital roommate, is hidden behind a curtain in the next bed and communicates through a row of buttons that can each play a different electronic sentence. He almost never presses the other four. Whatever else the box lets him say, what he keeps choosing, over and over, is "I am in pain." It's a bleak joke and a real diagnosis at once: strip a person down to the barest possible report of himself, and what's left looks less like a personality than raw awareness registering damage.

Bill hasn't been stripped that far, but he's heading in the same direction. A new doctor asks him what month it is and he doesn't know. Asked for his address, he reasons that he must have always lived at the hospital, since he can't remember living anywhere else. He tells her he has a fish living in his head, possibly a trout, and means it. Every face in the room looks more or less the same to him now — he can still pick his ex-girlfriend out by her hair, but her name is gone.

After another round of tests, including a catheter threaded up into his brain to map the damage, the doctor sits down with his ex-girlfriend and delivers the line the movie has been building toward without saying it outright: once memory loss gets bad enough, the brain starts inventing what it's missing, filling gaps with confabulated stories and people who never existed — not lying exactly so much as repairing itself with whatever material is on hand. It's a clinical footnote in the moment. It's also the movie handing you the terms and conditions for everything that happens next, including the ending, well before you know you'll need them. By now it's clear that the film has been behaving like Bill's memory all along: fragments assembled into something that feels continuous because somebody is still there to experience them.

Later, once Bill is well into his last drive, he dreams of a cliff wrapped in fog, the sea working against the rocks somewhere far below. Lean over the edge in the dream and you can make out shapes under the water: cars that went over the side across the years, still down there, headlights flickering on and off beneath the waves, a little dimmer each time, until eventually they stop flickering at all. It isn't really an image about the cars. Ralph Waldo Emerson put something close to it more plainly, in a sentence Hertzfeldt never uses but might as well have: "Society is a wave. The wave moves onward, but the water of which it is composed does not." The wave is Bill's family line, his workplace, his city, the species — whatever keeps moving regardless of who's currently making it up. The water is everyone who ever was, dimming underneath it, one headlight at a time.

There is a little Derek Parfit hiding in here too. One of the ideas running through REASONS AND PERSONS is that what connects one version of a person to another may matter more than some indivisible thing called identity. A useful way to picture it is as a rope rather than a single thread: thousands of overlapping strands of memory, intention, habit and character, none required to run untouched from one end of a life to the other. Bill's strands have been thinning since the office scene with the twins — his body replacing its own cells, the dead boy in the old photograph who somehow used to be him, names disappearing, memories filling themselves back in incorrectly. What the cliff dream adds is scale. Bill isn't uniquely coming apart. Everyone is temporary material inside something that keeps moving after us. The headlights dim; the wave doesn't.

ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND makes the sharpest comparison, because it runs the same experiment with the one variable this film never lets Bill touch: choice. Joel decides to have Clementine erased from his memory after their breakup, the same procedure she's already had done to him, accepting the promise of forgetting as a clean fix for pain. Then, partway through the procedure, watching the memories go one by one, Joel changes his mind. He starts trying to hide Clementine in memories she doesn't belong to — a childhood humiliation, anything the machine might not think to check — fighting to keep exactly what he paid to lose. It doesn't work. He wakes up with no memory of her at all, meets her again as a stranger, and, after the audio tapes tell them exactly how badly it went the first time, chooses her anyway.

The film's answer to whether memory is something you possess or something you're made of becomes an answer to whether you'd erase the bad parts if you could: no, not once you understand what disappears with them. Bill never gets that scene. Nobody hands him a machine and asks if he wants this. His memory doesn't get erased so much as it stops holding its shape, and there's no version of him standing outside the process to decide whether to intervene. Joel's story is about a man who almost throws away what matters, loses it anyway, and is improbably given the chance to choose it again. Bill's is about what's left when nothing gets decided at all — and it turns out something is still there, assembling itself out of whatever material survives, whether anyone signed off on it or not.

Twice before his doctor tells him he doesn't have long to live, Bill takes almost exactly the same walk. "It's kind of a really nice day," the narration says, nearly word for word each time: out around the block, past the leaf-filled tennis shoe that hits him, both times, with the same inexplicable sadness, along the bridge, back up the main street. Then comes the diagnosis, and the walk happens again — in the same words, past the same shoe, with the same sadness still intact — except now it's surrounded by everything Bill never used to notice standing next to it. His bathmats become gorgeous. The grain in his kitchen cabinets starts vibrating with meaning. "He's alive, he's alive," the narration repeats, like a chant it's trying to convince itself of, building to "the stars rattled him to the core."

It's a moving passage, maybe the most moving one in the movie, and it's also where Hertzfeldt's argument and mine begin to separate. The film uses Bill's approaching death as the thing that finally shakes him awake, and I understand why. But the walk didn't change. The shoe didn't change. The sadness is still right there in the third version, unedited. What changed is everything Bill could finally see around it once he ran out of time to keep not noticing. Which means the day was already beautiful, twice over, before Bill had any reason to understand it that way. The film even names his old condition: Bill has been "sleepwalking," and something has finally shaken him awake. Fair enough, as far as Bill goes. It doesn't follow that death is what wakes anyone up. It only proves that someone was asleep.

For nearly an hour, the narrator has described Bill's life in exactly one register: flat, unhurried, willing to give a swallowed paperclip and a drowned half-brother the same tone of voice. Three dead horses in the road land as a punchline. That composure survives the last drive, the cliff dream, even a nursing home visit with a man who might be Bill's father and might not be — right up until Bill, the left side of his body gone slack and numb, stops the car, stands for a moment by a tree, and lies down in the grass. Then it breaks. "Wait a minute, he's not gonna die here?" the narration asks, and answers itself before anyone else gets the chance: "No, no, no, Bill, get up. Get up, Bill." It is the first time in the entire film that the voice describing Bill's life sounds like it has something at stake in how the description ends.

What follows is the biggest swing the movie takes. Bill doesn't die. He lives for hundreds of years, then thousands — learning every language, reading every book, fathering children whose own children he loses track of — while, the narration says, "death will forever be a stranger to him." Everyone he ever knew is swept from the earth around him. Names stop meaning anything. People stop meaning anything. He outlives his own species, befriends whatever comes after it — beings of light who worship him as a god — and outlives them too, for millions of years, until the sun is gone and the earth is gone and he no longer remembers his own name or where he once came from. "He lives and he lives," it says, "until all of the lights go out."

Whether any of that is literally happening is a question the film has already taught you not to trust your own answer to. A mind losing this much of itself, we've already been told, starts filling the gaps with confabulated stories and people who never existed — not lying exactly so much as repairing itself with whatever material is on hand. An epilogue this large, arriving in the same moment Bill lies down in the grass, is either the biggest fact the movie asks you to accept or the biggest confabulation it ever shows you being assembled. It isn't only a guess: Hertzfeldt has said the audience is meant to know only what Bill knows, "and he's very confused" — which leaves the ending as unreliable as the mind having it. The choice turns out not to matter much anyway: read the epilogue as real, and Bill spends millions of years traveling toward forgetting his own name. Read it as one failing mind's last invention, and he arrives at the same forgetting immediately, wearing the shape of a lifetime instead of a few seconds. Either way, the story continues after the stable version of Bill no longer can — the same problem the movie has been circling since his own memory first started filling in what it could no longer hold.

For scale like this, the nearest company is scattered and brief. An episode of STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION, "The Inner Light," compressed an entire lifetime into minutes so a dying planet would have one person left alive to remember it. THE GOOD PLACE spent its final season concluding that paradise needs a door out before anyone can choose to walk through it. TWIN PEAKS: THE RETURN gave an hour of television over to imagery operating on a scale no single character was ever built to hold. Bill gets no door, and nobody built this ending to let him choose one — the universe runs out from under him instead. Waves don't stop on their own. They stop when the ocean does, and the epilogue's last trick is taking the ocean away too.

A friend once told me it's all one big day, and I never did get an answer for what that meant. Hertzfeldt spends an hour supplying several I didn't ask for, none of which cancel each other out. Take the cubicle guy's physics book literally, and it's the most direct reading available: if the past hasn't gone anywhere and the future already happened, "day" was always the wrong unit to measure a life by. By the time Bill's epilogue arrives, "yesterday" and "in a few hundred years" are describing the same stretch of film.

Take it as a claim about memory instead, and it's what Bill's doctor already told you: a mind assembling fragments into something that feels unbroken because somebody is still there doing the assembling, whether those fragments span a single afternoon or several million years. Bill says something close to the same thing without knowing he's quoting anyone. "It's kind of a really nice day," he tells himself three separate times before the words finally mean what they say — and my friend's whole abstract claim turns out to have been sitting inside Bill's smallest, most literal sentence all along.

Or take it the way the cliff dream wants you to: the wave keeps moving, individual lives dim underneath it, and calling the whole thing one day or ten thousand years is partly a matter of where you happen to be standing when someone asks. It still sounds a little like a friend being confident about something vague. It no longer sounds like nothing.

Final Verdict: 86 out of 100


Radio Flyer (Retro)

by Edward Dunn


RADIO FLYER (1992) PG-13 114 Minutes Director: Richard Donner Writer: David Mickey Evans Lorraine Bracco, John Heard, Elijah Wood
CAST Elijah Wood...Mike Joseph Mazzello...Bobby Lorraine Bracco...Mary John Heard...Officer Jim Daugherty Adam Baldwin...The King Ben Johnson...Geronimo Bill Tom Hanks...Older Mike / Narrator

Somebody’s cold one is givin’ me chills

— Weezer, “Say It Ain’t So”

As a kid, I sometimes took things apart, but I never had much interest in putting them back together. My preferred form of construction was less mechanical: I disappeared into movies and television, using other people's stories to put some distance between myself and whatever I didn't want to think about. Telling it that way now, I can't be sure how much of it is memory and how much is the shape I've given it over time. I can't relate to building a flying wagon, but I understand why Mike and Bobby need to believe one can fly — and why the man telling their story may need it even more than they did.

Bracco, fresh off GOODFELLAS, plays against every expectation her casting creates. You brace for someone hard enough to have survived Paulie Cicero's crew; instead, Mary is soft, hopeful, and repeatedly talked back into a marriage that's already put one of her children in a hospital bed. Her husband is the King to everyone in the house, a nickname that tells you almost everything about a man who needed one. The first promise comes at Bobby's bedside, after the King's arrest: "I promise this will never happen again." Not long afterward, while Mary is on the phone trying to prevent their truck from being repossessed, Bobby is the one reassuring Mike that the King is coming back and that "it's not Mom's fault." He returns on a temporary release to bury his mother, crying that he's changed, and Mary believes him again. The second promise arrives later in a quieter domestic scene — "It's gonna be different … I promise" — and by then the boys have learned to perform belief whether they feel it or not: "We believe you, Mom." "Yeah. We do." Wood is especially good as the watchful kid stationed beside something dangerous, a role he would return to in THE GOOD SON. There, Mark studies Henry because the adults can't see what he sees; here, Mike watches the King — and watches over Bobby — while the adults see enough and still fail to protect him. The sheriff's office sits only a building or two from their garage door. It's difficult to share Bobby's instinct to absolve his mother completely, even accounting for everything she's up against. There's a SOUTH PARK bit about divorced parents that crudely captures the hierarchy Mary's choices create: happiness and the new relationship first, the child somewhere after. Bobby is living the version without the joke.

The turtle isn't the throwaway gag he first looks like. He's found the day they discover the old clubhouse, having broken his own chain to climb inside. Shane's reaction makes them brace for worse, until Bobby stammers "it's a—" and Mike finishes it: "turtle." He gets named Samson on the spot, for exactly that strength, welcomed in as family. It plays as pure comedy in the moment. But Mike's note before the launch says they took "Samson and Shane, too," and in the framing scenes, when his own kids ask about their turtle, Mike pinkie-promises this is the same one — the only one of the three animals who survives into the present tense with a promise attached to him. Shane is the one whose stakes remain physical, at least for as long as the story keeps him in frame, and he's perfectly cast — those eyes do more acting than some of the humans in the frame. When he disappears and there's blood on the kitchen door, nothing in the dialogue explains what happened to him. He reappears for the final trip riding inside the Flyer rather than walking beside the boys, apparently hurt but alive, and Mike's note confirms that he went with Bobby too. The movie confirms his survival without explaining either the blood on the door or why he can no longer make the trip on foot.

The buffalo gets no such confirmation, ever. He's real at Geronimo Bill's roadside farm, where a boy asks if he might be the last buffalo left in the world, then he's a dream handing Mike a sense of purpose and a duty to protect Bobby — almost exactly the spirit-animal move THE SIMPSONS would later run with a talking coyote and a handful of insanity peppers — and finally he's reduced to a line in Bobby's postcard: "I scared the buffalo, flying too low." Promised, then lost from view, then never confirmed at all — the same widening gap between what happened and what got told that the ending runs on.

The film has its own excuse ready for anyone asking how a homemade wagon is supposed to fly, and it isn't aerodynamics. Every kid is born with seven great abilities and fascinations, the story goes, and loses them one by one on the way to adulthood — flight being the last and hardest to let go of. Fisher tried to hold onto his at fourteen, off a hill that would later carry his name, while his friends begged him to stop: "This is nuts, Fish. You're gonna get hurt." He didn't stop, and it went badly enough to become local legend before Mike and Bobby ever moved to the neighborhood. Even the boys argue about the legend before they've found the place. "He wasn't that great," Bobby says, until Mike pushes back and he overcorrects into some exaggeration of his own — the jump was off a barn, he insists, "probably two miles" down — before landing on his real verdict: "He probably did a good try. He just did it wrong." It's a kid's explanation, and a practical one. Bobby assumes Fisher failed because he made a mistake. The movie eventually settles on something stranger: Fisher simply waited too long. By fourteen, he'd already lost the seven great abilities.

They go looking for the hill anyway, and at "Fisher's Landing," where Fisher had made his own attempt ten years before they moved into the neighborhood, they try the same wager he lost. The film never pauses to acknowledge what this is — an adult giving a child pointers for a dangerous stunt — because Fisher isn't staged as a bystander who should know better. He's staged as a fellow believer, someone close enough to his own failure to root for a different outcome instead of stopping it. What Fisher offers Bobby from behind the gas pump, visibly marked by the same fall that made him a legend, is purely mechanical: ease off at the bottom, don't pull up, mind the angle, you'll stall. Nothing about abilities or fascinations. The film's own explanation for why Fisher failed and Bobby might not is mystical. The only actual expertise anyone in the movie offers is physics.

You could read the ending three ways, and the film leaves room for all three. Take the film at its word: the Flyer works, and the postcards that follow are proof of it, arriving — older Mike says — "every time I felt them slipping away," the seven great abilities and fascinations replenished right on cue, as if the universe knew exactly when he needed reassurance. Or take it sideways: "he grew up to be exactly what he was born to be: a flyer" is also a fair description of someone who never stops moving, who visits every place he ever dreamed of rather than stay anywhere long enough to be found — less a magical fulfillment than a very long way of running, the same thing LOST would later do to half its cast. Or take the physical ending at its most literal and least kind: the Flyer never leaves the ground, the King is hauled off for a charge the movie never bothers naming — even the supposedly real ending withholds its central fact — and the family simply goes home, the postcards a comfort older Mike invented because the actual ending wasn't a story he could tell.

The film doesn't adjudicate between these. Instead, it warns you that certainty isn't what Mike is offering when he turns to his own kids and asks if they finally understand what he meant about "history being in the mind of the teller." And when the moment comes to settle what happened to Bobby, the line he reaches for is "that's how I remember him" — which is a very different claim from that's what happened. The one apparent exception is Samson, and even that turns out to be less than it seems. Mike's children apparently have a turtle named Samson, but his connection to Bobby's flight exists only through Mike's pinkie-promise — the same kind of assurance Mary kept offering back when promises never seemed to hold.

Whoever RADIO FLYER was made for, it wasn't the children nominally invited to watch a story about a flying wagon — a PG-13 rating covers plenty of kid-marketed blockbusters too, but not many of them put a child in a hospital bed, whatever the poster promised. Columbia's marketing department couldn't figure out how to sell it either, spending $10 million promoting something that grossed only $4.6 million domestically against a reported $35 million budget. Critics couldn't agree on what they had seen. Roger Ebert wrote that the film "pushes so many fundamental questions under the rug" of its own screenplay; the Washington Post, reviewing the same movie, praised its "evocative texture" and how moving it found the brothers' bond.

Richard Donner later insisted that the ending means exactly what it shows, nothing cryptic — a claim that sits oddly beside his own studio's test screenings. One cut had adult Mike finding Bobby's Flyer hanging in the Smithsonian, which confused audiences; when that scene was removed, an intermediate version was left with Mike's voiceover narration but no onscreen adult Mike to establish who was telling the story. Donner finally took a day off from LETHAL WEAPON 3 to shoot the airfield framing scenes that open and close the finished film. The studio couldn't settle on its ending any more easily than the critics could settle on the movie.

THE SANDLOT runs the same basic trick — ordinary neighborhood objects and local legends inflated into myth by kids who need a mythology to organize their summer — but keeps the actual stakes safely inside the myth itself. Nobody's real life depends on whether the Beast is really a monster. RADIO FLYER uses the same structure and drops in a stepfather. ATONEMENT offers a closer comparison for the ending specifically, since it also ends with its storyteller admitting, in effect, that what we watched wasn't the whole truth — except ATONEMENT spells it out. Briony tells you directly that she gave her characters the ending reality denied them. RADIO FLYER approaches the same kind of confession and then pulls back, leaving the gap open rather than closing it.

BIG FISH is the version of this device that works most comfortably, and the difference is what's at stake in not knowing. If Edward Bloom's tall tales are exaggerations, the cost is a father turning out to be more ordinary than his stories made him. Either way, his life remains whole. If the Flyer never left the ground, the cost is a child who may not have gotten away at all. RADIO FLYER never fully earns the tenderness it borrows from stories in which uncertainty can be affectionate rather than horrifying.

The Flyer itself never quite convinces me. The need for it does. The boys' attempt to turn terror into escape remains moving even when the escape looks impossible. Mike may be preserving a miracle, disguising a loss, or doing both at once. I don't entirely believe the story he tells. I understand why he needs to tell it that way.

Final Verdict: 64 out of 100


To Build a Fire (Retro)

by Edward Dunn


TO BUILD A FIRE (1969) NOT RATED 52 Minutes Director: David Cobham Writers: David Cobham, Anthony Short, based on the short story by Jack London Ian Hogg, Orson Welles
CAST Ian Hogg…The Chechaquo Orson Welles…Narrator
AI-generated oil-painting-style image of a fireplace mantel covered in family photos and keepsakes, with a black-and-tan dog sleeping on the hearth

Our dog Butchie was half dachshund and half terrier, with the long body of one and the stubbornness of both. On especially cold winter nights, when my dad lit the fireplace instead of relying on the heater, he'd climb onto the brick hearth and stretch out so close to the slightly open stove doors that it made everyone nervous. There was no convincing him to back away. All we could do was keep an eye on him and make sure he didn't burn himself. He couldn't have explained the physics of heat or the dangers of hypothermia. He simply knew where warmth was. Watching the dog in TO BUILD A FIRE, I found myself thinking about Butchie.

The first fifty seconds of TO BUILD A FIRE aren't Jack London's at all. Before the man or the dog appears, Welles is reciting real history: George Washington Carmack's 1896 gold strike, the hundred thousand who set out for the Klondike, the forty thousand who made it, many of them unprepared for the winter waiting on the other side. It plays like the cold open of a documentary. Anyone catching this on television without knowing London or the story would have every reason to expect a survival-adventure picture, a Grizzly Adams with worse weather. Then the film narrows from a hundred thousand strangers down to one—a newcomer, a chechaquo, one more casualty-in-waiting from that same stampede—and within another few seconds Welles has delivered the story's actual thesis: this man reads the world in pure facts and never once in what those facts might mean. He is, in London's phrase, without imagination. That's not a hero being introduced. That's a diagnosis. Ian Hogg gets almost no dialogue for the rest of the picture, which makes sense: once you've been told exactly why a man is going to die, there's not much reason to let him talk his way out of it.

What "without imagination" costs him becomes clear as the numbers start arriving. Fifty below zero, then seventy-five, then a hundred and seven degrees of frost—the man logs each figure and files it under inconvenience, never converting information into consequence. London's original goes one step further than the movie does: that same failure of imagination, he writes, keeps the man from ever wondering about his own mortality or humanity's place in the universe—a line Welles doesn't read. By cutting it, the film has to make the point some other way. It does, mostly through the dog, who never once needs a thermometer to know that seventy-five below is a killing cold. The whole story is built on this contrast: a man measuring the world in numbers whose weight he cannot feel, walking beside an animal that feels the weight without ever learning the numbers. It's not a stretch to hear something of MOBY-DICK in London's Yukon, though the two men fail in opposite directions. Ahab loads the whale with more meaning than it can bear; London's man strips the cold of every meaning beyond a number. The dog commits neither error. It doesn't need the cold to mean anything. It only needs to understand what the cold demands.

I've felt my face ache in sixteen-degree weather, and that number matters: it is still ninety-one degrees warmer than what the man in the story is walking through. No production insurance covers a real shoot at seventy-five below zero, and no actor signs that release. Whatever Ian Hogg endures on camera is genuine cold, filmed at a survivable temperature, standing in for one that would kill the crew inside the hour. There's nothing dishonest in that; it's simply the same wall the man keeps running into from the other side. He knows it's worse than fifty and no more, with no way to make his body believe even that much. The production knows the real number and has no way to reproduce it. The man cannot even name it: of the man, the actor, and the audience, he is the only one never given the exact figure. He dies on an estimate he already knows is too low.

It's tempting to wonder what happens if the last fire catches—whether the resolve this kind of man is supposed to have would be enough to save him. London had already answered that six years earlier. The 1902 version, published in The Youth's Companion, names the man Tom Vincent, gives him youth and pride instead of a diagnosis, cuts the dog and the old-timer entirely, and finally lets him get a fire going after several failed attempts. He survives with frost-damaged feet and hands permanently scarred by the matches. The 1908 rewrite lowers the temperature further, keeps the same doomed first fire, then removes everything that might let determination rescue him: it adds the old-timer whose warning he ignores, adds a dog whose instinct makes his judgment look worse by comparison, strips his name, and lets every later fire fail. The basic risk is the same—a man alone in weather that can kill him—but what changes is whether resolve can redeem bad judgment. In 1902, it can. By 1908, London had decided it shouldn't, and rewrote the story until it couldn't. The unnamed man on screen is working from the version London ultimately decided was true.

The dog's send-off on the page is a three-part escalation: a soft whine, then a louder one, then—after it catches the scent of death and backs away—one final howl under stars the text describes as dancing, before it leaves for camp. The film's narration skips all three. Whatever whine you hear on screen is Pepper's own performance, not Welles reading London—the movie shows something instead of narrating any of it. But the thing doing the emotional work in that passage was never simple grief. London is precise about the relationship earlier in the story: there was "no keen intimacy" between the two, he writes, and then names exactly what stood in its place—a whip-lash, and the threat of one. The dog stays close to the man for the same reason it stays close to the fire: because distance has a cost. When the provider of both fire and punishment goes quiet, the dog goes and finds the next one. That's the real sadness in it, and it's colder than mourning—not that nothing was ever there, but that what was there was never anything worth grieving. Pepper at least gets a name London never gives the dog. Butchie, stretched across a hearth years before I'd read a word of this, never needed the physics explained to him either. He simply knew exactly where the fire was.

Final Verdict: 84 out of 100