I had wanted to see "Wild 90" for many years after reading about it in a book about bad movies, which gave some samples of some dopey dialogue found in the movie. Now that it's available on home video after being withdrawn for many years, was it worth the wait? For the most part, no. Most of the movie comes across as very amateurish, from the poorly recorded audio to the inept work by the cameraman - amateur work that is simply bad, not so bad that it's funny. Also, with the movie obviously being largely improved and not scripted, there is simply no story or evolution of characters - the movie just drones on and on without progressing in the least. What saves the movie from being completely unwatchable are the parts when Norman Mailer is up front and center. His acting and improved dialogue are so unbelievably bad that they do provide a good deal of unintended laughs. But sadly not enough to make the movie worth seeking out.
4 Reviews
Smug travesty.
st-shot26 June 2014
In his directorial debut author/journalist and tireless self promoter Norman Mailer has nowhere to go but up after this incoherent mess about three "tough guys" holed up in a grimy room in lower Manhattan spouting nonsequiter gibberish throughout its length. Rock doc low rent Maysles Brother wannabe DA Pennebaker is also along for the ride to take blame for the "script" and the atrocious camera and sound work in as abrasive an Indy as one could ask for.
The film opens with a sloppy tracking shot of a clock reading 6 (AM, PM?) with the Brooklyn Bridge in the background. It then cuts to a sparse mostly unfurnished apartment where the self satisfied Prince (Norm), Buzz Cameo and 20 Years drunkenly palaver and brag as they drink from quart bottles of Old Grand Dad, Seagrams and box with a light bulb. Some people drop in ( Mailer's wife, Light Heavyweight Champ Jose Torres as Kid Cha Cha) on the incipience to add nothing and the film ends as it began with a tracking shot of the same clock at 6:04. Was it all a dream? Try a case of very bad indigestion.
As famous for stabbing one of his wives at a party, sucker punching a gay writer (Gore Vidal) or making outrageous statements to an adoring NY Press as his checkered literary forays Mailer dives into filmmaking with the same braggadocio but with even worse results. Conversations are muddily recorded, shots over-lit, Mailer's inebriated musings indecipherable most of the time. From its all around sloppy construction I would venture the self assured Mailer probably caught a late night showing of Cassavetes, Shadows and a few hours of Warhol to know he could deliver the goods with his cool buddies and overwhelming charisma dispensing add-lib bon mots. He doesn't and it doesn't. Did it dent Mailer's ego or confidence as a filmmaker? Hardly, there would be more. Not as bad as Wild 90 but nevertheless terrible.
The film opens with a sloppy tracking shot of a clock reading 6 (AM, PM?) with the Brooklyn Bridge in the background. It then cuts to a sparse mostly unfurnished apartment where the self satisfied Prince (Norm), Buzz Cameo and 20 Years drunkenly palaver and brag as they drink from quart bottles of Old Grand Dad, Seagrams and box with a light bulb. Some people drop in ( Mailer's wife, Light Heavyweight Champ Jose Torres as Kid Cha Cha) on the incipience to add nothing and the film ends as it began with a tracking shot of the same clock at 6:04. Was it all a dream? Try a case of very bad indigestion.
As famous for stabbing one of his wives at a party, sucker punching a gay writer (Gore Vidal) or making outrageous statements to an adoring NY Press as his checkered literary forays Mailer dives into filmmaking with the same braggadocio but with even worse results. Conversations are muddily recorded, shots over-lit, Mailer's inebriated musings indecipherable most of the time. From its all around sloppy construction I would venture the self assured Mailer probably caught a late night showing of Cassavetes, Shadows and a few hours of Warhol to know he could deliver the goods with his cool buddies and overwhelming charisma dispensing add-lib bon mots. He doesn't and it doesn't. Did it dent Mailer's ego or confidence as a filmmaker? Hardly, there would be more. Not as bad as Wild 90 but nevertheless terrible.
The Naked and the untalented filmmakers
amosduncan_200015 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Basically unwatchable nonsense, which should prove to confuse Mailer's already confusing legacy. Just total garbage, perhaps interesting as an attempt at "punk" cinema. Mailer's wife at the time, Beverly Bentley, somehow emerges with her dignity and a suggestion of real talent. Otherwise it might have been better if this was totally lost. Not everything is worth saving even as a curio. Oddly, this was made when Mailer was at the height of his powers as a writer. The movie seems to want to prove that writing is not important. It fails. What was he thinking?Well, onto "Beyond The Law." How long do I have to write about this? There is nothing to say, it is an hour and a half of stupid improv by people who for the most part cannot improvise.
Fascinating...Boring...
JasparLamarCrabb21 June 2008
Warning: Spoilers
WILD 90, directed by Norman Mailer is, much like his literary work, both fascinating and boring at the same time. Three men, presumably gangsters, hole up in an NYC apartment talking and railing against everything, personal and otherwise. The "maf boys" shoot daggers at one another, get drunk, punch air (and a hanging light bulb) and are visited by various people. Although DA Pennebaker served as cameraman, the Cassavetes feel Mailer shoots for isn't there (there's clearly no script holding this thing together). Mailer doesn't really direct as much as he turns the camera on and let's it capture whatever happens. As an actor Mailer is very bad...unless of course he was actually a drunken horse's arse. That would make WILD 90 more important for capturing this literary lion in his prime. It's fascinating and boring and somehow very watchable while failing to be at all entertaining.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
