Showgirls (1995) - Verhoeven's outrageous, ridiculous, hilarious Hollywood anomaly

♥♥♥♥

 

A nubile, long-legged blond figure adorns this dark poster for Paul Verhoeven's Showgirls

Nomi arrives in Las Vegas without her suitcase but with her head full of dreams. And luckily she soon befriends Molly, a seamstress who introduces her to the town's adult dance scene.

 

Showgirls is written by Joe Eszterhas (Flashdance (1983)) and directed by Dutch master filmmaker Paul Verhoeven (Wat Zien Ik (1971)), whose 11th feature it is. 

It is an anomaly in Hollywood history: The first and only wide release NC-17 rated movie, Showgirls is likely the big studio pic with most bare breasts, a giant budget and no major stars. It is a lustful, young-boyishly-enthused, strange work that could only come from Verhoeven.

Elizabeth Berkley (Meet Market (2004)) is wild and electric as Nomi, (and writhes almost convulsively in her sex scenes), but in the context of the fever dream-like film her ridiculed performance actually could hardly have been better. Gina Gershon (P.S. I Love You (2007)) camps it up as the show's star Cristal. Robert Davi (The Hot Chick (2002)) is ideal as a creep, and Kyle MacLachlan (Free Jimmy (2006)) is funny (and shows off his great ass) as a rich playboy.

The melodrama gets another gear here. The photography (by Jost Vacano (Supermarket (1974))) and execution is highly competent and vivid, and the result is an outrageous, ridiculous, hilarious bucket of juicy, rich entertainment, a good/bad reflection on the American performance culture. The dance acts are phenomenal, and once the news sensation of the nudity evaporates, Showgirls still has more and more laughable developments to offer. It may be exploitation, (as Quentin Tarantino has called it), but in any case Showgirls is delivered with a major twinkle in the eye. 

Related posts:

Paul Verhoeven: Hollow Man (2000) - Superb effects in Verhoeven's miss 

Top 10: Best cop movies reviewed by Film Excess to date  
Basic Instinct (1992) or, Irresistable Desire!  

Top 10: Best erotic movies reviewed by Film Excess to date 

The Fourth Man/De Vierde Man (1983) - Verhoeven's amazing Dutch sex thriller nightmare

 

 

Watch a trailer for the film here

Cost: 45 mil. $

Box office: 37.7 mil. $

= Huge flop (returned 0.83 times its cost)

[Showgirls premiered 21 September (California) and runs 131 minutes. Eszterhas became the highest-paid screenwriter in movie history for Showgirls: He was reportedly given a 2 mil. $ advance based on an idea scribbled on a napkin at a meeting with Verhoeven, and then another 1.7 mil. $ once the film began production. Verhoeven was paid 2 mil. $ for directing; and Berkley was paid 100k $ for her performance in the film. Shooting took place from August - December 1994 in Los Angeles, California and in Nevada, including in Las Vegas. Distributor United Artists reportedly dispatched hundreds of employees to cinemas in the US to make sure no patrons snuck into showings and that the 17 age requirement was upheld. The film opened #2, behind fellow new release Seven, to an 8.1 mil. $ first weekend in North America, where it spent another weekend in the top 5 (#5) and grossed 20.3 mil. $ (53.8 % of the total gross). The film was banned in Ireland for blasphemy. Berkley was dropped by her agent following the film's release and was ignored by other agents. Although theatrically a huge flop, the film since became a cult favorite, accruing a reported 100 mil. $ through its video release. Roger Ebert gave it a 2/4 star review, translating to 2 notches under this one. Verhoeven returned with Starship Troopers (1997). Berkley returned in White Wolves II: Legend of the Wild (1996). Showgirls is rotten at 23 % with a 3.90/10 critical average at Rotten Tomatoes.]

 

What do you think of Showgirls?

Christopher Columbus: The Discovery (1992) - The ill-fated but entertaining ensemble adventure

♥♥♥♥

Majestic German poster for John Glen's Christopher Columbus: The Discovery

QUICK REVIEW:

The film tells the story of Christopher Columbus' apparently troublesome process of raising support for his voyage of discovery to seek out China or India, but instead falling upon an entirely 'new' continent.

How much of the plot of Columbus is historically substantiated is hard to say, (at least for us who aren't experts on the history). But the idea to make the sailors horrified and everyone exceedingly God-fearing is basically sound and well thought up by screenwriters Mario Puzo (The Godfather (1972)), Cary Bates (RoboCop: Alpha Commando (1998-99)) and John Briley (Gandhi (1982)). Although the pervasive fear cannot be conveyed very detailed due to the quick-edited swashbuckler style chosen here.
Italian lead Georges Corraface (La Pasión Turca (1994)) does well, and so do Robert Davi (Showgirls (1995)) and Marlon Brando (On the Waterfront (1954)).
Christopher Columbus: The Discovery is directed by 5-times James Bond director John Glen (A View to a Kill (1985)). It's a historical romantic drama epic adventure. Not visually sumptuous, but exciting nonetheless.

Related review:

John Glen: A View to a Kill (1985) or, Once a Gentleman, Always a Gentleman!

Marlon Brando and George Corraface in John Glen's Christopher Columbus: The Discovery

Watch the American trailer for the film here

Cost: 45 mil. $
Box office: 8.2 mil. $ (US only)
= Huge flop
[The film was a financial mess for its producers, father-son producer-team Alexander and Ilya Salkind, who had previously made the successful Superman movies. They broke up over the film, and Alexander Salkind is quoted saying, "I know, after this, that I'll never make movies again." The UK-US-Spanish co-production was derided and laughed at by the showbusiness community at large, and it even won Tom Selleck a Golden Raspberry Award as Worst Supporting Actor. Brando reportedly got 5 mil. $ for appearing in the film in a supporting part, which he also was Raspberry nominated for. It was also nominated as Worst Picture, Worst Director, Worst Screenwriter and Worst New Star. - And yet, it isn't bad at all!]

What do you think of Christopher Columbus: The Discovery?
Any insight stories about the production are welcomed
Other films that received undeserved mocking response?

City Heat (1984) - Eastwood and Reynolds wrestle dispassionately in Benjamin's messy period affair

♥♥

A nostalgia/buddy poster that seems to actively want to invoke George Roy Hill's super-successful The Sting (1973), for Richard Benjamin's City Heat

QUICK REVIEW:

Some murders, corruption, torture, prostitutes and fistfights in Kansas City of the 1930's.

- So superficially and indifferently can the plot of City Heat accurately be summed up. Although its teaming up of Clint Eastwood (In the Line of Fire (1993)) and Burt Reynolds (Boogie Nights (1997)) theoretically could have proven a big pleasure, - in a loony car-movie, for instance, - here they are far from it. In fact this may be Eastwood's poorest film as an actor.
City Heat is a forced noir-ish gangster burb, which is unpleasant and coarse to boot. The designs and costumes look like a costume party. The film is truly a dud.
It was originally written by Blake Edwards (Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)), who was fired as director of the film, and it was rewritten by Richard Benjamin (Made in America (1993)) under the pseudonym Sam O. Brown, who became the director, while Edwards renounced the finished film.
Eastwood got 4 mil. $ for doing City Heat, while Reynolds' jaw broke in an accident on the first day, causing him to be restricted to a liquid diet that made him lose 30 pounds during the production. He was conclusively suspected of having AIDS in the tabloids, and also developed an addiction to analgesics [painkillers]. - Bummer!

Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds even look sour and lost on this German poster for Richard Benjamin's City Heat

Watch the loud, inane trailer for the film here

Cost: 25 mil. $
Box office: 38.3 mil. $ (US only)
= Flop, though some uncertainty
[City Heat was poorly received upon release, although audiences in America seemed to flock to see it nonetheless. Since foreign box office results are unknown, the flop status is somewhat uncertain.]

What do you think of City Heat?
Is this Clint Eastwood's worst film?
And Burt Reynolds' worst film?