The Elusiveness of the Serial Killer Biopic

Introduction

Everyone loves the biopic. These films are as formulaic as the typical action movie, yet tailor-made for awards season. Even mediocre actors can get critical acclaim for their “daring” performance of doing an impression of someone everybody knows.

Precious few biopics manage to delve deeply into their subjects or offer something new to the genre (Control about Ian Curtis, Nixon about Richard Nixon, and I'm Not There about Bob Dylan are some rare, noteworthy films). Instead, most biopics are the equivalent of a “greatest hits” album, giving little insight into the subject or his/her impact on culture (yes, I'm including Ray and Walk The Line).

Probably since the 1930s, if not earlier, crime dramas have served as one of the preeminent genres in cinema. From gangster films (Little Caesar, Manhattan Melodrama) to film noir (Double Indemnity, Kiss Me Deadly) to cops-that-don't play by the rules (The French Connection, Dirty Harry) to the criminals themselves (The Godfather, Pulp Fiction), crime remains a prevalent subject for films all around the world.

Very few can deny the public's fascination with serial killers. 1952's remarkably prescient The Sniper probably represents the first film with an understanding of the psychological make-up of the serial killer. Since then, fictional books, movies, and television series (Peeping Tom, Natural Born Killers, American Psycho, The Killer Inside Me, Dexter) all feature serial killer protagonists and a number of true crime shows devote themselves to the study of the breed.

There is also the classic cop-chases-serial-killer films ranging in quality from Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho and David Fincher's Seven to those terrible Morgan Freeman Alex Cross Mysteries, Kiss the Girls and Along Came A Spider.

The question then becomes, why are there practically no biopics/based-on-a-true-story films about serial killers? It seems a given considering the above factors, but “true” serial killer films are surprisingly rare.

The Acclaimed Films

The two most critically acclaimed real life “serial killer” films are probably 2003's Monster and 2007's Zodiac, but neither of those movies were actually a serial killer biopic.

Monster, the 2003 film about Aileen Wuornos, purports to be about the rare female serial killer. However, it runs into two problems: 1) it is too Oscar-baity (and won the film's star Charlize Theron an Oscar as “really hot chick uglied up”) and 2) Aileen does not come across as a serial killer. In the film, Aileen seems less driven by the compulsion that defines serial killers and more because she's a man-hater, angry with men who won't hire her for jobs that she's dangerously unqualified for.

The focus of David Fincher's Zodiac was not the serial killer himself, but the people investigating the crime. This is understandable, as The Zodiac Killer's identity remains a mystery to this day. Zodiac works as a true story/procedural about catching a serial killer, but is not a movie about the serial killer himself.

Similarly, Spike Lee's Summer of Sam concentrated on a group of people living in New York during the time of the Son of Sam killings. While David Berkowitz was a character in the film (complete with hilarious talking dog sequence),

he was merely incidental to the story of Adrian Brody and John Leguizamo's characters.

Based On A Real Serial Killer

While some real life serial killers inspire real films (e.g. The Zodiac Killer inspiring Dirty Harry, Ed Gein inspiring Psycho, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, etc.), a number of films are actually based on an actual killer.

1986's remarkably brutal and terrific Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, featuring Michael Rooker as “Henry,” begins with a title card explaining that it's based on, but not meant to be a factual account of, the exploits of Henry Lee Lucas- America's most prolific serial killer, with over 600 claimed murders. Also in the film is Ottis, based on Henry's real life partner-in-crime Ottis Toole. Although H:POASK is commonly classified as a “horror” movie, the film and the performances contain a grittiness and intensity that few movies of any genre manage to obtain. All things considered, H:POASK would probably rank as the best “real” serial killer movie.

Years earlier, in 1968, Tony Curtis starred in The Boston Strangler, about The Boston Strangler (Albert DeSalvo) who terrorized Massachusetts in the early 1960s. Although the movie took more than a few liberties with the story (especially the fate of DeSalvo), the film was clearly a professional production. Backed by Twentieth Century Fox and with decent performances by Curtis, Henry Fonda, and George Kennedy, The Boston Strangler provides a much better-than-average example of the typical “real” serial killer movie.

Based On Other Source Material

In other instances, authors fictionalize the life of a serial killer, and then that account becomes a film.

2001's From Hell (starring Johnny Depp and Heather Graham) about Jack the Ripper is an adaptation of a graphic novel and not actually about the Whitechapel Murderer. Saying that From Hell is a Jack the Ripper movie would be like saying that League of Extraordinary Gentlemen constitutes Tom Sawyer: The Motion Picture.

Similarly, Leonardo DiCaprio announced plans to star in the feature film version of Erik Larson's The Devil in the White City. The movie will be based on the best-selling novel about America's first serial killer (H.H. Holmes), but not about the serial killer himself. See also: The Black Dahlia, being about the Elmore Leonard book and not the actual case.

Charlie Manson

Arguably America's best-known killer (despite not actually being a serial killer or physically participating in the murders he is most famous for), Charlie Manson never received an actual biopic. Manson Movies (and Manson TV-Movies) concentrate exclusively on the Vincent Bugliosi book Helter Skelter. While The Manson Family, the Tate/La Bianca murders, and the subsequent trial are important to the story of Charles Manson, the tale of the former singer/racial leader has a lot more untapped depth.

Recently, True Blood's Ryan Kwanten was cast as Charlie Manson in a The Family, a new movie that alleges to be more about The Family and its leader as opposed to the murders and trial.

The Crap

There are a number of famous serial killer “biopics” (a term I use very loosely), but they are low budget, poorly done, straight-to-video horror films. The type you'd expect to see available on FearNET, complete with a stupid joke to end the synopsis. Because of these films' positioning as schlock slasher fare, one should not be surprised that the filmmakers don't bother to delve into the motivations of these icons; the blatant inaccuracies make it clear that the filmmakers merely wanted to trade on name recognition.

Some of the most notable and infamous serial killers in American history received this treatment including homosexual cannibal Jeffrey Dahmer in 2002's Dahmer (starring Academy Award nominee Jeremy Renner); gentleman killer Ted Bundy in 2002's Ted Bundy; Wisconsin weirdo Ed Gein in 2000's Ed Gein; and killer clown John Wayne Gacy in 2003's Gacy.

Conclusion

In addition to those mentioned above, names like Richard “The Night Stalker” Ramirez, Albert “The Grey Man” Fish, and Joel “The Seinfeld Reference” Rifkin remain part of the popular crime culture landscape years after these killers finished their deeds, yet none of them have had their stories told cinematically. It's not as though Hollywood has an aversion to “real life” crime films, with a history ranging from before 1967's Bonnie and Clyde to after 2009's Public Enemies. And, as repeated ad nauseum over this post, the serial killer is not a rare topic for filmmakers to tackle.

The question therefore isn't why hasn't a serial killer biopic succeeded, but why hasn't it been tried in the first place?

TRAILER REPORT: LOVE AND OTHER DRUGS (SPOILERS)

We know romantic comedy-dramas. Male and Female meet, date, there's some minor disagreement over some insignificant thing, and then they get back together. All the while, quirky-yet-personalityless best friends provide hackneyed attempts at laughs. Love and Other Drugs seems to be one of those movies...probably.

The trailer for Love and Other Drugs shows cad/pharmaceutical rep Jamie (Jake Gyllenhaal) reforming his ways after he meets Maggie (Anne Hathaway). I guess she's some sort of “free-spirit” in the not-particularly-interesting mold of Jennifer Aniston in Along Came Polly and Jenna Elfman in Dharma and Greg.

They fall for one another, Jamie becomes a sales rep for Viagra (whether this plot point is relevant or if there's a rationale behind making this a period piece, I don't know), and they're clearly going to have relationship problems. It's the formula for this type of movie and director Edward Zwick (The Last Samurai, Blood Diamond, Defiance) is not the type of filmmaker who strays too far from the formula.

The trailer clearly alludes to a problem between the two, but gives no insights into what it might be. Jamie seems too into Maggie to return to being a cad, and Maggie's one explanation for doubting the relationship (that she doesn't want to hold him back) is too vague to be the sole reason for their relationship woes; there has to be a more tangible reason. Put another way, one party feeling that they're holding the other party back is the effect. What is the cause?

** SPOILERS BELOW **

Supposedly, Maggie suffers from a terminal disease and that's what causes the rift. I actually do believe that there was a first trailer to Love and Other Drugs that made reference to this fact, but I haven't seen it and cannot find it. (Actually, I just couldn't listen to Jake Gyllenhaal's delivery of “Hey Lisa” anymore.)

In order to make the film seem lighthearted as opposed to depressing, the people who re-cut the trailer (the “second” trailer is the one constantly shown in theaters and from which the television ad campaign is based) eliminated any trace of this fact. It's understandable- a fun movie about two attractive people falling in love will probably reel in more people than a movie about mortality. Yet by excising this plot point in all the advertisements, Maggie instead comes across as completely fucking mental.

She's violent, then she's crying, she's highly sexed, then she's self-hating. Based on the ads alone, if I had to guess, I'd say that Maggie was bipolar. Severely bipolar.

This wouldn't be a bad thing, mind you. Gyllenhaal and Hathaway have proven themselves as perfectly suitable leads for a film about emotional instability and the self-destructiveness, obsessiveness, and addiction-like quality of love. Additionally, this take on the subject would actually fit the title of the film.

Unfortunately, this movie does not appear to be Days of Wine and Roses 2010. From the ads, it seems to follow the Generic Romantic Comedy-Drama Playbook mostly to a T. Yet the zaniness of Bored to Death's Oliver Platt and the other fat guy who had a guest appearance this season on Bored to Death contrasts with Maggie's breakdowns, further highlighting that there's a big piece of the puzzle missing in this tale of love.

There will always be an audience for a love-until-and-beyond-the-grave movie. From Terms of Endearment to The Notebook, this genre works. Imagining your loved one dying might not get people riled up for a big holiday weekend, but these films work and usually do decent business over time. Yet the attempt to redact this information ends up making the Love and Other Drugs come across as darker and without the heart-wrenching element that turns those other films into successes.

Love and Other Drugs opens November 24, and its the biggest Thanksgiving movie for a pretty important demo, further showing what a lame year 2010 has been for films. Also being released that weekend are: Disney's animatead Tangled, Dwayne Johnson's revenge flick Faster, and Christina Aguilera/Cher PG-13 musical Burlesque.

Of course, I might be entirely wrong. Love and Other Drugs could be a modern day Sid and Nancy. In which case, I'd see this one in theaters.

Updating Old Sitcoms (An Admittedly Hack Topic)

Hollywood's obsessive penchant for remaking/rebooting/re-imagining even relatively newer movies (or, as it's called on the internet, childhood rape) has ramped up in recent years . This is to the dismay of many audience members who lambast the lack of creativity in cinema, despite the fact that you'll never see most of them in an art house theater, and who blissfully ignore that there have been good remakes like:

and

and

Still, over the past several years we've seen returns to Clash of the Titans, The Karate Kid, Star Trek, Nightmare on Elm Street, Pink Panther, I Spit On Your Grave, Halloween, with more to come. In 2011, we can expect at least Footloose and Fright Night. There's also going to be a Big Momma's House 3, so keep your eyes open for that one.

Even more recently, television has gotten into the remake game.

2004's Battlestar: Galactica set the bar not just for television remakes, but science fiction shows in general (up until the crappy finale). In 2005, Russell T. Davies successfully regenerated the legendary, nearly 40-year-old series Doctor Who. Hawaii 5-0 returned this season on CBS as an immediate fan favorite. The CW has become dependent on the television remake with its versions of/sequels to Melrose Place, Beverly Hills 90210, and La Femme Nikita. Even previous mistakes got a second chance to fail, such as Rob Thomas' 2009 Cupid, which was received slightly less favorably than his 1998 version of the same series (7 aired episodes v. 14 aired episodes). And who can forget NBC's duel abortions of The Bionic Woman and Knight Rider?

A few weeks ago, Pushing Daisies' Bryan Fuller announced plans to remake The Munsters with more of a The Office/Modern Family spin. (Which I'm sure will be better than Tim Burton's The Addams Family. The man simply does not understand eroticism, and Gomez/Morticia might have been television's first highly sexualized couple. You'd want to watch them fuck.)

These reboots tend to follows a more “modern” (or postmodern) take on television. The shows are grittier, have a greater respect for continuity and ongoing storylines, are arguably smarter, and possess a much higher budget than their decades-ago counterparts.

However, for the most part, only dramas have been given the treatment. What about sitcoms?

I Dream of Jeannie

No longer the simple tale of a scantily clad servant desperate to please her astronaut master, Jeannie represents just one member of a much larger, quite extensive, universe of supernatural creatures. The complex mythology and history of Jeannie and the Jeannies will play a large role in the development of the series. The show's zaniness will be tempered with antagonistic spirits and considerable limits on Jeannie's powers. If the remake is still set in the 1960s, the space race and the communist fear plays a huge role in Major Nelson's life.

Additionally, Jeannie and Major Nelson's relationship, which will turn romantic fairly quickly, becomes one of epic destiny and TRUEST TRUE LOVE, forged in the annals of time.

(On the public front: people will swoon over Jelson, Major Nelson will be a teen heartthrob, and Nellows slash-fic will be crazy popular.)

Bewitched

Ignoring the incredibly misguided, but almost respectably crazy-in-concept, 2005 film, Bewitched is about a 1960s ad man who marries a hot blonde chick with issues. We know where this is going.

Bewitched 2010 does not need to change all that much from the original series, but the moral of the story will be vastly different. Even unlimited power and unlimited abilities cannot fully distract us or save us from the ennui and emptiness that is inherent in modern life. Sure Samantha can mess around with the laws of God and physics, but so what? Nothing ever changes.

At least not until season 3 when Samantha, fed up about everything, goes mad with power.

(On the public front: the internet will be outraged if Darren is recast. The very least the writers can do is make meta comments on it from time to time.)

Happy Days

Turns out the 1950s were not so happy. With our enlightened 21^st century eyes, we know that series and movies from the 1950s and 1960s were balls of lies. Even looking back at the 1950s from a 20-year window further perpetuated those untruths. (Curse you Garry Marshall for having nostalgia.) Sixty years later, producers can finally force the Cunninghams to deal with cultures clashes, post-war blues, racism, sexism, oppression, homosexuality, depression, and the tragic death/disappearance of their oldest son.

Probably not Clancy Brown.

Go balls out by ending the first episode with a music montage showing Potsy shooting dope in Arnold's basement and Fonzie being stabbed to death by some actual street toughs. You will have viewers for episode 2.

(On the public front, 1950s fashion might come back in vogue. Some people will cry over the show being America-hating liberal revisionist history that ignores the greatness of America; others will cry that it doesn't go far enough.)

Green Acres

Once a fish out of water tale about a city boy fulfilling his dream of moving to the country only to discover its full of hicks and incompetents, Green Acres 2010 presents the plight of the American farmer and small town America amidst monopolization, corporate farms, and organic farming.

In today's world of globalization, even Hooterville is not free from the internet, Best Buys, and other modern conveniences. Can the citizens retain their identity in the face of corporate colonization? When Evil Corporate Guy tries to buy the land from the Haneys and the Ziffels, can Oliver Wendell Holmes step up and become Hooterville's grand protector? Is Mrs. Oliver Wendell Holmes becoming part of Hooterville society charming, or a dangerous example of going native?

(On the public front, expect very special messages about the environment to be inserted into nearly every episode while the cast makes pleas to help some Green cause.)

Three's Company

It's doubtful that anyone can duplicate the sheer charm that enabled John Ritter to make a show based solely on misunderstandings last nearly a decade. Equally impressive is that the series went 172 episodes without “officially” hooking up Jack or Larry with any of the chicks. Today, networks would probably be very insistent on at least one love story happening.

Cool, sleazy ladies' man Larry Dallas might overstay his welcome. The Roepers will continue with lack-of-sex jokes, but will be good for at least two Viagra references an episode. Mr. Roeper will be accused of cyberbullying Jack due to comments on Jack's alleged homosexuality. Second landlord/social retard Mr. Furley will receive a tragic back story and become a man to be pitied, rather than laughed at- an offshoot of his bizarre dead cat speech from 1984's “Look What I Found.” And maybe we'll figure out what the fuck was up with Lana.

(On the public front, a modern Three's Company would quickly fall victim to the Shipper Wars. The internet will be taken over by Team Janet fighting Team Chrissy, but Team Terry all the way.)

The Andy Griffith Show

Oh how we hate those old television shows that present the past with any sort of fondness. If you're not ironically condemning them, what's the point? Sure everything was whitewashed, but that was the style at the time. Besides, it's not like many modern comedies present life in 2010 as shitty as it actually is.

Much like Twin Peaks' Harry S. Truman, small town sheriff Andy Taylor will be forced to look into the dark underbelly of Mayberry, North Carolina. A lot of horrible secrets lurk beneath the pleasant facade, and Andy must confront problems like Otis' alcoholism, his confusing attraction to Aunt Bea, Barney Fife's retardation, and the end of segregation. There will always be the old fishing hole, but the quiet introspective moments only serve to remind Andy about the death of a time gone by, and further morph into an embittered, hard-boiled police officer.

(On the public front, see Happy Days.)

Gilligan's Island

Thurston Howell III will be young, rich, and CW-pretty So will The Professor. And The Skipper. And probably Gilligan. Or they'll combine fat and stupid for Gilligan so that the least attractive qualities are concentrated in one unlikeable character.

Racist natives might be recast to be slightly less racist, and reimagined as an ongoing threat throughout the entire series.

(On the public front, people will be debating for the show's entire run what everything means, they they are stuck on the island, why The Professor can't fix the box (interesting fact, in an early episode, The Professor actually does invent a glue and they attempt to sail back but the glue doesn't hold), etc. At the end, it'll turn out that all theories meant nothing. The series finale will just be an attempt from the producers to make the audience cry to distract them from the fact that no questions were answered and nothing led to anything.)

Hogan's Heroes

(On the public front, outrage from special interest groups will cause this show to be canceled before its first airing.)

Dennis the Menace

Can a child still be a menace in 2010? With zero tolerance policies in schools, outdoor play vaguely a memory, and parents opting to medicate their children instead of actually parenting them, Dennis Mitchell must live in a world where his rambunctiousness is a sign of ADHD instead of a natural expression of boyish boyishness. Can one young boy fight against an oppressive system while dealing with constant allegations of elder abuse (Mr. Wilson) and sexual abuse (Margaret)?

Instead of being a fat little misfit, Dennis will have six pack abs and George Clooney charm. Maybe Jay North could play Mr. Wilson.

(On the public front, if the show obtains any popularity, news programs will call in “experts” to explain why Dennis is a bad role model, what The Mitchells can be doing better, and signs that your youngster is troubled.)

Coach

Although Coach is the most recent show on the list, it could benefit from the sequelization concept utilized by that shows like Doctor Who, 90210, and Melrose Place. With the massive rise in popularity of college football and fantasy football, Hayden Fox can return as a sports commentator where his no-holds-barred approach to life could run afoul of our more PC culture. Also, he can be accused of cyberbullying his daughter's closeted boyfriend Stuart.

(On the public front, FUN FACT: Jerry Van Dyke is still alive.)

SHORT REVIEW: Jonah Hex- A Call For a Re-Imagining/Reboot/Whatever

Superhero movies do not need to merely be action movies. Just because the protagonist wears a costume does not mean that these films are only meant to throw as many explosions and effects at us as possible. Superhero movies can become a genuine crime thriller (The Dark Knight), or an epic,(Watchmen), or a Lifetime movie about a stalker date rapist (Superman Returns).

Jonah Hex, the 2010 bomb staring Josh Brolin and Megan Fox, is a flat-out terrible movie. Yet, for a film that pretty much failed on every conceivable level (some casting (such as Brolin, Michael Fassbender, and Jeffery Dean Morgan) was okay), within the concept of Jonah Hex and the Hexverse lies the potential for a truly great film.

Note: I have never read a Jonah Hex comic, and my first introduction to the character was through the film.

(Brief background: Jonah Hex is a former Confederate soldier bounty hunter in the late 1800s terribly scarred on half his face. In the comics, he has no special powers, although he is an excellent marksman and tracker. In the movie, however, he can talk to the dead for a short period like that guy in Pushing Daisies.)

While the talking to the dead angle of his character is a cinematic invention, it makes you wonder about a Jonah Hex film done as a respectable supernatural western.

If you look at the history of the genre, the great Westerns never move quickly, an idea that the 80-minute Jonah Hex never bothered to understand. Films like The Searchers (and other John Ford films), The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly (and other spaghetti Westerns), The Wild Bunch, or the post-Unforgiven series of modern Westerns, bide their time. The films are as much about the ambiance of the landscape and the scenic vistas as whatever quest the anti-hero protagonist undertakes. After all, when all you have is a horse and a vast terrain in front of you, time basically becomes irrelevant. And, while these films had gun fights and the occasional dynamite-caused poof of black smoke, simply shooting a lantern didn't make shit explode, as in this film.

(A minor complaint but the climax of Jonah Hex takes place on a boat and anyone who knows anything about the Western genre knows that it's the railroad that the true enemy.)

A supernatural angle should be less about fighting ghosts and goblins as though Jonah Hex was Ash from the Evil Dead series, but more about mysticism, spirits, and how the life after death surrounds us at all times.

And there is one person who would be perfect for this sort of film: Nick Cave.

Listeners of the songwriter/singer know how well he uses dark, vivid imagery of death and other morbid subjects. And, equally important, his history with the cinema shows a definite attraction to the Western.

The Proposition, which he scripted, is probably the best Western of the past decade. Along with Warren Ellis, Cave co-wrote the hauntingly beautiful score to 2007's underrated Western The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford.

Other films that Cave has been linked to as a screenwriter include a reboot of The Crow, and a bizarre yet interesting sounding sequel to Gladiator that finds Maximus contending with Roman Gods and reincarnation. http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/may/06/nick-cave-rejected-gladiator-script

In the coming years, plenty of big named comic book heroes will be getting a second shot at fame. Reboots include Spider-Man (starring Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, and Rhys Ifans), Superman (directed by Zack Snyder), The Fantastic Four, Daredevil, and we've already seen The Hulk attempt big screen success twice.

With so many others getting chances, why not give Jonah Hex a second go-around?A film combining the slow, methodological approach of the Western with an intrinsic understanding of the darkness of mortality, could be among the top films to showcase the untapped versatility of the comic book/superhero genre.