Good Grief, More Underrated Movies Lines

Here's the fourth in our series of lines from known films which aren't as quoted as often as I think they should be.

1. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984):
I can certainly understand why some would view this film as a copout since it revived Spock (Leonard Nimoy) after the character heroically sacrificed himself in the previous Trek film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982). However, I still give this film a lot of credit for still being able to entertain and, like Khan, end on a bittersweet note, even though it was clear from the beginning that Spock would return.
Kirk (William Shatner) and the rest of the crew go through hell thanks to the Klingon Kruge (Christopher Lloyd) in order to get their pal back.
Once Kruge has been vanquished, they take Spock's body to Vulcan, where the Vulcan Priestess T'Lar (Dame Judith Anderson) begins a ritual which will restore Spock's mind to his body. When she tells Spock's father, Sarek (Mark Lenard), that this ancient ritual carries the risk of killing Spock, Sarek, while from a race that contains its emotions, replies with a line that is full of compassion:
"My logic is uncertain where my son is concerned!"
One person who was against Spock returning was Khan director Nicholas Meyer. But his dissatisfaction didn't stop him from co-writing the next film Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986), which Nimoy directed (as he did with Spock), and from directing and co-writing (again with Nimoy) Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991).
In his review of Country, Confused Matthew rightly called Nimoy and Meyer the dream team of the original Trek films. How wonderful it would have been if they had gotten their hands on The Next Generation films.

2. Basic Instinct (1992):
If I had to pick my favorite 'guilty pleasure' movie, it would be this one. The plot twists are absolutely ludicrous, but its stars and the nice Jerry Goldsmith score give it a lot of atmosphere.
When police detective Nick Curran (Michael Douglas) is interrogated in relation to the death of a fellow detective Nilsen (Daniel Von Bargen), whom Curran was not on good terms with, he points out that it would have been foolish of him to kill Nilsen since he confronted him earlier that same day.
The interrogators then point out that the confrontation may have been insurance that Curran wouldn't be a suspect in the murder, which reminds them of their earlier questioning of Catherine (Sharon Stone), who wrote a book depicting a murder which, at the beginning of the movie, played out in the same way.
When one of the detectives asks what book they are referring to, another answers:
"Private joke, asshole!"
In a review of Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987), it is pointed out that overusing profanity causes it to lose its purpose, which, according to the reviewer, is to shock. I believe that profanity, when used sparingly, can also provoke laughter at certain times, and (while Instinct has a lot more profanity than this) this line certainly did that for me. A similar tactic was later employed in the movie...

3. Eyes Wide Shut (1999):
Stanley Kubrick's final film got mixed reviews, but I thought it ended on an appropriate note. When Bill (Tom Cruise) and Alice (Nicole Kidman) are discussing the events which Bill has gone through in the movie's final scene, Alice states that their marriage is still intact and tells Bill that there is something they need to do as quickly as possible. That something is:
"Fuck!"
The screen then goes black and the end credits begin. I find it appropriate that the final scene in Kubrick's final film would raise one's eyebrows in such a subtle way.

4. Jason X (2002): As I've noted elsewhere, the last word I would use to describe the Friday the 13th series is 'good,' but it can be fun to watch if you are willing to turn off your brain for a while.
Apparently, the producers of the series started feeling the same way as it went on because, while the first Friday the 13th (1980) had a nice atmosphere to compensate for its plot holes, each sequel seemed to embrace the fact that the premise of a serial killer who keeps being resurrected again and again was nonsense and, as such, ran with that.
Perhaps that was never more evident than in Jason X, the 10th film in the Friday series, which sees Jason in space, where (you guessed it) he kills off a ship's crew, which is comprised of (mainly) sex-obsessed dimwits.
At one point, one of that crew, Janessa (Melyssa Ade), is hanging on for dear life when the ship's hull is breached. Just before she's pulled out into space, Janessa says what could be viewed as a perfect summary of the series.
"This sucks on so many levels!"
Granted, she is not the first movie character to give a smart remark while faced with certain death, but this film, like most of the others in the series, can best be described as 'dumb fun.' This contrasts it with another 2002 movie set in space, Star Wars: Episode II-Attack of the Clones, which was just plain 'dumb.'

5. The Dark Knight (2008): Needless to say, this film and its predecessor Batman Begins (2005) were everything both Tim Burton's and Joel Schumacher's Bat-films should have been. As a result, they match Superman (1978) and Superman II (1981) in terms of quality. In a sad bit of irony, the respective third films in these series-Superman III (1983) and The Dark Knight Rises (2012)- proved less than satisfying.
Heath Ledger's posthumous Oscar win for playing the Joker was well-earned, but, unlike Jack Nicholson's Joker in Batman (1989), he didn't dominate the proceedings at the expense of the other actors.
This is especially true of Batman (Christian Bale), who has nice moments in this film where he questions himself. During the climatic fight scene between these two characters, the Joker anxiously awaits the moment when one or both of the boats he's rigged with explosives will blow up. He had previously given the crews of both ships the means to blow up the other, or he would blow up both himself.
When neither ship goes up in flames, the Joker moves to carry out his threat until Batman gets the upper hand. He then asks the Joker:
"What were you trying to prove? That deep down, everyone's as ugly as you?! You're alone."
This reminded me of an exchange between these same two characters in the graphic novel The Killing Joke. In that story, the Joker paralyzes Gordon's daughter and then kidnaps and tortures the Commissioner in order to drive him insane. When Batman arrives, he tends to Gordon who, while shaken, insists that the Caped Crusader take the Joker in by the book. Batman then finds the Joker and tells him that Gordon is still sane and that the Joker may be the exception rather than the norm.

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986)

"I'd like to kill somebody!"



"Say that again."



"I'd like to kill somebody."



"Let's me and you go for a ride, Otis."
-Otis and Henry



I'm not the type who condemns a film simply because it has extreme violence, and I'm certainly not the type who blames violence in movies for real-life horror such as Columbine or, more recently, the killings in Norway. Extreme on-screen violence, when used in a certain way, can enhance a film's impact. One great example of this is Stanley Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange (1971). I honestly consider this film a work of art, but I can certainly understand why some people dislike it (my father, a man I very much admire, is one such person). Most people remember the moments where Malcolm McDowell's Alex brutalizes innocent people. Where this film's greatness comes into play, though, is that it takes into account the reactions of other people to Alex's crimes; in the case of this film, those people are society in general. When Alex is incarcerated, the issue becomes what to do with him-and whether the route taken is the moral one in that regard. The scenes in which Alex initiates violence serve as the catalyst for that dilemma.
Contrast that with, say, The Devil's Rejects (2005), which simply shows scene after scene of violence by characters its director, Rob Zombie, will go to his grave insisting are supposed to represent 'real' people. On top of that, the film seems to go slower and slower as it reaches its boring slow-motion climax.
In his book Your Movie Sucks, Roger Ebert wrote this in response to criticism of his less-than-stellar review of the movie Chaos (2005):
"I believe evil can win in fiction, as it often does in real life. But I prefer that the artist express an attitude toward that evil. It is not enough to record it; what do you think and feel about it?"
This perfectly sums up why I love Clockwork but dislike Rejects, even though they both contain deplorable content (ironically, Ebert gave a thumbs-down to Kubrick's film, but a thumbs-up to Zombie's).
This brings us to Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. John McNaughton, perhaps best known today for making the quirky sex drama Wild Things (1998)-which, after Basic Instinct (1992), is my favorite guilty pleasure movie-made this film is just a month with a budget of just over $100,000. The inspiration for the story came from a 20/20 segment on serial killer Henry Lee Lucas, who confessed to over 600 murders after he was captured. He died in prison in 2001.
The title character (Michael Rooker) is someone who randomly kills people with his partner Otis (Tom Towles). One day, Otis's sister Becky(Tracy Arnold) comes to live with them and, eventually, falls for Henry, while becoming more and more repulsed by Otis. Eventually, Becky and Henry kill Otis after he brutalizes her. Rather than calling the police, they spend the night in a motel before Henry dumps a trunk on the side of the road the next morning, which, presumably, contains Becky's body.
Leonard Maltin commented that this film focuses on other sick minds besides Henry's. Indeed, as murderous as Henry is, Otis is even worse. In addition to raping Becky, he is all-too-eager to go after innocent people, such as the salesman who berates them for wasting time at his shop just as Henry is about to leave. The only lucky one is this film is a boy who sells him marijuana. Otis places his hand on his leg, prompting the boy to punch him in the face and fleeing. While he escapes, though, Henry uses Otis's frustration at the incident to kill a passerby on the highway after they fake car trouble.
Maltin also commented that this film resembles Peeping Tom, and I agree with that to some extent. Henry and Otis steal a video camera from the salesman they kill and later use it to record themselves slaughtering a family in their home. Unlike Mark Lewis, though, Henry doesn't wish to make a film of his deeds to show the world, but is content with carrying out his horrific acts in private.
The film's counterpoint is Becky, who listens to Henry from the moment she meets him. One reason being that they both claim to have been abused during their childhood by their parents. She's seems to be a lonely soul who wants someone who won't shun her, and she believes Henry is that someone-even when she points out that he changes his story about how he killed his mother.
Hence, the response to Henry's violent acts in this film come from someone who, ironically, wants his love and, tragically, is killed for her desire to be near him.
Rooker is great in the title role, coming as an everyman in some scenes and a downright terrifying S.O.B. in others. This was his first film role and it segued into a great career as a character actor, although the role I'll always know him for is as Kevin Costner's government-fearing aide in JFK (1991).
In Scream 2 (1997), one of the characters (played by Rooker's JFK co-star Laurie Metcalf) says that she hates it when people assume that a person's family or upbringing led to them murdering people. Indeed, many slasher films have pinned the cause of their mass slaughters on family trauma but this film, in a way, puts that cliche on its ear by mentioning it only once.
Although the film was made in 1986, it wasn't released until 1990, mainly due to its violent content, which, naturally, led to disagreements with the MPAA. However, it did form a cult following, enough to warrant the inferior Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, Part 2 (1996).

Paths of Glory (1957)

"YOU CAN GO TO HELL BEFORE I APOLOGIZE TO YOU NOW OR EVER AGAIN!!!"

-Col. Dax

This film, directed by Stanley Kubrick and based on a novel by Humphrey Cobb, takes place during WWI and concerns Col. Dax (Kirk Douglas), who attempts to defend the French troops under his command when they are accused of cowardice after they refuse to continue a suicidal attack.

The trench warfare scenes, a battle environment which WWI itself is known for (heck, Charles Schulz had Snoopy's brother, Spike, in the trenches while Snoopy was in the air searching for the Red Baron), are jolting, all the more so when you consider that this film was made years before America's military involvement in Vietnam began. The influence of these scenes can be seen in later war films such as Platoon (1986), Glory (1989), Saving Private Ryan (1998), as well as Kubrick's more famous war film Full Metal Jacket (1987).

Just as memorable though as the courtroom scenes in which Dax attempts to convince Gen. Broulard (Adolphe Menjou) that courtmartialing 100 troops simply because a planned attack by Broulard and his subordinate Gen. Mireau (George Macready) failed is wrong.

Although the film barely got any attention upon its release, it is revered today, so much so that a 1991 episode of Tales From the Crypt, entitled "Yellow," which guest-starred Douglas, was a takeoff of it.

More importantly, though, it earned Kubrick significant clout. This clout would come in handy when Douglas was working on his next film, Spartacus (1960). Anthony Mann was originally hired as the director until he left the production due to differences with Douglas, who was also the executive producer of the film. This led to Douglas hiring Kubrick as director. Spartacus became a huge hit and, although he disliked the mandates Douglas and the studio put on him during its production, Kubrick used that success to move to England, where he would be based for the rest of his career. This allowed him to make any subsequent films far from the interference of Hollywood. Hence, all of Kubrick's subsequent films, from Lolita (1962) to Eyes Wide Shut (1999), would carry his unique imprint on them.