I graduated high school in the 1980s so I can attest to the authenticity of this film. The difference between this and a brat pack film is that this film really captures the adult ambiance of the 80s without trumping it up with teen coming-of-age clichés. These are sexually predatory adults crashing into each other.
There is a ruthlessness to the casual nature of the relationships in this movie that you rarely see addressed in film, and in a non-judgemental fashion. In a way, the fact that such a film can even be made is testament to the time it was made in, because no film today would set up this kind of behavior without punishing it in the plot later. That feel and philosophy is what is so early 80s above all. Instead of sermonizing, this film lays the situations out almost as if the characters have to survive their own petty foibles. Its not a comfortable film, and Coyote does a harrowing job of portraying an artist seemingly bent on self-destruction. I've always known Coyote as a mellow older actor. Seeing him in this showed me a whole different angle.
The film addresses an even more rarely-covered topic, that of the art world, and the battle between poor, message artists, and rich, decor or abstract artists. Coyote gives some beautiful speeches on the topic while heckling a wealthier competitor at his opening. The film also accurately portrays a gallery owner and painting model as characters. This could only be in the film because it was directly related to the writer/director's life. It is super real, except perhaps in Coyote's change of fortunes, although he was doing something similar to Nagel, who did end up rich painting women in the 80s.
I have a bit of a envy for the warehouse district these guys were living in, before the housing bubble made these places worth millions. Medium to giant painting studios, with an art scene coffee shop nearby filled with locals. It shows you what an art district in a city like LA, SF, Seattle, Portland was actually like before the gentrifying latecomers showed up and kicked everyone out. The crime of central LA wasn't really shown, though this film just predated the most pronounced rise of gang drive-bys that peaked in the late 80s/early 90s. Colors, the 'first' modern gang film, came out in 1988.
There are some flaws in the pacing and purpose of the film, and some off acting here and there, but it's an example of a director who just set out with a low budget and captured a lot of mood and a lot of the time in which it was made, and now its a super-valuable time capsule. It's also the only film I can ever remember covering sexual competition between men, more specifically men under 30 in an age when AIDS and herpes were just around the corner.
I say its a 6 for execution, and an 9 for intent, average out to 7.5. Kudos to the THIS network for broadcasting it. Oh yeah, it does have an awesome 80s ambient synth soundtrack mixed in with some other fare.
There is a ruthlessness to the casual nature of the relationships in this movie that you rarely see addressed in film, and in a non-judgemental fashion. In a way, the fact that such a film can even be made is testament to the time it was made in, because no film today would set up this kind of behavior without punishing it in the plot later. That feel and philosophy is what is so early 80s above all. Instead of sermonizing, this film lays the situations out almost as if the characters have to survive their own petty foibles. Its not a comfortable film, and Coyote does a harrowing job of portraying an artist seemingly bent on self-destruction. I've always known Coyote as a mellow older actor. Seeing him in this showed me a whole different angle.
The film addresses an even more rarely-covered topic, that of the art world, and the battle between poor, message artists, and rich, decor or abstract artists. Coyote gives some beautiful speeches on the topic while heckling a wealthier competitor at his opening. The film also accurately portrays a gallery owner and painting model as characters. This could only be in the film because it was directly related to the writer/director's life. It is super real, except perhaps in Coyote's change of fortunes, although he was doing something similar to Nagel, who did end up rich painting women in the 80s.
I have a bit of a envy for the warehouse district these guys were living in, before the housing bubble made these places worth millions. Medium to giant painting studios, with an art scene coffee shop nearby filled with locals. It shows you what an art district in a city like LA, SF, Seattle, Portland was actually like before the gentrifying latecomers showed up and kicked everyone out. The crime of central LA wasn't really shown, though this film just predated the most pronounced rise of gang drive-bys that peaked in the late 80s/early 90s. Colors, the 'first' modern gang film, came out in 1988.
There are some flaws in the pacing and purpose of the film, and some off acting here and there, but it's an example of a director who just set out with a low budget and captured a lot of mood and a lot of the time in which it was made, and now its a super-valuable time capsule. It's also the only film I can ever remember covering sexual competition between men, more specifically men under 30 in an age when AIDS and herpes were just around the corner.
I say its a 6 for execution, and an 9 for intent, average out to 7.5. Kudos to the THIS network for broadcasting it. Oh yeah, it does have an awesome 80s ambient synth soundtrack mixed in with some other fare.