Before viewing last year's little sleaze-fest Wonderland, be prepared to wallow in a Hollywood-created world of drug addiction, bad hair, crappy clothes and blood-splattered walls. All of this lovely excess is spiced with frenetic quick-cut editing - you know, in order to create the wonderful high of freebasing for three straight days. I liked Wonderland, but then again I have always had a morbid fascination with crime. This crime is as morbid as one could possibly be.
There is more to like in Wonderland than dislike, but the already-mentioned machine-gun editing hides several good performances. And the story plays out in a he-said-she-said, Rashomon-like fashion confusing more than aiding. Three versions of this story are shown in Wonderland, so the "interested" viewer can decide for themselves. Flash over substance always pisses me off, and director James Cox has gone to great lengths to make a stylish film about the most unsettling cretins in Hollywood history.
Wonderland, sadly enough, is a true story that happened in 1981. Four people are found brutally murdered in a house on Wonderland Avenue, their skulls crushed by lead pipes and a baseball bat or two. Johnny "Wadd" Holmes, one of the most famous porn stars in history thanks to a 13-inch doppelwanker, is a prime suspect. The Wonderland house was a drug den, and Johnny "Wadd", coke addict Superdick who hadn't made a film in two years, hung around (pun intended) often.
Investigators haul Holmes in and get a convoluted story detailing robbery, double cross and dope. It appears the Wonderland victims had robbed the home of Eddie Nash, Los Angeles nightclub owner and 1980's drug dealer king. Nash suspected Holmes was involved, and forced the weaselly drug addict porn star to lead his own goons over to the Wonderland house to exact bloody revenge.
I could write an epic post if I wished to recount all the mistakes sophomore director James Cox made in Wonderland. Frankly, he was out of his league with this subject matter (he had one previous film, the thoroughly dull Highway in 2002). Cox's obsession with the Wonderland murders is reportedly why the film was financed in the first place. I imagine the casting of Val Kilmer helped.
Everyone in this film is sleazy, and it's surprising such a strong cast to include Kilmer, Dylan McDermott, Lisa Kudrow, Josh Lucas, Kate Bosworth, Jeneane Garofalo, Carrie Fisher and Christina Applegate would take on such shady roles. The performances are uniformly good, though a lot of fine actors disappear in the shadows of communion dope smoke and coke snort. I suppose Applegate can be excused for taking part. She jumped on board because she grew up near the house on Wonderland Avenue. Applegate could actually recall the bloody mattresses sitting in the front yard awaiting trash pick-up. Now I ask, have you ever heard a better piece of trivia?
Article comments
1 - Lono
You made an interesting link, which should be stronger stated: Wonderland is part two to Boogie Nights. If you ever want to know what happens to Dirk's character... the Holmes story is perfect. I thought it was a really interesting DVD (I rarely kick down the cash to see a movie. Unless it is something like Lord of the Rings... every movie gets the Netflix treatment here). I highly recommend this DVD as a piece of escapist entertainment for people with low legal standards for what constitutes fun!
2 - Chris Kent
Thanks Lono,
I suppose one could consider Wonderland a continuation of the epic Boogie Nights saga, though both films are so different in tone and style that it would be an uneasy transition. Boogie Nights delved far deeper into the characters. Wonderland was so obsessed with the crime, the characters fell by the wayside. If we are to depend on Boogie Nights for the character motivation of Wonderland, then this film is a complete disaster.
Both films have equally talented casts, so the fault must fall on the director and writers of Wonderland. Wonderland perhaps gets a nod for showing a mostly unflinching look at the lives of these Hollywood losers......I will give it that. It's not an easy film to watch.
Wonderland is a historically accurate film, but character depth is shallow and Cox pulled a few too many stylistic moves with a story undeserving of them.
3 - Aaron, Duke De Mondo
Chris, great review as ever! And some really interesting observations, not least the one mentioned by Lono about how this could be an unnoficial sequel to Boogie Nights. I have yet to see this here flick, but hopefully will do shortly, and indeed, my intentions to seek it out have been given a shot in the arse by your article.
Interesting stuff on the crime, too.
Good work, man.
4 - Chris Kent
Thanks Duke,
Depends on which side of the bed I wake up on as to my overall opinion of Wonderland. It's not anywhere near the level of Boogie Nights, which I consider one of the great films of the decade......an absolute classic.
Wonderland should probably be quickly forgotten. But it's still fascinating to watch.