Elektra Luxx

IMDb Link

If Tom DiCillo had come out of film school and was a total TV freak, this is the film he'd have made.

TV-wise, we got 'Entourage,' 'Californication,' 'Mad Men,' 'Weeds,' 'Justified' and, I guess, '3rd Rock from the Sun.'

Yeah: there are some really hot women (Chriqui is ridiculously pretty/hot/cute. And that's good, because she's not the best thespian out there), who want to show us how cool they are by acting in a 'little film.' And the girl playing Holly is funny, thanks mostly to her dialogue. Yes, it's clichéd because it's dumb bimbo talk. But that always makes me laugh. I'm a simple guy, don't you know?

So, I don't know... I really wanted to like this film, but apart from the opening credits which are really nice (really, I think the whole budget was spent there), it just feels so... I don't know... So early 90s. So independent. So... amateurish, I want to say. Mostly because of the set design, if that's not too weird to mention. Nothing screams 'early 90s indie flick' like red walls, especially in an elevator. Or non-sequitur black and white sequences (with a typewriter sound in the background, because we hadn't understood she was telling a story!) Actually, up to the black and white sequence, I was more or less enjoying the film. But that sequence bored me to tears (really, I cried a thimble-full) and that's when I started writing this review.

And then there was a non-sequitur musical number.  Don't get me wrong, there was another non-sequitur musical number before, but it involved Chriqui stripping (well, dancing in her underwear, really), so I didn't care. But this second number? This second number told me that the director, as a writer, ran out of steam after writing his outline, which probably was half-a-page long; so he had to add some shit to make
his film feature-length and thus: ta-dah! Black and white and musical scenes that have fuck all to do with the story. If you tell me that the number was a dream and shows her psyche, I'll retort, crudely: 'Fuck off.'

Maybe, perhaps, it's possible, but I really do not think so, maybe then: he thought that the musical numbers would be funny. Sarcatstic. Post-modern. Lynchian.

They really aren't.

Yeah, so... It looks like it was made on the cheap, and I totally respect that. But it looks like it was made just because it was  possible to make it. By that, I mean to say 'kudos' for making a film, 'kudos' for getting so many actors attached to your project, 'kudos' for shooting it and actually releasing it. But also 'fuck you' because if this had stayed a home movie, that would have been okay, too.

Is the writer/director/producer the fuck-toy of a studio head? Is that it? He gives head to the head? He went head to head?

This is getting too heady...

Okay, fine: I'm just plainly saying: 'fuuuuck.' Some scenes look like scenes my friend shot while we were at uni. No, friend: this is not a dis to you at all. Just saying that we should have the hot actresses and kinda cool actors doing our shit. Do you believe in magic? I hope so, 'cause I'm walking on motherfucking sunshine (sorry, this was one long private joke).

Also, the J. Gordon L. guy... Ha ha, no you silly person: not Liddy, but Lewitt! (will anyone actually understand this? Am I being a pompous fuck? Is this too heady? Oh, shit: I don't know!) Anyhoo... First: cool that after 'Inception' he was in that (although I haven't researched this film and, for all I know, it was shot before any of the actors actually got their big breaks and then some PA stumbled on the reels and went 'OMFG!' and the rest is history. I hope that's the case, I really do. It would help me find sleep at night... But I of course know it's not the case), but in this film he is over-acting. Which proves how important a GOOD director is (case in point: Pacino in 'The Godfather' vs Pacino in 'Looking for Richard.')... Plus, him playing a hispanic is as believable as Tarantino not being a cock.

Also, what's with the weird awkward close-ups?

And how bad of a director are you when you even fuck up the fake porn scenes, where they actually look TOO good, where the acting is not off-beat enough? Seriously... This is a case of: 'In the Dumb Fucks Olympics, you'd win second place because you're too much of a dumb fuck to win first place.' Ah... Wake up 'Log Jammin',' they've gone crazy! At least Maude Lebowski has an unexpected cameo, and that's cool! And unexpected.

And completely unnecessary.

Then the characters all get together in the most unbelievable and contrived way and the film just ends on a 'Whaaaa?' note.

And anyway: twins? Really? Why? What's the point? And then the whole 'new life' aspect, regrets about the past as a porn actress? Come on... She was powerful and cool as a non-apologetic porn star. And then we gotta see her cry about it... Yawn.

I kept expecting to see a dwarf holding an apple walk across the screen. But it never happened, unless I was asleep when it did.

In any case, I am left perplexed, wondering how so many good actors ended up in this film. Maybe the director is also the agent of all these people? I couldn't explain it in Larry Bishop's films either, but LB's flicks are entertaining as hell.

So, yeah: Whatever. What the fuck ever. On the plus side, I ran out of sleeping pills a few weeks ago, but after watching this, I'm ready for a deep deep slumber.

PS: To be honest, great line: 'I'm wet with indecent happiness.'

PPS: And, by the way, Ms Gugino is a billion times hotter with brown hair. As most women are anyway.

PPPS: How vain are you when in the end credits you get the 'written by' credits and right under it the 'based on characters created by' credits? I mean... Isn't that what writing is all about? Creating characters?