Plot: What’s it about?
I think the older I get, the more I realize how cyclical things are. Having said that, I can remember with the utmost clarity the first time I opened the pages of the February 1990 issue of Playboy magazine. As someone who was about to turn 17 years old, seeing the Canadian beauty that was Pamela Anderson in all her glory was, well, certainly an experience. As we all know, Anderson was one of the defining faces (and bodies) of the 90’s with her over-the-top looks, silicone-injected breasts and collagen-infused lips. Hey, she managed to make a career out of her plastic surgery. But the 90’s ended and with it, we saw less and less of Pamela Anderson. The model/actress is now approaching 60 (as of this writing) and has shed her man made looks for something a bit more natural. Is her role as a Vegas showgirl that’s on her way out symbolic or just good casting (or both)?
Anderson stars as Shelly, a dancer at Le Razzle Dazzle for quite some time. It’s a topless revue that’s started to wane in popularity as more raunchy acts have become the mainstream ticket. Eddie (Dave Bautista), the show’s producer, announces that it’ll be closing in a few weeks, the younger dancers take it stride. Shelly, however, has dedicated the last three decades of her life to this gig and sees those years wasted. She turns her attention to her best friend and former showgirl, Annette (Jamie Lee Curtis) for some guidance and moral support looking for a way forward in her life. Shelly also attempts to reconcile with her daughter, Hannah (Billie Lourd) as she sees her past fade away.
Having been to Sin City on several occasions, I can say that I’ve never seen a showgirl routine or a topless one at that. But I do understand that, for years, this was essentially the main draw to Las Vegas. As time, things and tastes change so to does the market. Seeing a topless woman dance might not have the same impact for something we can see on the internet for free. I realize that’s not the point of the film, but there are things that had their time and now that time has passed. I imagine this film is indicative of what it’s really like in Vegas. But the point at hand is that Anderson seems to have embraced her age and her past. I think it’s a good move for her to do more films like this. No longer the pin up she was a few decades ago, the botox has faded, the collagen gone – she’s a shell of her former self, but she seems to realize that that’s OK. And it is.
Video: How’s it look?
This isn’t a glitzy and glamorous image some might be expecting. Rather Autumn Durald Arkapaw’s 16mm image capture Sin City in a literal different light. While the 2.39:1 AVC HD encode looks good in most spots, there’s always a tinge of grain and dirt to be found. And that’s fine. I think it goes without saying that we’re at the point in technology that we know that every new-to-the-format Blu-ray can look spectacular. It took me all of 7 seconds to say “OK, this is how this is going to look.” But the gritty image is certainly a metaphor for the film’s subject matter as well as Las Vegas as a whole. Once you get past the fact that this won’t be a reference-quality disc – you’ll be fine.
Audio: How’s it sound?
Likewise, the included DTS HD Master Audio mix certainly gets the job done, but that’s about it. Don’t expect earth-shattering dynamic audio that’ll shake the pictures off the walls. By and large this is a very heavy dialogue-driven track. I’d expect nothing less. Vocals come across as pure and crisp, though a few scenes had me wondering “what did she say?” There’s a bit of surround in a few scenes, but this could have easily been a 2.0 mix and nothing would have been lost in the process. Take it for what it is and, like the video presentation, you’ll be fine.
Supplements: What are the extras?
- Unreserved – Running just a shade over 15 minutes, we get director Gia Coppola along with Anderson, Curtis Brenda Song and Kiernan Shipka as they analyze the story, their respective characters and some tidbits on the shoot as a whole.
- A Conversation with Pamela Anderson and Jamie Curtis – Pretty much that. The two actresses “dish the dirt” on the film as they discuss it in front of an audience at a screening of the film.
The Bottom Line
It’s taken Pamela Anderson a few decades to “embrace” her former self. Gone are films like Barb Wire and replaced with more simplistic films like this. It’s low key, features a decent cast and it works. It’s not the most uplifting movie, then again not many films directed by a Coppola are, but it’ll entertain.
