I recently saw a post that listed Ed Wood as the greatest film made by director Tim Burton. My immediate reactions was, "No, Edward Scissorhands is the best!" but I realized I'd never watched Ed Wood, so I decided to give it a try. Maybe it is the better film?
Ed Wood (1994) directed by Tim Burton
This very affection biography details the life of Ed Wood, often proclaimed the worst filmmaker in Hollywood's history. In the film, Wood is played earnestly by Johnny Depp. Wood was a World War II vet with great ambitions and odd habits. He wants to be the next Orson Welles, that is, he wants to write and direct and act in a great film (and maybe do some other stuff too). He's also a cross-dresser, though he tells everyone that he is into girls, not guys. Wearing women's clothing makes him feel closer to women. He reveals at one point his greatest fear during the war was being injured and the medics discovering that he was wearing women's underwear. He also borrows freely from his girlfriend Dolores (Sarah Jessica Parker) though she is clueless about it, even though he dresses like that in front of her.
Wood has attracted a lot of other characters around him--the magic-faker Criswell (Jeffery Jones), the beefy wrestler Tor Johnson (George Steele), Bunny Breckenridge who wants a sex-change operation (Bill Murray), and, through a chance meeting, Bela Lugosi (Martin Landau), an actor Wood admires immensely. They all help him make low-budget fare on the side as he does the sort of "fetch and carry" work that lets him wander all over the big studios. His eclectic entourage matches the odd films he winds up making--a movie about a guy getting a sex-change operation called "Glen or Glenda" and his most famous work, "Plan 9 From Outer Space" (originally called "Graverobbers from Outer Space" before the Baptist Church financing the movie insisted on a change). Wood and his supporting cast go through a lot of challenges as he tries to make great works.
The movie apes the visual style of Wood's films (at least, from what I have seen of them). It's black and white, with exaggerated characters and narration. The movie barely acknowledges that Wood is not that good at making films. He's shown as rushing through without taking extra shots or extra care in crafting images or performances. Wood doesn't seem aware that he's not accomplishing his goals and the film has no criticisms of him whatsoever. He's puzzled why "Glen or Glenda" doesn't play in Los Angeles even though the low-budget producer told him it's for markets in other states. Wood remains polite and unassuming, a naive and misguided fellow.
Burton clearly loves weird things and people. He presents this enigmatic director in all his weirdness, along with all the other people around him, without making any judgments. There are negative ways of being weird, some of which are touched on remotely in the film but not directly confronted. This film is interesting as a pastiche of Wood's life through Wood's own cinematic style. But is it really great?
Edward Scissorhands (1990) co-written and directed by Tim Burton
Peg (Dianne Weist) is a door-to-door Avon saleslady who doesn't get much business in her suburb. After visiting several neighbors and getting no sales, she looks at the spooky castle up on the hill. She decides to give it a try. The front yard is full of exquisite topiaries; the interior is rundown and full of cobwebbed equipment. She goes up a staircase to the attic (which has a massive hole in the roof) and discovers Edward (Johnny Depp) hiding in the shadows. When he comes out, his hair is crazy and his hands are elaborate scissor contraptions. At first she is frightened (as is he) but she sees his scarred, pale face and switches in to Avon-mode, recommending cosmetics to help his appearance. She decides to take Edward to her home down in the suburb. Her husband (Alan Arkin) and young son (Robert Oliveri) accept Edward and his weirdness in stride. Daughter Kim (Winona Ryder) is out camping with friends so Edward spends the first few days sleeping on her water bed, an odd enough experience for an odd fellow.
All the local housewives are fascinated by Edward and want to find out more about him, as if they were from 1950s America with nothing better to do than be nosy. Two of them stick out from the crowd: Joyce is the local cougar and is far too curious about what Edward can do, and Esmerelda is a religious fanatic who thinks he's the spawn of Satan, though she never directly confronts him. Kim's return from camping provides more complications as Edward is innocently fascinated by her while her family and friends tease her about Edward's affection. Kim's boyfriend Jim (Anthony Michael Hall) does not like Edward. A lot of trouble brews in the town even as Edward tries to fit in by cutting topiaries in everyone's yards and cutting the hair of dogs and housewives alike.
As the story is told, Edward's creation in the castle is revealed. The Inventor (Vincent Price) has all sorts of machines and contraptions in his home. He's inspired to make an artificial man. He makes a lot of progress, even teaching Edward something of etiquette though they are both more interested in poetry. The Inventor is on the verge of giving Edward human hands when he suddenly dies. Edward is left to fend for himself.
The story has a wonderful fair-tale feel to it. In the opening an old lady (Winona Ryder) tells her grandchild about the creation of snow in their town. That tale is her flashback of her mom bringing Edward into town. The suburb is bland and stereotypical, with mono-color houses and all the dads going off to work and coming home from work at the same time. Edward is a withdrawn and artistic fellow who does not know enough about the "real world" to function easily in it. He's an oddball who ultimately doesn't fit in, even though he gives so much to the outside world (including the snow from doing ice sculptures in the castle attic).
Which is better?
The films' protagonists are surprisingly similar. Ed Wood is an outsider with odd behavior who doesn't quite understand the world around him even as he tries (and fails) to be the best filmmaker he can. Edward is also an outsider with odd behavior and appearance who never learned enough about the larger world to comfortably fit in. Edward is a lot more innocent and naive; Ed is naive but probably should know better. As struggling outsiders, they evoke a lot of sympathy (thanks in no small part to Depp's fine performances), especially since their behavior is so mild for the most part. They could easily be frustrated, vengeful outsiders, turning them into anti-heroes. Edward almost goes that route at the end but his emotions don't get the better of him. Ed remains blithely unaware of the results and consequences of his actions.Both movies have a lot of style. Ed's is, as I said above, a loving mimicry of the filmmaker's own work. Edward's is a brand new fairy tale in the old style, with a bit of darkness and violence that Disney often washes out of their adaptions. They both look beautiful but Edward's is naturally more artistic just because fairy tales exist in a more heightened reality.
Interestingly, both mirror 1950s realities. Ed Wood is in 1950s Hollywood, with a lot of optimism and activity going on. The studios are booming and opportunities are everywhere, even for small-timers like Ed. Edward visits a 1950s suburb right out of 1950s television, with the ideals of that era (working fathers, mothers at home, comfortably well-to-do) even though they have DVD players, home security systems, and such.
While both are fine films, I think Edward's is, oddly enough, more down-to-earth and connected to the real world. Edward's simplicity creates a contrast even with the simplicity of 1950s suburbia, bringing out better grounding and moral sensibility. Ed lives in his own world as much as he can. The movie wraps him in that as much as it can, too, leaving some contrast with the "real world" that he doesn't quite comprehend and that doesn't really accept him. But there's no judgment at all in Ed Wood, pretty much everything is acceptable (with the exception of Lugosi's drug addiction). The moral free-for-all leaves Wood in the same place where he started. He doesn't learn anything or grow as a person. He doesn't become a better artist or have more than cult status as his legacy. He's an interesting character but doesn't have the staying power of a more mythological figure like Edward.
I can see why Ed Wood is so popular in the Hollywood crowd. It's about a creative artist plying his trade. Hollywood loves movies about itself (how many versions of A Star is Born will they make?), so naturally the biopic about a director has a little extra love in Tinsel Town. But it really isn't the better film.
Winner:
Winner:
Loser:
Posts
