Dish Dogs is a romantic comedy/coming of age/road trip/buddy/surfer/philosophical drama movie. If this sounds to you like way too many genres to mangle into one film, you are clearly brighter than the director. Not only does the film have this severe identity crises, but it also has poor acting from most of the principles. The comedy elements fall flat, it features Brian Dennehy in a spray-on wet suite as a retro hippie guru, and it is full of cliches, such as the stripper who is really a wonderful, wholesome, intelligent girl who just needs the money (Shannon Elizabeth). The final scene featured one of the worst songs ever written, performed as a wedding present by Matthew Lillard, who not only can't sing, but should probably not be allowed to even listen to music.

Two friends have graduated from college with degrees in business, and take jobs as dishwashers (Dish Dogs), not because that is all a BA in business is good for, but because they want to become great philosophers and have their Epiphany. When one of their friends gets married, Morgan (Sean Astin) meets Shannon at the bachelor party and is attracted to her, and Jason (Matthew Lillard) gets back together with his old girlfriend (Maitland Ward) at the reception. Thus the conflict in the film ... philosophy or sex. Guess which wins.

Some of the supporting performances were very good, the production values were there, and there was some good scenery and art direction. To me, the failure was that the director didn't figure out what he was trying to say. The first 12 images come from arguably the best scene, where Shannon drags Morgan into the changing room and makes him help her try on and select bras. Unfortunately, it was cut from the released version. Thank god for deleted scene features. I suspect the scene had to go to avoid the deadly NC-17 rating, and wonder how much other exposure met the same fate. This one is not worth renting.

Candyman was skillfully adapted into an American Urban Legend, from a short story by Clive Barker which was originally about a superstition held by working class families in Liverpool. Barker himself took the role of executive producer, so the metamorphosis was done with his consent and co-operation.

It's a good movie, with a lush big-budget "look and feel" and an excellent cast. A-list actors and direction made it a scary movie that is actually scary, for several reasons:

1. The director makes excellent use of the sudden surprises and jump cuts so popular in this genre. It is common practice to deprecate their use, but I like 'em when they are done well.

2. The Urban legend itself is scary. Stand in front of a mirror and repeat his name five times. I guarantee if you were a kid or somebody likely to believe in the preternatural, and somebody spun this tale for you as if it were true, and there were real murders in your neighborhood that people attributed to this mythical dude, that you would be scared to do the ritual. Oh, maybe you'd do it, but don't tell me you wouldn't be apprehensive and chilled before saying that fifth "Candyman".

3. The bogeyman himself is played by a powerful screen presence (Tony Todd) who is simultaneously chilling and romantic, and not at all completely unsympathetic. After all, he is a man who loved honestly and zealously in his lifetime, and who was unfairly tortured and killed for it.

4. The story leaves open the possibility that the scientific researcher really is the real murderer, and is subconsciously using the Candyman legend to bury the guilt. (Remember we saw her hit someone with a meat-cleaver, and the police caught her, after all, with the cleaver in her hand, about to descend on a woman. Furthermore, the police evidence videotapes never support her versions of the stories.)

In fact, in a logical world, the world of the police investigators, Helen must have committed the crimes. In her meeting with Candyman, he says that people are starting to doubt him, so he has to do some new killings. Oh, really? Well, if that's the case, why would he make it look like Helen committed the crimes? That would make Candyman seem even less credible, not more credible. If Candydude committed the crimes, he'd want everyone to be very clear on that point. Nobody will be afraid of Candydude if they know Helen really committed the murders and is under secure lock and key.

Not to mention the baby thing. Helen was in the prison hospital for 30 days while the baby was missing. Of course, the baby thing is a major plot loophole. If Candydude isn't real, then who took care of the baby for 30 days while Madsen was incarcerated? Then Candydude must be real, but during that time, do you expect me to believe that Candydude was changing the baby's diapers and giving him his 4 A.M. feeding? Say what? He pops into an all-night Eckerd's for pampers and formula? We know he couldn't have killed the clerks while Madsen was locked up, because the emergence of the real killer would have exonerated her. So he paid for the stuff. How does he reach into his pocket to get his wallet? How does he earn money? Anyway, he shows this loving kindness toward the baby for a month, but is perfectly willing to let him die in the closing bonfire? Come, now.

Anyway, the ambiguity makes the film special, because it leaves the impression that the entire thing could have been a product of her warped mind. After all, none of this happened until the other professor filled in the details of the Candyman legend for her. Only then did she start thinking about the hook and the bees.

And I never did see why he's the Candyman. Is he named after a Sammy Davis, Jr song? Shouldn't he be the Hookdude, or the Beeguy or something?

The film was a moderate success, with a $26 million domestic gross generated by a moderate budget. It has generated two sequels so far, the latter of which went straight-to-vid.

IMDB summary: 6.2 out of 10.

DVD info from Amazon. The DVD has no special features except the theatrical trailer, but the basics are excellent. The picture quality is excellent, and the disc includes both a standard version and a 1.85-1 widescreen version. There was no cheapie version produced. Both versions are clear and newly mastered from an original print. See the side-by-side comparisons elsewhere on this page.

Book info from Amazon. This link leads you to a page of information about "The Essential Clive Barker", an analysis of his work assembled by Barker and Armistead Maupin, around thirteen themes including the complete text of "The Forbidden", the story which forms the basis for "Candyman". There are some other complete stories, and excerpts from several more works.

Additional video info from Amazon. Clive Barker himself directed an earlier (1973) adaptation of "The Forbidden". That short film is included on a video tape which also includes "Salome" (another story), and an interview with Barker.

Side-by-side version comparisons. The standard version shows about 6% more on the top and 6% more on the bottom than the widescreen. The widescreen version shows about 11% more on the right, and 11% more on the left. These variations did not affect the nudity in any significant way.

Constantina Popi

Lisa Rogers

The British starlet is Lisa Rogers, in another pic from the same batch I sent in last week.

Drew Barrymore

Jessica Alba

Leelee Sobieski

Svetlana Khorkina
(1, 2)