Backtrack (1990) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski) and Tuna
The Robbins recipe: Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Silent Lamb Girl.
Bad movie, but Jodie is often naked or in skimpy clothing, so it's worth a look for that reason.
Jodie Foster is kind of the Joe DiMaggio of acting, in the sense that both have an unchallengeable aura far beyond anything actually related to their mere mortal achievements.
To hear DiMaggio's proponents describe him, you'd think he was faster down the line than Mantle, a better fielder than Mays, and a better hitter than Ted Williams and Babe Ruth combined. DiMaggio was, of course, a great ballplayer, but nowhere near as great as the legend that has sprung up about him. Between ages 27 and 32, a baseball player's theoretical prime, he averaged 22 homers and 102 RBI's per year, and hit .303 over that span. During his famous 56 game streak, he didn't hit as well as Williams hit for that entire season.
He stole only 30 bases in his life, and fielded only .978. His lifetime batting average was .325. Per 550 at bats, he averaged 29 homers.
Fine numbers, but I'll bet you thought he was much better than that, right? Everybody does.
And the same is true of Jodie Foster. She made Backtrack during the absolute zenith of her acting career, 1988-1994. That period started with her best actress Oscar for The Accused and concluded with her nomination for Nell. In the middle was her signature role in Silence of the Lambs, which won her yet another Oscar. There you go, three best actress nominations in six years.
This film was made in that period, and offers no evidence to support either her script judgment or her acting abilities. It's a mediocre film, with often illogical, even incomprehensible plot twists, and poor character development. Jodie is not especially good in it, and is even responsible for some of the problems. She isn't awful, but she shows none of the spark and imagination that you'd expect if you hired the best young actress in the world, which many people considered her at the time.
The movie irritated me, frankly. Dennis Hopper and Jodie play a hit man and his intended victim who end up in love despite their obvious incompatibility, and end up fleeing from the mob and the FBI and heaven knows who else.
Here are some especially irritating moments:
comments in yellow:
never had a us release, and never had a theatrical release under that
name. There was a 98 minute European release called Catchfire which producer/director/star Dennis Hopper disowned, and was
credited to the officially anonymous Alan Smithee. Critics have it at
2 1/2 stars, and blame Hopper's direction for most of the problems. I
didn't find that to be the case. I agree at 2 1/2 stars - watchable
but not exceptional, but think the problem was Foster's performance in
the female lead. I adored her in Silence of the Lambs, but didn't
think she ever developed the character in her own mind in this film,
and she was just Jodie, looking good and reciting lines. While the plot was not
hard to follow, Jodie's motivation for her character's actions and
changes was never conveyed. I adored Hopper's performance, and those
of most of the supporting cast.
2) She shows
near contempt for the gallery owner who is giving her her big break.
Why? Later in the film, she has a fight with Milo, saying that she has
to be around art and culture. Why then doesn't she care about her big
|I suppose these
problems could have been corrected with writing and direction, but
they all involve Anne's motivation as a character. The good news is
exposure. The most famous scene of the film from a nudity standpoint
is a shower scene. Hopper should give lessons in selecting shower
doors for nude shower scenes, because, while they distort enough to
show a shower scene, they don't really hide much.
Return to the Movie House home page