Long Lost Cinema: Spun
- By Matthew Torti
- Published 08/15/2008
Matthew Torti
I fell into the wonderful world of film after watching Tim Burton's "Batman" back in 1989 at the ripe old age of 5. From there, I began writing an assortment of short stories, screenplays and teleplays. I attended York University in Toronto, Canada, graduated from its screenwriting program and have since written a number of spec scripts and am currently working on a pilot for a television series. My opinions of certain films have been known to frustrate many, which is what I love most about film- its ability to create heavy debate.
I’ve developed a newfound appreciation for Mickey Rourke over the past couple of years. Now I finally understand why he was once referred to as the next Marlon Brando. There’s just something about his acting abilities that seem otherworldly. He oozes machismo and intensity, but also hides a vulnerability that would make Tom Hanks jealous. While, to many, Sin City was the film that brought him back to the forefront, for me it was the criminally underrated film Spun.
Spun follows a couple of days in the lives of different meth users, chronicling how the drug gradually forces their lives to spin out of control; some are lost, others achieve retribution, but not without sacrifice. The film was directed by Jonas Akerlund (a famed music video director) and stars a who’s who of up and coming actors in the form Jason Schwartzman, Brittany Murphy, Mena Suvari, Patrick Fugit and John Leguizamo. The cast is actually quite large, but these are the characters that make the most impact throughout the story. Other actors enter the fray, such as Eric Roberts, Peter Stormare and Alexis Arquette. However, it is the Cook, played by Rourke, that keeps the film together. He’s the wrestling loving protagonist and antagonist in equal measure; someone who you feel sympathy for but also hate because he’s responsible for destroying all the young lives by supplying them with their drug of choice. The film more or less follows Schwartzman’s character as he sets out in search of his girlfriend and along the way meets a series of demented and twisted characters. Throughout his journey he eventually becomes the driver for Rourke’s almost mythic Cook character and that’s when things really get out of control.
Seeing the film for the first time back in 2002, I thought it was a shameless exercise in production value and flashy editing techniques (it holds the Guinness World Record for most cuts in a feature film). But seeing the film many years later, I discovered that there is much more going on beneath the surface. While films such as Trainspotting and Requiem for a Dream are more respected in the annals of drug cinema because they have “a message”, Spun approaches its subject matter in a different light; in that, you can look at it either as a warning or a celebration of living life without worry. But it makes sure to emphasize that there are always consequences.
The characters in Spun are broken people; wandering throughout life foolishly trying to hold on to whatever normalcy they once had. Throughout the film, we get to know these characters and while some are drug addled for the majority of the running time, there are moments where their humanity shines through. Those moments are both heartbreaking and beautiful. I love the fact that the characters (with names as outlandish as Spider Mike, Frisbee, Cookie and April Love) appear to have been taken straight out of a video game or comic book, which explains their manic behavior and appearance. While unrealistic in many ways, it makes sense considering the film is seen through the eyes of meth users who haven’t slept for what appears to be weeks.
Recently, Spun has been attacked for glorifying drug use. I personally do not see where this idea comes from. Like most films in drug cinema, the filmmakers are trying to show the effects of drugs. The only difference is, unlike other films, some of the characters in Spun do not learn anything by the time the credits roll. To me, that makes it even more realistic. This film shows regular people at their best and their worst. It’s completely up to you to decide if the filmmakers went about it the right way. I just hope you have an open mind about it.
As I mentioned earlier, Rourke’s the Cook is the character that keeps the whole film together; there’s so much happening beneath the surface of his façade. It’s surprising to me that he has yet to achieve a cult status in order to help the film reach a bigger audience. Yes, Rourke has been ridiculed for his appearance as of late, but in my opinion I think it benefits him as an actor. There’s legitimate age and pain behind those eyes, which helps push the Cook above and beyond one of those average “wise beyond their years” characters to become one of my most favorite characters in any film.




