With this week’s release of the much anticipated Grindhouse, I look back at Escape From LA and try to figure out why so many people can appreciate one tribute to midnight movies, but not the other.

Before the year 1996, I had a pretty normal life. Like any typical 17 year old, I was a into horror films. More specifically, I was a fan of the work of legendary master of horror, John Carpenter. Even as a kid I’d been drawn to his films. In fact, I’d say Carpenter was the first director in which I’d noticed common themes and styles. His use of the Albertus font, the skillful use of the pana-glide camera, and his treatment of the 2.35:1 aspect ratio. (even though the early VHS tapes I’d been watching were formatted for a 4:3 television screen.) I had begun to realize that a single man was responsible for many of the films I’d consistently beg my parents to rent. It was a great time to be a John Carpenter fan. Little did I know, things were about to change.

In 1992 he took an unusual turn with the Chevy Chase action/comedy Memoirs of an Invisible Man. (The only film in which his name is not above the title.) This was followed up by the satisfactory ‘Body Bags’, a cable television anthology-style horror-comedy. ‘In the Mouth of Madness’ brought Carpenter back into theatres and received some critical acclaim, although didn’t perform too well at the box office. The same year, Carpenter’s remake of The Village of the Damned was so poorly received that I’m surprised it wasn’t blamed for paralyzing Christopher Reeve. Finally, in 1996, Carpenter released the much anticipated sequel to one of his biggest cult classics, Escape From New York. This time, Snake Plissken would be sent to the island of Los Angeles, which like New York, has been written off and transformed into a dumping ground for criminals and undesirables. It was the perfect setting for what many fans thought would be a worthy follow up. They were right. They just don’t know it.

I’m a fan of Escape From LA. I thought it was funny, creative and classic Carpenter. Only recently have I really felt the need to come to the defense of this forgotten film. With the release of Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez’s ‘Grindhouse’ right around the corner, Kurt Russell has been receiving a lot of positive attention from internet movie pundits and message board fanatics. Proof again that Tarantino still has what it takes to resurrect careers. But even among this sea of belated adoration, Escape From LA has not only been absent, but uninvited. People genuinely seem to hate this movie. Previously, I wouldn’t have been surprised. Although I did enjoy the movie, I can see why others might not. But what makes this situation different is the fact that all of this adoration comes on the heels of Russell’s starring role in a production that specifically pays tribute to a style of filmmaking that Escape From LA reproduced so accurately. If L.A. had been surrounded by faux trailers and covered in artificial film scratches, would people have responded differently? Here’s just a short list of some of the reasons why you SHOULD like Escape From LA:

1. Snake Plissken
2. Snake Plissken’s game of ‘Bangkok Rules’
3. Bruce Campbell as a the Surgeon General of Beverly Hills
4. Pam Grier as Hershey
5. Snake Plissken playing full court basketball for his life
6. Hang Gliders and machine guns
7. Snake Plissken SURFING WITH PETER FONDA

I’ve heard a few different reasons why people generally don’t like this film. Mostly they end at ‘lame’ and ‘cheesy’, but I’m convinced that it all comes down to special effects. Escape From LA was released in 1996 and digital effects were still in their infancy. (I’d say they still are.) I agree, the digital effects are definitely not the greatest, but at least they’re being used in creative ways. I’ve also heard criticism in regards to the fact that the story is basically the same as the first one. To this, I have three words: Evil Dead 2. EXACTLY the same story as the first, only much more over-the-top and playful. The same goes for Escape From LA. But still, people just can’t seem to get past the effects. An article at Underground Online includes Escape From LA in a list of films that could’ve been special effects contenders, but instead, fell flat. ‘How is it possible that the FX for Escape from L.A. look so, so much worse than the effects for Escape From New York, a movie that came out 15 years earlier? The answer: over-reliance on cut-rate CGI.’ I’ll agree with that statement. But they follow it up with a remark that seems to suggest that the entire point of this film was missed: ‘The worst was the unintentionally funny surfing scene that makes Snake Plissken look like Gidget, wiggling his hips in front of a barely-convincing green screen.’ Did you really think it was meant to be taken seriously? Yes, well you and everyone else it seems. You know those people who look at the Grindhouse commercials and say ‘That’s so cheesy. A girl with a machine gun leg?’, and you say ‘But it’s suppose to be cheesy! It’s paying tribute to blah blah blah…’. Well when you rip into the surfing scene in Escape From LA, you sound like that person ripping into the machine gun leg in Grindhouse. If you think both suck, then you’re fine by me…but to like one and not the other seems strange.

There was one major supporter of Escape From LA; Roger Ebert ended up giving it three and a half stars, calling it “a go-for-broke action extravaganza that satirizes the genre at the same time it’s exploiting it.” His review clearly explains the intentions of Carpenter, calling the film courageous and willing to take chances that many others weren’t willing to take. He asks “Whose heart is so stony it can resist the sight of Kurt Russell and Pam Grier swooping down from the sky, automatic weapons blazing, in an attack on Disneyland? Who, for that matter, can resist some of the other stops along the way, including Snake’s encounter with a colony of “surgical failures,” who have had one plastic surgery too many, and can survive only by obtaining a steady supply of fresh body parts? Or by the sight of San Fernando Valley used-car signs peeking above the waves? Or by a chase scene which involves motorcycles, cars, trucks, horses, machine-guns and boleros?” According to popular opinion, these aren’t the sort of things that people want to see in this type of action film. Yet Grindhouse, which features equally ridiculous (and thrilling) characters and situations, is the must-see film of the year. I guess it all comes down to context.

Let’s face it. Escape From LA just wasn’t given the chance it deserved. It’s not Carpenter’s best work in any shape or form. But it is what it is: a fun, satirical action film that pays tribute to the midnight movies that Carpenter helped influence throughout his career. There’s no question that Grindhouse wouldn’t exist as we know it without the influence of John Carpenter and his films. In a recent Wired Magazine article, Robert Rodriguez cited Carpenter as the main source of inspiration for Planet Terror. In fact, according to a recent interview with Kurt Russell at Cinematical, he even visited the set of Escape From LA! So this weekend, after you’ve drooled over Grindhouse in theatres, go out and rent Escape From LA and turn that double bill into a triple. Maybe you’ll appreciate it in a whole new light.

Video Link: Escape From LA Theatrical Trailer

This trailer clearly expresses the tone in which this film was made.